Rethinking sound and text: Sikh site of resisting ethnic boundaries

and metaphysics
Abstract:
In this paper I shall track the deconstruction of what is called, Ideologies of sacred
sound in Arvind-Pal S. Mandairs ook, !eligion and the Specter of the "est# hereafter
!S"$, pulished in %&&' ( )olu*ia universit( press. +his ook is perhaps, an ,rst
atte*pt ( a scholar of its kind, through which he has rought a new insight of
understanding and relating with oral-te-tual traditions of Sikhs, along with wider Indian
traditions in general. .owever, due to its i*plicit reliance on /acanian ps(choanal(sis, the
scope of in0uir( of Arvinds e-egesis, opens up various i*plicit and e-plicit arenas of
further discourse, e(ond ps(choanal(tical oundaries of su1ect *atter. I shall tr( to *ake
such a *ove in this paper.
Arvinds arguments invites us to revisit the widely endorsed suggestion of structural
linguistic studies in Western academia, that Indian and Western cultures relate
diferently with language and therefore, perceive orality and written texts in
diferent ways. Referring to the works of uy ! "eck and #ohannes $a%ian, Arvind
clari&es that it is perceived that there is a diference in approach towards orality
%etween West and Indian traditions. Western orality is primarily focused towards
communication of knowledge, while 'outh Asian(Indian orality is most productive
sense that is closest to communicate divinity. ) R'W p. *+,-. $urther, referring to
the works of !evi.'trauss and his linking of writing to Western ethnocentrism, Arvind
notes the re/ection of 0visualism1 in the favor of orality, suggested %y diferent
scholars like Walter 2ng, #ack oody, 3arshall 3c !uhan and #ohannes $a%ian.
4hese scholars have contested for an anti.imperialist strand of Western dominance
of textual superiority over 2riental su%/ectivity, %y arguing that sacred scriptures
are fundamentally oral and secondarily textual. $urther, the duality of
knower(known or su%/ect(o%/ect within textual reading causes interiori5ation or
privati5ation of religion in west, while the non.dualistic or monistic view of
experiencing should get a priority %y adopting sound as principle of structure of
language. 6e notes, 0 In defense of this thesis that language as oral constitutes an
exit from Western imperialism, scholars have often cited the case of Indian tradition,
as the paradigm &rst of orality in general, and second of civili5ation where the sonic
principle has en/oyed an overtly privileged status over writing1. )R'W, *+,-
Arvind makes two signi&cant moves in this chapter, with regards to
sacredness of sound or sonic principle. At &rst he pro%lemati5es the psychological
in7uence of repetition of sound in cycles that causes awakening of some kind of
origin in human mind. 'econdly, he contests for a%sence of any opposition or
privilege of one over the other, %etween orality and texuality. $or making this move
he takes the case of 'a%da. uru and makes his arguments that, 0 'ikh scripture
severely complicates the issue of opposed cultural universals as it possess e8ually
strong oral and written dimentions1 ) R'W, *+9-. !et me discuss %oth these
arguments one %y one.
'acred 'ound, :thnoscience and formation of cultural identity
:valuating Indian linguistic theory, Arvind has teased out some references from
traditional Indian sources that relate with the su%/ect of language formation. 4hease
sources point towards inner unity of sound and meaning within the sound
represented %y Anhad ;ada) unstuck 'ound-. 6e refers to the rigid system of
linguistics developed during post.<pnishidic period ) =>>"? to =>> A@- with works
like Astadhyayi of Aanini, Laulika 'anskrit and Aatan/alis Mahabhasya. 'imilarly,
Aratisakhyas %y Aanini noted the rules of phonetics to preserve the sacred speech
sounds of Beda in disciplined and pure form. Byakarna )'anskrit grammar- %y
Aitan/ali determined the ethos that descri%ed the metaphysics of eternal 'anskrit,
considered central to the de&nition of pure Aryas. "ased on these authoritative
sources and others like Paniniya Siksa and the Rk-Pratisakhya, the rules of correct
phonetics were determined in Indian linguistic culture. It was understood that for
proper understanding of the Artha )internal meaning or signi&ed-, the sa%da )word(
external sound or signi&er- must %e articulated with right sound as %oth 'a%da and
Artha are contained together in articulation of sound. 4his re8uired a principle of
sta%ility or power that upholds the esta%lished order of Ccorrectness )including that
of articulation of sound-, expressed as dharma. @harma was therefore to %e upheld
%y "rahmin, as a chosen set of people and oDcial guardian of 'anskrit. 0Although in
the early stages of development the word Brahman )from 'anskrit root word Brh,
implying a sacred force of power- referred to the power of speech sounds in Bedic
mantras, it %ecame merged with vak to give earliest meaning of Brahman as
0sacred Word1or 0'acred formula,1 which referred ultimately to Beda itself.1 )R'W,
**E-
4he sacredness of sound lies in its articulation as a C3antra or a sacred voice,
reproduced in exact same replication of the original sound as it was revealed.
