Voice of Khalistan

News Updates

November 27, 2018

 

Guru Nanak’s Concept of Justice – Article discusses concept of justice according to Guru Nanak Dev Ji

 

April 10, 2018

 

Khalistan: One Sikh's View - Response to I.J. Singh’s article against Khalistan posted.

March 28, 2014

 

A detailed biography of Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji is added under the Sikh Gurus section.

 

March 10, 2014

 

Authenticity of Shabad Guru: Historical Perspective - Was Guru Granth Sahib ever declared a Guru or given Gurgaddi? This article refutes the Namdhari theories.

- See more at: http://searchsikhism.com/#sthash.dCxb32sh.dpuf

Find Us On...

Find Sikh Freedom Home Page on FacebookFind Sikh Freedom Home Page on Twitter

In Defense of Sikhism and Khalistan – Part 1

Bijla Singh                                                                                                                                                        July 11, 2012

Sikhism has always been subjected to numerous attacks physical and literary from Hinduism since the beginning of Sikhism. However, the arguments presented against Sikhism are often repeated over and over. Once again, a bigot Hindu has written an article of so-called “myths” to refute Sikhism. This is our response to his unsubstantiated, weak, incoherent, subjective and blundered article. We have divided up our response in series of parts for readers to make correlation to the original article. The red highlighted text is comments from the Hindu author.

1. The Sikh Raj (or empire of Ranjit Singh) fell due to the treachery of the Hindus.

The author shows his complete ignorance of the actual events of history and tries to sugarcoat the despicable Gulab Singh’s treachery in an attempt to show him as an honest and faithful man. Dhiyan Singh and Gulab Singh both held high offices during the time of Maharaja Ranjit Singh as courtiers and governor of the hill region respectively, which did not change after Maharaja Ranjit Singh’s death. On the contrary, their power increased even more. Their aspiration was to setup a sovereign Dogra state on the grave of the Sikh Empire and install Hira Singh, son of Dhiyan Singh, as its king. In order to fulfill their dreams, they decided to murder the entire reigning family of Lahore one by one. Dhiyan Singh ensured that every military campaign of Maharaja Kharak Singh, eldest son of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, failed by not supplying food, grain, fodder and weapons to the army. Rumors were spread that the cause of Maharaja Kharak Singh’s failures was his inability to run the kingdom properly. Another rumor was spread that the king was negotiating with the British to hand over the Sikh kingdom. Fake letters were produced bearing official stamps. Unfortunately, the reigning family fell for the trap and plans were made to dethrone Maharaja Kharak Singh. Subsequently, Price Naunihal Singh was brought forth as a replacement ruler, accompanied by Gulab Singh, who on the way filled Prince’s ears with so many conspiracies and lies that he was ready to imprison his father and sit on the throne to “save the empire”. Maharaja Kharak Singh was arrested and put in jail, where he was fed poison in low doses mixed in his food and dies nine months later. He was never allowed to see his only son.

On the day of his cremation, plans had been made to murder Maharaja Naunihal Singh by the Dogras. While he was passing under a bridge archway, it was blown up. Udham Singh, son of Gulab Singh, died on the spot, and Maharaja Naunihal Singh suffered only a minor bruise. This shows that Dogras were willing to sacrifice their own kith and kin to establish their own rule. While Maharaja Naunihal Singh was recovering and trying to get up, he was grabbed by Dhiyan Singh, put in a palanquin, which was already waiting there as part of the plan and rushed back to the fort. After reaching the fort, its doors were shut and no one was allowed to see Maharaja Naunihal Singh or even given any information about the his health. Even his mother, Rani Chand Kaur, beat on the door so much that her hands started to bleed, but the doors were not opened. Smyth writes on the authority of Captain Gardner, who was present with Dhian Singh, that the king had a minor injury with small blood stain above his right ear. However, when Doctor Honingberger was called, the king was bleeding profusely and it looked as if his head and face had been smashed with a heavy rock. Alas, the king died and his mother Chand Kaur sat on the throne. There was a plan to marry her to Sher Singh, but the Dogras did not allow this to happen as it would’ve spoiled their devious plans. Gulab Singh took a lot of wealth of the Sikh Empire with him to Jammu. Approximately 16 bull-carts were loaded with gold, silver and diamonds and 500 horses were loaded with heavy bags filled with precious jewels and stones. Eventually, Rani Chand Kaur too was murdered by her maid servants who were employed for this very purpose by the Dogras. Seeing that the Sandhawalia family will not let the Dogras succeed, they decided to form an alliance with them and devised a plan to murder Sher Singh so that the Sandhawalia family could take over the throne with Dhiyan Singh as the main courtier. However, Sandhawalias were too cunning and knew the true colors of the Dogras. They instead murdered Sher Singh and his 10 year old son, Tikka Partap Singh, and then, the same day, shot Dhiyan Singh. Hearing the news of his father, Hira Singh, along with Pandit Jalla, loaded significant amount of royal treasure and headed for Jammu. He was caught up by the army and killed for his treachery.

