Jump to content

Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma & Dhadrianwale Attack - An Analysis

Recommended Posts

Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma condemns the attack on Baba Ranjit Singh Dhadrianwale in the first statement he makes on the subject:


Dhumma says:

  1. These actions need to be condemned in harsh words.
  2. Everyone should speak out against it. Sikh Jathebandis should get together to answer back on these things and need to mobilize themselves to stop such ploys.

Then in the following statement, Dhumma's words take a change in direction:

Check the Facebook page of the news channel for a better version: https://www.facebook.com/abpsanjha/

Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma claims Baba Ranjit Singh Dhadrianwale have been making accusations for over 4 years and has made derogatory comments on Dam Dami Taksal's dastar and reputation. The derogatory comments are claimed to be of the very low and despicable character.

  • I have yet to see evidence of the above claim.

Dhumma believes Dhadrianwale should have looked at his own dastaar and realised it has the same honour and respect as someone else's.

  • This is a comical suggestion as Dhumma himself criticized Dhadrianwale for his choice of dastaar style, a useless critique.

Dhumma claims in 4 years he never made any derogatory comment against Dhadrianwale.

  • This is proven false by Dhumma's critique a few weeks ago of Dhadrianwale and his dress, deferring to this chola as ghagri and making comments about his dastaar style

Dhumma makes a point of Sikhs only supposed to be wearing 4 colours of dastaars.

  • A fair point, but hardly something that warranted negative utterance toward another parcharik. Calling Dhadrianwale up and raising this concern and doing benti to stick to the four colours would have been the better move.

Dhumma says that the Singhs that attacked Dhadrianwale wished to get him to stop his derogatory comments about Dam Dami Taksal. They did what they did for the the honour and respect of Dam Dami Taksal. A lot of people's feelings are connected with Dam Dami Taksal and that some can handle someone's attacks while others cannot.

  • I have seen no evidence of Dhadrianwale making any defaming comments about the Dam Dami Taksal
  • While it is a fair statement to say that people's feelings can get hurt and they take matter into their own hands, Dhumma comes across condoning the attack when he should be condemning it.

Dhumma originally condemned the murder, but since the perpetrator are the student's and friends of his institution, the attack is now being condoned and justified.

  1. Hurt feelings over the alleged bad-mouthing of your institution's leader is not sufficient justification for attacking and attempting to murder someone
  2. Dhumma should be vehemently criticizing and denouncing what occured but instead has shifted to defending and tolerating the attack
  3. Was the killing of Bhai Bhupinder Singh, who made no utterances toward anybody, not wrong? Should his killing not be condemned?
  4. The vehicles being destroyed, while a minor misdeed in comparison to the life lost, is the loss of property funded by the Guru's sangat. Is that not worth expressing regret over?
  5. A chabeel was made part of the ruse to trick the targets into the trap. An age old tradition of seva was utilized by the perpetrators to commit murder. People will look toward chabeels with suspicion, the government has outlawed them without prior permission, and beadbi of the tradition has occured. Is that not worth condemnation from Dhumma?
  6. Dhumma says he will be supporting and helping those charged with these crimes. While raising concerns about potential police torture and brutality is legitimate, unequivocally supporting those who committed such disgusting acts is lunacy.

The following is a news article following Dhumma's press conference on May 23rd, 2016:


The article states:

  • Dhumma admits the perpetrators and vehicles used are from Dam Dami Taksal
  • Dhumma states he has no knowledge about the Chabeel being used as a tool in this attack (how is it possible to attempt to even feign ignorance about this).
  • HERE'S A BOMBSHELL: The press note being used during the press conference (which Dhumma read from) was prepared by the media advisor of Punjab cabinet minister Bikram Singh Majithia and Dhumma read it word for word
  • When the journalists had one on one interviews afterwards (as in the ABP Sanjha video above) what Dhumma read and what he said in those interviews went in opposite directions

Questions that need answering:

  1. Why are the media advisors of Badal's cabinet ministers helping Dhumma with his press statements?
  2. Why is Dhumma putting up a farce in his statements? He is blatantly being deceitful and disingenuous by stating one thing through a press note (probably things he doesn't actually believe) and then airing his real thoughts and feelings in the interviews. Why the two-face bigotry?

