Sikhnet on Khalistan

In this section we look at some of the arguments raised by Sikhnet forum. Many Sikhs and youngsters who visit the forum everyday are being fed with false information. The sole purpose of this section is to eliminate the doubts raised by Sikhnet and provide a better and clearer understanding about the freedom movement. The following comments were emailed to me stating their reasons for not supporting Khalistan. Now let’s look at what they have to say.

The Gurus believed in creating harmony between people of different faiths, so that we could all live together as children of the same God. Khalistan, to me, doesn't support that mission. It creates even more divisions in the name of religion when the Khalsa are here to protect and serve so that religions don't divide people any more.

Yes, Guru Sahib teaches creating harmony between people of different faiths and this principle can be propagated with much emphasis and lived with vigor in Khalistan. Khalistan is not against the harmony but against tyranny, oppression and injustice. It is against the very government which seeks to destroy harmony between different faiths. The very existence of Sikhism is at stake and Sikhs are fighting for their survival. Shouldn't we fight for our rights as instructed by Guru Gobind Singh Ji? What is the meaning of Kirpan if we don't fight for freedom? It is not about land but about freedom of religion, speech and everything else. Guru Gobind Singh Ji said that Khalsa should live a free life, but how can we live a free life under someone else's rule? Sikhs in fact served the humanity in much better way when they were rulers of Punjab than now? Sikhnet has clearly misunderstood the fact that it is not the Sikhs who want to create divisions and separate themselves but it is the Indian government that launched a full scale attack on Darbar Sahib and alienated the Sikh Nation forever. It is the Indian government that has created the division by not acknowledging the distinct and unique identity of the Sikhs.

How can we live in harmony in the same country that is hostile towards us? If that be the case then Guru Sahib and Sikhs in 18th century made a grave mistake by raising arms and fighting for freedom. Sikhnet needs to realize that in order to keep peace and harmony, arms must be raised so that the mission of Guru Sahib can be fulfilled. In the name of “peace” and “harmony” survival of Sikhi cannot be jeopardized. In fact, the mission of Khalsa and message of Guru Sahib can be better served and spread with the help of Khalistan. Is USA preventing them from following Sikhi? If they are so concerned about “peace and harmony” then I suggest them living in Kashmir or Israel so that the “mission” could be better fulfilled. It is much easier to talk sitting here in America where no one bothers you.

If all of the money, time and energy different people spent on trying to create Khalistan were instead channeled into securing true freedom of religion for all people, the Sikhs would be loved, honored and admired. Sikhs are here to serve the interests of the entire humanity, not just their own interests. This is what a sovereign does. Remember, the Khalsa are the spiritual royalty of the world. We are here to rule-not through power and politics, but through love and service. We are here to protect-not ourselves, but all people. We are here to secure that every human being has a chance to enjoy his or her life the way God intended. That is our duty. Khalistan distracts us from that duty.

Many wrong statements and assumptions in just one paragraph. I guess when one is so highly opposed to an idea they would use every excuse in the book to prove it wrong. In order to serve the humanity one needs a lot of money and power. To ensure certain amount of funding, they would need a country that supports their cause. For example, how did Christian missionaries serve the humanity? They had many countries behind them which gave them all the money they needed. In India, Christian schools were opened by missionaries but the money was provided by England and America. If we have Khalistan, we can do better job in preaching the message of truth. Without political power, it is impossible because there will always be governments against you and your religion. Indian government and Brahmins are well aware of message of the Gurus but they are doing their best job to destroy it. After learning the truth about Sikhism, the British tried to make many conflicts between Sikhs and tried to destroy Sikhi. Why were there no converts from English people after they learned the truth? Simple, it’s because the message of truth (Sikhi) conflicts with Christianity. They were in power and they favored their religion. Indian government is doing the same.

With Khalistan, it would be a lot easier to do the job. Khalistan will provide money for preachers. People will only hear you when you have the power. For example, famous scientist Galileo discovered the truth but did anyone listen to him? He didn't have any political power, so he was killed. Those Christian priests didn't listen to him even though he was telling the truth. If we send a Sikh preacher to a country like Afghanistan, he would be killed because Muslims would not tolerate anything that conflicts with Islam. Then who would be responsible for his death? No country would put force on Afghanistan's government to punish the murderers. But if the same preacher is sent from Khalistan, he will have political power behind him which means the chances of him getting killed would be a lot less. Khalistani government would put pressure on Afghanistan's government to hand over the murderers so they could meet the justice. People will listen to Sikhs if Sikhs have political power. Through power we can teach that people shouldn't fight in the name of religion but live together in harmony. With political power, money and all the media we can propagate the message of our Gurus in much better and effective ways. We should be worried about our safety first. By living in Khalistan, we can set an example for the entire humanity. Who would listen to you if you have no recognition in the world? 

