Monopolising the Almighty

One of the interesting aspects of religions is that while those that evolved before the Christian era show a surprising tolerance towards sectarian diversity, those that evolved after or during the Christian era are less tolerant. Thus it would appear that tolerance is directly proportional to the age of the religion. Christianity, when the church ruled supreme in the lives of its followers, tended to be quite intolerant but now boasts of hundreds of sects and everyone co-exists peacefully. In that sense it is almost on a par with Hinduism, which has thousands of sects with a few being added almost every year. Buddhism and Jainism too have many sects, and no one makes a fuss. On the other hand, Islam, which is the youngest of the Semitic religions and just about 1,400 years old, is relatively intolerant of sects. In Pakistan, for example, the Ahmediyas have been declared non-Islamic. The notion that there is but one God, first propagated by the Jews 3,500 years ago, has something to do with all this.

The recent and ongoing events in Punjab, the home of Sikhism, perhaps need to be viewed in this light. Sikhism is just under 700 years old and its formal structure is rather less accommodative of sectarian diversity than other religions. That could be one reason why the Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee (SGPC), an organisational body that was started in 1920 and which has appointed itself as the custodian of Sikhism, tends to be so prickly. Its call for a Punjab bandh today and its latest edict that all deras (headquarters of sects) in Punjab be dismantled by May 27 suggest an approach and attitude that is familiar. If this is all there was to it, there would not have been much cause for worry because there is a historical inevitability to it. Sadly, in a relatively immature democracy like ours ""where divisive politics is seen as an important stepping stone to power""religion (and sects within religions) become an important instrument in the hands of desperate politicians. What is happening now in Punjab has happened there once before with the most tragic consequences for the whole country. A prime minister was assassinated, as were many other important leaders, not to mention thousands of citizens.

The question that our politicians need to ask now is if some of their tribe are taking us down that path again. If the intransigent stand taken by the SGPC is any indication, it would certainly seem so. It has rejected the apology tendered by the dera that offended Sikh sentiment. But everyone knows how closely associated the SGPC is with Akali politics in the state. Everyone also knows how the Congress had used the dera in question for garnering votes in the last election. Not all of what is going on in Punjab is clear. But one thing is: politicians are meddling again with a mix that can turn fiery anytime. They should cease and desist forthwith.