From Bhagat to Guru: Epistemic Violence and the Ravidassia Challenge to Sikh Orthodoxy

Abstract

The 2009 Vienna attack on Ravidassia leaders underscores the fundamental conflict between Sikhism and Ravidassia religiosity, anchored by epistemic violence and contested religious authority. I contend that central to this conflict is the Bhagat-Guru inversion: Sikh orthodoxy relegates Ravidas to the status of Bhagat, while the Ravidassia faith elevates him to Guru. This opposition augments ongoing ruptures, as Tat Khalsa and Singh Sabha Sikh doctrine deems it blasphemous to recognize any Guru beyond the Adi Granth and the ten Sikh Gurus. The Ravidassias elevation of Ravidas, enmeshed in his Dalit identity, fosters an anti-caste consciousness that confronts hegemonic Sikh narrations, charging inter-community discord. Despite this historical-doctrinal disjuncture, Sikhs and Ravidassias share religious practices, iconography, and linguistic traditions, yet Sikh orthodoxy views these similarities as emulation, further deepening this schism. Understanding Edward Said’s contrapuntal thinking, this scholarship conceptualizes epistemic violence as a tool for enforcing religious hierarchies and eradicating untouchable epistemologies. I critique Mark Juergensmeyer’s ‘Sikhization’ which overlooks Dalit resistance and counter-hegemonic assertions. By exploring the Bhagat-Guru dichotomy, the paper argues how Dalit religiosity resists institutionalised doctrinal rigidity, asserting autonomy through counter-narratives, institutions, and collective memory.