PDA

View Full Version : Operation BlueStar 1984- Untold truth..



Samarkadian
February 8th, 2014, 03:54 PM
Want to share this article from India Today about untold stories of much condemned Operation Blue Star in 1984.

======

It was a blistering April afternoon in 1984. A white Ambassador car drove into the driveway of a modest Lutyens Delhi bungalow, 1 Safdarjung Road, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi's residence. A tall bespectacled man got out. He was known only as DGS or director general security, a key official in the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) who controlled a small air force and two covert paramilitary units, the Special Frontier Force and the Special Services Bureau. Three years earlier, DGS had raised another unit, called the Special Group or sg, for clandestine counter-terrorist missions in Punjab and Assam. For the past two months, SG personnel, all drawn from the Army, had been training in secret at a base near Delhi for a critical mission.

DGS was ushered into the living room where a pensive Mrs Gandhi sat with a salt-and-pepper-haired gentleman wearing thick black glasses-Rameshwar Nath Kao, 66, the reclusive spymaster who had built the external intelligence agency, RAW, in 1968 and used it to train Mukti Bahini guerrillas during the Bangladesh war in 1971. He had returned to government as Mrs Gandhi's senior aide in 1981 and was now her de facto national security adviser. More important, he was a key adviser on the Punjab problem. For over two years now, India's most prosperous state had been engulfed by communal violence. A radical group of Sikhs led by a fiery religious preacher Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale, 37, had declared war against the state. His motley group of armed supporters had, by 1984, murdered over 100 civilians and security personnel. The radical militant leader had then been ensconced near the Golden Temple since 1981 with his heavily armed followers, shielded by his proximity to Sikhism's holiest shrine.

DGS briefed Mrs Gandhi on a surgical mission that fell short of a military strike to evict the rebels. Operation Sundown, he explained, was a 'snatch and grab' job: Heliborne commandos would enter the Guru Nanak Niwas guesthouse near the Golden Temple and abduct the militant leader. The operation was so named because it was timed for past midnight when Bhindranwale and his guards would least expect it.

SG operatives had earlier infiltrated the Golden Temple, disguised as pilgrims and journalists, to study its layout. Then, for several weeks, over 200 SG commandos had rehearsed the operation on a wood and Hessian cloth mock-up of the two-storeyed rest house at their base in Sarsawa in Uttar Pradesh. Commandos would rope down from two Mi-4 transport helicopters onto the guest house and make a beeline for Bhindranwale. Once they captured him, he would be spirited away by a ground assault team which would drive in. There was a possibility of a firefight with the militant leader's bodyguards and civilians who could rush in to protect him.

Mrs Gandhi's listened to the details impassively. She had just one question. "How many casualties?" Twenty per cent of the commando force and both helicopters, dgs replied. Mrs Gandhi grimaced. She wanted to know how many civilians would die. The RAW official did not have an answer. No one did. That was it. Mrs Gandhi said no and Operation Sundown died before the first helicopter could take off.

Just two months later, Mrs Gandhi ordered the Army to flush militants out of the temple. Eighty-three armymen and 492 civilians died in Operation Bluestar, the single bloodiest confrontation in independent India's history of civil strife. Machine guns, light artillery, rockets and, eventually, battle tanks were used to overwhelm Bhindranwale and his mini army and the Akal Takht, the highest seat of temporal authority of the Sikhs, was reduced to a smoking ruin. In the maelstrom of Bluestar, Sundown and its extensive preparations got buried in RAW's secret archives.

Three decades later, Operation Sundown resurfaced in an unexpected location-London. On January 13, the United Kingdom was shocked by declassified letters dating to February 1984 that revealed that Margaret Thatcher's government had helped India on "a plan to remove Sikh extremists from the Golden Temple". This plan, according to a top-secret letter from the principal private secretary of then British foreign secretary Geoffrey Howe to the then home secretary Leon Brittan, was drawn up by an officer of the Special Air Services (SAS), UK's elite commando force. The letter, written four months before Bluestar, sparked fears of a backlash from the UK's Sikh community, prompting Prime Minister David Cameron to order an inquiry into the findings.

Festering Wound

Operation Bluestar still touches a raw nerve in India and abroad. On September 30, 2012, four Sikh youths attempted to murder retired Lt-Gen Kuldip Singh Brar on London's Oxford Street. Brar, who led Bluestar, and a frequent visitor to London, survived. Two of his attackers were handed down a 14-year sentence in December last year. The new revelations about a possible British role in the build-up to Bluestar have already inflamed passions. "This obviously raises huge questions over the role of the British government at the time," Labour MP Tom Watson told bbc on January 13. Watson's constituency, West Bromwich East, has many Sikh constituents. New Delhi has so far not responded to the revelations. Brar calls reports of sas involvement in Bluestar "utter nonsense".

