JOURNAL OF RITUAL STUDIES 30 (1) 2016

75

Adaptation and Incorporation in Ritual Practices at the

Golden Temple, Amritsar
Navtej K. Purewal and Virinder S. Kalra

Abstract
The Golden Temple (Harmandir Sahib) in Amritsar is popularly considered to be the central Sikh religious site.
This article demonstrates how the evolution of ritual at the Golden Temple embodies a multiplicity which is often
overlooked alongside attempts to either incorporate or erase devotional rituals by official and formal interpretations of Sikh tradition. The popular dimensions of contemporary practices which cross the boundaries of what is
determined to be 'Sikh', we argue, are represented in devotional rituals which have continued alongside and within
formal Khalsa Sikh tradition highlighting a milieu of heteropraxy of devotional ritual taking place at the site.

Introduction
Harmandir Sahib (transl. temple of Hari/God), or the
Golden Temple, in Amritsar occupies an iconic position in
the representation of Sikhs. The complex lies in the centre
of the walled city of Amritsar in northwest India, a city
whose foundation is symbiotically linked to the establishment of the sacred site. As Grewal (2008: 1) notes, "the
story of Amritsar is the story of its [The Golden Temple's]
foundation and survival". This article's focus upon Harmandir Sahib presents it as a site which embodies multiplicity through its history of evolution through the performance of rituals. It is here that we examine how official
practice (orthodoxy) became specified and sanctioned
through codification while heteropraxy became maligned
as 'non-Sikh' and thus outside of the realm of acceptability.
It is this process of institutionalization, incorporation, and
adaptation that this article wishes to explore. The popular
dimensions of contemporary Sikh practices which cross the
boundaries of what is determined to be 'Sikh', we will argue,
are represented in devotional rituals which have continued
alongside and within formal Khalsa Sikh tradition highlighting a milieu of heteropraxy of Sikh devotional ritual.
The city of Amritsar (amrit sarovar- 'sacred bathing
pool') was founded in 1577 by'the third Sikh Guru and developed by his next three successors. Whilst it had a turbulent subsequent history, the rule of Maharaja Ranjit Singh
and the patronage of the British colonial state ensured its
centrality as a place of pilgrimage. In postcolonial India it
is the focal point for Sikh religious affairs and an intensely
attractive site for worshippers and tourists alike.
Whilst the birthplace of Guru Nanak at Nankana Sahib,
now in present-day Pakistan, had been another central
place of locatable Sikh identification prior to 194 7, the
Golden Temple acquired this singularly definitive iconic

status after the partition, as a place for Sikh pilgrimage in

newly formed India. The city of Amritsar is considered
the epicentre of contemporary Sikh religious identity.
However, its identification in previous eras has been more
ambiguous. For example, in the colonial era, demographically Amritsar had been a Muslim majority city (Talbot 2006). In the period after partition, the lackDf access
to sites such as Nankana Sahib and Panja Sahib has meant
increasing focus on the Golden Temple, such that the complex is now recognised by UNESCO as a World Heritage
site. Indeed, the partition can be considered as one of the
key events in which rituals, especially the performance of
hymn singing (kirtan) were greatly impacted upon.
Briefly considering the historical formation of the site,
the shift in its naming from Darbar Sahib (the court of
the Guru) to Harmandir (God's temple) to the Golden
Temple (referring to its gold adornment) provides the
context for considering the transformations that ritual
practice has undergone since 1947. Sikh reformist movements in the British Colonial era eventually gained control of the site in 1925 and attempted to curb popular heteropraxy by institutionalising the centrality of the Ad
Granth (the sacred text of the Sikhs). This period is particularly well documented in Sikh historical studies and
forms a key area of academic debate. Our contention, by
looking at the transformation of devotional practices, is
that rather than a dichotomy developing between reformists and popular practice (as is suggested by the textual sources), a process of incorporation and accommodation took place. Even in the reconstruction of the
complex after the Indian Army assault in 1984, sites of
popular worship were retained. Despite attempts by the
management of the shrine to bring popular practices into
line with institutional rules of conduct, worshippers continued to find methods of adaptation. However, as we

76

JOURNAL OF RITUAL STUDIES 30 (1) 2016

Fig.1: Golden Temple, Amritsar (photo by V.S. Kalra)

will conclude, the persistent exclusion of women from
formal rituals is a poignant reminder of the obstinate nature of institutional authority in maintaining bounded
exclusivity which, though textually unjustifiable, relies
heavily upon a masculinist assertion of dominant religious institutional authority.

From Darbar Sahib to Golden Temple

There are multiple narratives as to why the third Sikh
Guru Amar Das and his son-in-law Guru Ram Das chose
this particular site to establish a new centre for their followers. The sanctity of the site in particular was related to
the presence of a pool of water and of a large number of
Jujube (berh) trees. The Buddha is said to have stayed in
the vicinity while there is mythological reference to the
Pandava brothers of the Mahabharat having been raised
from battle-ridden unconsciousness after drinking water
from the pool (Kaur 2000). In the Sikh tradition it is a site
visited by Guru Nanak (the founder) as well as successor
Guru Angad, in which way its future centrality to Sikhs is
guaranteed in the past (Singh 2000). Even though the present site was established through the construction of a baoli
or sarovar, a fixed construction for the holding of water,
it was under Guru Arjun (1563-1606), the fifth Guru, that

the site became formally constructed in the shape that it

has today. Indeed, in establishing the shrine at the centre
of what was initially known as Guru Ka Chak (the place
of the Guru) or Ram Das-pur, a thriving community came
to be established (Grewal 1996; Moosvi 2005).
The spiritual centre of this new place was the figure of
the Guru himself. This was literally a Darbar Sahib (which
is how the temple is also still referred to), 'a court' where
followers could come, pay obeisance, and meet the Guru
and partake of various rituals and activities. Alongside
making the Amrit Sarovar a brick lined pool, the building of the structure in tlie centre of the pool, the specific
building called the Harmandir, was also constructed by
Guru Arjun.l As Fenech (2008) has described, by the time
the sixth Guru Hargobind built the Aka/ Takht (the seat
of authority) in the complex, the town and community
of Sikhs were well established. However, the tensions with
the central Mughal authorities, which resulted in the execution of Guru Arjun and the persecution of subsequent
Gurus, meant that the site was left in the hands of caretakers by the middle of the seYenteenth century. Indeed,
just as previous Gurus had established other centres, subsequent Gurus established towns such as Kiratpur and
Anandpur. From the mid-sewnteenth century until the
early nineteenth centur\- :\mritsar became a site of turmoil and upheaYal \,-ith the temple being desecrated and

