Approaching nationhood having beaten back assimilation, where do the Sikhs stand today? An analysis by Omar Khalidi Unlike Islam and Christianity that prescribe rules for membership, insist on adherence to specific dogmas and codes of conduct, Hinduism has no clear rules as to who or what constitutes a Hindu. Many Hindus consider anyone who observes any Vedic rituals, worships any Hindu deities, or philosophically subscribes to any element of Hinduism as a Hindu. In addition, most Hindus regard religions originating
in India, including Buddhism, Jainism, and even Sikhism as Hindu.

The Indian constitution's article 25 flaunts assimilation when it describes Buddhists, Jains, and Sikhs as part of the Hindu fold. The post-independence abolition of tribal religions as census categories in India can be viewed as an attempt to manufacture a majority by enumerating everyone as Hindu unless a person unambiguously declares himself a Muslim or Christian. The expulsion of the Buddhist religion which is committed to nonviolence, from the land of its birth to East Asia and the absorption of tribal groups has been deeply troubling to the minority elites. Despite the absence of conversion in Hinduism, except the Arya Samaj, it has shown a tendency to absorb other groups through incorporation into the lower rungs of the caste. As far back as the late nineteenth century, many Sikhs categorically declared 'we are not Hindus', in response to the Arya Samaj campaign to convert borderline groups. Although the Sikhs were not specifically targeted by the Arya Samaj, yet the fear of assimilation persisted.

For instance historian and journalist Khushwant Singh warned in the early 1960s that his fellow Sikhs would be absorbed within the Hindu fold in the next 25 years due to intermarriages, loss of knowledge of Punjabi language resulting in ignorance of scriptures, cutting their hair and the like. Half a century since his forecast, it is obvious that Khushwant Singh's pessimistic prediction has proved wrong. Before the 1947 partition, the Sikhs were a dispersed minority in Punjab. Soon after, however, they emerged as a majority group in several districts of the province in the wake of massive demographic changes. Then a prolonged agitation led to the formation of the Punjab province (separating it from Haryana) in 1966, effectively making Punjab a Sikh majority (63 pc of the total in 1991 census) state. In addition to inhabitation in a well-defined territory, the Sikhs speak a distinctive language: Punjabi written in Gurmukhi characters. Although there are probably just as many Hindus who speak Punjabi, that language is more
significant to the Sikhs than to others, as shown by the preference of Punjabi Hindus for Hindi.

In the political arena, the exclusively Sikh political party, the Shromani Akali Dal has been in and out of power since 1967. The violent events of the 1980s and early 1990s further sharpened the Sikh sense of identity distinct from others. In short, the major events and their memories, such as partition, the creation of the Punjabi province, the violence of the 1980s culminating in Operation Blue Star, and the subsequent massacres in Delhi and beyond are the strands of Sikh identity. I

It is possible that healing the wounds of Operation Blue Star, coupled by an expanding economy may act as catalyst in dulling Sikh distinctiveness. However, there are indications that this is not the case. Instead, there is now a clamor for further differentiating Sikhs from others, in three aspects of state and society. The first is the demand by an articulate segment of Sikhs for change in the Indian constitution's article 25. This is a demand made as far back as 1973 in the famous Anandpur Sahib Resolution. As a corollary to the demand for constitutional revision, some Sikhs have also asked for a Sikh personal law, along the lines of Muslims. Gurcharan Singh Tohra, a president of the Sikh Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee reiterated this demand to the union government, which he claims has been made since the 1970s. Tohra's demand has been echoed by the Institute of Sikh Studies (ISS) in Chandigarh. In a resolution passed in August 2000, the Institute says: 'In India Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists and Parsis have their own respective modes of social intercourse and specific norms, practices and usage governing them. But with the application of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, and the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, the Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists (these acts are not applicable to Muslims, Christians, and Parsis), these people are declared Hindus [and] are subjected to Hindu code of law based on outdated concepts which are irrelevant to Sikhs.

All this is not fair to the Sikhs, whose personal laws, derived from the catholic [sic] precepts of Guru Granth Sahib, Gurmata, Rehat maryada (code of conduct), customs and usage, have been obliterated through legislative ingenuity, (The Pioneer, 18 August 2000, electronic edition). Tohra and the ISS seek the state to acknowledge a sociological reality through constitutional revision. Close on the wheels of this demand comes the clamor for greater state autonomy and decentralisation. The Punjab Chief Minister Prakash Singh Badal petitioned the Constitution Review Commission to ask for complete decentralization of powers with the Center remaining in charge of defense, foreign affairs, finance (currency) and global communications. What can the experience of the Sikhs tell us about the future of the minority groups in the homogenisation/ifferentiation continuum? To date only Muslims and Christians had successively resisted absorption. Now there is a third such group: Sikhs, particularly if they are able to persuade the legislature to make the constitutional changes recognising their distinctive identity as defined by the community itself. XModerate Sikhs within India may rest content at this possible achievement and may consider the present Punjab after settlement on the Chandigarh and related questions as the virtual Khalistan. Like all religions, different interpretations of Sikhism are
possible and presented. As long as it is presented or seen as merely an off shoot of Hinduism, and its followers firmly embedded in the caste system, the chances of its absorption are high. On the other hand if it is interpreted as distinct from both Hinduism and Islam and its followers rejecting caste, then its absorption into Hinduism would be difficult.

Already many of its followers believe in the fusion of politics and religion, dramatically demonstrated through expressions such as Khalsa shall rule, and, Khalsa - either a ruler or a rebel. The appeal of such interpretations is high in the Sikh diaspora. They are likely to press for an independent Khalistan as a buffer between Hindu India and Muslim Pakistan, as explicitly suggested by Samranjit Singh Mann, an Akali leader in 1991. For an outsider, the Sikhs are now approaching nationhood having beaten back assimilation and acquired most attributes of a nation except sovereignty.