Retired RAW officials and former members of its secret military wing, however, tell a different story. The sas assistance was not for Bluestar, a pure army assault, they told india today. It was to vet Operation Sundown, a commando raid. As revealed by B. Raman, former head of raw's counter-terrorism division, in his 2007 book The Kaoboys of R&AW, two MI-5 intelligence liaison officials at the British high commission had scouted the Golden Temple complex in December 1983. They briefed a senior sas officer sent by the UK to Delhi who deemed the special operation feasible. The sas expertise was sought by Mrs Gandhi's spy chief R.N. Kao who had a personal equation with several foreign intelligence chiefs.

Though Sundown was aborted, some of the commandos who had trained for it spearheaded a near-suicidal frontal assault on the heavily fortified Akal Takht during Bluestar and stayed till the last militant was flushed out of the temple three days later. This is one reason those officers, long since retired, refuse to be identified. "My anonymity is my only protection," says one of the officers who lives in a metro.

If Kao was unhappy with Mrs Gandhi's rejection of Sundown, he didn't show it. In fact, his thinking was in line with her extreme caution. Weeks earlier, RAW station chiefs in foreign capitals, particularly those with large Sikh expatriate populations, had warned Kao of the adverse fallout of a military operation to flush out the militants. Kao had personally led the parleys with overseas Sikh separatists to persuade Bhindranwale to vacate the Golden Temple. "They promised him a lot," says a former RAW chief who is close to Kao, "but delivered nothing." "Another possible reason for the commando operation being called off was the influence of a 'soft group' within the Congress headed by Rajiv Gandhi which favoured a negotiated settlement with Bhindranwale," says Mandeep Singh Bajwa, a Chandigarh-based analyst.

In January 1984, the government had instituted secret talks with Bhindranwale at the behest of Rajiv. But within four months, hardliners on both sides prevailed. In late April 1984, Satish Jacob of bbc's Delhi bureau saw trucks carrying construction material into the temple. He also saw a slim, fair man of medium height in a white salwar kameez and sporting a flowing beard. Major General Shabeg Singh was a war hero who had trained Mukti Bahini fighters in 1971 but was stripped of his rank and court-martialled on charges of corruption just before he was to retire in 1976. Now, as the military adviser of Bhindranwale, he oversaw conversion of the five-storeyed Akal Takht into a fortress. "We're doing it for the community," the soft-spoken former general told Jacob.

Indira Gandhi gives the Go-ahead

By May 1984, Punjab teetered on the brink. The daylight murder of dig A.S. Atwal inside the Golden Temple in April 1983 had paralysed Punjab Police into inaction. And the thousands of paramilitary personnel sent by Delhi after it dismissed the state government in October 1983 had failed to prevent the state's descent into chaos. On May 11, 1984, Bhindranwale rejected the final settlement offered by Mrs Gandhi's think tank led by Narasimha Rao to the Akali Dal. Soon after, Army chief General Arun Kumar Vaidya became a frequent visitor to Mrs Gandhi's office. Her personal secretary and confidant R.K. Dhawan was present at one of those half-hour meetings. "Gen Vaidya assured her there would be no casualties and there would be no damage to the Golden Temple," Dhawan told India Today. On June 2, talks with the Akalis collapsed.

As Mark Tully and Satish Jacob wrote in their 1985 book Amritsar: Mrs Gandhi's Last Battle, "Mrs Gandhi was not a decisive woman, she was very reluctant to act, and she only fought back when she was firmly pinned against the ropes." The Army was her last resort. She green-lit Operation Bluestar. Dhawan says two "extra-constitutional authorities" in Rajiv Gandhi's inner circle, who would later become key figures in his Cabinet, were responsible for her change of mind. "They told her the military option was the only solution," he says. The mantle fell on the Western Army commander, the flamboyant Lt-Gen Krishnaswamy Sundarji. He had briefly considered a plan to starve out the defenders but junked it fearing an uprising in the countryside.

contd...