JOURNAL OF RITUAL STUDIES 30 (1) 2016

ransacked three times by Afghan marauders, taking advantage of the disintegration of the Mughal empire.2
With the departure of the Gurus from the site, the central focus of Sikh actiYities was the Harmandir where, according to Singh (2006), the earliest form of the Ad
Granth, compiled by Guru Arjun was housed. Indeed, the
narrative by which the central rituals of the site came to
be focused on the Harmandir and the sacred text is an essential component in understanding why this site, rather
than the others established by the Gurus, became iconic.
It is this site where the completed Ad Granth was first
housed after the final living Gm=u Gobind Singh passed
on the Guruship to 'the book'. Various individuals from
Sikh history, such as Baba Budda, Bhai Gurdas and Bhai
Manni Singh were all associated with the site and, perhaps most crucially for our purposes here, a set of ritual
practices, derived from those that are locally embedded
at the Harmandir, was standardised by nineteenth century reformers as universally Sikh. This nineteenth-century
colonial focus on the Ad Granth was aided by the previous period of Sikh rule under Maharaja Ranjit Singh
(1780-1839) who clad the dome of the Harmandir in gold
leaf, turning it into Swaran Mandir. It was the British,
who having annexed Punjab to the empire in 1849, subsequently translated this into English and gave it the name
by which it is most known today in world religions approaches to Sikhism: The Golden Temple.
The cartography of Sikh spiritual spaces in South Asia
spans the subcontinent, and before the twentieth century
had been largely constituted by sites associated with the
Sikh Gurus. Most of these sites had been managed by caretakers who came to be collectively known as the mahants,
who either inherited the sites through a bloodline associated with the Gurus, or received their office through state
appointment during Ranjit Singh's and British colonial
rule. The mahants, in light of the colonial state's reification of religious boundaries, became juxtaposed against
the emerging canvas of Sikh community identity. The Gurdwara Reform Movement or the Akali Movement of the
1920s was accompanied by the ,creation of the Shiromani
Gurdwara Prabandhak Commitree (SGPC) which would
become the Sikh political voice in Punjab thereafter.
Murphy (2012) highlights how this period marked a
transition towards a spatial and Sikh imaginary in which
there was "a new sense of the logic of ownership by and
for the community" ( 184). Gurdwaras and other religious
sites which had previously been embedded in Mughal and
then British management of revenue-free land grants, land
management and entitlement became coopted into a newlycreated twentieth-century Sikh gurdwara management
under the authority of the SGPC. The struggle for Sikh
control over gurdwaras during the 1920s was resisted by

77

the mahants, who had previously benefitted from British

patronage, culminating in violent encounters such as that
at Nankana Sahib (the birth place of Guru Nanak) in 1921
over rights of control and access to the shrine (Singh 1978).
Mahant Narain Dass was criticized by an emerging Sikh
critique that problematized his personal gain as proprietor
of the shrine estate and taker of all offerings made by worshippers at the shrine. The case became the milestone for
the SGPC and the gurdwara reform movement of the time
and culminated in the Nankana Sahib massacre at which
approximately fifty people were killed. The British patronage of Mahant Narain Dass became a focal point of
the movement and highlighted how hereditary entitlements
were out of sync with the movement to liberate gurdwaras
from individual control.
After years of protest and many deaths the colonial state
relinquished control of'historic' gurdwaras to the SGPC.
Unlike Nankana Sahib, which had been run by mahants,
the Golden Temple was managed by a committee until the
British annexation of Punjab in 1849. The British colonial state's patronage of the shrine continued through its
appointment of a committee to manage the administration of the Golden Temple through the rules and regulations set out in the Dastur-ul' Amal.3 Adopted as a tool for
influencing and gaining tacit allegiance to colonial authority, the Golden Temple became the site at which the
British attempted to exert control over the emerging urban
Sikh community. Ultimately, the struggle over the gurdwaras led to the compromise of the 1925 Sikh Gurdwaras
Act which bestowed controlling authority of 'historic'
shrines onto the SGPC and local committees. This marked
both the end of hereditary administration at these specified sites as well as a legal definition for the status of historic gurdwaras as formalized Sikh institutions.
As the independence movement against British colonial rule mounted and eventually the partition of 194 7
occurred, the fight for Sikh control of gurdwaras shifted
from one in which the British colonial state was invoked
in order to recognize Sikh religious distinction to a scenario in which religious identity and practices in gurdwaras were represented, managed and mediated by the
religious authority of the SGPC. One of the outcomes of
this was that ritual practices came under the scrutiny of
the SGPC and the Sikh Rahit Maryada (Code of Conduct
and Conventions) in which official practice (orthodoxy)
was specified and sanctioned through codification while
heteropraxy was maligned as non-Sikh and thus outside
of the realm of acceptability. It is in this context that the
changes in ritual at the Golden Temple are most usefully
viewed. Crucially, the Ad Granth's status as the nucleus
of formal Sikh practice came to be institutionalised.

