**1. Introduction**

As a canonical text for Sikhs and the faith's sacred scripture, the Sri Guru Granth Sahib (Guru Granth) informs my spiritual practice in a very personal manner. As an initial reference for the reader, the Guru Granth is also known as the Adi Granth, "the adjective *Adi*, or first has been appended to distinguish this Granth from the second sacred scripture of the Sikhs, the Dasam Granth, which contains the works attributed to the tenth (dasam) Guru, Gobind Singh" (Singh 2000, p. 1). While acknowledging its premier position "as a supertextual source of authority within the Sikh Panth" (Singh 2000, p. 266) and that personal knowledge of the Gurmukhi language is required in order to engage with the original form of the Granth, for this paper, I have also relied on English translations of various texts to fully understand and appreciate the form and meaning of the *Gurshabad* (the Word) and the Sikh code. As a feminist, my contextual study of religious text interpretations is laden with critical questions that are not encouraged in formal institutional structures of the faith; nevertheless, many questions rise from within me. As a young religion, Sikhism (est. 1469) is only recently deconstructing the long-forged and existing power relations within third-wave feminist activism and beyond into fourth-wave feminism, including social, technological, textual, and dialogical aspects. The central question of this paper is the following: what are the issues that Sikh feminists need to explore in order to further develop a Sikh feminist hermeneutic? I take a largely emic view of Sikh tradition even as I critically analyze Sikh texts and history.

Although not ye<sup>t</sup> fully theorized, Sikh feminism's critical goal has been to de-center the notion of normatively androcentric hermeneutics and to (re)raise the textual and practical meaning that surveys Sikh thought and understanding. (Singh 2014a) suggests, "There is a lack of feminist hermeneutics. Consequently, the existential correlation between the sacred text and daily life has ye<sup>t</sup> to be made in the Sikh world. Whereas Sikh scripture has been radically open, the community has been reticent to acknowledge and implement its innovative ideas" (p. 618). The time presents itself to challenge old and new interpretations as a first step—a critique of the religious interpretations in light of misogyny, feminism examines the status quo with new understandings of the text. (Singh 2000) poses many questions on the ability of any Sikh to understand the canon's oral and written exegesis based

on the following estimate, "all interpretive activity is subject to particular cultural predispositions, the historical situation of the interpreter, inevitable change in the modes of attention and the nature of interaction between the past and the present" (p. 240). He further suggests that "in the case of literary interpretation one approaches the text without preconceived intention in order to explore the many possibilities of its meaning and confronts the world in front of the text" (p. 260). I sugges<sup>t</sup> that this immediate, personal, and contemporary approach combats traditional interpretations that have neglected the feminine.

Keeping this in mind, this paper investigates and undertakes a literary interpretation of how Sikh texts, codes, and practices may be understood and interpreted through a feminist lens placed on historical texts, various interpretations, contemporary views, and personal sense-making (via spiritual learning and lived realities). The feminist lens allows me to analyze how women are represented and portrayed in comparison to men in Sikh texts. Feminist political, cultural, and economic movements have worked to bring about equal rights and legal protection for women through the three waves of feminist history, growing the positionality of feminist thought. Positioning an analysis of Sikhi's sacred texts and codes of conduct through third-wave feminism seeks to challenge the binary opposition and subsequent interpretations/transliterations present in the texts.

While medieval India was the stage for Nanak's reform movement, I turn our minds to the rise of postmodernism's third-wave feminism, which "embraces multivocality over synthesis and action over theoretical justification" (Snyder 2008, p. 175). Third-wave feminism collapses both the category of "women" by foregrounding personal intersectional narratives of lived experiences and the judgmental policing of boundaries of feminist politics. We are aware that the politics of coalition have dogged feminism since its early days of self-identification to the third wave that attempts to break down the rigid structures of feminist ideology. In a similar manner, Nanak was a reformer attempting to break down centuries-old, rigid codes of faith ideologies, practice, and culture in India in the late 15th and early 16th century. His construction of the thirty-eight stanzas of the Japji Sahib are what Rabindranath Tagore called an anthem for the world. Just as, today, feminism is something di fferent to every individual, so did Nanak provide the means to understand Sikhi through a very personal lens and made it available for a personal relationship and interpretation. He suggested that it is "not about hearing voices from God, but it is about changing the nature of the human mind and anyone can achieve direct experience and spiritual perfection at any time" (Mandair 2013, p. 31). The Guru Granth is the only text penned by a faith's teachers, as well as philosophers from other religions. While no modifications can be made to the text, unique to Sikhi is the personal interpretation and will of application of the *Gurshabad*. Nanak's critique of inherent privilege and illuminating the vast caste and gender divides in India led to a philosophy of Sikh equality of all