People would have better knowledge about Sikhism. A person with a turban will be considered a Khalistani and looked upon as a Sikh. But today if a Sikh is seen, he is misunderstood to be a Muslim or a Hindu. If a Sikh says he is from India, most people automatically assume he is a Hindu. How many people really know about the Sikh religion? If there is Khalistan, the message of Gurus can be preached in better ways. We can teach people how to rule with love and humility if we have Khalistan because Khalistan will set an example for them. Khalistan means freedom of religion. Why would Sikhs ask for freedom of religion if there was no interference by the Indian government? Without Khalistan we can hardly survive let alone the responsibility of preaching to others. We can't even solve our own issues and Sikhnet is talking about solving world issues and serve the humanity.

Khalistan will represent not only Sikhs of Punjab but Sikhs living all over the world. Our purpose is to ensure that every human enjoys their life the way God intended. The same underlying principal should apply to the Sikh Nation which therefore proves that the purpose of fighting for Khalistan is to enjoy our way of life the way Guru Sahib intended. Does God not want humans to live with freedom, dignity and honor? Sikhs lack all of these in India then how is fighting for Khalistan distracting us? On the contrary, Sikhs are fighting to secure their free way of life. If raising arms is not the correct way then I suggest to them to study Sikhi and its history at an in-depth level. It is absurd to keep talking about “serving” the humanity and its “interests” and oppose Sikhs at the same time when they are the most qualified people to be served in current times. Maybe they should put their words into practice and start their mission from Sikhs of Punjab or do they not consider Sikhs as part of humanity?

Thousands of Sikhs were killed in 1984 and their families received no support from anyone. We should take care of our own people first and then set an example for others. We need to do it first which means taking care of those orphans whose parents sacrificed for the Sikh faith. Have Sikhnet people served those people yet? They live in America. What do they know about situation of Punjab and Sikhs living there? They are definitely not serving and helping people living in many third world countries. Besides, they have already separated themselves from the rest of the world by living in America. If Khalistan divides people then they are divided already because America is also separated from other countries. American government sent air force to Afghanistan that bombed many cities and killed many innocent people. Have Sikhnet people taught anything to their own government yet? Their own government divided them and separated them from the rest of the world. How can we preach freedom of religion if we are not free and don't have freedom of religion. Sikhi teaches "Raj Bina Nahin Dharam Chale Hain, Dharam Bina Sab Dalle Malle Hain" meaning sovereignty is a MUST in order for a religion to survive otherwise religion perishes. Now should we listen to Sikhnet or Sikhi? Sikhism is a way of life which does not separate politics from religion. That's why Akaal Takhat Sahib stands in front of Darbar Sahib. Khalistan does not distract anyone from doing anything that Sikhi requires. It certainly did not distract Baba Banda Singh, Nawaab Kapoor Singh, Sardar Jassa Singh, and Maharaja Ranjit Singh.

All Sikhs-regardless of what their cultural background-recognize the line as saying, "Khalsa shall rule." The question is-in what manner will they rule? The ruler ship of Khalsa is not one of physical might, but one of spiritual sovereignty.

This might be the yogi’s interpretation but not of the Sikhs who have been reading it for 300 years. Bhai Sahib Bhai Randheer Singh Ji, Baba Nand Singh Ji, Sant Gurbachan Singh Ji Bhindranwale and many other Sikhs have said that Khalsa Rule in the world shall come. A Khalsa rules over five vices which makes him a spiritual ruler. This means the spiritual sovereignty is already in existence. If we look at Sikhs of 18th century, we find that each and every one of them was a real Sikh. They had control over five vices because they had reached the highest level of spirituality. So they were ruling spiritually already.

The problem with the above interpretation is the implication that no Khalsa has ever been capable of spiritual sovereignty meaning no Sikh has ever been able to fully live up to the ideals of Sikh principles. This is an insult to early Sikhs. It also implies that Sikhs have been reading "Raj Karega Khalsa" for over 300 years and they have been unable to understand its true meanings until these sikhnet people came along. All Sikhs knew what it meant. Only Khalsa is qualified for sovereignty. Now, if we look at the Shabad clearly, we find that "Khalsa" is referred to as a whole Panth not a single person. Because a Khalsa who becomes one with the Guru and has total control over five vices has spiritual sovereignty already. So it must be referring to the whole Panth having physical rule. Furthermore, the next line “Aaki Rahe Na Koe” refers to enemies of the Khalsa (Truth) which does not refer to five vices simply because five vices cannot be killed or wiped out.

