Long long back it was established that our sense organs cannot experience God. Eyes cannot see Him, ears cannot listen Him, etc,.

Soon some people started claiming that they have seen God with their mind's eye. These were the mystics, and in minority. The mystics themselves couldn't be unanimous on one "picture" of God. Therefore, the mystics as a minority class was a divided house. They said: God is a subjective experience.

Ever since, the genius of the society have been deeply concerned about the masses. They were preoccupied with the question of keeping them[the masses] ethical, and under their control. The genius of the society had the Nietsczhen Will to Power.

And unfortunately it stood established that God was not cognizable! The genius were bothered with the problem of wholesale atheism. The whole society could stop believing in God and become unethical. A social disorder could be in the offing. In other words, the concern was: How to retain the masses now?

One thing was clear that the masses had to be somehow connected to God, indirectly, through a medium, because a direct cognizance of God was impossible. Medium was a necessity if the mankind was to proceed further in the matter of God. Either God was to travel down this medium or the masses had to travel up.

The Western religions talk of revelation, and in their case Jesus, Moses, Hazrat Muhammad, etc, are the media down which God traveled to mankind. It was God who took a step towards mankind and revealed Himself. God appeared before Moses. Allah sent Gabriel to fetch Muhammad. It is no coincidence that each of the Western prophets destroyed the other type of medium, a rival medium, of the IDOLS. Moses destroyed the pagan idols, Muhammad destroyed the pagan Arab idols. And Moses went to such an extent so as to ban taking the Name of God[YHWH], and it is blasphemy in Judaism.

The chief reason for iconoclasm of Western prophets was the destruction of an alternate mode of approach to God. The reasons were derived from the theory of exclusive monopoly and were political and strategic in nature.

The Western prophets were a media between man and God. One of them said: I am the Gate. The concept of a medium between man and God had succeeded in abolishing atheism which never surfaced in the Western societies till about the 18th century. Such is the strength of a medium as a concept ! It can halt the withering of masses. The concept of a medium survived. The archetype of the masses found it attractive.

In India, idolatry was on a similar footing. It was a medium invented by the Brahmans, who were the Indian counterpart genius of the society. Their religion was not a revealed religion; so it was not the God who was to travel to them, it was, rather, the masses who were to remain busy making efforts.

Idolatry was the medium of the second type--man was required to travel to God. The Brahmans were intelligent people and introduced a simple black stone with the guidelines that it was to be used as a medium of approach to God and nothing more. The interested reader may refer to Cunningham's footnote in the Chapter II sub-heading 'loses its vigour' for details. And 44 years after 1849, at Chicago, Swami Vivekananda justified the Hindoo idolatry on the same lines.

This was the concept of a 'medium' as suited for the limited intellect of the masses. Since one couldn't approach God directly[because He was incognizable], a medium, a path was required. The path was through a messiah, or through an idol. The masses were satisfied with either.

The minority called mystics, being of a higher intellect, rejected both the rudimentary approaches to God. They relied on a human helper called the guru. To amuse the students, the guru would keep his disciples busy through yogic postures or through philosophies of creation, the philosophies of the sacred syllable of AUM, or through the mythological stories of success through repetition and meditation.

Such was the state of dark fog that engulfed the innocent mankind. No one was the culprit, and no one is in this Universe. The human archetype is in Hukm.

In the 15th century India a Dhadi was singing through the dusty streets of a village called Nankana. He was writing a new path all set to overturn the age-old requirements of a 'medium'. He was planning a most subtle iconoclasm. A genius par excellence was this Dhadi; a builder of a new world order was he to be--the Supreme Master: Guru Nanak, who was to surpass all prophets and thinkers by quashing the centuries old theme of the requirements of a 'medium'. His' was a new subtle mode of approaching God.

But first we discuss the shortcomings of the old approach.

The fifteenth century India was a picture of a failed scheme. The picture in the West was no different either. So it would not be wrong to conclude that bridging the gap between the masses and God through a 'medium'[whatsoever] was a failed experiment. The genius worldwide had committed a mistake somewhere.

The untrained masses had with them a medium of connection, which they abused thoroughly. The medium encouraged individualism and compartmentalization.

The people were more loyal to the God to whom they were connected, rather than to each other. The concept of Mukti through the "Gate" introduced selfishness. One man could trample his fellow men for sake of his own Mukti.

Interrelationship of men was not central to this scheme just like God is not central to the scientific thinking. The old scheme was absolutely consistent even if the men were not connected. The umbilical cord between man and God was the sole requirement. Yes! it became an umbilical cord. The idol became an umbilical cord. Man could speak his grievances to an idol. Man could cry before an idol. Man could ask gifts from an idol. The relation between man and idol became a personal relation--the society was moving towards individualism. Man was no longer connected to his fellow human beings.

Man-God relation was abused to such an extent that each man was lonely in this crowded world. INDIVIDUALISM was the key word.

Hitler would massacre six million Jews at Auschwitz. Hindoos would stop loving their fellow Hindoos, forgetting that the untouchables too were men.

In the 21st century, some youths would smash planes into twin towers knowing well that it would be devastating. Is it not because man is secured by an umbilical cord, and that he can neglect everything else?

The masses donot think much. They learn, but not think. The logic of connecting masses with God was not wrong, only that it was applied to untrained masses.