$urther, when this metaphysics of sacred sound is translated into temporal reality it
leads to two signi&cant understandings. $irst that only a certain chosen people, who
are the upholders of @harma are authori5ed %y Bedic community to orally dictate
the meaning to consciousness. And second that the principle of correct articulation
of sacred sound should lead to conscious suppression of writing as a temporal
experience. 4his is %ecause inscription was considered as a fall or pollution of
dharmic %oundaries working against the principle of preservation of sacred speech
sounds of Bedas to %e recited in disciplined and pure form. 0 A %rahmin should not
recite or orally transmit the vedas after he has eaten meat, seen %lood or a dead
%ody, had sexual intercourse, or engaged in writing1 )Fuoted from Aitareya
Aranyaka =.*.*G R'W, p **H -. In other words the metaphysics of sacred sound led
to formulation of rigid dharmic and linguistic %oundaries, that authori5ed the
demarcation of a cultural identity of Aryans and "rahmins )at the top in hierarchy of
Aryans-, sanctioned %y the authority of Bedas )also known as Shruti signifying
revealed sounds-, language )'anskrit- and ethos )esta%lished order- from that of
mleccha or foreigner.
Arvind does not stops here, he takes a step further to analyses the
physcoanlytical mechanism that operate %ehind inscri%ing the unstuck sound
)Anhad nada- within memory, for its perfect recollection and utterance through
mirroring , echoing or mimesis of sound in human mind. "efore using the !acanin
psychoanalysis, he retrieves his foundational elements in the works of Ananda
?ommarawamis demonstration for placing the Bedic(oral tradition in the works of
"harathari along with that of Alatonic traditions, and his attempt to draw
resem%lances %etween %oth. 4he ousia or essence of a particular thing, according to
Alato is in its name, the original sound, the ideal or unstuck sound, that is
remem%ered imperfectly. 4he art of memory, or mnemo-technic in Alatos ?ratylus
descri%es the techni8ue of engraving or inscri%ing any &gure within mind through
the art of name, to signify what he calls C%eautiful. 'imilarly according to
"haratharis 'phota theory, %oth 'a%ad ) word- and its meaning are in mental
cognition, written in consciousness of human mind. 4he ultimate unity of %oth is
regarded as the essence of Bedas. 0Saphota is language in its prover%al potential
stateG a potentiality that can %e actuali5ed %y means of physical nada, i.e.,
se8uential utterance1. )R'W, p*9=-
4aking his arguments ahead %ased on !acanian psychoanalysis of ontology of
language, Arvind points that mimesis or cycles of repetition of a particular sound,
transforms the su%/ectivity into a process that takes attention away from an
su%/ect(author duality. !anguage is deontologi5ed in mimesis remaining a mere
instrument of man that is devoid of any thinking element. 4he techni8ue of mimesis
impresses upon mind a self.grounded principle of repetition. 3imesis denies human
experience, repeatedly retrieves a psychological state of an origin that descri%es a
way to live, like a standard way, that leads to formulation of ethos, and therefore
the %oundaries of a particular community descri%ed %y its ethnic origin or ethnicity.