When the whole Panth gets together and wakes up in the morning to do Naam Simran, Khalsa Raj will come and there is no doubt about it. Many respected Sikhs in the Panth have written about it. Bhai Rama Singh Ji from England has said the same thing and it is well written in his book. Guru Ji has given us the Raj but are we well qualified or capable of ruling? The only way Khalsa is qualified to rule is when Khalsa does Naam Simran and follows the Rehat Maryada of Guru Ji. 

Being a Sikh in Northern India is both a cultural ethnicity and a spiritual identity. Because of that-there are a lot of issues that you face in the Punjab related to politics, society and culture. Those of us who have become Sikhs in the West already have a cultural and political identity. However, Sikhs in the Punjab have political, social and economic challenges to face. Because of that, you connect very strongly with Guru Gobind Singh's message of standing up to tyranny and becoming sovereign over your own life. We firmly believe that when people are willing to live in tune with the Will of God, then all these social, political and economic injustices will automatically come back into balance. But as long as people do not live surrendered to the Will of God, the imbalances will continue. If it God's will that the Sikhs have an independent state, then all you need to do is meditate and learn how to surrender yourself to God's Will and by His hand, without any effort from your ego, it shall happen.

Now Sikhnet is simply contradicting itself. First, it was all about serving the humanity and making sure that each individual enjoys the way of life as God intended but when it comes to interests of Sikhs, Sikhnet resorts to “let’s wait for God to do it”. Why have a mission when we can sit around and try to “surrender” to God so that all problems could be fixed? Did Americans, Hindus and Muslims surrender to God in order to get independent countries?

There are many problems with the above statements. First they say they don't support dividing people but now they say it is not their issue that Punjabi Sikhs are being killed in India. When a person takes Amrit he belongs to Anandpur Sahib and his father becomes Guru Gobind Singh Ji and mother Mata Sahib Kaur Ji. Anandpur Sahib is in Punjab. So either you belong to Punjab or you belong to America. According to the above statement Sikhnet people do not want to belong to Anandpur Sahib. They say they already have a culture. Does American culture fit in the way of life of Sikhi? Not at all. When you become a Sikh your identity (political and spiritual) becomes one. So there is no point in saying that they have different political identity. There is no political system better than Miri Piri which was set up by Guru Ji. By saying they already have a political identity they mean that they don't belong to political system of Guru Gobind Singh Ji instead they belong to American politics which is created by humans. Once you are 21 you can legally buy drugs and smoke tobacco in America. Is this the identity they belong to???? Use of tobacco and drugs is prohibited by Sikh faith and is against Sikh principles which means American political laws conflict with Guru's political system. American culture promotes adultery and doing whatever you want. So I guess this is kind of culture sikhnet people want. If you are a Sikh, you belong to Anandpur Sahib and the authority of Akaal Takhat Sahib supersedes any other political power in the world. Did Panj Pyare not tell them this or they are sticking with American political system on purpose? Sikhs are connected with Akaal Takhat Sahib just as the Catholics are connected with the Vatican.

Sikhs are not fighting because they want to rule over others. They are fighting for the truth because Indian government attacked Darbar Sahib and killed thousands of Sikhs. Khalsa is fighting against oppression. Khalistan is not about political issues. It is about religious freedom. Guru Ji taught us to fight for truth and justice. Sikhs in the 18th century fought for truth and the right cause. Did they not live in tune with will of God? Guru Gobind Singh Ji fought against oppression because Guru Ji said "When all other means have failed, it is  right to raise arms." This is exactly what Sikhs are doing. We have to be both Saints and Warriors. Practicing Naam Simran and fighting against oppression at the same time is what Guru Ji has taught us. Guru Gobind Singh Ji said that sovereignty is a MUST for a religion otherwise it perishes. Do they have different interpretation of this? If the only purpose of Sikhi is to meditate and accept the will of God then what was the point of building Akaal Takhat Sahib? I highly doubt Sikhnet people know the meaning of "Will of God". How do they know fighting for Khalistan is not the will of God?

True Sikhs are the ones with swords in their hand and word of the true Almighty on their lips. Besides, fighting for justice and righteousness is part of Sikhi which they are not following. A Khalsa should fight his inner thieves and outer thieves. If Sikhi is all about meditating then Guru Nanak Dev Ji wouldn't have spoken against Babur. Babur didn't do anything to Guru Ji but Guru Ji spoke for human rights and the truth. Why didn't Guru Ji just say "These are not my issues. I am not being harmed. If others are being harmed then it’s not my problem?" Why didn't Guru Nanak Dev Ji wait for God to end the whole oppression? Why did Guru Ji have to speak for the people?

