Land as Memory: Dialogues with Salish Memory for Re-Interpreting Sikh Memory in the Diaspora

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is not to parse through history11, but it is to explore, question, and engage with our current understanding of the role of the Khālsā; engage the Sikh diaspora to talk about ideas of land, sovereignty, and belonging through the rejection of coloniality; lastly, contend with our participation in settler colonialism and move differently in our struggles towards justice. Sikh discourse in the diaspora has spent many decades focused on outlining our philosophy, history, and traditions with the intention of making it legible within Western academia; subsequently, we have become entrenched in debates of the ‘right or best’ ways to practice Sikh values and traditions. While I am also interested in the impacts of that discourse overall, this paper will hopefully pull on a different approach towards discussing land, belonging, and sovereignty that is aware of previous discourse but seeks to overcome it as well. I intend to structure this paper in the following ways.

My primary discussion will be about: (1) what is the Khālsā and what are some of the origins of Sikh praxis; (2) what are some of the mainstream approaches towards conducting advocacy work in the diaspora; (3) how does this all begin to formulate our early understanding of Khālsā, especially with land relations and responsibilities. After establishing this background, I will turn first to the work of Lee Maracle’s Memory Serves: Oratories to analyze and begin a dialogue with Salish formations of memory and understand how a Salish thinker has articulated the purpose of memory, and thus what types of responsibilities emerge then related to land, sovereignty, and belonging/story. This dialectic will then be used to help frame approaches Sikhs could apply to conversations around land particularly. While there is ongoing research in pre-colonial Sikh literatures, spiritual and political, that encourages the reframing of diasporic translations of Gurbani outside of colonial paradigms and philosophies, I hope that this will add to that discourse by considering the contexts of the land that we have currently participated in settled on. In the final section of this paper, I will outline my hopes to continue to use this analysis and framing towards sovereignty and belonging, and the unique ways this can also be tied directly towards the development of curriculum or actions through another analysis of an unique anthology edited and written by Dr. Nesha Haniff, Pedagogy of Action: Small Axe Fall Big Tree.

When thinking about the purpose of this dialogue, I want to clarify that I do not aim to ‘reinvent’ Sikhī, but rather reframe our current approaches that ultimately devalue our own philosophical, spiritual, and temporal traditions13. Rather, I believe that developing this conversation between cultures and peoples, can help us in our efforts of contending with diasporic politics that are often operating through a preservationist attitude and thus not adequately engaging with marginalized communities that are also facing oppressive and subjugating institutions. By doing so, I believe this continued dialogue can ground Khālsā-centric moves towards liberation and decolonization, in the diaspora, Punjāb, and amidst other nation-states.

I would like to also clarify that I do not believe I am the first to write about these relationships, in a Sikh or a diasporic Sikh context14. I feel that most of the discussion around Sikhs and land has been primarily engaged within our relationship to Panjāb; which is understandable given that most Sikhs are strongly aware of the relevance of diaspora and homeland in conversations around Sikh sovereignty today. These are still powerful movements today that continue to decry and organize against the continued state violence faced by Sikhs in Panjāb. The concept of homeland then is used in diasporic politics to talk about issues, such as the pervasiveness of drugs and alcohol, lack of economic opportunities, separatist movements, etc.15. Particularly in the latter point, advocacy for a self-governing Sikh homeland, popularly termed Khālistān, is a topic that draws increased scrutiny and surveillance, but is a source of deep-rooted, passionate activism amongst many Panjābi Sikhs16. Those discussions are usually about freeing Panjāb from its tether to the nation-states of India and Pakistan because we believe that by doing so, it will rectify and alleviate the injustices inflicted upon us under the current systems of governance. I acknowledge and am also invested in the Khālistān movement because it is why I began thinking about relationships with land and Sikhs in the first place, but, in this project, I ultimately wish to also approach, and really confront, the underlying relationship that many diasporic Sikhs have with settler-states - whether or not they are connected to the Khālistān movement.

It is imperative to understand the relationships that Sikh organizing plays amidst movements for justice in settler-nations like the United States. It is imperative that in tandem with the rich conversations about Panjāb within Sikh discourse, that we also engage in the question of asking about diasporic Sikh responsibilities to marginalized communities in settler-states. This is why I am looking at Lee Maracle, as I will further analyze and delineate later in this paper, because although many Indigenous peoples have been fractured from their lands, their governance, and their freedoms, there is an powerful understanding that that this erasure does not erase original responsibilities, instructions, intentions, and guiding actions. This view, to me, is resonant with the model of the Khālsā that asks for expanding beyond ‘just’ serving Panjāb, but as a revolution towards worldwide phenomenon. For this project, I will attempt to engage in this conversation and intricacies by connecting formations of Sikh memory with Salish memory, as shared by Lee Maracle, and other contributions of Indigenous scholars and peoples. However, again, I will begin with understanding what are the types of bedrock that are fundamental to our understanding of Sikh history and memory.