Repetition or mimesis causes the production of identity of the su%/ect as identical to
itself and therefore %ecomes central constituent of formation of human ego
)discussed later-. 4his process of deontologi5ing language cements a conceptual
metaphysics, to produce a sense of certain identity that is re7ected in the Barna
system. 0 'ince the entire aim of oral.aural tradition is to imprint sameness or
ideality of the original sound on all minds that are attuned to hear this sound ) those
who possess correct dharma-, such proximity reinforces the %oundaries of the
listening community. I. the %oundary of those not privileged with correct
%irth(dharma cannot pollute the dharma of those privileged with eternal sound1.
) R'W *=,-
$urther, Arvind draws attention towards %orrowing of dominant sonic
principles from Indian cultural traditions into 'ikh rites and recital techni8ues, as a
phenomenon of exact reproduction of sacred sound. 6e contests that the 'ikh
practice of repetition of naam simran that is understood such that the worldliness of
language gets suppressed to achieve a transcendental domain %y which mimic
reproduction of sound gets imprinted is not true to the spirit of ;am 'imran. 0;am
simaran %egins with the techni8ue of voiced repetition, where the practitioner
chants aloud a &xed word ) such as vahiuru or satnam-, repeating this over and
over until the words %ecome interiori5ed as a soundless and spontaneous repetition
)a/apa /ap-. <nderstood purely as a techni8ue, nam simaran ) and akhand path-
involve the exact reproduction of the word.sounds supposedly heard and then
uttered %y the human urus1 )R'W *+J-. 6e argues that the urus did not advocate
this kind of voiced repetition and it is much of cultural %orrowing from the dominant
strand of "rahminism that continues to operate till this day, causing
institutionali5ation of sound present in the framework of caste. 6e notes, 0 there is
no credi%le evidence that any ideology of sacred sound .which refers to a
technology of reproducing exactly correct soundsI.. was ever sanctioned %y 'ikh
urusI1) R'W **,-
4his is where Arvind %rings in a very signi&cant argument to reclaim of 'a%da
uru in the form of text, that he contests is indispensa%le to exit the cycles of
repetition. 4his is what, I shall discuss next.
;on.dual temporal structure in uru ranth 'ahi%
"uilding his arguments against cyclical repetitive nature of worshiping that
has invaded 'ikh essence of ;am 'imran, Arvind points towards the relevance of
Raags as central to the performance of Kirtan as inscri%ed in uru ranth 'ahi%. 6e
stresses that raag should not %e treated as a mere super. scripture or title to a
'ha%ad that is marginali5ed in the present day performance of Kirtan. 6e highlights
its importance of Raag in reminding the self.conscious aspect of listeners mind to
come into dialogue with the unconscious aspect of emotions and feelings. Raag is
central to evoke a particular mood of self.re7ection that is in direct interplay with
the nature including the time of the day, seasons and natural phenomenon. It
resists the conceptual production of eternity through self.efacement, something
that works against self.reference or self.representation, leading to production of
ego. 4herefore, in order to reali5e the true essence of Raag and to exit or %reak the
repetitive nature of present day practices of treating 'a%ad as a 'acred sound . that
Arvind argues has %een %orrowed from Bedic economy,. he stresses on the textual
authority of uru.'a%ad. 02ne must accept the primacy and sovereignty of the text
as sabda-uru, the word(language.as.guru whose function is to instruct and
transform the self ego of the reader(listener1 ) R'W *=H-. "roadly speaking Arvind
suggests that %oth textual tradition of west and oral tradition of Indian mode of
structuring reality, are a harmonious engagements with time and world that are
existing in Sabda-!uru.
In order to reali5e the true essence of Sabda-!uru Arvind suggests for a
retranslation or revisiting the present day performativity, to something that he
descri%es as, 0taking %ack to original entry into the sym%olic order as it existed
%efore the colonial encounter1 )R'W *=H-. 4his %y no means is a merely a time
travel, %ut also travel in consciousness to make choices 0on master.signi&er od
religion, etc., %y means of which we %ecame a su%/ect1. ) R'W *E>-. With that
discussion, I shall return to the last part of this paper to %ring a 'ikh perspective
into the commentary on urmat, that Arvind has %rought in this %ook.