Overall, Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma has proven that he severely lacks skills in leadership, strategic thinking, conflict/crisis resolution, honesty, and accountability. Operating as the head of Dam Dami Taksal's Mehta faction, his weakness and ineptitude in being a competent leader does a disservice to the entire Dam Dami Taksal. This incident and the subsequent severe mishandling of the response by Dhumma has eroded the reputation and respect for Dam Dami Taksal in the eyes of Sikhs world wide.

Those close to Dam Dami Taksal have to deliberate with themselves and ask, is Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma's handling of the situation helping the taksal? Will it help them engage and connect with the hearts of Sikhs? Will it help them prosper and flourish going into the future? If the answer is no, we may have someone in a job way above his skill set.


I did this quick analysis just pouring over the information on the internet. If you find any mistakes, any additional relevant information, or have any analysis of your own to air, I would welcome your feedback and will make any corrections necessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good analysis Singhballer - I concluded the same thing. It is very obvious of the glaring difference between his initial knee <banned word filter activated> reaction and the complete change of tone, stance and overall portrayal in front of the camera. It's a clear case of support from lawyers and some shraarti individuals.

A good analysis by Ajmer Singh on the recent attack:

The beginning is good and his analysis of how GurSikhs carry out such veechars, but in the middle I disagree how S. Ajmer Singh mentions how Sikhs have their own views on Sri Dasam Granth. He makes it sound like it isn't important to Khalsa Panth which I think is wrong.

I guess he's right about how Dhuma's chelas cussed out the missionaries who attended because of the incorrect language used, even against missionaries, I don't think that's how you carry out parchar against missionary mindset. The way Dr. Harbhajan Singh Ji intellectually dismantled Dhunda is how it should be done. That is the nishaani of a GurSikh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Singh559, I like Ajmer Singh's analysis of how Dhumma handled himself in comparison to the Sikh way of dialogue and too don't agree with his opinions on the rift being created on Sri Dasam Granth.

I have always enjoyed his rational arguments and ability to look at the bigger picture for specific situations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Always love listening to ajmer singh. He has such a unique perspective on the political situation of the Sikhs in India, 84 and kharkoo leher, and current situation. He completely rips apart the false history created by Hindu historians and communist Sikhs who tried to paint the Sikh Gadhar movement as a secular non Sikh movement. His books are a must read.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One point repeatedly being made by Dhumma to justify the attack is that Dhadrianwale's verbal attack on Dhumma was a direct attack on Dam Dami Taksal. Dhumma asserts that anything said about the leader of an institution is to be taken as it being said about the institution itself. He questions how you can separate the two.

This is a very flawed assertion by Dhumma. It is entirely acceptable for a leader or individual to be criticized without an institution that criticism being linked to the institution or organization they represent. This is a poor method for Dhumma to justify the attack.

Using Dhumma's logic we would be smearing and disgracing the Akal Takht when we criticize Gurbachan Singh and the other Takht Jathedars for pardoning Ram Rahim and taking orders/directives from the SGPC and Badal government.

Another example, Jathedar of the Akal Takht, Aroor Singh, had honoured General Dyer the person responsible for the Jallianwala Bagh massacre in Amritsar. Is what Aroor Singh did not something Sikhs should oppose? Should Aroor Singh not be condemned and criticized for his shameful behaviour?

More on Aroor Singh:

Not anyone would disagree with condemning Aroor Singh but by Dhumma's argument, we would be denouncing the Akal Takht at the same time.

Having had so much Gurmat instruction you would think a person like Dhumma would think his arguments over to determine their sensibility. I guess not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt

  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use