When I saw the most recent question that the "Sikh clergy" is addressing, "Can statues of Sikh Gurus be installed?" all I could think of was 'here we go again'. The Panth's handful of activists will now all be engaged in responding to this latest outrage. (Incidentally "Sikh clergy" has troublesome connotations, but it will have to be addressed in a separate article.)

I don't believe in conspiracies, and I am careful to impute motives or intentions to those who disparage or distort Sikh ideology; but the string of ludicrous questions and impertinent claims raised from ostensibly unrelated quarters does baffle me.

We have pretentious scholars weaving their sophistry around incredible questions such as "Who is a Sikh?" or "Is the Guru Granth Sahib really the Guru of the Sikhs?" Coincidentally, right-wing Hindu organizations make related claims that "Sikhs are Keshadari Hindus" or "The Guru Granth belongs in Hindu temples alongside the idol." Then we have Sikhs discussing bizarre issues such as "Should Sikhs celebrate rituals such as karva chauth (ritual fasting for a husband's long life)?" or "Can statues of Sikh Gurus be installed?"

While these questions get effectively answered, Sikhs end up spending an inordinate amount of time in reactive mode. Just by raising a few silly issues, those who would see the Sikh faith assimilated or eliminated manage to keep the limited human resource within the Panth occupied in an agenda set by someone else.

The Khalsa Panth needs to seriously consider the merit of spending so much time reacting to ridiculous questions and stupid claims. Perhaps, Sikhs need to be more secure with their faith and the message of their Guru and not respond to every gadfly who raises a question or writes a book.

If Sikhs, who comprise the "Sikh clergy," were aware that Guru Gobind Singh in Zafarnama not only disapproves of idols, but also claims to be iconoclastic, the community would not be wasting its time petitioning the "Sikh clergy" to disallow idols. Guru Gobind Singh's words should be etched in every Sikh's mind when he says in Zafarnama (transcribed from Persian):

mnm kuSqnm kohXW pur i&qn [ ikh aU bu~q pR~sqMdo mn bu~q iSkn [,

which means "I (Guru Gobind Singh) subdued the (Hindu) hill rajas because they are worshippers of idols, and I am the breaker of idols."

Now I am not suggesting that Sikhs should close their eyes, ignore the world and stop responding to the litany of challenges to the Sikh identity. But we should weigh the time we spend in reacting versus the time we spend proactively building the Sikh Nation. The best articles on Sikhe.com last week provoked this realization, paradoxically because these articles were largely reactive.

Three of the Panth's luminaries, Ranbir Singh, Gurtej Singh and IJ Singh, who proactively contribute to the Khalsa's scholarly coffers, wrote lengthy articles essentially defending positions that should not have to defended. Ranbir Singh, whose painstaking translation of the Baba Jarnail Singh's speeches will be an asset for posterity, wrote a decisive response to those many Indians and self-hating Sikhs who have twisted Baba Jarnail Singh's life and martyrdom. Gurtej Singh, whose numerous contributions range from a marvelous collection of essays in Punjabi (ikC khIeY ikC sunIeY) to his recent analysis of the Indian manipulation of the Sikh struggle in 'Chakarvyu' (this book also included an excellent translation of Amarnamah, an incredibly useful Sikh historical text), had to write a long response to a book that did not even deserve to be read. And then Dr. IJ Singh, a prolific and lucid contributor of insightful essays, found himself defending the Panth against accusations of fundamentalism.

Although reactions, these articles are useful in that they can help us marshal our resources. Indeed these authors are far more proactive than reactive, and it is merely coincidental that all three of their responses came in the same week. But let this coincidence be serendipitous, as it becomes an occasion for the Sikhs to realize that we need to be judicious in our reactions, ignoring some outrages and offering limited responses to others. For every outrage we express, lets endeavor to create something valuable for the Panth as Ranbir Singh, Gurtej Singh and IJ Singh have and will continue to do. Let the Khalsa be proactive in marshalling its resources and not permit tiresome and soulless scholars or the RSS set the Panth's agenda.

Sikhs could be more selective in their reading choices. Instead of wasting time reading the string of mediocre book by pundits of Sikh studies, it would be wiser to spend time reading original Sikh texts.

I am often appalled by Sikhs who are impressed by some academician's latest work, but have not read much of the Guru Granth and are not familiar with great Sikhs who have harnessed the Sikh spirit in their scholarship. Anyone who has not connected with Bhai Gurdaas, Rattan Singh Bhangu, Bhai Vir Singh, Bhai Kahn Singh, Professor Sahib Singh, Professor Puran Singh, Sirdar Kapur Singh or Harinder Singh Mehboob, to name just a few, is likely to be impressed by the sophism that is articulated, often lucidly, in English and carries the imprimatur of a Western university.

As we leverage movie reviews to pick the films we see, lets leverage reviews of books to form our reading list. A review by Gurtej Singh or IJ Singh may help us avoid the latest inane thesis on Sikhism that deserves as much attention as those that considered issues such as, "Did Jesus ever exist?" or "Did the Holocaust every happen?"

The worst fate that can befall some of these scholars sitting in "Sikh" chairs is that their work never gets read. By demonizing them, however, we end up popularizing them, and more of their books get read.

Finally, let us be more secure in our faith. Our Guru clearly defends the right of people to choose their beliefs, and he would die for their right to express them, no matter how ridiculous they may be. In his ninth form, our Guru died upholding the Sikh principle of freedom of choice and expression, even though the benefactors of his martyrdom were Brahmins whose practices and faith he found repugnant.

So, if a scholar belittles the Sikh faith or mocks the Guru, I am convinced our Guru would defend such a scholar against attacks of blasphemy. He might say to a scholar who spends his career textually analyzing the Guru Granth or critically evaluating the making of the Guru Granth that:

piV piV pMifqu bwdu vKwxY ] BIqir hodI vsqu n jwxY ],

which might be interpreted that the scholar wastes his scholarship stirring up meaningless controversy about the Guru Granth, but has no clue as to the beauty contained within the message of the Guru Granth. The Guru would probably feel sorry and pray for the wasted life of such a scholar, but would not feel affronted in anyway. And neither should we.