MAHANT RANJIT SINGH BRINGS DISGRACE TO AKAL TAKHAT

Only Mahants and Masands delivered Judgments without Gurmatas

ਭਾਈ ਰਣਜੀਤ ਸਿੰਘ ਦੀ ਪੰਥ ਵਿਚ ਢਾਹਡੀ ਇੱਜਤ ਸੀ, ਜਿਸ ਨੇ 12 ਸਿੰਘਾਂ ਦੇ ਕਾਤਲ ਗੁਰਬਚਨੇ ਨੂੰ ਸੋਧਿਆ ਸੀ। ਨਿਰੰਕਾਰੀਆਂ ਖਿਲਾਫ ਹੁਕਮਨਾਮਾ ਮੌਜੂਦ ਸੀ ਜਿਸ ਵਿਚ ਓਨਾਂ ਦੇ ਬਾਈਕਾਟ ਦਾ ਹੁਕਮ ਸੀ । ਪਰ ਲਗਦੈ ਵਕਤ ਪਾ ਕੇ ਭਾਈ ਰਣਜੀਤ ਸਿੰਘ ਵਿੱਕ ਗਿਆ ਤੇ ਓਸੇ ਅਕਾਲ ਤਖਤ ਦੇ ਗੁਰਮੱਤੇ ਦੇ ਖਿਲਾਫ ਚਾਲਾਂ ਚਲੀਆਂ।ਇਸ ਸਾਰੀ ਖੇਡ ਦਾ ਖਲਨਾਇਕ ਗੁਰਚਰਨ ਸਿੰਘ ਟੌਹੜਾ ਸੀ ਜਿਸ ਦੀ ਕਿ ਡਿਊਟੀ ਬਣਦੀ ਸੀ ਕਿ ਵਕਤ ਪਾ ਕੇ ਹੁਕਮਨਾਮਾ ਵਾਪਸ ਲੈਣ ਲਈ ਕਾਰਵਾਈ ਕਰਦਾ। ਪਰ ਉਸ ਨੇ ਹੁਕਮਨਾਮੇ ਦੀ ਉਲੰਘਣਾ ਕਰਕੇ ਆਪ ਹੀ ਹੁਕਮਨਾਮਾ ਦਾ ਮਖੌਲ ਉਡਾਇਆ।ਫਿਰ ਭਾਈ ਰਣਜੀਤ ਸਿੰਘ ਨੇ ਕਾਂਗਰਸੀ ਹੁਕਮਰਾਨਾ ਦੀ ਵਫਾਦਾਰੀ ਦਿਖਾਉਦਿਆਂ ਟੌਹੜੇ ਨੂੰ ਇਸ ਕੇਸ ਵਿਚੋਂ ਸਾਫ ਬਰੀ ਕਰ ਦਿਤਾ। ਤੇ ਇਹ ਸਾਬਤ ਕਰ ਦਿਤਾ ਕਿ ਇਨਾਂ ਹੁਕਮਨਾਮਿਆਂ ਦੀ ਕੋਈ ਵੁਕਤ ਸ਼ੁਕਤ ਨਹੀ ਹੁੰਦੀ।

Guru Nanak was put behind the bars by Emperor Babur. ll Nanak was once attacked by Hamayun. There were complaints against lll Nanak and emperor Akbar visited Goindwal the then abode of Guru Amardas himself investigated and V Nanak was martyred on the orders of emperor Jahangir. Thus those believing in the ideology of Guru Nanak will remain in constant conflict with the evil forces. ਹਊਮੈ ਨਾਵੈ ਨਾਲ ਵਿਰੋਧ ਹੈ। ਦੁਇ ਨ ਵਸੈ ਇਕ ਥਾਇ॥

On the advent of Vl Nanak, the conflict became open. He openly raised army and founded Akal Bunga now called Akal Takhat just in front of Golden Temple. Akal Bunga symbolizes temporal i.e. non- spiritual powers of the Guru, while for the spiritual powers lay Golden Temple.

Bhai Gurdas contemporary of lV, V and Vl Nanak, himself a devout Sikh writes about Guru Hargobind in his Gian Ratnawali (Warran):-

ਧਰਮਸਾਲ ਕਰਿ ਬਹੀਦਾ ਇਕਤ ਥਾਉਂ ਨ ਟਿਕੈ ਟਿਕਾਇਆ॥ ਪਾਤਿਸਾਹ ਘਰਿ ਆਵਦੇ ਗੜਿ ਚੜਿਆ ਪਾਤਿਸਾਹ ਚੜਾਇਆ॥ ਉਮਤਿ ਮਹਲੁ ਨ ਪਾਵਦੀ ਨਠਾ ਫਿਰੈ ਨ ਡਰੈ ਡਰਾਇਆ॥ (The earlier gurus sat in the gurudwaras but the present does not stay at a place, Earlier the kings came to pay homage, now our forts are being attacked by them. lt is difficult for his followers to find his place as he is always on move and is not afraid of anybody)

Akal Takhat thus the symbol of temporal power of the Khalsa has been historically very influential as 'hukamnama' or the edicts issued from this seat are binding on the Sikhs.