:lements of post.modern theological foundations in R'W
Revisiting !acanian psychoanalytical interpretations, Arvind %uilds what I
would call a post.modern interpretation of urmat. It is here that I &nd that this
%ook opens up many new arenas of further intellectual in8uiry, particularly %y 'ikhs.
I must mention here that although there are various diferent reviews that are
availa%le on this %ook, however there is none of a serious nature that is undertaken
from a 'ikh point, that can comment on the insights of urmat that are %rought
forward in this %ook. It %ecomes important for including 'ikh insights in reviews,
especially when it is critical in post.modern studies to include Cwhat one has to say
a%out his own self and how one relates with language.
3oving towards the last part of this chapter, Arvind has undertaken a
psychoanalytical discussion on the functioning of ego and non.ego. $ollowing !acan,
he shows that role of language gets de.ontolgi5ed with the functioning of ego.
su%/ect. 6e relates the conception of uni8ueness or oneness of , , %ecomes closely
mediated with the structure of ego or self.attachment or returns the self to self
generating the sense of one Cuni8ue existence. 0Ioneness makes ego the prior
%asis of rationality1 ) R'W *EH- 4his causes erection of %arriers with the outside
world, as the self operates against the world in a su%/ect.o%/ect mode of relation of
mind with world. $urther, the language produced under the in7uence of ego is
reduced to mere tool of communication %etween two egos where Cone ego is
ru%%ing against the Cother. 4herefore this mind as ego is in a state of tension with
the mind as other, erecting an inner wall of self.defense and communicating from
the point of self.defense and egos desire for permanence.
With this %rief %ackground of psychoanalytical theory, Arvind enters into the
sphere of urmat. 6e argues that according to uru ;anak the relationship %etween
inside )self.ego- and outside )unconscious state of non.ego- is like that of love
%etween lovers. :go which is the site of asserting permanence within conscious
mind, has to %e fused with non.ego of unconscious mind which is the site of death
of self or %eing stranger to itself. 6e relates Li5eks term1 minimal noncoincidence
of the self1 as minimal coincidence of self with other that is expressed through the
state of Birha in urmat. 0 I. birha signi&es a link %etween self and other that
exists only in erasing itself. Birha is a point at which self and other touch and fuse
%ut are ever in danger of seprating1. )R'W, *J*-. Assertion of ones existence in
world through self.naming is fundamental misuse of language.
4his is where Arvind &nd the conception of monotheism as pro%lematic. 6e
contends that monotheism is a cause of a duality that %ecomes discriminatory %y
allocating values of maturity to religions, from pantheism to monotheism. 6e
asserts that the pro%lem of monotheism is that it creates a perception of a rigid
duality of opposition M one(many, form(formless, existence(nonexistence, good(evil
etc. 4herefore he contests for paradoxical dialectic %etween appropriation of nam
and disappropriation of ego. "ased on his experience with urmat, Arvind
advocates that the communication %etween :go and non :go takes place through
"am. "am is an empty signi&er with no metaphysical entity, that is cultivated
through 'imaran ) fusion of 'imar meaning Remem%rance and 3arna meaning
renunciation-. 4his takes us to &nal comment of this chapter, 0 "ecause ;am
simaran is not a metaphysical concept %ut a concrete sacri&cial practice for
transforming memory, as the function of mind which weaves times into the
structures that manipulate our existence and thinking, it can also %e viewed as a
way of transforming worldly time into existenceI.. ;am simaran is as inherently
political as it is spiritual.
I am not sure if Arvind would agree with me on my argument that even
though his work re7ects a deep concern for epistemological conceptions of urmat
in post.modern studies, yet there is an element of theology that keeps appearing
within this chapter. !et me clarify that %y theology, I understand conceptuali5ing
religious )'ikh- philosophy in an analytical framework, with phenomenological
elements open to critical review in the light of rational reasoning. In this context the
commentary on the CBein parvesh of uru ;anak on page *EJ, is what I &nd
somewhat incompati%le with the 'ikh spirit. Arvind su%tly talks a%out the Bein
Aarvesh of uru ;anak as a psychological performance in which the uru got
introduced to pure language, in which the uru )in his human form- was actually
silent, while 6is mind was in communication with <nconscious or Word. 4his
particular interpretation that underpins a psychological performativity of the uru,
unconsciously %ecomes to %e a su%/ect of science that is open to critical reasoning.