78

JOURNAL OF RITUAL STUDIES 30 (1) 2016

Disciplining the Darbar

There is a gap in studies of popular practices at Sikh spiritual sites due to two debates which have directed the lens
of scholarship towards textual and historical evidence, eclipsing any focus upon popular and contemporary expressions
of devotion. Sikh studies has been primarily consumed with
two deliberations, in this respect, that both took place in
the 1990s. One was spurred by Harjot Oberoi's ( 1992, 1994)
seminal but highly debated work on popular saints and his
deconstructive historical exercise of the Sikh tradition as we
know it today. The other was set off by W.H. McLeod ( 1975,
2004) and Pashaura Singh's (2000) attestation of the authenticity of authorship of the Ad Granth. Both of these debates reflect the attention towards the sanctity and sacredness of the Sikh tradition in history and text. Each brought
to the fore how far the limits of acceptability could be drawn
in terms of applying a historiography of religion and academic critique to sacred texts and hence religious identity.
For our purposes here, we do not intend to tread the
paths of either deconstructing Sikh identity or attesting
the authorship of sacred Sikh texts. What we do intend
to explore, however, is the popular dimensions of contemporary Sikh practices which cross the boundaries of
what is determined to be 'Sikh' in the formal Rahit
Maryada. Devotional rituals have continued alongside
and within the Khalsa Sikh tradition which highlights how
Sikh popular rituals, rather than being in opposition to
formal, institutionalised practices, are a continuing part
of the milieu of Sikh rituaJ.4 However, this article is not
an exercise in understanding syncretism, but an examination of the interplay between institutional forms of worship and the rituals of heteropraxy which underlie contemporary practice.
Within our focus upon heteropraxy, devotional seekers are not bound by religious categorizations of identity in their practice, and pilgrims and visitors to these
shrines are multifarious in motivation and identification. While the openness of the Sikh tradition beyond
the limits of Khalsa identity was identified by Oberoi
(1994 ), his deconstructive exercise was interpreted as a
critique of formal Sikh identity writ large. Our intention here is not to tread that same deconstructive path,
but instead to focus upon the negotiations that exist between heteropraxy and the institutional attempts of regulation through "Sikhisation" (Juergensmeyer 1982).
While the Singh Sabha movement played a significant
role in the making of modern Sikh identity in which
Sikh identity assertion was mobilized through this educated, urban-based leadership, its institutional form
in the SGPC occupies the contemporary voice of this
process of"Sikhisation" and indeed was created for that

purpose. It continues in the regulation of contemporary practices of devotion at the Golden Temple and
other SGPC managed gurdwaras.s The main document
which outlines the disciplining aspect of the SGPC in
terms of ritual conduct is the Rahit Maryada (The Sikh
Code of Conduct and Conventions). We quote extensively
here to illustrate the extent to which certain practices
are considered illegitimate:"
Not believing in [ ... ) magic, spells, incantation,
omens, auspicious times, days and occasions, influence of stars, horoscopic dispositions, Shradh
(ritual serving of food to priests for the salvation of
ancestor on appointed days as per the lunar calendar), Ancestor worship, khiah (ritual serving of
food to priests-Brahmins-on the lunar anniversaries of death of an ancestor), pind (offering
of funeral barley cakes to the deceased's relatives),
patal (ritual donating of food in the belief that that
would satisfy the hunger of a departed soul), diva
(the ceremony of keeping an oil lamp lit for 360
days after the death, in the belief that that lights the
path of the deceased), ritual funeral acts, hom
(lighting of ritual fire and pouring intermittently
clarified butter, food grains etc. into it for propitiating gods for the fulfilment of a purpose), jag (religious ceremony involving presentation of oblations), [ . . . ] veneration of any graves, of
monuments erected to honour the memory of a deceased person or of cremation sites, idolatry and
such like superstitious observances (SGPC 1925).
Even though a distance and tension between rules and
practice is expected to exist within religious discourse,
the fact that the SGPC central office is located in the
Golden Temple complex shows that the Golden Temple
represents more than symbolic authority. Both the head
Granthi (loosely translate<;! as Priest) and the fathedar of
the political seat of authority (the Aka/ Takht) who is selected by the SGPC are based at the site which gives a
weight of institutional authority to the implementation
of the Rahit Maryada. Despite this support for orthodoxy,
our exploration of heteropraxy at the Golden Temple finds
that alongside formal, regulated rituals of worship and
obeisance, there is also a continuing popular practice constituted by a multifariousness of seekers of devotion. Folklore, devotional votive, and village religion, thus, are not
necessarily in conflict with Sikh identity, but exist in tandem, though sometimes on contested terms.
Analysis of the constructed nature of major religious
boundaries, for instance, draws attention to state and
other modes of control and rationalisation which have
historically attempted to disrupt popular notions of plu-

JOURNAL OF RITUAL STUDIES 30 (1) 2016

79

Fig.2: Bathers at the Golden Temple (Photo by N.K. Purewal)

ralism rather than foster them (Gottschalk 2000). Others
have given contextualised examples in the South Asian
context of rich 'confluent' histories of coexistence and
commonality which go beyond any notion of primordial
religious distinctions but which have relied upon a notion of syncretism (Assayag 2004, Sikand 2004). Heteropraxy at sacred Sikh sites highlights the limitation of the
concept of syncretism for our purposes, since it implies
the existence of bounded traditions which can then be
'mixed' (see Mir 2006). The requirement for discrete categories for the concept of syncretism cannot be met within
Sikh sacred sites, unless the construction of those categories are de facto accepted. The symbolic marking of sacred spaces such as gurdwaras as being essentially Sikh,
or the worship of objects or deities other than the Ad
Granth as essentially Hindu, or of the worship of living
or eternalised pirs or saints as Muslim, are all part of the
process that locates that which is within and that which
is outside of the Sikh realm of fqrmal practice and identity. Mandair (2009) argues that these attempts to create
closure and to assert a dominant interpretation of Sikh
sacred texts are a means of staking claims to a comprehensive unity and identifiable self-projection in relation
to the Hindu and Muslim 'other'. Such closure was not
necessarily so concerned with popular practices (though
clearly these were often forefronted as problematic) but
was driven by an exercise in " 'fulfilling the Sikhs' desire
for theology as a mode of totalizing signification in the