Gulab Singh at this point made pledged allegiance to the British and agreed to supply every minute detail of the Sikh Empire to them, provided that they would recognize him as the sovereign ruler of the hill region. The British agreed and the dreadful fate of the Sikh Empire was sealed. Further, Tej Singh and Lal Singh, both foreigner Hindus, were employed in the Sikh army and made generals so they could lead to Sikh army into defeat. As soon as the battle commenced, they left their ranks and fled the battlefield with their Dogra army. The Sikh army, nonetheless, fought so bravely without any commanding officers that the British could not help but praise the chivalrous Sikh warriors. The defeat of the Sikh army was due to many reasons. It was misled by the Hindu generals who were taking instructions from the British. Its plans were communicated to the British and food, grain, fodder and weapons were not supplied by the Dogras. The British officers in the army admit that they would have never defeated the Sikh army in a fair battle and that their victory was due to the treachery of the Dogras towards the Sikh Empire. It is significant to note that while the Sikh army was disbanded, disarmed and Sikh officers killed, the Dogras at the same time were rewarded and declared rulers of the hill region by the British.

According to Treaty between the British and the Sikhs signed on March 9, 1846 it is clearly stated that Gulab Singh was recognized as the sovereign ruler of Jammu and the hill region. The British not only fined the Sikhs for the entire war expenses but also made the Sikh kingdom pay 15 million rupees. The British cunningly imposed such fine on the Sikhs fully knowing that the latter did not have that amount of money. At the time of death of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, the Sikh kingdom had 120 million rupees in the treasure but due to greediness and loot of the Dogras, the treasure was almost empty. The British forced the Sikh kingdom to “sell” Jammu and the hill regions for 10 million which was handed off to Gulab Singh and the remaining 5 million was paid by the Sikh chiefs. The Sikh army was reduced and disbanded on a large scale and Sikh chiefs were imprisoned but Gulab Singh, Tej and Lal Singh were rewarded for being faithful to the British and turning Sikh victory to defeat.

British authors such as Smyth, Gough, Thackwell and many others reveal the treacherous role played by the Hindus during Anglo-Sikh wars. It is pitiful that the Hindu author justifies the treachery of Gulab Singh by stating that his brother and nephew were killed. However, he makes no mention of their treacherous role due to which they were given the deserving punishment. Further, it proves that Gulab Singh held personal vengeance, enmity and hatred towards the Sikh Empire and he was not loyal towards it. It further proves our point that Gulab Singh was disloyal and unfaithful to the Sikh Empire and, for personal reasons, misused his authority to destroy the Sikh Empire which the Sikhs had built after a century long sacrifices.

While there were many Hindu employees in the Sikh Empire, however, it does not prove that the treacherous role of the Dogras was not the cause of the destruction of the Sikh Empire.

Sources

How Fell the Sikh Kingdom by Sohan Singh Seetal

Punjab Utte Angrejan Da Kabza (Annexation of the British on Punjab) by Dr. Ganda Singh

The Sikh Empire by Piara Singh Datta

Secret History of the Khalsa Durbar by George Smyth
 

2. The Sikhs had an independent state before their defeat by the British and this is the basis of modern day support for Khalistan.