At this juncture in the twenty-first century, I sugges<sup>t</sup> that global Sikhs may want to recognize how contemporary Sikh feminists see themselves not just as interlocutors but as vital meaning makers of the faith, its various interpretations and through its inherent impact on their lives. In the past, "the educated elite among the Sikhs, by virtue of their proficiency in the language of their erstwhile conquerors, took advantage of their position, claiming full authority to translate, elucidate and define new parameters, particularly for those who were closest and most subordinate to them, their womenfolk" (Jakobsh 2003, pp. 201–2). However, today, this has changed, and we are in the midst of a largely quiet Sikh feminist revolution that seeks to challenge traditionally-accepted androcentric textual understandings. At the same time, I am humbled (and cautioned) in my analysis by (Singh 2000)'s suggestion that "it is the text that illuminates the interpreter like radiance, not the interpreter who illuminates the text" (p. 260). This illumination is not without its dark corners, and I attempt to bring the issues of Sikh praxis together.

In this paper, my investigation leads to the text in the *Rahit Maryda* (Sikh code of conduct) that codifies a *Khalsa* Sikh's personal duty and responsibility to the five kakars (*punj kakars*). These are the five articles of faith through which I sugges<sup>t</sup> the ethical *Khalsa* (a collective of spiritual and worldly Sikhs that are pure of thought and action) is imbued with gender neutral/supportive personal and spiritual

agency on an everyday basis. Further and more broadly, I start at the beginning of our introduction to the Sikh scriptures. Emancipatory feminism allows for an understanding that the all-encapsulating first words in the Guru Granth *Ikk Oankar* have universal appeal and can be reconnoitered, and different interpretations of parts of the Guru Granth can be critically surveyed (Beasley 2004). My interpretation is directly affected by the daily representation of a contemporary female reality that is embodied in Sikhi for me. This reality is informed by my feminine consciousness as a global Sikh living in a diaspora and through taking part in and observing practices at the Sikh religious institutions—projecting forward as it were into in an anticipated world.

The genesis of Sikh feminist thought can be attributed to the founder of the faith, Guru Nanak Dev ji (born 1469), who revealed a new inclusive ontology and theology of difference whereby his understanding of the creator's formless quality allowed for deliverance from caste discrimination, gender bias, or hierarchy and was a move away from the worship of idols (Grewal 1969; Kaur 1990; Jakobsh 2003; Singh 2000, 2005, 2014a). Nanak's third way (Nanak *Panth* or path of Nanak that nine other Gurus followed) teachings follow *nirgun bhakti*, defining a Sikh's devotional goal to become one with the One (*Ikk Oan Kar*), omnipotent, omnipresent, fearless, and loving—without form (*nirankar*), and without attributes (*nirgun*) (Mandair 2010; Grewal 2009; Takhar 2005; Shackle and Singh 2005). Critically important is the fact that Nanak does not evoke the contradistinction of the formless One who has neither male nor female attributes ye<sup>t</sup> is completely subsumed within manifested attributes and is complete and whole. (Singh 2011) states,

"It is critical that we do not put Guru Nanak's truly unique configuration of *Ikk Oan Kar* into any pre-existing molds. The standard translation 'There is One God' does not quite express the vastness and plenitude or the intimacy bursting forth in the original. Instead of an opening into limitless possibilities as envisioned by the founder Sikh Guru, scholars and translators have selected, structures [sic] and shaped *Ikk Oan Kar* into a male god".

> (p. 68)

She further states that "[a]s the inclusive numeral shatters the dominance of male imagery, it creates a space for the Divine to be experienced in other new and important ways" (p. 607). As the opening words (*Ikk Oan Kar*) of the Guru Granth in the *Mul Mantar*, (Singh 2000) suggests "the numeral ('IK') at the beginning of the Mul Mantar represents the unity of the ultimate reality, a concept which Guru Nanak interprets in monotheistic terms" (p. 85). While affirming the single supreme essence ("supreme being"), (Singh 2000) departs from the idea of one and unity and corroborates with (McLeod 1968) transliteration with the following male-default androcentric colonized interpretation from the Guru Granth's verse on page 350: "My Master is the one. He is the one, brother and he alone exists" (p. 85). The transliteration from the original Gurmukhi text is as follows: *Sahib Mera Eko Hai. Eko Hai Bhai Eko Hai.* In Gurmukhi colloquial terms, sahib is a prefix/honourific given to a male of significant stature and status, but I sugges<sup>t</sup> that, today, it can be accorded gender-free teacher (guru) designation *here*, rather than the word Master (male); and the word *Bhai* colloquially in this context can generally be calling upon a person (not only a man) and does not have to be the (male) brother—but rather those in the collective *sangat*. In the online SriGranth.org translation, the interpreters put in the superfluous word Lord and also add Master—"My Lord and Master is One" (SriGranth.org, p. 350) and further interpret the stanza: "He is the One and Only; O Siblings of Destiny, He is the One alone" (p. 350)—and here how the interpretation of *Bhai* signifying 'siblings of destiny' is not fully understood. (Jakobsh 2014) is right in suggesting that the honourific Sahib has masculine utility, but I sugges<sup>t</sup> that in terms of the Guru Granth's inclusive views in this regard, Sahib can also be a guide/teacher for the learner and can be inculcated as such. In analyzing the androcentric colonized mentality of the translations of the Guru Granth, (Singh 2014b) suggests that "[w]hereas the Divine is the transcendent, metaphysical One,itisinvariablytranslatedintoaWesternmonotheistic'God'andgivenamaleidentity"(p.619).