4he urus %ody as a human gets a precedence over 6is divinity, that perhaps
unconsciously, reduces the cosmological experience to 'ikh spirit. 4his
commentary therefore leaves a gap of %ringing whatever is %eyond human sense of
reason( understanding( experience of unconscious.conscious etc., well within the
domain of, what I would call Cconscious.conscience, of understanding what is in
urus mind N as a su%/ect of human analysis. :xamining the works of 3arcel
auchet, commentator philosopher ?harles 4aylor notes, 0 auchet shows how in
the nineteenth century, one facet of this new depth develops, namely the sense
that our thinking and willing emerges out of cere%ral(nervous function, through the
concepts of the re7ex arc and sensori.motor scheme. 4he second half of century
comes to %e dominated %y a psycho.physiological outlook, which tries to place
consciousness, thinking and will within its %odily reali5ation1.
+
)4aylor, +>,>- 4his
commentary %y Arvind is primarily an experience of %ody and mind of the uru,
while %oth human soul and cosmic spirit gets su%tracted or deleted in error.
4he Sakhi "eeyam ) closely translated as hagiographic order- of the uru, as
understood in traditional 'ikh consciousness is central to 'ikh experience. 4he
Auratan/aman 'akhi, that according to many academic scholars is centered around
miracles )R'W *E=-, re8uires a deeper reali5ation of Bismadh in Sakhi "eeyam
transcending the limits of time and space. :xplaining the 'akhi ;eeyam, 'ikh
scholar Arof #agdish 'ingh notes, 0Iit )sakhi- should not %e confused as a mere
center of philosophical conceptuali5ation, drawing its nutrition from 7uid experience
of consciousness and at the same time masking its latent moves to coloni5e an
experience in order to expand its own hori5ons. 'akhi ;eeyam is an am%rosial
instance, in which the corporality ruptures the duality of time, to Cdawn the cosmic
reali5ation on mans consciousness, within 'akhi. 4he transactions of imperfections
of human corporality that rise within the anxieties of time, transcend into higher
cosmic reali5ation )with 'akhi-.
*
1 )4ranslation mine- )Arof #agdish 'ingh, +>,>-
Asychoanalytical analysis after the works of ' $reud and ' 6all has %een
concentrated on de.coding what is inside mind to understand thoughts emotions
and %ehavior, in order to develop systemi5ed sets of theories. @ialectics and duality
cannot %e segregated or %rushed aside for developing a psychoanalytical theory.
6owever, I must mention that I am not contesting the value of psychoanalysis in
theory, %ut I want to revisit the possi%ility of actually exiting a dialectical opposition
in a theory through psychoanalysis. 4his is not something that Arvind could actually
get rid of completely through this chapter. 6is commentary of Bedic economy
unnoticea%ly creates an Cother, that he many times contests, that the uru is
working against. Aerhaps, it would have %een more enriching to take an
epistemological study of Bedas and to discover how uru ranth 'ahi%, assists in
shedding its hegemonic political metaphysics to reach its spiritual essence. In other
words the transparency of experiences and how they culminate in the uru is a part
that can %e found missing in Arvinds works, that causes the formation of the
Cother.
I must mention here that these errors of empiricism can %e easily overcome
%y undertaking an 2ntological study of %eing, along with the psychoanalytical
analysis. Relying heavily of psychoanalytical examination, as I have argued is open
to a dialectical mode of duality of self(other. In this context, Arvinds argument that
the caste system in 'ikhs is merely a cultural %orrowing from "rahminical
hegemonic political system or vedic economy, may not %e a completely agreea%le
claim. It re8uires a deeper ontological study to examine that what makes such a
cultural %orrowing a possi%ility to such a wide extent, as is seen among 'ikhs today,
%oth within Aun/a% and diasporas, even though the 'ikh spirit is deeply inconsistent
with caste metaphysics, in essence and in efect. In other words, an 2ntological
study of %eing, if added along with a psychoanalysis can %ring richer
epistemological value. I want to add the void of living experience,. as Arvind talks
a%out %ut does not discusses deeper in his work, .although challenges metaphysics
of monotheism, %ut at the same time re.creates another metaphysics of an empty
signi&er in its place, with monotheism of #udeo.?hristian tradition as the Cother.