The Hindu author, in a vain attempt, tries to show that the Malwa States particularly Nabha, Jind and Patiala did not side with the main Sikh army and the Sikh kingdom and thus, there was no independent cohesive Sikh state. However, the argument is futile. The First Sikh rule in Punjab and first independent rule in Mughal India from the time of 8th century was established by Baba Banda Singh Bahadur, which lasted from 1708-1716. After a long struggle of life and death, the Sikhs became official rulers of Punjab in 1765 and, up till 1849, they had remained its rulers. During the Misl period, Maharaja Ala Singh of Patiala remained on good terms with the Sikhs and Ahmad Shah Abdali but he never supported the Afghan army with money or men. In fact, Abdali was so irritated with Ala Singh not supporting him that he ordered Ala Singh’s hair to be cut as a punishment. However, Ala Singh, with his sweet talk, pleased Abdali and paid a hefty amount to save his hair. Ala Singh was given Amrit by Dal Khalsa and supported by the Sikh army. This proves that he did not side with Sikh enemies. The only reason Malwa States sides with the British was to retain their sovereignty which they feared might get taken over by MAHARAJA RANJIT SINGH. These states were significantly smaller than the entire Sikh Empire.

Additionally, three Sikh states siding with the British is not a justification against Khalistan. In fact, Hindus have a long history of betraying their own countrymen from the time of 7th century. Mahmood Gaznavi, who is attributed to beginning Islamic onslaught on India, attacked India 17 times, had Hindus in his army. 4 out of 12 generals were Hindus and 44% of his army consisted of Hindus. During British rule, majority of the British army that fought against Azad Hind Fauj (National Liberation Army) in Burma, and Malaya regions consisted of Indians, mainly Hindus. If the same logic was applied to Hindus, it can be argued that since Hindus sided with Muslims and the British, India or a Hindu state for that matter should not exist.

The basis of Khalistan is not the fact that the Sikhs used to rule Punjab but the betrayal and oppression of the Hindus on the Sikh nation. Sikhs deserve to live freely as a distinct nation not as a second class citizens or an offshoot of Hinduism.  This is a Universal Right and has been declared as such by the United Nations.

Sources

Rise of the Sikh Power by Sohan Singh Seetal

History of Sikh Misls by Bhagat Singh

3. The Sikhs saved the whole of India (read the Hindus) from conversion to Islam

The author obviously shows his ignorance of history of India prior to 1770. He is deliberately ignoring the fact that Aurangzeb had decided to convert the whole of India to Islam using the power of sword. This is why Pandits from Kashmir came to the sanctuary of Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib to save their religion. Guru Gobind Singh Ji, in the Bachittar Natak, clearly states that His father sacrificed and saved the “Janju” (Hindu sacred thread) and “Tilak” (saffron mark on the forehead). This is why Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib is called “Hind Di Chadar” (Sheet of India) that covered the honor of Hindus and saved them from conversion.  Otherwise there would’ve been only two religions in India remaining today: Sikhism and Islam. In his book “Hindus and the Punjabi State”, author Om Parkash Kahol states:

If the Sikhs, under the guidance of the Gurus had not resisted the Muslims' cultural invasion on Punjab we would have none but the Arabic characters now. (p. 11)

Here is a short clip in which Ramdev (a Hindu) acknowledges the fact that Sikhs saved Hindus from extinction.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AoNQIzJkfU&feature=player_embedded

Yogi Allah Yaar Khan, a Muslim poet, also affirms by writing:

I talk about neither yesterday nor tomorrow; I talk about today. Had there been no Guru Gobind Singh, All would be under Islamic sway.

Next, we address some of Hindu claims:

The Sikhs were only able to exert effective control over Punjab in around 1770 – even at this stage the Afghans were able to penetrate a few more invasions

The fact that the Sikhs never let any ruler exert and properly establish his rule in Punjab shows that the Sikhs stayed in power. Further, in 1765 Sikhs had become official undisputed rulers of Punjab. Just because Afghans invaded the country afterwards does not prove that the Sikh rule did not exist. Afghans were defeated and the entire area they had taken over originally belonging to India was joined back to the country. Abdali was never able to fully establish his rule in India and it was due to the Sikh bravery and sacrifice.

by 1735-1740 the majority of India made been conquered by the Marathas under their war leader Baji Rao

This is a false statement. Marathas did not even come to Delhi until 1758. Their rule was limited and they busied themselves with personal gains. They were oblivious to the concept of united India and fighting for their own countrymen. If they had a large army and controlled most of India then why did they not face Nadir Shah who started his invasions in 1739? Historical accounts are testimony to the fact that no one except Sikhs encountered him and plundered his army.