While global Sikhs in the diaspora have long been attuned to their colonial history (British Raj), they mostly rely on available translated texts for religious knowledge if the mother language has

become lost (Punjabi in this instance); however, many exegetes have their academic study rooted in Western texts and through that training have been influenced by western religio-philosophical concepts. Singh (2007) suggests that in her analysis of the various translations, "English words imbued with Jewish and Christian meaning have come to dictate Sikh ideals. Key theological concepts from western philosophical tradition—alien to Sikh worldview—bury scriptural translations and obstruct real a ffinity between Punjabi and English" (p. 37). She further suggests that the master–subject relationship of the British Empire continues to have credence in the diaspora, "younger generations of Sikhs in Canada, England and America are not familiar with the original verse. Sadly, it is in *his master's* voice that many Sikhs relate with their sacred books" (p. 37).

Key concepts such as *Ikk Oankar* are misconstrued or narrowly construed in translation, signifying a male God (commonly understood to mean 'there is one God')—because it closely follows *Satnam* (commonly understood to mean 'His name is truth'). (Singh 2007) clarifies the two di fferences, "There is One Being, Truth by Name" versus the versions of eastern and Western intellectuals, "There is one God, Eternal Truth is His name" (p. 38). She clarifies thus:

"'There is One God' is a monotheistic conception, which does not quite invite the multiplicity and poly-imagination of Nanak's numeral One. A specific male 'he', with pronounced male pronouns, horribly distorts Nanak's original language of plenitude and destroys the elemental modality of 'Ikk Oan Kar'. The dynamic processes set in motion at the very outset of Sikh scripture are immediately aborted in the English translation".

> (p. 38)

Does the interpretation of the *Gurshabad* receive social justice when female subjectivities are ignored or are superimposed by patriarchal hermeneutics? For example, if repeatedly exegetists (e.g., Gurcharan Singh Talib, Gopal Singh, Pritam Singh Chahil) of the Guru Granth transcreate that the way to union with the Divine is through the feminine, is the quest then to see how the male adherent finds his feminine side in order to complete the union? Jakobsh (1999) suggests, "addressing the Divine through the feminine voice leads one to conclude that there is a concerted e ffort to maintain the masculine identity of God, the female overcome with love for the Bridegroom, her Love, can thus only be male" (p. 31). The online SriGranth.org (, p. 38) interprets a verse in the Guru Granth in this vein:

She who knows her husband Lord to be always with her, enjoys his constant presence—

*jini piru sange janiai piru rave sada haduri*

O woman, you must walk in harmony with the Guru's will

*Mundhe tu chalu gur kai bhai*

Night and day, you shall enjoy your husband, and you shall intuitively merge into the True One

*an din raevh pir apna sehje sach sama e*

Attuned to the Shabad, the happy soul-brides are adorned with the True Word of the Shabad

*Sabad rai a sohagani sachari sabad sigar*

Within their own home, they obtain the Lord as their Husband, with love for the Guru

*Har var pa in ghar apani gur kau het pi ar*

Upon her beautiful and cozy bed, she enjoys the Love of her Lord. She is overflowing with the treasure of devotion

*Sej suhavi har rang ravai bhagat bhare bhandar*

Does the Sikh male see himself represented in devotion as a female, or is that negated to a (subsumed/secondary) female position metaphorically? (Singh 2005) suggests that "it is imperative that a one-sided memory of Sikh sacred verse and its male application be rectified" (p. 141), but what of the exegesis of a hyper-sexualized female representation as the devotee to a male Lord? It is true, as she posits, that "[i]n the literature of the Gurus, female images serve as vital reminders of the Transcendent One, and they are greatly valued for cultivating spirituality; but the minds of the Sikh community lack the ability to store this rich symbolic data" (Singh 2005, p. 141). The question that arises is whether the Guru Granth's exegesis provides the full benefit to all adherents of the faith, regardless of genders?
