Khuswant Singh- Please Share Your Views?

[SAadmin]

I was reading more on khuswant singh on wikepdia, didn't know he was 95 wow and also another thing it strikes me to see - under his religion, it mentions his agnostic? is that typo? or he is really an agnostic? I think agnostic are still better than atheist, agnostic- One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism where atheist outright reject existence of God.

I think many people have any high opinion of him and many not, please share why and why not? Here are some of good things, here are few examples of many- In BBC documentary on Sikhs, he mentions "bhindranwale fought back like a tiger" , He was awarded the Padma Bhushan in 1974 for service to his country. In 1984 he returned the award in protest against the siege of the Golden Temple by the Indian Army. Singh's faith in the Indian political system has been shaken by events such as anti-Sikh riots that followed Indira Gandhi's assassination, in which major Congress politicians were alleged to be involved. But he has remained resolutely positive on the promise of Indian democracy.

Anyway, please share your input- what you think of him and also what made khuswant singh be agnostic if above is true?

[dalsingh101]

I meet so many people of Sikh backgrounds who are agnostic these days it's unreal. Some of them are open with it, some cover it up in public. I do agree with N30's opinion that agnostics are still better than outright atheists but I still have trouble digesting people with the Sikh apparel (Pagh kesh) who do not believe. There are lots of them about.

Many many years ago (pre 1984) I came across Khushwant Singh's History of Sikhs and was impressed. It was a lucid account of Sikh itihass written in English from a Sikh view point. It was a much needed address to the other various attempts at Sikh history by European writers that I had stumbled apon.

After the events of 84 unfolded, I started to come across Khushwant's other writings which were vehemently against Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale.

It seemed apparent (to me at least) that he was very pro-Congress, perhaps to the point of sycophancy. (But then can we not say the same of Manamohan Singh today, who has neverless done much good for India, economically speaking at least?)

I've read a fair bit of Khushwant Singh's writings and one thing I have noticed is that there are strong strands of contradiction in his published works. He wrote that he had lost faith when he was younger but continued to wear a turban and kesh in fear of his family, but at the same time he continues (to this day) to write books related to Sikhs, be they historical, political or translations of scripture.

Loosely based on what I can recall of his own writings (don't ask me to quote, its been a good few years since I read them), I think he is agnostic because of two things, first is the communist influence his generation had. Secondly from his experiences with Sikh polity (namely the Akali Dal). I think he views Sikhi as being taken over by narrow minded rustics who use it as a political tool?

He is more of a cultural Sikh, than a believing one. But his open position against what many would consider mainline views makes him unpalatable to many orthodox Sikhs. From the perspective of a writer, the fact he has managed to keep going for so long is impressive. I think he isn't religious at all myself but is a very clever character who can play politics very very well and knows how to tap into large chunks of the Indian psyche, hence the continued popularity of his writing in that country. His writing is sometimes strange and his opinions change frequently, I've seen him go from vocal proIndia patriot, to a demoralised person prophesising the inevitable disintegration of India (after early BJP victories) and then back to patriot again. I think he makes a good living from all this.

[jaikaara]

when he is drunk he is better ... if he is his own self, the guy is para normal

[Xylitol]

Dalsingh's right. He claims to keep the identity b/c it helps him maintain a sense of connection to his heritage/community. He was also friends with Indira Ghandi. That being said, he did help set up the Citizen's Justice Committee after the 84 pogroms.

[dalsingh101]

That's the thing though Xy, people can be like that, doing good and bad at the same time.....

Is it duality?

I think Khushwant sees himself as a sophisticated urbanite and the majority of the panth as backward pindus. He is projecting a sort of 'progressive versus the dogmatic' framework on his interpretation of religion and politics visa vis Panjab and Sikhism.

[SAadmin]

I think there are many people in our panth are agnostic but sad thing is they don't even know it. Lets look at the definition of agnostic:

1 : a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god.