domain of European conceptuality" (36). It is at this juncture between what is identified as formally Sikh and what
is not where institutionalizing processes present a disciplining attempt upon heteropraxy.
How then can devotional practices at such iconic yet
popular sites as the Golden Temple be conceptualised
when terminologies and categories are subject to scrutiny
for their bounded nature? While the open-ended, unbounded nature of social formations has been recognized
by Barth (1994) as a problematizing factor to any singularizing depiction of religion, Fitzgerald (2000) moves
this understanding further by arguing for a modification
of the western-inspired theological project by opening up
the focus to the everyday of spirituality in which "we find
a possible transition point from 'religion' and 'religions'
to the ritual or cultural reproduction of transcendental
representations ..." (18). From this perspective the emphasis is placed on rituals that are, for example, driven
by desires to fulfill wishes associated with life-cycle and
kinship relations or that are routinized as part of everyday life. At the Golden Temple local residents incorporate a visit to the site into their daily routine of work and
family. Their devotional practices could be said to represent the ritualization of everyday life through the spiritual life of its localized context, Amritsar. Positioned at
the centre of the old walled city, the sarovar and then the
Golden Temple provide a centripetal focus spatially, socially and spiritually.

80

JOURNAL OF RITUAL STUDIES 30 (1) 2016

This move towards culture is one means of understanding the popular devotional practices in northwest
South Asia. However, it is not adequate on its own if we
wish to understand how religious institutions engage with
popular practices in terms of an interplay and engagement leading to incorporation and accommodation.
When we explore what people 'do' in their devotional
practice rather than how they are defined, we find that
there is much that goes on which is not so neatly locatable within the available religious categories, but which
is also not completely disassociated from frameworks established by institutional authority. Indeed, what we identify as rituals of devotion in the iconic Sikh sacred space
of the Golden Temple contains practices and idioms which
are not exclusively Sikh within the formal sense but which
are certainly Sikh within the popular sense. It is at the
juncture of the formal, institutional and the popular that
ritual activities are therefore best explored and explained.

Water and Trees

On entering the Darbar Sahib complex from any one
of its four entrances the most immediate visual impact is
of the water and on sunny days the shimmering reflection of the gold plating of the Harmandir. It is indeed the
Amrit Sarovar (from which the city derives its name) or
the Ram Das Sarovar (after the third Guru) which was
the central focus of the settlement when it was formed in
the early 16th century. The importance of the water is
also to be found in the writings of the fifth Guru Arjun,
who, in an extremely popular hymn (shabad) from the
Ad Granth states:
(Sorath, Fifth Mehl, Third House, Du-Padas):
One Universal Creator God. By The Grace Of The
True Guru:
Bathing in the nectar tank of Ram Das,
all sins are erased.
One becomes immaculately pure, taking this cleansing bath.
The Perfect Guru has bestowed this gift.
Indeed, the selection of the site was combined with the
presence of a Jujube tree, which is still extant and is
revered as Dukhbhanjani Berh. In local lore, the story of
Rajni provides the most significant reference of the
sarovar's healing properties. As the story goes, Rajni, a
young unmarried woman made a dismissive remark to
her father about his generosity. She stated that the gifts
he had given to her and her sisters were not a sign of his
goodness but that all gifts are from God and that her father was merely the go-between. As a means of teaching

Fig.3. Dukhbhanjani berh (Photo by N.K. Purewal)

her a lesson, Rajni's father arranged her marriage to a
leper who she would have to struggle to look after and
cart around as they begged. She is said to have parked the
cart near a tree next to the sarovar where a black crow was
seen to dive into the water and emerge as a white dove.
Rajni's husband bathed in the sarovar and emerged as a
healed and handsome man, proving the healing powers
of the water, while also containing the message of the
power of the spiritual over material pursuits. On hearing
this story Guru Ram Das then went to the spot and decided to build a tank there and named the tree Dukhbhanjani berh (Kaur 1983: 173 ).
A version of this story (in English and Punjabi) is actually given on the enclosure around the tree inscribed
onto a white marble plaque, but with the difference that
the agency for the whole event is with the Gurus. Rajni
is not brought up by her father but in her mother's maternal home in Lahore, who are followers of the Guru and
thus she is a devotee. The healing powers of the water are
a reward for her devotion rather than intrinsic to the water
itself. Another story relates to Guru Amar Das taking a
leaf from the tree to give to Guru Angad to cure a skin
illness. In both cases the healing properties of the water
are material, as could be argued for Guru Arjan's own
representation of the water. Yet this aspect is side lined in

JOURNAL OF RITUAL STUDIES 30 (1! 2016

81

Fig.4: Baba Budda Sahib (Photo by N.K. Purewal)

Pashaura Singh's (2006) analysis, for example. He argues,
following a reformist perspective that the shabad refers to
'spiritual cleansing'.
A second tree that is of significance within the precinct
of the complex is the Lee hi Berh, which is specifically associated with Guru Arjun as he is said to have sat and supervised the construction of the brick lined Amrit Sarovar and
also wrote many of the shabads in the Ad Granth in the
shade of the tree. A third tree, Baba Budda di Berh (the tree
under which Baba Budda sat), is associated with Baba Budda
(transl. old man), known as the first head Granthi (priest)
of the Golden Temple, who is said to have lived until the
age of around 100 during the lifetimes of the first six Sikh
gurus. The tree, or berh, which marks the spot at which
Baba Budda sat as he supervised the excavation of the
sarovar has thus become a site to pay obeisance by visitors
to the shrine. The berh lies within the shrine complex along
the parkrama (outer walkway) and symbolises Baba Budda's
service to the spiritual and built history of the Golden Temple. Just as Dukhbhanjani Berh is known for its healing properties, Baba Budda di Berh attracts devotees for the blessings associated with Baba Budda's wisdom, long life and his
role as protector and overseer of the Dar bar Sahib.
Alongside trees, water and its curative powers also has
a wider importance outside of the iconic Amrit sarovar,
which is demonstrated by the fact that the Gurus built
other water tanks in the vicinity. In fact, over the period