6owever, this is something that is perhaps unavoida%le in any modern western
academia to completely deconstruct or erase the structures of modernism and at
%est it can produce what we understand as post.modernism.
?onclusion
Religion and 'pecter of the West is perhaps a signi&cant landmark in the &eld
of 'ikh studies, that has taken the su%/ect to its new hori5ons. 2ne of the
noteworthy distinctions of this work is that it has helped to decoloni5e 'ikh studies
from earlier dominant schools of west particularly that of 6ew 3c!eods. "esides
that, the critical arguments especially in chapter &ve of Ideologies of sacred sound,
has as %rought many signi&cant insights for 'ikhs to revisit their traditions and
practices in relating with the uru.
After reading this chapter, there are many new perspectives that come into
light that further give way to many more to come. Autting &rst things &rst, let me
comment that this chapter makes one reali5e the centrality of text and how
imperative it is to get engaged with it, in order to &ll the gaps that are left out in
ones knowledge and understandings. Without shying away, I must point that if this
point is taken seriously, this chapter has a right potential to %ring a wider social and
academic transformation within the educational aura of not only Aun/a%, %ut within
Indian su%continent. It is perhaps a %ig %ang in the academics that has several
conscious and unconscious discussions to %e followed. A few among them at this
point can %eM
,. What is the importance of script in languageO What role does grammar
play to linguistic studiesO 4herefore the linguistic studies, of Aun/a% need
to %e revisited along with the sym%olic order to reopen the role of
sym%olism, oration and enciption in language. $or example is there any
role of C3atras )can %e closely translated as Boiced vowels- in urmukhi
scriptO In this context, the name ;anak )nwnk- is also written as ;anak
)nwnku- in urmukhi script. Would it not %e a pro%a%le error of
understanding to drive a %lanket connotation that wherever the work
;anak is recited in ur%ani, it would have the same meaning or
referenceO In this example, ;anak with the matra(vowel )aaunkar- as
noted %y many urmukhi linguistic grammarians including 'ahi% 'ingh,
signify the uru in person, while ;anak without an aaunkar signi&es uru
as a cosmic %eing of spiritual consciousness. $urther, are these matras
translata%le in :nglishO Is it a shortcoming of an language or diference in
relating with sym%olism %etween 2riental and Western spheresO What was
the reason that as hymns were recited %y uru, it were encrypted in
urmukhiO Would it pro%a%ly %e grossly erroneous to assume that it was a
mere accident that the script chosen %y uru is urmukhi, and not any
other oneO 6ow does alpha%ets in urmukhi represent the participation of
mind, %ody and soul especially when each speci&c set of = alpha%ets, get
pronounced with speci&c part of %ody with a distinct oratory techni8ue of
using lungs, tongue, mouth lips, teeth etc. 6ow does sym%olic experience
of mankind gets culminated in the urmukhi scriptO
+. ?arrying out a psychoanalytical analysis on repetitive orality, this chapter
%y Arvind makes one rethink a%out the widely prevalent customs %y many
Kirtan #athas and sangats, that inculcate speci&c physical exercises of
%reathing along circulatory repetition of particular words Satnam
#aheuru. Arvind exposes that such concentration on a speci&c word as
sound )o%/ect- concentrates to awaken a speci&c origin in mind, %orrowed
from Poga("rahminical practices. 3aking his arguments more su%stancial,
he contends that such practices negate the relevance of Raags of uru
ranth 'ahi%. 4his argument opens the 8uestion of revisiting raags in 'ikh
Kirtan. What constitutes the formation of %eing that elements a speci&c