There are baptised sikhs and just kesdhari sikhs who are influenced by Victorian type sikhi and have protestant view of sikhi some call them comrad types, they refuse to concept grasp or accept - sargun form of god in Sikhism and will call it bhaminvaad. It denies existence of sargun form of god. So whats left? Nirgun form of god which is non-existent in their mind. After they spent some time reciting gurbani in their daily routine, thoughts can easily come- whats the point? what are we praying to?. They go through extreme dubta within their mind that they are just sikhs from outside, 5 kakari or keshadhari but inside they are pretty much agnostics, they don't even know it. They just live an life as an 5 kakari or keshadhari sardar.

Solution- They are not totally misguided as atheist but they can be bought into panth which beleives in Vahiguroo ji in both forms be it both nirgun and sargun. If they can experience some sort of mysticism while they do nitneem in their daily routine experience mysticism while listening or reciting simran in Gurdwara or if they manage to listen to discourses on nirgun and sargun form of God by an bhramgyani/mahapursh or utam katha vachik.

[dalsingh101]

Still, saying "I don't know" is better than those morons who aggressively push their conviction that "there is definitely no God", like it is some verifiable fact and seem to imply that any belief in God is caused by puerile or wishful thinking, or brainwashing. Dawkins is the modern Guru of this.

I think many agnostics don't discount the possibility of Rabh but struggle to accept the given conceptualisations of Waheguru. This is partially understandable as the entirety of God seems pretty much unfathomable to a normal mind.

Edited March 15, 2010 by dalsingh101

[SURYADEV]

1 : a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god.

UNKNOWN = I think that applies to most people on this earth. Who apart form those few braham gianis really know Him?

UNKNOWABLE = Again, here most people, inc Sikhs, will say that we cannot truely know Him.

I'd say the main difference between Agnostics and others is that Agnostics hold the 'failures mentality': we don't know Him and cant be a$%ed to find out about him.

Whereas ohters of a spiritual mindest at least want to try. In other words: the journey is more important than the destination.

[Xylitol]

Almost the entire missionary movement falls within the definition of Agnostic or limited Theist (believeing in an extremely limited God). They interpret sikhi within the framework of current scientific knowledge and put limits on what God can or can't do. Their views of dharm are generally limited to the spere of psychology and ethical behaviour, no mysticism exists for them and they categorically deny that such things can ever occur. The hilarious (and sad) thing is that these people almost always lack any decent grasp of science and scientific method themselves!!

[dalsingh101]

They interpret sikhi within the framework of current scientific knowledge and put limits on what God can or can't do. Their views of dharm are generally limited to the spere of psychology and ethical behaviour, no mysticism exists for them and they categorically deny that such things can ever occur. The hilarious (and sad) thing is that these people almost always lack any decent grasp of science and scientific method themselves!!

The other extreme also exists Xy, with people who willingly belief ANYTHING put to them and are not at all concerned with verification or authenticity on any level at all.

These are the types who will argue for, fight and defend anything in an ultra conservative way.

Whereas the people you mentioned above fail to account for any mysticism at all, the other side's take on mysticism doesn't leave anything out.

[Xylitol]

The other extreme also exists Xy, with people who willingly belief ANYTHING put to them and are not at all concerned with verification or authenticity on any level at all.

These are the types who will argue for, fight and defend anything in an ultra conservative way.

Whereas the people you mentioned above fail to account for any mysticism at all, the other side's take on mysticism doesn't leave anything out.

lol, too true.

[dalsingh101]

lol, too true.

It is this 'mysticism' that has people running around all the dodgy dera babas thinking they have supernatural powers like gullible fools.

[kdsingh80]

There are 2 type of agnostics 1 who don't practice their religion but still their heart lies with it.The other one who just criticise their own religion in front of others.I don't think agnostics whose heart lies with community are bad for it.If they are diplomatic they can safeguard interest of their community much better than other non diplomatic leaders

we should remember Jinnah was agnostic but still he tried his level best to safeguard the interest of muslim community

[Xylitol]

There are 2 type of agnostics 1 who don't practice their religion but still their heart lies with it.The other one who just criticise their own religion in front of others.I don't think agnostics whose heart lies with community are bad for it.If they are diplomatic they can safeguard interest of their community much better than other non diplomatic leaders

we should remember Jinnah was agnostic but still he tried his level best to safeguard the interest of muslim community

That's a really good point. The ones who are community oriented can lose their agnosticism with proper sangat as well. oth, The uncle toms just need to get out.