where the Gurus were present in Amritsar (up to Guru

Hargobind), another four pools were constructed. These
are Santokhsar, Kalusar, Bibeksar and Ramsar, each with
its own associated narrative of spiritual power. Indeed,
one of these pools, Ramsar, built by Guru Angad, also
features in his writings as a site for bathing and pilgrimage. It is located within the walled city at Chatiwind gate,
but is at some distance from the main complex. This was
the site where Bhai Gurdas and Guru Angad are said to
have compiled the first pothis (books) which would be the
precursors to the Ad Granth. The sole focus therefore,
even on the Amrit Sarovar, is part of the centralisation of
the site, arguably appropriate for a single site of Sikh authority and authenticity. The folklore associated with each
of the trees and sarovar's votive and healing powers present a parallel sense of piety to that of the official Sikh historiographical ownership of the site. The two are however symbiotically related and not necessarily contlictual
as the Sikh studies debate with its overly textual approach
might indicate. The institutionalising processes of the
management of the Golden Temple since 1947 show attempts at negotiating, accommodating and incorporating this mystical power into a narrative centred on the Ad

Granth.
The formal daily routine of tituals at the Golden Temple, which is carried out and managed by the granthis, sewadars and other SGPC employees, consists of an elabo-

82

jOURNAL OF RITUAL STUDIES 30 (1l 2016

Fig.S. Worshippers paying respects at Baba Budda Sahib (photo by N.K. Purewal)
rate schedule and calendar. Though times vary according
to season, every morning at approximately three a.m. the
Ad Granth is carried by a granthi on a cushion on his head
in preparation to be placed on an ornate silver and goldgilded paa/ki (palanquin), laden with coverings and cushions made of silk brocade. The processional carrying of
the Ad Granth starts at the Aka! Takht, passes through the
darshani deorhi and then proceeds across the causeway to
the inner chamber of the Golden Temple in the centre of
the sarovar. Here the Ad Granth is placed onto the paa/ki
sahib as hymns are sung accompanied by the rhythm of
nagara-s (large drums). Subsequently, devotional hymns
are sung throughout the day by groups of singers and accompanists until the late evening where the Ad Granth is
returned to the Aka! Takht.
The contemporary dynamics of devotional ritual at the
Golden Temple shows the centralising, magnetic force of
the Harmandir which houses one of the many installations of the Ad Granth in the complex. Queues of devotees wait for up to three hours to matha tek, (paying respect by literally kneeling down and touching the forehead
to the ground) and make an offering to the book, the embodiment of the living Guru. While the official daily routine of ritual at the Golden Temple involves multiple rituals involving SGPC officials, local Amritsar businessmen

and the general population of devotees, they are all focused on the Ad Granth.6
Outside of this authorised daily process, however, the
Golden Temple complex is also dotted with smaller
sacralised sites and spaces of obeisance, most notably the
Berh trees. In other sites, trees have votives tied to them
or divas lit under them as way of marking a desire or wish.
Placing garlands of flowers and taking leaves for medicinal purposes are all part of the multiple rituals associated
with trees at sacred sites .. There is a two-way process of
institutionalisation and regulation of rituals that take place
at the trees. The installation of the Ad Granth at the
Dukhbhanjani Berh and the development of a small Gurdwara at Lechi Berh are two examples of the incorporation of devotional practice into the Sikh Rahit. At Baba
Budda's berh there is no presence of the Ad Granth, but
it continues as a site of ritual obeisance, and respects are
paid to the site of the tree which was cordoned off in the
1990s by a marble encasement and a brass frame, in order
to prevent worshippers from making physical contact with
the tree. Prior to the brass and marble encasement, worshippers would pay respects by touching the berh with
their hands and foreheads or even kissing the tree. Today,
not only is the tree physically inaccessible to devotees, but
this is also regulated by an SGPC-paid sewadar who stands

at the site to ensure that restrictions on overt obeisance

are observed.- \'isitors are permitted to pay respects by
touching the marble with their hands or forehead. However, the marigolds at the base of the tree show the adaptive devotional practice to subvert the institutional imposition of distance between the berh and worshippers
who are able to find an indirect means of physical contact with the berh through the marigolds which are tossed
at its base.
Operation Blue Star, the attack on the Golden Temple
complex by Indian Army forces in 1984, ostensibly to rid
the temple of militants using it as a base, resulted in the
destruction of many sites of ritual worship on the site.
Perhaps more significantly is the incorporation and adaptation of many aspects of popular worship which took
place in the rebuilding of the site. If the intention of the
Indian state was to curb fundamentalism then the impact
of the destruction was to allow a rebuilding much more
closely focused on a bounded Sikh identity aligned with
the sole veneration of the Ad Granth. Ironically, perhaps,
it also allowed for the creation of a new object of curiosity surrounding the events of 1984, if not veneration, in
that the SGPC have encased some of the bullet holes that
were left in the walls of the complex as a memorialisation
of the 1984 events. In April 2013 a memorial plaque was
installed at Gurdwara Yaadgar Shaheedaan (Martyrs' Memorial Gurdwara) near to the Akal Takht with the inscription "Memorial in the memory of 14th head of
Damdami Taksal Martyr Saint Giani Jarnail Singh Ji
Khalsa Bhindrawale and all martyrs of 1984", highlighting the incorporation of the figure of Bhindranwale who
is otherwise viewed as a contested symbol of extremism.
The SGPC's recognition has now created a legitimised site
for public obeisance to him close to the temple.