Samarkadian
February 8th, 2014, 03:54 PM
Bluestar bloodbath

Shortly after 10.30 p.m. on June 5, 1984, 20 men in black dungarees stealthily entered the Golden Temple. They wore night-vision goggles, M-1 steel helmets, bulletproof vests and carried a mix of MP-5 submachine guns and AK-47 assault rifles. The men of sg's 56th Commando Company were then the only force in India trained for room intervention, the specialised art of fighting in confined spaces. Each commando was a sharpshooter, diver and parachutist and could do 40-km speed marches. Some of them wore gas masks and carried stubby gas guns meant to launch CX gas canisters, a more potent tear gas. Three months before this night, the commandos had stayed around the temple and rehearsed for Operation Sundown. Some of them still sported the beards they had grown for their undercover work as volunteers in the Golden Temple's langar. When the plan was called off, they returned to their base in Sarsawa. They had flown into Amritsar the previous day at the request of Lt-Gen Sundarji.

The three battalions that Lt-Gen Brar's 9th Infantry Division sent into the Golden Temple that night were trained to fight a conventional combat on the plains of Punjab and in the deserts of Rajasthan. They would overwhelm the enemy by sheer force of numbers. The commandos, who spearheaded the assault, made use of stealth, speed and surprise to achieve results. Soon after arriving, one of the sg officers had briefed Lt-Gen Ranjit Singh Dayal, Sundarji's chief of staff, on a plan to capture the Akal Takht by blowing off its rear wall. General Dayal, a paratrooper who had captured the Haji Pir pass in an unconventional operation in the 1965 war, immediately overruled it. "There must be no damage to the Akal Takht," he said. The commandos were to capture the sacred building by using gas to flush out the militants, he said.

The Army had clearly underestimated the defences. As soon as they entered the temple, a sniper shot the unit's radio operator clean through his helmet. The rest took cover in the long gallery of pillars that led to the Akal Takht. Light machine guns and carbines crackled from behind impregnable walls of the temple, their multiple gun flashes blinding the commandos' night-vision devices, forcing them to take them off. The commandos and infantry soldiers cautiously advanced, sheltering behind rows of pillars. Those who tried to advance towards the Akal Takht were cut down on the marble parikrama. An armoured personnel carrier bringing in troops was immobilised by a rocket-propelled grenade. "Shabeg knew the Army's Achilles heel," says an SG colonel. "He knew we couldn't fight in built-up areas."

Post-midnight, remnants of the sg unit and the Army's 1 Para huddled near a fountain at the base of the Akal Takht. The area between the Akal Takht and the Darshani Deori that led to the Golden Temple had turned into a killing zone, covered by Shabeg's light machine guns. Attempts by the para-commandos to storm the defences were repeatedly beaten back. They lost at least 17 men, their black dungaree-clad bodies lying prone on white marble. Commandos who tried to fire the CX gas canisters discovered that the Akal Takht's windows had been bricked up. The only openings were horizontal slots out of which machine guns poured deadly fire. The commandos neutralised two of the machine gun nests by dropping grenades into them but the Akal Takht was impregnable. Then, around 7.30 a.m. on June 5, three Vickers-Vijayanta tanks were deployed. They fired 105 mm shells and knocked down the walls of the Akal Takht. Commandos and infantrymen then moved in to mop up the defenders, tossing gas and lobbing grenades inside the building.

The temple premises resembled a medieval battlefield, one sg trooper recalls. Bloodied and blackened bodies lay scattered around the white temple parikrama. In the basement of the blackened, still-smoking ruin of the Akal Takht, the commandos found the body of Shabeg. The Army recovered 51 light machine guns, 31 of which had been concentrated around the Akal Takht. "Normally, an army unit (of around 800 soldiers) would deploy this quantum of firepower to cover an area of about eight km," Lt-Gen Brar recounted in his book Operation Blue Star: The True Story. Shabeg, he believed, wanted to hold out until daylight in the hope that there would be a popular uprising among the people when they get to know of the army action. The former war hero had extracted a bloody price on an army he felt had wronged him.

'Oh my God,' she said

Around 6 a.m. on June 6, 1984, the phone rang in R.K. Dhawan's Golf Links home. Minister of State for Defence K.P. Singh Deo wanted Dhawan to convey an urgent message to Mrs Gandhi. The operation was a success, he said, but there were heavy casualties-both armymen and civilians. Mrs Gandhi's first reaction was anguish. "Oh my God,â? she told Dhawan. "They told me there would be no casualties."

It took the Army two more days to clear Bhindranwale's men from the temple's labyrinthine corridors. The commanding officer of the sg contingent, a lieutenant-colonel, was seriously wounded by a sniper as he escorted President Zail Singh around the temple on June 8.