Why should we wait for God to do something? "God helps those who help themselves" (Benjamin Franklin-an American politician and forefather). This is very true. If we should wait for God to do something then why didn't Guru Ji wait for God to do something? Why did Guru Ji fight? Why did Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji sacrifice to save the Hindu religion? He could've waited for God to fix the whole problem but He didn't because Guru Ji knew it was not the right way. If we just sit back and start doing Naam Simran then anyone would be able to crush us. Guru Ji made us Saint-Warriors. True Khalsa is immortal, timeless and an army of God. Why should Khalsa sit back and wait for something to happen? Sikhs make things happen. Where is the warrior spirit in Sikhnet people? God gave us two hands and Kirpan is given by Guru Gobind Singh Ji and we have to fight for our rights with our hands if it comes to it. Sikhs are instructed to make their own destiny not to just sit back and wait for God to do it. Then what would be the purpose of God given hands?

The Indian government's plan was to go to every village to kill Sikhs which was called Operation Wood Rose but the Sikh army rebelled and government's attention turned to rebellions, otherwise they would've killed all Sikhs. I want to ask them one question: If the American government turns against them (Sikhnet people) and their children are killed in the streets, men are burnt alive, women dishonored and the government doesn't punish the criminals, would they still say that they are proud to be Americans or would they rather support a separate country? Would they still live among those who killed them? Would they raise a sword and fight like Guru Gobind Singh Ji has taught us or they rather spend their time in serving the criminals and not fight for justice? Or would they just forget about the whole thing, get themselves killed and wait for God to do something. I wonder what their reaction would be if the similar things started happening to them and Sikhs from Punjab said “We already have a culture and political identity”. Their responses do give the feelings that skin color is important to them. Guru Ji said "Soora So Pehchaniye Jo Lare Deen Ke Heth” which literally means "Brave are those who fight for truth and justice with honor and valor." So why shouldn't we fight to protect religion? Perhaps Sikhs winning a Khalistan after a war might be God's way of doing things.

The Sikhnet people say they belong to America but their own government doesn't recognize them. September 11 was a very bad disaster for Sikhs. How many Americans know about Sikhi? These Americans killed Sikhs. Sikhs were attacked all over the country. If there was a Sikh country standing behind the foreign Sikhs giving them full support, this wouldn't have happened. Sikhs should always wear a Kirpan but Sikhs are not allowed to wear Kirpans on airplanes, and other government places. Sikhs have been living in America for over 100 years and yet American government hasn't understood the significance of Kirpan and they never will until there is a country that represents Sikhs. Sikhs are not admitted in the army. In America, which is the most democratic country in the world, Sikhs are being discriminated. In Khalistan Sikhs will be allowed to wear Kirpans everywhere and only then the world would learn about the true message of Sikhi.

If there was a Sikh country, no one would have attacked Gurdwaras and killed Sikhs. If there was a Sikh country, the situation would have been different and Punjab wouldn't be stuck between the nuclear war of India and Pakistan. If there is a war, the whole of Punjab will be destroyed. How does their community service help solving the real problems of Sikhs? The Indian government is spending billions of rupees to bring Sikhism into the fold of Hinduism. How does their community service help Sikhs to stop Indian government from attacking their Sikh brothers in Punjab and India?

Sikhs are fighting for survival, their religion and to keep Sikhi alive. If that means a separate country then why not? It doesn't mean we want to divide the world but shouldn't we think about securing the Sikh faith first and all the virtues it stands for? If the Indian government doesn't like us and doesn't want to live with us, then why shouldn't we just be separated? When we gain power we can promote Sikhi and teach the message of the Gurus and universal brotherhood. Can this not be done? Khalistan is not for bad purpose. When I ask any non-Punjabi Sikh about Khalistan, the vast majority have the same answer that they don't want to be separated or wouldn't want to move to Khalistan. But this is not an asnwer to the question. Moving back is one thing and supporting it another. Sikhs will still live in other countries. But most of Sikhnet people reply in exactly the same words. It sounds like they have been brainwashed by yogi. They need to learn the true purpose of fighting. Perhaps they are sticking with community service a lot but what if those people we want to help turn against us, should we not fight to defend ourselves? If yes, then that's exactly what Sikhs are doing. If no, then that is not Sikhi.

The world is our homeland. We cannot form a protected "bubble" and separate ourselves from others.

