2 Comments

While I enjoyed the tenor of the piece and the underlying ideas of sovereignty, I was disappointed by the writer's lack of understanding of Sikh texts and our Sikh historical tradition. Teer Kaur is trying to reduce the kirpan to a utilitarian object, a weapon. However, it is a divine instrument, bestowed to us by the Tenth Guru at Keshgarh. We use it transform our karah into prashad and bear it on our person at all times as a reminder that we are saint-soldiers, always ready to fight. As a kirpan-wearing Sikh whose experience is shared by others in history, I find that there are many weapons to fight the oppressor; the kirpan, however, has a different role. It inspires us to act. It reminds us to not sit on the sidelines and watch the tyrant trample upon others. Even in the eighteenth century, the khanda and guns were of greater utilitarian value than the kirpan. Therefore, the kirpan should not be reduced to a mere weapon, especially in modern times, as Teer Kaur is attempting to do. Quoting a line from the Zararnamah without context shows lack of awareness of this historical text. The use of "shameer" (sword) when all "heetle" (stratagems) have been "dar guzasht" (exhausted) in Guru's epistle is not a reference to the kirpan. Lastly, before the Sikh Coalition came on the scene in 2001, all Sikh organizations referred to the kakars as "symbols." The courts were arguing that if your kirpan is a symbol, then wear it as a symbol around your neck, as many Sikhs do. By calling the kirpan an "article of faith" for the first time, the Sikh Coalition radically changed the discourse in the courts and enabled the Panth to win many victories. The Coalition has consistently defended and won the Sikhs' right to wear the kirpan and the dastaar. I was disappointed that this piece provided many critiques but no solutions. If we are going to advance the Sikh agenda, then critiques must be based on the long-established Sikh tradition reflected in Sikh texts and must be accompanied by real solutions.

Expand full comment

Rights and duties go hand in hand : and in the US context, anything that stands out as 'suspicious looking' will invite a standard police response : the police officer was respectful, as was Mr Singh. While the right to wear a kirpan is not clearly understood , what is the need to 'open carry' ? Your article misleadingly (and completely incorrectly) portrays a rather negative view of how Sikhs are treated in the US - citing examples of how illegal immigrants are detained. These aren't the people 'escaping oppression in India' but willful economic-immigrants who break several laws with their method of immigration (via traffickers and drug runners). The article also needlessly delves into a long-lost-cause of ' Sikh independence' : that never had mainstream support to begin with and was only a ploy to trap and derail the peaceful and legitimate struggle of Sikhs demanding fair laws and non-discriminatory. The economic disparity is also largely self-inflicted : what stops youth from Punjab work hard towards respectful professions that pay more? The answer lies in the attitudes our youth carry and the erosion of values. One way to gain respect is to rise above everyone, earn respect in chosen professions like so many people from India have already shown : we see new India-born CEOs being appointed everyday , for example.

Expand full comment