So much so it is said that once - Maharaja Ranjit Singh was also summoned to Akal Takhat and punished. There have been several instances of Takhat's supremacy over the Sikhs. Only a few years back photos appeared in the press where the ex-minister. Buta Singh was shown raising his hands as a symbol , of his surrender before the Takhat. We also saw photos of Surjit Singh Barnala the ex- chief Minister of Punjab and the present Union minister with placards around his neck.'l am guilty'.

This Takhat issued a 'Hukamnama' against Nirankaris in the year 1978 asking the Sikhs for the social boycott of ; Nirankaris.

The post of the Takhat chief has thus remained in the centre of controversies and every powerful Sikh politician has wished his own man at the Takhat, which is presently in the control of Tohra through SGPC.

When the 'Hukamnama' against the Nirankaris was issued, one Bhai Ranjit Singh rose to the occasion and killed Baba Gurbachan, the Nirankari chief. Ranjit Singh underwent a long tenure of jail. ln year 1996 there was hectic activity in Delhi for the release of Bhai. We found that some Sikh leaders who always towed the line of Congress were on the run to seek his release. Ultimately the Bhai was released from jail.

Much before his release, however the Sikhs had announced his appointment as the chief of Akal Takhat. ln his appointment some militant bodies were also involved who had some more names in their mind for the coveted post but Mr. Tohra agreed on this very name as he apprehended little danger from a man who was in jail, secondly with his appointment Mr. Tohra had the benefit to appoint his own man as the acting chief who enjoyed all powers which a ful ltime chief can and Tohra appointed his sycophant Prof. Manjit Singh.

Some friends at the release of Bhai Ranjit Singh felt that there is going to be damage to the Takhat as there must have been a bargain before his release. We however then advocated that a true Sikh like Bhai Sahib the real hero cannot become a stooge. Moreover we felt that during the long tenure of jail Bhai Sahib must have fortified his mind from the evil forces of 'haumen' and must have remained imbibed in the 'naam' and thus become a true Sikh who believe this world is a drama where a Sikh has to participate treading the path of truth.

Now however we feel that our hopes 'have shattered. Bhai Ranjit Singh' is like any other Akali, miles away from the concept of a Gurmukh Sikh. Earlier he was behind the bars now his soul is bound in the chains of 'Haumen'. Neglecting the God who created him he seems now more faithful to the agencies who liberated him from the jail. Agencies want to kill many birds with this one stone i.e bringing disgrace to Akal Takhat, ii) making fund of to the hukam nama issued by Takhat.

The convict now made judge and naturally one can expect what kind of justice he would deliver. Obviously now we feel that that Bhai Ranjit Singh is different from this Ranjit Singh who was found in 'dubidha' i.e. the double mindedness when he was faced with the adjudication of the case against his 'own employer' i.e Gurcharan Singh Tohra.

The Bhai obviously got frightened and did not give a fair trial to the case. He did'nt carry out the proceedings before 'Sangat' and decided the case stealthily. Thus bringing disgrace to the august seat he is occupying.

When Amrinder Singh alleged that Jathedar Tohra had gone to Nirankari Bhawan, Patiala, Tohra issued press statement wherein he justified his visit and did not deny the allegation.

Later he appeared before the 'five Singh Sahiban' along with an army of the SGPC employees. The Singh Sahiban including Bhai Ranjit Singh did not question Tohra about his alleged visit to the Bhawan. Tohra just handed over his written -' statement, held an in- camera meeting with his employees' and came out with head held high. Tohra's written statement has also not been made public so for by Ranjit Singh.

Though the Jathedar did not question Tohra , neither was he heard in public as has been the tradition including the latest cases. ln this way the Singh sahib has violated all traditions where the cases are decided in the Sangat and then only the decision can amount to 'gurmata'. Decision alone individual in Sikhism has no authority.

The following questions will thus keep on haunting the pious soul of old Ranjit Singh; the ex- hero;

1. Why he took so much time in adjudicating the case where he did not find a single example in the past ? Were not by elections of Taran Taran and Sham Churasi in the mind of the Takhat chief ?

2. Why did not he constitute a fact finding enquiry committee to fulfil the conditions of a gurmata as has been the tradition whenever the circumstances wanted, as in the case of Neel Panthis

3.Why did not he questioned Tohra when he appeared before him?

4.Why no cognizance of, Tohra's press statement was taken where in he had justifieds his visit.? And why did he demanded additional evidences like the photographs and then made an issue out of them?

4. Why Tohra was not asked to appear at Akal Takhat in the presence of sangat ,and instead close door meeting was held ? Was it a hearing or a meeting?

5. When the Takhat Chief had found that Amrihder had submitted a forged photo and thus tried to mislead Panth why no action against Amrinder was taken ?

6. Mr. Mahant Sahib, is Mr.Tohra more important than Panth ? The fact is for Ranjit Singh, Tohra is more important and Panth has a secondary place in his mind. Now Ranjit Singh is no longert he same man the hero who acted like Bhai Bidhi Chand or like Sukha Singh Mehtab Singh. Bhai Ranjit Singh is now a changed man: a politician like any other Akali of the day.-B.S.Goraya