Operation Bluestar inflamed Sikh sentiments and triggered a mutiny in certain Indian Army units. It also led to the death of Mrs Gandhi: Her two Sikh bodyguards gunned her down on October 31 that year. The communal holocaust in which over 8,000 Sikhs were murdered by mobs around the country-including 3,000 in Delhi-fanned another decade of insurgency in Punjab. In the aftermath of Mrs Gandhi's assassination, sg commandos, several of whom had seen action at the Golden Temple, were rushed to 7 Race Course Road to guard Rajiv Gandhi and his family round-the-clock for a year. They had plenty of time to wonder if history would have turned out differently had they been given the chance to carry out Operation Sundown.

http://in.news.yahoo.com/the-untold-story-before-operation-bluestar-080806093.html

swaich
February 8th, 2014, 11:42 PM
I have read both Brar's account of the events and multiple other books on Op Bluestar; almost all except Brar's pro-govt version are of the opinion that it was an avoidable folly. From every angle one looks at it - the Army which lost scores of brave commandos, the community that suffered and paid for consequences of the actions of its own and the damaged unity of the country - Op Bluestar was a terrible and ill conceived plan.

ravinderpannu
February 9th, 2014, 11:44 AM
Operations Blue star definitely had its pros and cons.

It definitely left a mark in a particular community. But was Bhindrawale not responsible of killing,, Did his men not kill innocents,
were they not the first to kill a man in holy place.

were they not planning for KHALISTAN.

The army did what they were meant to do, they were, they are to defend the country and they did well then and doing very well now.

rohittewatia
February 11th, 2014, 08:59 PM
Whoever created Bhindranwale in the First Hand? How did he became so powerful without even being noticed by Neither State Govt. nor Central? Whatever happened was a subsequent effect of what they had sown. Moreover, what was the fault of innocent blood spilled in the Pogrom? If the Operation Blue was a necessary evil, then what about whatever happened in Delhi? A whole community had to pay for the stupidity of an arrogant Dictator?

anilsangwan
February 12th, 2014, 09:55 AM
Exactly.... It was Indira Gandhi who ensured Bhindrawale's rise to keep Akalis on backfoot.



Whoever created Bhindranwale in the First Hand? How did he became so powerful without even being noticed by Neither State Govt. nor Central? Whatever happened was a subsequent effect of what they had sown. Moreover, what was the fault of innocent blood spilled in the Pogrom? If the Operation Blue was a necessary evil, then what about whatever happened in Delhi? A whole community had to pay for the stupidity of an arrogant Dictator?

maddhan1979
February 14th, 2014, 02:04 PM
Who really cares in this country? Any new story?

Sikhs, Jats, Rajpoots, Gurkhas become fodder for Idol worshipers.

All of the above stated communities had the worst history in this country, their ancestors fought long battles in different names. For what reasons?

Rajpoot girls used to commit sati or kill themselves, newborn Jat girls were also killed, Gurkha girls land up in bad places, same happened with Sikh women.

And who were they fighting for? and in the name of what? They were fighting with people, who are their own blood, write same family names, eat same food, talk same language. Look at Punjab, it is same right across border in Pakistan, look at Kashmir it is again same right across border, we find similarities all the way till Afghanistan and Iran.

These communities were the greatest doers as they were also the best farmers and warriors, yet, they seem to be most exploited people. North Indian girls marrying south Indian boys is again worst thing that can happen to northern Indians after such a turbulent past. There is already a bad male female ratio in north India.

maddhan1979
February 14th, 2014, 02:19 PM
Who really cares in this country? Any new story?

Sikhs, Jats, Rajpoots, Gurkhas become fodder for Idol worshipers.

All of the above stated communities had the worst history in this country, their ancestors fought long battles in different names. For what reasons?

Rajpoot girls used to commit sati or kill themselves, newborn Jat girls were also killed, Gurkha girls land up in bad places, same happened with Sikh women.

And who were they fighting with and in the name of what? They were fighting with people, who are their own blood, write same family names, eat same food, talk same language. Look at Punjab it is same right across border in Pakistan, look at Kashmir it is again same right across border, we find similarities all the way till Afghanistan and Iran.

These communities were the greatest doers as they were also the best farmers and warriors, yet, they seem to be most exploited people. North Indian girls marrying south Indian boys is again a story going wrong. There is already a bad male female ratio in north India.