The Rajput states were independent by the early 1700’s after their meeting at the Lake Pushkar

They were tributaries and paid to Delhi annually to keep their kingdoms alive. True sovereignty of the Hindu states did not exist.

The Braj region (south of Delhi) was under the control of the Hindu Jats by the 1750’s

Once again, a false statement. No name of the Hindu ruler is provided. That time was a period of confusion and whoever could capture Delhi became the ruler while the next one appeared on the scene. Sikhs had attacked and captured Delhi 11 times.

In 1758 the Maratha general Pandit Raghunath Rao defeated Timur Shah Abdali near Lahore and detachments chased the Afghans to Peshawar. He stopped at Amritsar after defeating the Pathans and his troops cleansed the golden temple and lake which had been desecrated by the Muslims – He then made an offering of 1.25 lakh rupees to the temple

The Hindu author conveniently forgets the fact that Marathas were invited by Adina Begh to help him establish his own rule in 1758 at the cost of 100,000 rupees per day. Adina Begh, Marathas and the Sikhs launched a joint attack on Sirhind and then fought the Afghans near Lahore. It was Sikhs who captured the Afghan army and made them clean the Sarovar (Nectar Pool) which had been desecrated. These events prove that the Marathas could care less about India or freeing their homeland from the Muslims and for money were willing to lend support to the Muslims. Neither did they care for their own people nor establishing an independent country.

The fact remains that only after the successful military campaigns of the Sikh Raj into Afghanistan, where they conquered Kabul, and established a chain of fortresses in the Khyber Pass, did the foreign invasions cease in India.  This is the same Khyber pass that was used to invade time and time again by foreign invaders for centuries.  Had this feat not been accomplished, the very map of the Indian subcontinent would be vastly different in the present day.

Sources

Sikhs in 18th Century by Surjit Singh Gandhi

Ahmad Shah Durrani by Dr. Ganda Singh

    4. that the references to the names of Hindu Gods and Goddesses in the Sikh scriptures are not really those same Hindu Gods

There is no such thing as a “Hindu language” which Hinduism can claim monopoly over. All Indian languages including Urdu are derived from Brahmi. The languages evolved over time yet retaining some similarities. This is why many words appear in many different Indian languages. Names such as Gopal, Govind, Murari, Raam etc. are not Hindu names but used by Hindus to attribute to their incarnations whereas same names are used by the Sikhs to attribute to One Almighty God. Raam means Omnipresent God and it is known fact that Rama Chandra was not Omnipresent but a king of his area. Gopal means one who supports/sustains the Earth. There are verses in Gurbani that actually define the meanings of these words and there is a stark contrast between the Sikh definition and the Hindu definition of the same words.  Sikhism does not attribute powers of sustaining, creating, and destroying to anything other than One God. These terms are used in general sense and for what they actually mean. Hindus use Gopal for Vishnu but Sikhs use it for God. These words were commonly understood by the Indian population and to use any other language or words foreign to the local population would’ve been irrational. Guru Sahib used the local regional language to convey the revealed message. The fact to be noted is that the Gurus did not use Sanskrit or Arabic but regional language most commonly understood by the people to preach and also write down His message.

Further, many words like Allah, Khuda, Rahim, Karim etc. are also used in Gurbani. These words appear in Islamic books but refer to Islamic God Allah. However, in Sikhism these words are specifically used for God. Utilizing the same words does not amount to agreeing with their specific meanings assigned to them in the parameters of Hinduism or Islam. The only commonality between Hinduism and Sikhism is the language and it ends there. From there on, the meanings, ideology and philosophy is entirely different.

Christians still read the Old Testament as part of their religious scripture, and yet are considered a separate religion.  Mohammad has stated in the Qua'ran multiple references to Moses and Jesus.  These same three religions are universally recognized as separate individual religions.  How then is Sikhism, whose very philosophy is different from Hinduism from Ik Onkaar onwards, a Hindu sect?  Using names and expressions from the local region to relay the message to the people does not make Sikhism a subset of Hinduism.

