The Internet now offers a plethora of sites related to Sikhs and Sikhism. There are discussion groups aplenty. There are sites on which one can access the whole Guru Granth in the original as well in translation. There are sites dedicated to history in all its gory and glorious detail and to Sikh art and architecture in all its splendor. Given the right software one may enjoy keertan from a variety of sources, styles and ragis.

But the sites that claim the most attention are those dedicated to discussion. The questions run the gamut from the sacred to the profane, from the silly and inane to the profound and the sublime. These are the busiest sites. They command the most vociferous loyalists. The discussions often get angry and out of control. The young haunt these sites and, in keeping with their youth, they drive like young people anywhere – crowding, tailgating, honking and speeding breathlessly! Ten years ago there was one site, now there is a whole supermarket of choices.

A friend, frustrated, by both the number of sites and the volume of the contentious voices wondered which ones to log on, and which ones to ignore. How to pick and chose? He wished he could shut some of these down for their interactions were merely a jarring noise.

After some reflection I would say that the issue is not so forbiddingly complex. For a new generation of young people who spend their lives on the Internet, pen and pencil are archaic, as strange as the computer keys are to us. To the young, newspapers are a technology of the past, much as the radio, the staple of our parent’s generation, is a relic to us who are addicted to television. Where we rely on the newspaper and television for our news, the young person logs on his handy little laptop, or perhaps something even smaller that fits inside his palm.

Look at the large number of newspapers and periodicals published in this country for people addicted to paper. They range from the dignified, almost staid but eminently readable New York Times, Christian Science Monitor, Washington Post and Chicago Tribune to the Daily News and the New York Post that specialize in lurid headlines. For a fuller appreciation of the first four, a college education might be eminently desirable, but the last three can be enjoyed by someone with a vocabulary of 300 words and who may not know where India or Chechnya are. If you think the New York Times is popular, so is the tabloid sold in your grocery store; in fact, the latter might have a more attractive bottom line. On television, too, which channel should I select – Comedy Central or History?

That brings me back to my initial question: Which site on Sikhism should I click on everyday to cement my ties to the electronic sangat in cyberspace?

I think we select a site very much like we choose our newspapers or the television channel to inform and entertain us. Some of the sites will morph into the New York Times of tomorrow; others will plod along as the Star at the local deli. I will pick what my mood and temperament dictate at a given time.

On some sites it appears as if the readers are screaming at each other, at other sites they are calmer, though not any less determined. Which site has a monopoly on truth? Sometimes the New York Times scores a scoop, sometimes an uppity New York Post can show the Monitor and the Times some fancy steps that everybody missed with their noses in the air. (Remember when the lowly Punjabi weekly Chardi Kala predicted India’s nuclear blast while the mighty CIA slept.) Some of the Sikh sites on the Internet will surely eat dirt and disappear into the sunset while others become institutions that people will look at with awe and amazement.

Yes, there is a bewildering number of sites on Sikhs and Sikhism, but they differ in focus, target audience and readership; they have different participants, differing loyalists and styles. Time will separate the wheat from the chaff. Each serves a purpose. The history channel can be too much sometimes when only comedy central will do. As Milton said, "They also serve who only stand and wait".

v

The India vs Sri Lanka series threw up not just poor cricket for the Indians but a new dialect for the sport called Sidhuism. The man behind the metaphors, former opener Navjot Singh Sidhu, tells us more:

Q. Does the term Sidhuism flatter you?

A. Yes, It’s original. Like me.

Q. What’s your favourite line?

A. "A laugh is worth a thousand groans."

Q. You made that up.

A. Yes, Originality to me should flow like a river.

Q. Ever considered writing poetry?

A. No.

Q. What’s easier – opening for India or inventing new Sidhuisms?

A. In life, nothing is easy.