Name any war, name any event and count the number of people who stood up for fighting and saving the day, you will find maximum people from these communities most of the people from north west of India, yet at national or state level these people are at the worst receiving end.

upendersingh
February 15th, 2014, 02:21 PM
The whole story is : Sikhs were raised from Hindus to fight against Mughals. Afterwards they started considering themselves different than Hindus. It is like all army men start considering themselves different than the other Indians. Moreover some of those so called Sikhs started demanding separate Khalistan for them. Was it fair? I wondered to know that this so called Khalistan was not consisted of Just Punjab (where even 45% Hindus also live), but it included half of North India. Was there any limit of foolishness? Just 2% Sikhs (and Khalistan supporters far less) wanted to seize 50% India. A foolish so called saint Bhindrawala got around 2000 Sikhs killed in Operation Blue Star, then around 5000 Sikhs in Delhi and then during the militancy era in Punjab uncountable Sikhs were killed (may be 3000+). So 10000+ Sikhs (mostly innocent) got killed because of a foolish person. And still where is that Khalistan?
When a dozens of Jats got killed in Muzaffarnagar recently then I lost my sleep for some nights. I wonder how do Sikhs feel? A foolish person has given a heavy and black spot on whole of his community.

swaich
February 15th, 2014, 04:24 PM
The whole story is : Sikhs were raised from Hindus to fight against Mughals. Afterwards they started considering themselves different than Hindus. It is like all army men start considering themselves different than the other Indians. Moreover some of those so called Sikhs started demanding separate Khalistan for them. Was it fair? I wondered to know that this so called Khalistan was not consisted of Just Punjab (where even 45% Hindus also live), but it included half of North India. Was there any limit of foolishness? Just 2% Sikhs (and Khalistan supporters far less) wanted to seize 50% India. A foolish so called saint Bhindrawala got around 2000 Sikhs killed in Operation Blue Star, then around 5000 Sikhs in Delhi and then during the militancy era in Punjab uncountable Sikhs were killed (may be 3000+). So 10000+ Sikhs (mostly innocent) got killed because of a foolish person. And still where is that Khalistan?
When a dozens of Jats got killed in Muzaffarnagar recently then I lost my sleep for some nights. I wonder how do Sikhs feel? A foolish person has given a heavy and black spot on whole of his community.

Never read a more simplistic and ignorant explanation of the Khalistan issue.

Sikhs were not 'raised' to fight anybody nor from any one religion. Both Muslim and Hindu lower castes joined in large numbers in the initial years. The first 200 years of the religion were peaceful. The martial bearings were attached by the later Gurus - Hargobind (who assimilated Jats in large numbers), Gobind and lastly during Banda's agrarian revolt.

Khalistan was hardly a demand untill after 1984. True, it had no logical or practical basis, but the demand for more autonomy when repeatedly rejected was exploited by uneducated Babas like Bhindrawala and violence ensued.

upendersingh
February 15th, 2014, 04:48 PM
Never read a more simplistic and ignorant explanation of the Khalistan issue.

Sikhs were not 'raised' to fight anybody nor from any one religion. Both Muslim and Hindu lower castes joined in large numbers in the initial years. The first 200 years of the religion were peaceful. The martial bearings were attached by the later Gurus - Hargobind (who assimilated Jats in large numbers), Gobind and lastly during Banda's agrarian revolt.

Khalistan was hardly a demand untill after 1984. True, it had no logical or practical basis, but the demand for more autonomy when repeatedly rejected was exploited by uneducated Babas like Bhindrawala and violence ensued.

Lie is only option left for the people defending Sikhism and demand for Khalistan. By the way can you tell me any Muslim or non Hindu out of these initial persons, who converted to Sikhism? This was the beginning.
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .........
Guru Gobind Singh Ji, who had abolished the institution of masands replaced charan pahul with khanda di Pahul. He summoned a special assembly in the Keshgarh Fort at Anandpur on the Baisakhi day of 1756 Bk/30 March 1699. After the morning devotions and kirtan, he suddenly stood up, drawn sword in hand, and, to quote Bhai Santokh Singh, Sri Gur Pratap Suraj Granth, spoke: “The entire sangat is very dear to me; but is there a devoted Sikh who will give his head to me here and now? A need has arisen at this moment which calls for a head.” A hush fell over the assembly. Daya Ram, a Khatri of Lahore, arose and offered himself. He walked behind the Guru to a tent near by. Guru Gobind Singh returned with his sword dripping blood and demanded another head. The Guru again asked for another head, this time Dharam Das, a Jat of the village of Jatwara in the Saharanpur District, presented himself to the Guru. Guru Gobind Singh gave three more calls. Mohkam Chand, a calico printer/tailor from Dwarka, Himmat Rai, a water-bearer from Jagannath Puri, and Sahib Chand, a barber from Bidar, stood up one after another and advanced to offer their heads.
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................
Map of Khalistan

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v63/singhsta/av-1724.jpg

RathiJi
February 15th, 2014, 05:17 PM
I can't stop laughing when word saint is used with Bhindrewala.

He was not only responsible for murders of innocents but also exposing wrong side of Sikhism. He was a Sant Sipahi for Sikhism like Jihadis are for Islam. Both needs to be condemned & eliminated without a second thought.

