It is deeply sad that a most gloriously inventive, radical and genuinely pious religious community like the Sikhs now seems to be frequently hostage to a regime of internal intolerance. Not only was this tradition founded on the premise of an astonishing synthesis; it allowed an amazing internal diversity as well. In the nineteenth century, there were a large number of traditions with which Sikhs identified: Khalsa, Nirmala, Udasi, Nanak-Panthi, Nihang, Kalu Panthi, Ram Dasi, Kuka, Nirankari, etc. Now it is fair to say that over the course of the twentieth century this diverse tradition has also succumbed to the cardinal sins any religious tradition can commit: establish a coercive set of monopolies.

The roots of the current conflict that took a murderous turn in Vienna will, in due course be traced to contingent causes. On the face of it, both the violence in Vienna and the violent response in Punjab will turn out to have political overtones. But underlying this conflict is the fact that Sikh identity has been transformed over the course of the twentieth century, often in the direction of internal intolerance.

Some of its followers have succumbed to the idea that there can be only one authoritative interpretation of the tradition, there can be only one authority pronouncing over temporal aspects of the religion, and that both of these monopolies will also be tied to a territorial imagination. The attempt is to monopolise the master narrative of Sikh tradition, to eviscerate its diverse imaginings, and to concentrate power in organisations like the SGPC. You take all of these aspirations, and align them with religious politics and you will get the combustible mix that we are seeing in Punjab.

... contd.