5. Sikhism was a complete break from both Hinduism and Islam

The proofs are abundant in Gurbani, Vaars and various Sikh books of past and present. Since, no evidence has been presented we won’t write a detailed analysis. Rather, we will address and refute Hindu’s comments:

Guru Nanak was born in a region which was majority Muslim by the early 1500’s – yet his entire teachings seem to draw from Hindu sources and to a Hindu audience. Very scant references from Islamic usage are utilised in clear contrast to the almost endless usage of Hindu terminology, cosmology and theories.

Starting from the Muslim rule to the present day, the Muslim population has always been a minority in India. History is replete with Islamic invasions, in which sometimes only 500 Muslims would attack and enslave thousands of Hindu men and women to be sold off in Islamic countries. It was the Hindus who were being oppressed and suppressed. Therefore, awakening and elevating the oppressed was the main goal of Guru Sahib, so their status could be raised to the level of equality and they could feel a sense of dignity. This is why Gurbani makes heavy use of the local language and it is in consonance with every other prophet’s method of delivering the message. For the people of India, only the local language could be used. When Guru Sahib held discourses with some Muslim saints, He spoke Arabic or Persian. When He debated Naths and Yogis, He employed their terminology and redefined these terms to convey the true message and show them the true path. These terms were misunderstood or purposely altered in meaning for personal gain by prevalent sects and religions which Guru Sahib corrected by dispelling ignorance. We are willing to debate the author on any term or concept which he falsely believes is drawn from Hinduism and we will show that, apart from similarity of the words, there is nothing in common Sikhism has with Hinduism in substance.

The undisputable fact remains that Guru Gobind Singh composed verses Khalsa Mero Roop Hai Khaas, specifically outlining that when the Khalsa goes the way of the Brahmin, He will not provide them support and that the Khalsa is to remain distinct.  This is in stark contrast to the Brahmin dependent society that is Hinduism.  References from the 1699 Vaisakhi Amrit Sanchar document that Guru Gobind Singh abolished the practice of the caste system, welcomed all of humanity under the banner of the Khalsa as a siblinghood.  Such equality has no parallel in Hinduism, which propagates a stratification of society into castes and refuses more and more privileges the lower and lower one goes on the caste system ladder.  From the time of Guru Nanak Sahib, Brahmins have been given a beating in Asa Ki Vaar, which exposes their duality, hypocrisy and overall fleecing of innocent people.  Lastly, Gurbani is not written in Sanskrit, the preferred language of Hindu scripture.

The Sikhs were almost universally referred to as Hindus by others until the late 1800’s

The author has presented no evidence. The fact that Guru Nanak Sahib rejected all of Hindu ceremonies and established His own religion as commanded by God Himself and testified by Bhai Gurdas Ji clearly proves that Sikhs are a separate nation. One example should suffice here. In 1710, Bahadur Shah ordered all Hindus to cut their hair and shave their beards to make it easier for the Muslims to identify the Sikhs and kill them. Further, only Sikhs were hunted down by the Muslims and prices were put on the heads of Sikhs only. Hindus, on the other hand, played the role of spies to earn rewards and be on the good side of the government. This proves that the Mughal government considered Sikhs separate from the Hindus.

Sources

Defining a Sikh by Balpreet Singh

Hum Hindu Nahin by Kahan Singh Nabha (English Translation Here)

Sikhs in 18th Century by Surjit Singh Gandhi

6. The Brahmins have always been enemies of Sikhs and are hostile to Sikhism

Brahmins follow very rigid and convoluted self-created system according to which the entire Indian population divided in four castes is reduced to the level of subservient of the Brahmins. Sikhism, on the other hand, preaches the concept of fatherhood of God and brotherhood of man. There is to remain no caste system or inequality in the Sikh religion. As for familial ancestry:  In Sikhism, religious affiliation and membership is superior to familial genealogy, a concept that a Manu Simriti follower cannot comprehend.

Now we address assertions put forth by the Hindu.