Operation Bluestar should not be condemned because of Army use or violence inside a Gurudwara by state/nation but delay in action and leverages given to religious fanatics like Bhinderewala in initial days which resulted in this violence. Sikhs were misguided by him and they paid the price.

swaich
February 15th, 2014, 05:44 PM
Lie is only option left for the people defending Sikhism and demand for Khalistan. By the way can you tell me any Muslim or non Hindu out of these initial persons, who converted to Sikhism? This was the beginning.
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .........
Guru Gobind Singh Ji, who had abolished the institution of masands replaced charan pahul with khanda di Pahul. He summoned a special assembly in the Keshgarh Fort at Anandpur on the Baisakhi day of 1756 Bk/30 March 1699. After the morning devotions and kirtan, he suddenly stood up, drawn sword in hand, and, to quote Bhai Santokh Singh, Sri Gur Pratap Suraj Granth, spoke: “The entire sangat is very dear to me; but is there a devoted Sikh who will give his head to me here and now? A need has arisen at this moment which calls for a head.” A hush fell over the assembly. Daya Ram, a Khatri of Lahore, arose and offered himself. He walked behind the Guru to a tent near by. Guru Gobind Singh returned with his sword dripping blood and demanded another head. The Guru again asked for another head, this time Dharam Das, a Jat of the village of Jatwara in the Saharanpur District, presented himself to the Guru. Guru Gobind Singh gave three more calls. Mohkam Chand, a calico printer/tailor from Dwarka, Himmat Rai, a water-bearer from Jagannath Puri, and Sahib Chand, a barber from Bidar, stood up one after another and advanced to offer their heads.
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................
Map of Khalistan

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v63/singhsta/av-1724.jpg

Sikhism didn't start with the Panj Pyaras. The names you have mentioned are those of the Panj Pyaras during the initiation of the Khalsa by Guru Gobind in 1699. True, it became more formalized and recognizable, but it had emerged as a separate entity long back.

I don't know of any prominent Muslims who were converted to Sikhism, but read about Mazhabi community. Its the largest scheduled class group in Punjab who were originally Hindu and Muslim lower castes. Almost every Sikh history book states the Gurus were joined by lower castes from both Hindu and Muslim communities.

That map is as idiotic as the people who espouse Khalistan. It was a massive mistake to even envision Punjab to break away from India. Whatever grievances the community had should have been resolved without taking recourse separatism. Having said that, one can understand why the movement went astray.

swaich
February 15th, 2014, 05:47 PM
I can't stop laughing when word saint is used with Bhindrewala.

He was not only responsible for murders of innocents but also exposing wrong side of Sikhism. He was a Sant Sipahi for Sikhism like Jihadis are for Islam. Both needs to be condemned & eliminated without a second thought.

Operation Bluestar should not be condemned because of Army use or violence inside a Gurudwara by state/nation but delay in action and leverages given to religious fanatics like Bhinderewala in initial days which resulted in this violence. Sikhs were misguided by him and they paid the price.

True Bhindrawala wasn't a saint, but the blame for 1984 cannot be put squarely on the Sikh community alone. The politicians of the day, especially Indira Gandhi cannot be absolved of their actions.

upendersingh
February 15th, 2014, 11:54 PM
Sikhism didn't start with the Panj Pyaras. The names you have mentioned are those of the Panj Pyaras during the initiation of the Khalsa by Guru Gobind in 1699. True, it became more formalized and recognizable, but it had emerged as a separate entity long back.

I don't know of any prominent Muslims who were converted to Sikhism, but read about Mazhabi community. Its the largest scheduled class group in Punjab who were originally Hindu and Muslim lower castes. Almost every Sikh history book states the Gurus were joined by lower castes from both Hindu and Muslim communities.

That map is as idiotic as the people who espouse Khalistan. It was a massive mistake to even envision Punjab to break away from India. Whatever grievances the community had should have been resolved without taking recourse separatism. Having said that, one can understand why the movement went astray.

Swaich ji, I don't have any problem if you defend Sikhism, but it will be better if you don't try to misguide me. I very well know where Sikhism started from. I hope you are not going to claim that it started even before Guru Nanak (a Hindu). Actually 5 kakars were not announced by Guru Nanak and before that Guru Gobind Singh's panj pyara drama there was popular term nanakpanth. It was just like many religious preachers in present have their fan following, so had Guru Nanak and earlier Gurus before Guru Gobind Singh. Yes, Guru Nanak protested against the Brahminic propaganda, but I don't think he wished to establish a new religion than Hinduism. Still many people think Sikhism is not any religion and it is just a sect. When so called Sikhs fought some wars against the Mughals (though lost badly), then some of them started considering themselves different than the Hindus. Was that fair?