music return into 'ikh practiceO
*. Arvinds exposition on oral traditions also raises 8uestions on
concentration on exact articulation of words and how the experience of
'a%da gets transformed into mantra practices of certain 4aksals and 'ant
sama/s, that interdicts the experience of Bismadh. 4his raises the 8uestion
on revisiting many common life practices that have %een followed as
cultural tradtion
9. $urther the remarks on uru ranth 'ahi% as text or scripture, has
somehow %ecome a common practice among western scholars and can
also %e located within this %ook. 4his may not gel well with 'ikh
imagination and experience, %ecause such a reference always carry the
potential to restrict 'ikh imagination for uru and potentially lead to
interpreting 'ikhi as a Creligion of %ook, which is also against Arvinds own
central contestation in R'W. 'o this invites another 8uestion, that is there
any limitation in western imagination that further is the dependent on the
imagination within language to relate with uru not as a physical
scripture, %ut as an unconsciously.conscious experienceO
=. !ast 8uestion that I think can %e further explored after this discussion is
that why did %oth uru Ar/un and uru o%ind 'ingh at %oth occasions
recite uru ranth 'ahi% orally, while it was noted %y "hai urdas and
"hai 3ani 'ingh respectivelyO Is this not going against the argument that
Arvind is making in this chapter. an account that underpins the argument
that the revealed 'ha%ad is &rst oral and then scriptedO $urther one way
to look at texual(oral dichotomy is that the written word inscri%ed as text
takes the shape of rule or law, something that is not changea%le and
temporal, while orality continues its 7ow for freedom of consciousness,
open to emerging experiences. @oes that mean that the uru is primarily
arguing for a 3aryada )closely translated as spiritual order(discipline- with
centrality of 'ha%ad and at the same time opening up the consciousness
through Kirtan to experience the highest state of freedom in 3aryadaO
At this point these are the 8uestions that are spontaneously occurring in my mind
that I %elieve in some way or the other have initiated after going over this chapter.
It is perhaps a stimulating argument that Arvind has undertaken in this chapter and
that can potentially invoke many further in8uiries. In that context it would not %e
something wrong to interpret the works of Arvind Aal ' 3andair as the %ig %ank in
structuralist phenomenology, and the potential it contains for 'ikhs studies in
diferent times and spaces. 6owever, while undertaking such endevors, I want to
remind from the works of another 'ikh 'cholar 6imat 'ingh, 0 'ikh.philosophy
cannot %e that of conceptuali5ation %ut of Cliving vitality, of Cthe life itself vi%rant
through the Csentient. 4he method of understanding such vital life needs its
apparatus to %e lively vital too, %ut with a chiseled awakening through the touch of
the uru ) 'a%da- who creates the entire cosmic panorama1.
9
) 6imat 'ingh, p ,*>-
References
$. Arvind Aal 'ingh 3andair, Reliion and the Specter of the %est, +>>H, ?olum%ia
<niversity press
&. ?harles 4aylor, 'he Secular Ae, +>,>
(. Arof #agdish 'ingh, Amrit #ela, +>,>, 'ingh "rothers, Amritsar, India, p,Q.
2riginal text reads, 0ieh .AlsAwnw pwr"2i8k8w dw ky;dr nhI;, /o ho;d dy risk APlwA
n<3 iksy s<Km s3klpk /ug8 nwl A3dro; kr uaus n<3 Awpxy APlwA leI vr8dw hPR I..
iesy pRkwr swKI nym dyh dw auh A3imR8 pl hP, /do; dyh kwl dy dv3d APlwA dI
cy8nw 8o; inrol pwrdr'8w dy %Rihm3fI APlwA n<3 Awpxy co; pRgt krdI hPR kwl "yA
A@In A@<rypx dy sm#2i8Aw; c i/au;dI dyh dw k3cn sI dyhI dI s3p<rn8w c 7xw swKI
nym dw pRgt hoxw hPR
). 6imat 'ingh, 'he Philosophical *onception of Sabda, ;aad Aargaas, Amritsar, +>,*,
p,*>