Shabad Gurbani Kirtan

at Harmandir Sahib
One of the most significant symbolic tools for enforcing the 'Sikhisation' of devotional practice at the
Golden Temple has been kittan. The rules for the performance of kirtan, coverin~ its recitation, rendition,
form, and textual specification, were made explicit in
Chapter 5 of the SGPC's Sikh Rahit Maryada on kirtan.
In requiring adherence to the code of conduct with regard to devotional hymn singing, Article 6 states that
only a Sikh may perform kirtan in a congregation and
that only hymns of the Guru Granth Sahib may be sung
without improvisation, musical extraneousness or interpretation of the texts being sung. While the Code of

Sikh Conduct and Conventions was published in 1925,

Article 6 was not enforced with any rigor until after 1947
when the partition of India forced questions around religious authority and representation of Sikh community identity at the shrine. The rababis, the hereditary
and official performers of kirtan at Harmandir Sahib,
who had once been employees of the management committee of the shrine, were, as non-Sikhs, no longer permitted to perform. The post-1947 context forced the
religious question in more stark ways than had previously been done. While some rababi musicians converted to Sikhism, became baptized as Sikhs, and continued to perform kirtan, others migrated to Pakistan
where their livelihoods became detached from their earlier Sikh patronage.
The search for authenticity in the performance of kirtan became embedded within the religious question, so
estranging and ostracising the traditional hereditary rababi
performers of kirtan at Harmandir Sahib. The rababi performers were Muslim in terms of overt religious identity
but were professionally attached to Sikh religious institutions and patrons through the musical performance of
Sikh scripture. This position became tenuous as a result
of the post-1947 environment of politicized religious identities and the wave of migration of Muslims from East
Punjab to newly created Pakistan. The rababis of the
Golden Temple were forced either to convert formally to
Sikhism and adopt a Khalsa identity, so as to maintain
their livelihood, or to migrate to Pakistan where their
Muslim identity would require them to find other means
of income. Thus, the performance of kirtan at the Golden
Temple saw a transformation when this hereditary group,
who were symbolic of a previous heteroreligious space,
were erased from the ritual performance of kirtan at the
shrine (Purewal2011; Kalra 2014a).
A more contemporary debate around conventions surrounding the performance of kirtan concerns whether
it should be performed in a classical form, following
rules of raag and taal as specified in the Guru Granth
Sahib, or as popular renditions of shabads for the public sung in pleasant, accessible tunes (Kalra 2014b ). While
representing the debates over the correct raag form and
the use of stringed instruments rather than the harmonium may be represented as a struggle against the SGPC
by revivalists, another group was also attempting to
change the shape of kirtan performance in the Harmandir within the same time period. In the literature
lamenting the decline in the quality of kirtan and the
authenticity of the sacred, which has gained some prominence in academic discourse in India and in the USA,
there is no mention of the struggle by a group of women
to gain access to the perforn'lative space of the Har-

84

JOURNAL OF RITUAL STUDIES 30 (1) 2016

mandir.s This lack of mention is striking, since the debate about lineage and authenticity relies on gender as
an organising principle. As music becomes more sacred
and pure, so women as music makers become more rare.
From Dhrupad, to the rababis, to the orthodox Sikh performers, it is genealogies of male peformers that are held
up as the trail carrying the traces of original tunes. It is
poignant that just as rababi Bhai Ghulam Mohammed
Chand is not allowed to perform kirtan in the Harmandir
during visits to Amritsar because he is not a Sikh, he is
still able to assert patriarchal lineage by saying: "Our
women don't sing".
The prevalence of women-only kirtan groups, Istri
Satsang, is hardly documented. It refers to performances
that are outside of the usual fixed patterns of worship
in a gurdwara. Taking place in exclusively women-only
spaces, this has been represented in some senses as the
music of the sangat (congregation), and as a common
practice before the commoditisation and professionalization of kirtan. Most notably in diasporic contexts,
such as East Africa, the lack of professionally trained
musicians meant that women learned and performed in
the Gurdwaras in a much more prominent way than in
Punjab (Purewal and Lallie 2013). The continuation of
these women-only practices have been matched with the
emergence of professional women's kirtan groups, yet
these too are barred from performing at Harmandir
Sahib. It is not that women do not perform kirtan at
other gurdwaras but rather that the rituals associated
with the Harmandir have been controlled and maintained by men. Both the morning and evening rituals
and the performance of kirtan within the Harmandir
are central boundary-markers of a masculinist Sikh
identity.
In 2003, two amritdhari (baptised) and turban-wearing
women attempted to perform the morning ritual at the
Harmandir and were restricted by the men present. Mejinderpal Kaur and Lakhbir Kaur then went on to lead a
campaign for equal access for women to all the rituals associated with Harmandir Sahib, including the performance of kirtan. Citing that the SGPC of 1940 had already
passed an edict that amritdhari women were allowed to
perform kirtan at the site but that this had not been instituted, a strange replay of that initial overture took place.
In 2005, the first woman head of the SGPC, Bibi Jagir
Kaur, announced that women would be allowed to perform at the Harmandir, but once again this was not implemented in practice. Even though the changes in performance practice of kirtan in terms of classicisation have
been accepted, the existing male dominated structures
were unmoving when it came to this issue. The transformation of kirtan from an open form with musicians from

all backgrounds being allowed to play to one that solely

allows orthodox amritdharis to perform reaches its limit
on the question of gender. Indeed, it is women's practices
that were seen as heteropraxy by Singh Sabha reformers
in the early part of the twentieth century (Malhotra 2004)
and thus orthodoxy in kirtan is maintained by securing
the boundary between men and women in the twenty first
century.