The world is ours and we belong to this world. But the way Indian government has made up its mind to destroy the Sikh faith and foreign countries are discriminating against Sikhs, I just don’t see in which way we belong to this world? We are being alienated because of our separate identity. If Sikhnet people don't  want to separate themselves from others then why do they live in America? Why have they separated themselves from Sikh orphans who witnessed their fathers and brothers being taken away by the police never to be seen again and rapes of their mothers and sisters? Why don’t these “White Sikhs” go live in Punjab with those Sikhs who live on 200 Rs. a month? Why don’t they go live in Afghanistan and help them build their country? USA is the best “protected bubble” they have which separates them from the rest of the world. The only thing they know is to make excuses when it comes to Khalistan.

A country of Akal Purakh where the message of the truth will be preached and where oppression and injustice will have no place is the need not only for Sikhs but for the humanity of this world. Khalistan is not our destination but a must need.

Let's say we had our own country. What if more Hindus move into the country than Sikh's. Are they not allowed to vote? Would we have first and second class citizens? To keep a sikh majority, would we force some of them to leave and kill or imprison the ones that refuse?

It is not uncommon for anti-Khalistanis to come up with unrealistic scenarios and ask questions which are ridiculous and have no basis. So what if more Hindus move in? Is Sikhnet assuming that the borders will be open and there will be no immigration and security forces protecting and patrolling the borders? Is there any country in the world with such conditions? Sikhs are not idiots. They know how to free their homeland and manage it properly. Every person (Sikh or Hindu) must go through the same process to immigrate to Khalistan and become a permanent resident. There will be no “second class citizens” because Khalsa believes in equality. Guru Sahib has taught us to live in peace and harmony with others and fight to establish peace. We are taught to see light of Waheguru in everyone.

Voting system will depend on the political structure of the government. In the United States only citizens are allowed to vote and Khalistan won’t have anything different. When it comes to choosing Panj Pyare of Akal Takhat Sahib only Sikhs will be allowed to vote and it won’t be restricted to citizens of Khalistan. If Sikhnet believes that Sikhs will kill or imprison non-Sikhs just to keep Sikh majority in the country then I have no doubt to assume that they think very low of Punjabi Sikhs and the freedom movement. Sikhs have never done in the past and will never do it in the future. It was a Punjabi Sikh (Yogi) who educated them about Sikhi. It was Sikhs of Punjab who destroyed the Mughal rule and freed the poor men and women (non-Sikhs) from the oppression, indignity and dishonor. Only time will tell whether Sikhs form a majority or not but regardless the country will survive.

Khalsa will rule the whole world, why limit it to some tiny borders?

So it is not just a “spiritual” rule anymore? Khalsa will rule the world but must it not start from somewhere? How do expect Khalsa rule over the world? It won’t happen over night. Purpose of Khalistan is not to contain or limit Sikhi but to lay a strong foundation to spread and protect the message of Sikhi and safeguard our culture, heritage, women, Gurdwaras and future generations. Is that immoral? I don’t think so. If living in Khalistan means putting borders around Khalsa then how is it any different than Sikhs living in America? Have they not put borders around themselves by living in USA?

Religions spread through political sovereignty. Buddhism spread when Ashoka became a Buddhist. Christianity spread when it was adopted by the Roman Empire. Islam spread when Muslims took over Medina. Islam’s spread in India was due to their rule. Population of Sikhs increased when they had sovereignty otherwise they were hunted down and prices were put on their heads. How will Khalistan limit Khalsa? Is Islam only limited to Muslim countries? Is Hinduism limited to India? Is Catholicism only limited to Italy? So no doubt that Khalistan no matter how small is a must to safeguard Sikh interests. Sikhi and its principles will spread at much higher rate after Khalistan compared to today.

It is ironic that Sikhnet is hell bent on opposing Khalistan (a small country) yet have wishful thinking about conquering the world? I could ask the same questions to them. What would they do to keep the Sikh majority in the world? Will they kill or imprison people? Will non-Sikhs have the right to vote? What would the political structure be like? Will there be second class citizens? How exactly are they planning on taking over the world when they highly oppose Sikhs from acquiring a tiny fraction of land? The list goes on and on. Why not start Khalsa rule from Khalistan and mark it as beginning of Khalsa Raj. Why not establish all of the Khalsa rules in Khalistan and show the world how the government is supposed to serve for the betterment of humanity? There is nothing that can be done in Khalsa world rule and not in Khalistan. If managing and running a small country seems impossible and impractical then how practical is it to run the world by the same people? We can have a country founded by Sikhs, populated by Sikhs and operated by Sikhs and still be secular to respect the teachings of our gurus.

Sikhs live in many countries that are limited by borderlines. Our minds need to be free from any human law. Our bodies need to be free from oppression, injustice and slavery. Khalsa shall rule the world so let’s start from Khalistan.