RathiJi
February 16th, 2014, 01:22 PM
True Bhindrawala wasn't a saint, but the blame for 1984 cannot be put squarely on the Sikh community alone. The politicians of the day, especially Indira Gandhi cannot be absolved of their actions.


delay in action and leverages given to religious fanatics like Bhinderewala in initial days which resulted in this violence

This line in above post conveys the same thing.

But the problem lies somewhere else, Sikhs ( not everyone ) started feeling alienated to the concept of united India where all religions were co existing. They had an impression of being martial/superior religion which could take away a Sikh nation named Khalistan from union of India. To achieve this notorious target they resorted to violence and killed innocent civilians in the name of religious land. They even worked in the hands of Pakistan & ISI to harm & bleed India. It was must to teach them lesson so that they would never dare to do the same. I hope now they understand it and we all again co exist together.

On Sikhism evolution, Yes it started from Hinduism. Guru Nanak was a Hindu Khatri who can be termed as founder of this new concept. Down the line many low caste hindus joined Sikhism because of casteism in Hindu religion & they got better option than Islam but there were little or very less evidence of muslims converting to Sikhism en-masse. The high time came from 6th guru Hargovind Singh when Sikhs started growing as an organized community. Then followed by many Gurus till Govind Singh when many Hindus from martial race mostly Jats joined the religion to fight against Mughal atrocities. The evolution, struggle , rise & existence of Sikhism all these phases witnessed a major contribution form Hinduism & its various castes.

maddhan1979
February 16th, 2014, 05:16 PM
Who really cares in this country? Any new story?

Sikhs, Jats, Rajpoots, Gurkhas become fodder for Idol worshipers.

All of the above stated communities had the worst history in this country, their ancestors fought long battles in different names. For what reasons?

Rajpoot girls used to commit sati or kill themselves, newborn Jat girls were also killed, Gurkha girls land up in bad places, same happened with Sikh women.

And who were they fighting for? and in the name of what? They were fighting with people, who are their own blood, write same family names, eat same food, talk same language. Look at Punjab, it is same right across border in Pakistan, look at Kashmir it is again same right across border, we find similarities all the way till Afghanistan and Iran.

These communities were the greatest doers as they were also the best farmers and warriors, yet, they seem to be most exploited people. North Indian girls marrying south Indian boys is again worst thing that can happen to northern Indians after such a turbulent past. There is already a bad male female ratio in north India.


Those were the bad uncertain days of the past when our ancestors had a very bad time because of wars. The above stated situation is common in any war prone area in the world.

swaich
February 16th, 2014, 08:18 PM
Swaich ji, I don't have any problem if you defend Sikhism, but it will be better if you don't try to misguide me. I very well know where Sikhism started from. I hope you are not going to claim that it started even before Guru Nanak (a Hindu). Actually 5 kakars were not announced by Guru Nanak and before that Guru Gobind Singh's panj pyara drama there was popular term nanakpanth. It was just like many religious preachers in present have their fan following, so had Guru Nanak and earlier Gurus before Guru Gobind Singh. Yes, Guru Nanak protested against the Brahminic propaganda, but I don't think he wished to establish a new religion than Hinduism. Still many people think Sikhism is not any religion and it is just a sect. When so called Sikhs fought some wars against the Mughals (though lost badly), then some of them started considering themselves different than the Hindus. Was that fair?

Upender bhai, Sikhism is not being crucified here that I need to defend it. And if it were, I don't proclaim myself to be endowed with all knowledge on the subject to be capable of defending it. Whatever I write here is based on my limited learning and as a 'Sikh' (student), I am still learning.

But I do take exception to the fact that you start off by saying that I am trying to misguide you. What we are doing here is a engaging in a debate with a difference of opinion, but lets not call my expressing a divergent opinion as an attempt to misguide you or anybody. If we start off like that then there's no point in having a debate or a discussion as you have proclaimed in the beginning that my views are misguidance and yours are THE truth. So I hope you will consider my divergent opinion.

Now, from what I understand, your main argument in the above post is that Sikhism was never a separate religion. It was just a panth, a sect of Hinduism. And the rationale behind the argument is that Gurus were all Hindus to begin with who didn't want to start a separate religion and Guru Gobind's drama (as you put it) to formalize a separate identity meant nothing. Did I get that right?