Conclusion
This article has examined how the Golden Temple!Harmandir Sahib shows processes of incorporation and adaptation evident in the evolution of ritual practice amidst
institutionalizing processes. In doing so, we have argued
that the popular dimensions of devotional practices point
to ongoing negotiations and interactions of heteropraxy
which challenge the singularity of orthodoxy with which
such iconic sites are most commonly associated. The currency of distinct, often polarized, religious boundaries
has been increasingly questioned by the recognition of
the multiple nature of practice and identification (King
1999). Acts and practices of spirituality which cross formal religious boundaries can be seen across northwest
South Asia in common idioms and practices at gurdwaras,
shrines, mandirs, the tombs of saints and other spiritual
sites. Matha tekna (paying respect by literally touching
the forehead to the ground), darshan (paying a visit to
the spiritual site), and mannat (making a wish or requesting a blessing) are a few examples of common ritual practices of devotion which are not exclusive or
bounded by religious categorization. Water and trees in
these sites play an extraordinarily important role in healing and votive practice. These practices have often become the target for reformist groups wishing to assert
modern, singular religious identities. In the Sikh case this
debate has found its way into academic debate and to a
large extent led to an intellectual stalemate within Sikh
studies. By looking at existing ritual practice at the iconic
centre of Sikhism, the Golden Temple, we have attempted
to indicate a way out of this impasse.
It is clear that the SGPC are engaged in a process of
incorporating rituals at various sites through the installation of the Ad Granth or a re-narrativisation into a
Guru-centred history. These are acts of accommodation
and incorporation rather than of conflict. For example,
where overt obeisance is present, such as at Dukhbhanjani Berhi, flocked to by worshippers for its healing properties, and Baba Budda Berhi, popular amongst devotees
for protection and blessings, a vigilant approach by the
Golden Temple management is taken to regulate rituals

JOURNAL OF RITUAL STUDIES 30 (1) 2016

of veneration while also permitting them through institutionalised mediation. These are not examples of conflict but rather of a slow process of institutionalisation of
popular ritual.
It is also important to note that the SGPC only manages a small proportion of gurdwaras in India. In other
historic sites such as Hazoor Sahib in Nanded, Maharashtra, specific rituals associated with the site have continued unabated. At Nankana Sahib and Panja Sahib in
Pakistan, the PGPC (Pakistan Gurdwara Prabandhak
Committee) nominally presides over some of the historic
gurdwaras in Pakistan. The trees in these complexes continue to be used by women to make mannats (offerings
in order to fulfill wishes) to become pregnant, not least
to obtain particular blessings for male offspring. Panja
Sahib also holds mystical significance for having healing
and protection for the folklore associated with Guru
Nanak's miraculous act of blocking a boulder thrown at

85

him by a jealous Pir with his hand. The boulder with the
hand imprint is on one side of the gurdwara housing the
Ad Granth. Placing one's own hand on the boulder is considered especially auspicious. This practice still continues but remains outside the domain of the institutionalizing practices of the SGPC due to their lack of access to
these sites.
Ritual practices at Harmandir Sahib, by contrast,
have been transformed since the Singh Sabha social reform movement began in the 1920s and then after the
partition of India and Pakistan in 1947 and highlight a
long-term process of assertion, adaptation and incorporation. Institutional controls of devotional practices
at the Golden Temple have not resulted in an erasure
of popular practices but instead show the evolving nature of the management and sustenance of popular ritual practices, even at the most iconic of all Sikh spiritual sites.

Acknowledgements
The research for this article was funded by the ESRCAHRC Religion and Society programme on a project entitled Gender, Caste and the Practices of Religious Identities. The authors wish to thank Professor Ursula Sharma

(retired) for her invaluable insights to the overall project

and the conceptualisations of religious practice in the region that have come out of it.

References
Assayag, Jackie
2004. At the Confluence of Two Rivers: Hindus and
Muslims in South India. New Delhi: Manohar.
Aulakh, Ajit S.
2007. About the Golden Temple. Amritsar: B. Chattar
Singh Jiwan Singh.
Barth, Fredrik
1994. Enduring and Emerging Issues in the Analysis
of Ethnicity. In Hans Vermeulen and Cora
Govers (eds.), The Anthropology of Ethnicity:
Beyond 'Ethnic Groups and Boundaries'. Amsterdam: Het Spinhuis.
Fenech, Louis E.
2008. The Darbar of the Sikh Gurus: The Court of
God in the World of Men. New Delhi: Oxford
University Press.
Fitzgerald, Timothy
2000. The Ideology o( Religious Studies. Oxford: Oxford UniversitY Press.
Gottschalk, Peter
2000. Betwee11 .\Ili:;li'rz ,u;d Hindu: Multiple Identity

Narratives in Village India. Oxford: Oxford

University Press.
Grewal, J.S.
1996. Sikh Ideology, Polity and Social Order. New
Delhi: Manohar.
2008. The City of the Golden Temple. Amritsar: Guru
Nanak Dev University.
Johar, Surinder S.
2008. The Heritage of Amritsar. Delhi: National
Book Shop.
Juergensmeyer, Mark
1982. Religious Rebels in the Punjab: The Social Vision of Untouchables. Berkeley, CA: University
of California Press.
Kalra, Virinder S
2014a. Secular and Religious (Miri/Piri) Domains in
Sikhism: Frames for Sikh Politics. In P. Singh
and L. Fenech (eds.), Oxford Handbook of Sikh
Studies. New York: o'xford University Press.
2014b. Sacred and Secular Musics: A Postcolonial Approach. London: Bloomsbury.

86

JOURNAL OF RITUAL STUDIES 30 (1) 2016

Kaur, Madanjit
.
1983. The Golden Temple: Past and Present. Amritsar:
Guru Nanak Dev University Press.
Kaur, Manjit
2000. The Harmandir. In F. Singh (ed.), The City of
Amritsar: An Introduction. Patiala: Punjabi
University Publication Bureau.
King, Richard
1999. Orientalism and Religion: Post-Colonial Theory, India and the 'Mystic East'. London:
Routledge.
Malhotra, Anshu
2004. Gender, Class and Religious Identities: Restructuring Class in Colonial Punjab. New Delhi:
Oxford University Press.
Malhotra, Kamaljit
2007. Contemporary Evidence on Sikh Rites and
Rituals in the Eighteenth Century. Journal of
Punjab Studies 16: 179-97.
Mandair, Arvind-pal S.
2009. Religion and the Specter of the West: Sikhism,
India, Postcoloniality and the Politics of Translation. New York: Columbia University Press.
Mayaram, Shail
2004. Against History, Against State: Counterperspectives
from the Margins. New Delhi: Permanent Black.
McLeod, W. H.
1975. The Evolution of the Sikh Community. New
Delhi: Oxford University Press.
2004. Discovering the Sikhs: Autobiography of a Historian. New Delhi: Permanent Black.
Mir, Farina
2006. Genre and Devotion in Punjabi Popular Narratives: Rethinking Cultural and Religious
Syncretism. Comparative Studies in Society and
History 48: 727-758.
Moosvi, Sireen
2005. Economic Profile of the Punjab. In R. Grewal
and S. Pall (eds.), Precolonial and Colona/
Punjab. New Delhi: Manohar.
Murphy, Anne
2012. The Materiality of the Past: History and Representation in Sikh Tradition. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Oberoi, Harjot
1992. Popular Saints, Goddesses, and Village Sacred
Sites: Rereading Sikh Experience in the Nineteenth Century. History of Religions 31: 363-84.