In fact the title of Bhai was first given to a Brahmin family from kiratpur from which came Bhai Gurdas, Bhai Budha, Bhai Mati Dass and Bhai Sati Dass

Contrary to what the Hindu always dreams of, the title of Bhai meaning brother was given to Mardana Ji, a lifelong companion of Guru Nanak Sahib. He was from a low caste and Guru Nanak Sahib raised his status to advocate brotherhood of mankind. Bhai Gurdas Ji was not from a Brahmin family but from Khatris. Baba Buddha Ji was never called a Bhai but Baba because of his maturity and magnanimity. Bhai Mati Das and Bhai Sati Das had adopted Sikhism and did not remain Brahmins anymore. Whenever someone becomes a Sikh, his past religious ties, caste system and even sins are considered erased and not important anymore.

Their nephew wrote the earliest known Sikh Maryada – Chaupa Singh Chhiber with Kesar Singh

Chaupa Singh and Kesar Singh both belonged to the Sikh religion. Being from a Brahmin background does not prove that they kept their belief in caste system or Hindu Brahmins did not keep a hostile attitude the Sikh religion.

The descendants of this family fought against British rule – Bhai Paramananda also head of the Hindu Mahasabha and Bhai Mahavir has been the Governor of Madhya Pradesh.

No reference has been provided. Also, this does not prove that the Brahmins have never been hostile to Sikhism.

Today the same Brahmins are reviled under a deluge of race hate and caste hate from Sikhs bordering that of Nazi Germany’s depiction of the Jews – Most have now lost all links with Sikhism

And the fact that the Brahmin led regime have oppressed the Sikhs since 1947 means nothing? Operation Blue Star, Delhi Massacre, Operation Woodrose etc. make it amply clear that it was the Hindus who have truly put Nazis to shame in terms of atrocities and destroying a nation. The caste system stems from Brahmin works. Sikhs do not hate anyone but are against the caste system which goes directly against the principle of equality.  The Hindu writer would do well to examine the lineage of Gangu Brahmin all the way to Indira Gandhi/Rajiv Gandhi and see the long line of hostility that this one family had against Sikhism for a dramatic example of Brahmin hostility against Sikhism.

To get a complete picture of how Hindus have played their role against the Sikhs, read Hindu Sikh Brotherhood

7. The Hindus betrayed their mother tongue of Punjabi be declaring Hindu to be their main language

Hindus betraying their mother tongue was due to opposition and anti-Sikh feelings imbedded in the Hindu mind by the Congress leaders and Hindu media lead by Arya Samaj. Sikhs wanted to establish a Punjabi speaking state in the North as promised by the Hindu leaders prior to 1947. When the time came, the government organized the entire India on language basis except Punjab. Since Gurbani is written in Gurmukhi script which is also the script of Punjabi, the government considered growth of Punjabi as growth of Sikhism to oppose which they asked Hindus of Punjab to register Hindi as their mother tongue by abandoning Punjabi the language they had been speaking for centuries. Hindus followed suit and to show their utter hatred towards the Sikhs adopted Hindi as their language. Om Parkash Kahol in his book “Hindus and the Punjabi State” states:

What should be the mother-tongue of a Punjabi-Hindu be called? He speaks what is properly called Punjabi and when questioned, he insists on and persists in saying that his mother-tongue is Hindi. No amount of argumentation can make him see the truth, for he does not want it. His apathy, antipathy and hatred for Punjabi is clearly an unmistakable index of his anti-Sikh mind which fact again, the confounded Hindu is not bold enough to confess frankly. (p. 35)

Pre 1947 Punjab – Punjabi language was primarily written in Urdu or Persian script – Many of the Hindus began utilising the Devenagari script to write Punjabi