I think that's a very relevant an interesting point you raised. I think all religions start as a sect only. Even Pagans or animistic tribalism is called a religion and all founders of a religion or the followers belong to an established religion before starting a new one. Jesus was a Jew. Buddha I believe was a Hindu. But the fundamental difference between a new religion and the old one is of the basic tenets, philosophy and form of worship.

So at what point did Sikhism emerge as a separate religion (if at all it did, according to you)? I don't know if any Guru before Guru Gobind proclaimed a formal separate identity. But by the virtue of teachings and philosophy alone, I think Nanak's panth was separate from Hinduism, at least the commonly followed Brahamanical version. The stress on equality, abolition of castes and lack of 'murti-puja' was revolutionary at that point of time and that is where it fundamentally differed from Hinduism the way it was practiced. One could even say that in terms of worship of a formless one God, it was more similar to Islam except for the fanaticism.

All of what I mentioned above was first formulated by Guru Nanak and hence I believe scholars and historians consider him to be the founder of a separate religion called Sikhism.

swaich
February 16th, 2014, 08:38 PM
This line in above post conveys the same thing.

But the problem lies somewhere else, Sikhs ( not everyone ) started feeling alienated to the concept of united India where all religions were co existing. They had an impression of being martial/superior religion which could take away a Sikh nation named Khalistan from union of India. To achieve this notorious target they resorted to violence and killed innocent civilians in the name of religious land. They even worked in the hands of Pakistan & ISI to harm & bleed India. It was must to teach them lesson so that they would never dare to do the same. I hope now they understand it and we all again co exist together.

It isn't that black and white. You make it sound like some Sikhs suddenly got up one day and said we will break away from the union and started resorting to violence.

You are mixing up a lot of things there. Yes, Sikhs did start feeling alienated with the central leadership. The seeds were in some way sown by Nehru's promise of 'self-rule' during 1947.

Master Tara Singh was being wooed by Jinnah to join Pakistan and though the Sikhs in majority were with the INC, Nehru tried to win them over and remove all doubts by promising 'self-rule' within the Union.
Then further frictions were created after the demand of Punjabi Suba kept getting delayed and the resultant Punjab state formed in 1966 after years of agitation was smaller than expected as Punjabi regions areas like Ambala and Sirsa were kept out.
Chandigarh was supposed to be handed over to Punjab after 10-15 years but it continued to be a UT
In the meantime, newspaper owners like Lala Jagat Narain, a Congress supporter were trying to win the Punjabi Hindu vote and continued to print inflammatory articles maligning the intentions of the Sikh community.
Later the water-sharing issues also crept up


So the continuing delaying tactics and unsatisfactory resolution of these issues kind of left the Sikhs with the feeling of a step-motherly treatment. A community that had contributed above its share to the nation felt like it was being cheated of its right.

Again, that's not to say, there wasn't any extremism. It got very bad in the late 70s and early 80s. Scores of Hindus were killed, Hindu businessmen were forced to leave, ruining the economy and alliances with the notorious ISI were made. But for about 30 years, the responsibility for the deteriorating situation lay at the Centre's door.


On Sikhism evolution, Yes it started from Hinduism. Guru Nanak was a Hindu Khatri who can be termed as founder of this new concept. Down the line many low caste hindus joined Sikhism because of casteism in Hindu religion & they got better option than Islam but there were little or very less evidence of muslims converting to Sikhism en-masse. The high time came from 6th guru Hargovind Singh when Sikhs started growing as an organized community. Then followed by many Gurus till Govind Singh when many Hindus from martial race mostly Jats joined the religion to fight against Mughal atrocities. The evolution, struggle , rise & existence of Sikhism all these phases witnessed a major contribution form Hinduism & its various castes.
No one is trying to take away the contribution of Hinduism or of Hindus from establishing Sikhism. There would be no Sikhism without Hinduism. But to say that Sikhism is a sub-sect or not a religion in itself is akin to belittling those who see themselves as a separate religion. But yes, different doesn't mean superior.

narenderkharb
February 18th, 2014, 06:37 AM
-------------------------

Samarkadian
February 18th, 2014, 08:05 PM
Thats what happens when a billion population see its salvation at the hand of mere mortal leader who has all human tendencies to become a dictator with in democracy. A menopausal whim left a country, state and a brave community in its nadir.

swaich
February 18th, 2014, 11:08 PM
Thats what happens when a billion population see its salvation at the hand of mere mortal leader who has all human tendencies to become a dictator with in democracy. A menopausal whim left a country, state and a brave community in its nadir.

I was once discussing the issue of Britain raising a modern Sikh regiment with an ex-British army guy when IG's assassination and Op Blue Star came up. His response -"Sic, semper, tyrannis!" Google it and you will understand its historical significance.