1994. The Construction of Religious Boundaries: Culture, Identity and Diversity in the Sikh Tradition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Purewal, Navtej K.
2011. Sikh/Muslim Bhai-Bhai? Towards a Social History of the RabCHARACTER1bCHARACTER3 Tradition of Kirtan. Sikh Formations 7:
365-382.
Purewal, Navtej K. and Harjin<kr S. Lallie
2013. Sikh Kirtan in the Diaspora: Identity, Innovation and Revivalism. In Michael Hawley (ed.),
The Sikh Diaspora: Theory, Agency and Experience. Leiden: Brill.
Shiromani Gurdwara Prabhandak Committee
1925. Sikh Rahit Maryada (The Code of Sikh Conduct and Conventions), Chapter X, Article
XVI. http://new.sgpc.net/sikh-rehat-maryadain-english/ Date of access, 3 March 2015.
Sikand, Yoginder
2004. Sacred Spaces: Exploring Traditions of Shared
Faith in India. Penguin Global.
Singh, Fauja
2000. The City of Amritsar: An Introduction. Patiala:
Publication Bureau, Punjabi University.
Singh, Ganda (ed.)
1959. Tarikh-i-Amritsar Ke Chand Makhaz. Amritsar: Sikh History Society.
Singh, Kirpal
2000. Sri Harmandir Sahib Sunheri Itihaas. Amritsar: SGPC.
Singh, Narain
1978. Nanakana Sahib. Patiala: Punjabi Language
Board.
Singh, Parm Bakhshish, Devinder Kumar Verma, et al
(eds.)
1999. Golden Temple. Patiala: Publication Bureau,
Punjabi University.
Singh, Pashaura
2000. The Guru Granth Sahib: Canon, Meaning and
Authority. Delhi: Oxford University Press.
2006. Life and Work of Guru Arjan. Delhi: Oxford
University Press.
Talbot, Ian
2006. Divided Cities: Partition and Its Aftermath in
Lahore and Amritsar, 1947-1957. Karachi: Oxford University Press.

JOURNAL OF RITUAL STUDIES 30 1l _::,:;

Biographical Sketches
Navtej K. Purewal is Deputy Director of the South Asia Institute and Senior Lecturer in Sociology and Contemporary
Indian Studies at the School of Oriental and African Studies at the University of London. She has focused most of
her writing on the region of Punjab (across India and Pakistan) exploring a range of aspects of social change, including the making and unmaking of religious identities on
which she has published a number of articles and chapters.
She also has a distinct interest in feminism, gender and culture and has published in this area including Son Preference:
Sex Selection, Gender and Cul!ure in South Asia (Berg 2010).

Dr. Virinder S. Kalra teaches in the department c : >:

ciology at the University of Manchester, UK. h~'- ~:
search interests are in Punjabi popular culture anli ~:::
ligion across the borders of India, Pakistan and t~ o
diaspora. He is the (co )author of the book, Hybrid~:.
and Diaspora and an editor of the collection: A Postcolonial People: South Asians in Britain. His latest book
'Sacred and Secular Musics: A Postcolonial Approach
(Bloomsbury, 2014) explores the intersections of music
and religion in Punjab focusing on Qawwali, Kirtan and
Dharmic Geet.

Notes
1. Guru Arjun is of crucial importance in establishing the history of the Darbar sahib complex and its centrality to contemporary Sikhism. It is his writings along with Bhai Gurdas which provide an insight into the formation of the site and the city as a whole.
(see Pashaura Singh 2006 and Hans in Singh et al. 1999)
2. Murphy (2012: 171) clearly illustrates the turmoil of the period: "[the site was controlled by] various parties over the course
of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Prithi Chand and his
son Harji controlled the site in the second half of the seventeenth
century after the time of Guru Hargobind and it remained under
the control of the apostate group, the "Minas" as they are traditionally called, until the time of Guru Go bind Singh".
3. A Persian document from Ranjit Singh's time which documented the various personnel employed at the Golden temple.
4. See Kamaljit Malhotra (2007) for an examination of the eighteenth century period immediately after the death of the last living Guru Gobind Singh when Sikh rituals and practice became
more clearly specified through the creation of"a new bounded identity" in the Rahitnama which framed "Sikh" within a Khalsa identity, pp. 179-182.

5. Gurdwaras in other parts of India, Pakistan and the diaspora do not come under the formal remit of the SGPC, though
generally follow the Sikh Rahit Maryada and the authority of the
Aka! Takht (which is under tacit control of the SGPC), but this is
often contested.
6. A detailed analysis of the rituals surrounding the Ad Granth
at the Golden Temple would also reveal a range of shifting customs
that connect to older shrine practices, such as the blessing of flowers thrown and the singing of eulogies (savaiyyan) about the Gurus.
7. It is ironic that while sevadar literally means one engaged in
selfless service, in the context of the institutionalisation process it
has now come to mean a paid employee. In a contemporary interview, one devotee complained that "at least with the mahants
only they and their families ate from the offerings, now with the
SGPC there are hundreds of employees stealing from the takings
(golak)".
8. See the double issue of Sikh Formations (2011) in which none
of the articles devoted to kirtan mention the on-going exclusion of
women and this particular struggle, whilst the issue of correct musical form is tediously discussed.