The sole cause of failure of the umbilical cord was the individualistic direction the untrained society took.

And Guru Nanak would introduce a new approach addressing the shortcomings of the earlier one: There was to be no 'medium'[in the sense described earlier] between man and God. To the followers of both the approaches, the Hindoos and Mohammedans, he said: "Shubh Amalan Bajhon Doven Roi." Man was not to reach God through an idol. Nor was he to reach God by merely accepting Guru Nanak as his Guru. Man was to reach man first, through Sewa. THE MASSES WERE TO BE TRAINED, through Sangat and VICHAAR. The mental level of an ordinary man was to be upgraded through VICHAAR. The ordinary man was not to approach God through a medium. He was to transform himself by leading the life of a Gurmukh. Gurmukh is central to Guru Nanak's teachings.

Can you see the whole thing now? Guru Nanak was not motivated by the Will to Power, and this is what made him truthful. He would not win converts by allurement, force or tactic. He was a straightforward Master. Man-God relation cannot be established without the Man-Man relation. The former had to be superseded by the latter, only to be realized later.

Khalsa as a religion is a religion of collectivism--Jathebandi. Khalsa is not an individualistic approach to God. It is a corporate approach. Man can reach God through Man. Jathebandi as a term means 'relationship between men'. Khalsa is a collection of five men, before whom Guru Nanak too bowed.

God cannot be reached through an idol, nor through a man-Guru, or through a prophet. God can be loved through man.

The whole idea of Sikhism is to build a corporate society, train masses through Sangat, VICHAAR, Sewa so that they adopt the Khalsahood and realize God as Keertan, Vismaad. The road to God passes through man, and not through an idol or a messiah--"Jithay Neech Smalliayen Tithaiy Nadr Teri Bakhsis"[Sri Raag M: 1]

But have we understood Guru Nanak?

The Sikhs are not a failed institute, and will never. It is no denying the fact that the modern day Sikhs are like a lotus in a dirty pond. Punjab is a distinct state of India, the most prosperous, and genetically, the Sikhs are enterprising. The Sikhs worldwide have a per capita income of $702 as compared to $392 of their Hindoo counterparts. If we discount the fact that majority of them are living in a developing country with too few opportunities, then this is a considerable achievement. The general outlook, appearance, grace of a Sikh do make him stand out.

A Sikh inherits certain Sikh values like non-adherence to superstitions and meaningless rituals. These have a profound effect on shaping his personality.

All this proves Guru Nanak's success in training the masses.

But there was a dark period in Sikhism commencing with the passing away of the Tenth Guru. There is some missing link between how Sikhism is being practised now and how the Tenth Guru actually intended it to be. After 1708, the Sikh population is continuously on a downhill journey, we have never really been able to "pick-up". There is something wrong somewhere.

The Sikhs are bedroom-Sikhs now. They prefer doing Patth at their homes only. They become Amritdhari Sikhs and sit at homes. They are not aware of the idea of Jathebandik practice. The SRM does refer to it. An Amritdhari Sikh of the contemporary practice carries little relevance. The concept of collective living is dead among the Sikhs, and they are, therefore, unable to get convinced about the significance of Amrit. They donot know the answer to the question: What next, What after Amrit?

No matter how much the people like Gurbaksh Singh[Gill] try to argue about the significance of Kesh and Kakkars, the arguments are informative to read but meaningless if the fundamentals of Sikhism are not put to a practical action. The Sikh renaissance is going to be a failed enterprise. We have to give a practical meaning to Amrit. Let us be reminded by the failed experiment of Malabar: [Briefly] "About 500 men and women from that region were converted to Sikhism, and were baptised at the Akal takhat with the ceremony conducted in English. They were sent away to their province with the good wishes of the whole Panth, but in a short time almost all of them went back to the old faith."

We should stop giving arguments on the significance of Keshas and Kakkars.

We should start living a public life and show results. Let Guru Nanak's philosophy be put to practice, let the product speak, let the product sell itself. A well dressed public Khalsa working in the slums needs no arguments justifying his Kakkars. The deeds speak for themselves. Let us take Sewa out of the walls of the Gurudwara, and get public! The Kakkars and Rehat will no longer be heavy for the masses. Society will join us and become ethical.

A Sikh has no answer to the question why is he to take Amrit, of course except the old Brahminical answer of the Babbas: Guru Wale Bano. He has no clear-cut satisfactory answer for becoming an Amritdhari, because Sikhism is being practised as an individualist religion. In an individualist religion a personal relation with God and His idol becomes self satisfying and the co-humans are like competitors.

The Sikhs are compartmentalized in their bedrooms. To me they are idol worshippers, even if they prostrate before Guru Granth daily. Naam Jaap is a yet another handy tool with them. It can be done in a bed! [Repetitive]Naam Jaap is a mode for establishing a direct relation with God. It, too, is an idol, and an aberration of Sikhism.

For a Sikh Gurmukhta is more important. The practice of Sikhism can lead to God, and not the practices of Jaap and Taap, or of Sanjam, or of Ascetism.

Sewa of mankind gives happiness, Keertan is an expression of the consequent peace and happiness about the Wonder called God, WAH-E-GURU is a thankfulness to Guru Nanak.

We have to move towards collectivism, the true essence of Guru Nanak, the singing Dhadi of Nankana.