The statement is nothing short of utter foolishness and ignorance. If what the author states is true, why did the Hindus vote that they spoke in Hindi? Punjabi language used to be written in Lande and Takri prior to the Sikh Guru period. Sometimes, Shardha (Kashmiri language) script was used. Guru Nanak Sahib employed and devised Gurmukhi script to write Punjabi and Gurbani. Afterwards, Gurmukhi came to be used to written Braj, Persian, Punjabi and Hindi languages in Punjab. During British rule, court language in Punjab was Urdu which was used to write Punjabi. AT no time in history was Devanagari ever used to write Punjabi. After 1947, the Hindus abandoned Punjabi while still speaking it in their social life. Devanagari script is best used to write Sanskrit but it can never be utilized to write Punjabi due to its lack of many sounds of consonants and vowels. Hindi has half letters whereas Punjabi does not. Punjabi pronunciation is Kakka, Khakkha, Gagga etc. where as in Hindi they are Ka, Kha, Ga etc. Punjabi letters such as ੳ, ਅ, ਞ, ਙ, ੜ are not found in Hindi and therefore, cannot be written using Devanagari script. Om Parkash Kahol writes:

The Punjab Hindu, misguided and misled by selfish politicians, however, adopted a course, which was not only irrational, unfair, ignoble and anti-national, but also injurious to his immediate political interests. Strangely enough, ho opposed Punjabi in Gurmukhi characters being made the court language in the Punjab! He overnight fell in love With Hindi in Devanagari script-of which he was as ignorant as for Gurumukhi-and just to oppose the Sikh, he began to clamor of Hindi to be made the only court language in East Punjab!! (p. 13)

Kahol further states:

An honest Hindu, who wants to replace Gurumukhi with Devanagari, should frankly acknowledge thus: “Punjabi has its natural script Gurmukhi; Arabic was once imposed upon it by force; I have been sitting as an unattached observer all this time. Now that after centuries of struggle, Gurmukhi has got rid of its mortal rival, Arabic, I feel ashamed of my apathy towards it. I have also been criminally indifferent towards Hindi, which has been groaning all along under the oppression of Urdu in the All-India sphere. Now I can rationalize my mortification and sense of guilt only by raising the bogey of Punjabi in Devanagari script.” (p. 24)

Gurumukhi was used solely for Sikh religious scriptures.

Gurmukhi has been used to write all Sikh historical texts starting from early Sikh period.

The Sikh religious and political bodies lobbied for the imposition of Gurumukhi on all the population despite the Sikhs not being in a majority in the province.

The author shows his complete ignorance. Sikhs pushed for Punjabi language and only Gurmukhi is best suitable and sufficient enough to scribe it. All other states had been reorganized on linguistic basis and leaving Punjabi out was unfair. Since majority of the Punjab including Hindus spoke Punjabi it was a fair and legal demand. The claim was never made that Hindu or Devanagari would not be used.

Eventually Punjab was divided again to appease the Sikhs

No Sikh was ever happy with the division nor was it ever supported or even advocated. Sikhs wanted the government to make Punjabi the official language of Punjab but the government was hell bent on destroying the Sikh faith. Therefore, progress of Punjabi would’ve been contrary to their plan. Ultimately, the Hindu government divided Punjab in such a schismatic way that the state lost most of its tourist areas, control over water and electricity, capital and a large part of Punjabi speaking districts. This was done to destroy the Punjab economically.

Sources

Punjabi Sooba

Hindus and the Punjabi State by Om Parkash Kahol

Punjabi Tay Hindi Da Takra by Kartar Singh Dakha

To summarize, Sikhism is a distinct religion. The fact is, there is no such thing as Hinduism...it is a collection of tribal religions with the only organizational structure provided by Manu Simriti (societal divider) and the Brahmins that preside over it.  No Vedic text uses the word Hindu.  Hindu means thief from Arabic vernacular.  Even today, the Hindu of Maharastra is a worshipper of a different deity than the Hindu of Gujarat.  Some define Hinduism as polytheistic, some as monotheistic.  There are almost countless granths of Hindus, often in conflict with each other.  The conclusion of all of this is that there is no one religion called Hinduism.  It is cobbled together by Brahmins under the guise of Manu Simriti to exert control over the people of India.  One only has to do a cursory read over the Rig Veda (tribute to countless gods and goddesses) and the Atharban Veda (medicinal/spiritual book from which Ayeruveda is distilled from) to see the vast difference.  Never mind the Bhagavad Gita (subset of Mahabharat) and Upanishads etc. etc.  Bhai Gurdas Ji documents how the Hindus would debate to the death the superiority of their granth/philosophy before the advent of Sikhism - doesn't sound like a very cohesive religion at all.