1'i. :r;1j.1. Pt'S~ltL · ~~ -N G/llCJJ,J ~ '­V~ ~­

D.~: :Af~ltu~ - --- ~'-1-18: s. As;.. J'J.f)cJ, "'48;;,' "'

5 KAREN LEONARD

Pioneer Voices from California Reflections on Race, Religion, & Ethnicity

It has become common to talk of the Sikh diaspora. but there is some question whether or not "Sikh·· is the moet appropriate category for analysis of these emigrants from South Asia. While the overwhelming mapity ol the Punjabi pioneers in early twentieth century California were indM Sikhs, my rele.n:h indicates that religion wu less ulient than other characteristics for these men. It was in fact a Punjabi diaspora, and to go back and emphasiu Sikhs and Sikhism does violence to the historical experiences of the immigrants and theirdetcendants.

Most research on the Punjabi immigrants has fOCUled on their publk! life. It is clear that these pioneers in the American West contended with racial, religious, and ethnic pejudices all their lives in the U.S. They battled for dlii.enshap and lost; losing that, they fell prey to the Alien Land Laws of California and Arizona and could continue fanning only in ways that put them al lhe mercy of non-Indians; theirGhadar party activities and conflicls with each other were magnified and misinterpreted in the press. Scholars have recently clarified, corrected, and enlarged upon the early materials about the public life of the men from the Punjab (Barrier, this volume; Jacoby, 1978; Puri, 1980).

Pionttr Voices from C.Olifomia 121

It is equally important to look at the immigrants' private U~ at family life, where US. immigration prohibitions and CaUfornia miscegenation laws dictated an overwhelmmgty non­Punjabi and, indeed, an Hisplmc origin for the women with whom most Punjabi men formed familiell.1 Men and wanmt applying to the County Oerk for a marriage licenle Md lo be of the same race, had to look alike, and molt often It wu Hllpenlc women who satisfied that requirement. Many • liceMe •pplication luls "brown" and "brown" in the blanbfor"ratl!," IO

we know how both the Punjabi and Mexican immigranll loolEed to the Anglo county clerks in the early twentieth century . . ·

But how did Punjabi pioneers see themselves, and how did their wives, children, and neighbors see them. pirticularly wilh respect to race, religion, and ethnidty7 M09t ol the mrly immigrants are dead now, but we can look to the few 1Urvivon, and to the widows and children from lhe families founded in California, for pioneer reflections on ra<:e, religion. and ethnicity. To l'l'Construct an ethnosodologkal view ol the immigrants, I have drawn heavily on interview1; the inteniew data will be used in a "collective biography'' fashion (Bertaux,, 1981; Ferraroti, 1981). The interview dtations In the bibliography, organia'd by sex, generation, kinship, and ethnicity. show the range of informants; the names alone gtff one a feel for the community. Some 65 informants provided subalan­tial interviews, 1Ubstantial in length and/01 quality.1 The infor­mants include a few memben ol lhedomlnant Angloaalture and Punjabi men, their Hispanic and other non-PunJabi wlwt, and their sons and daughters, most ol whom tvett called ''Meximn-Hindus." '.'. ,;

The traditional name for lhe community of Punjlbl­Hisp1nic couples and children, the c:ommunity which inducle.a most of the Punjabis who married and settled inC.lif~ mdy in this century, is Mexican-Hindu. It was a significant community, not in terms of numbers-there were 90me 380 mupB-but In terms of its systematic biethnic composition and itsc:enlAlity In the lives of the Punjabi immigrants. One muld argue lhat lhe Punjabi men who founded families in California were• deviant minority, not characteristic of the immigrants; but in fact they

02Q

122 Tiit Sti Diaspora

were a large minority, from 20 IO 46~ of the men from Inda. resident in California from the a.te 1920'1 IO 1950. 1 furthermore, the lmperql Valley, localed along C.Ufomil'l IOUthem border with Mexico and lite ol the western hemitphese'1 lugat lrrtga­tton system, wuamajorm.terforPunjlbUmmlgnnl81n C..Ulor­nla until the 1960' .. and that WM wheR Mexican-Hindu family life began and thrived. l!lpeddy In lhe Imperial Valley but throughout the state whenve they ftllded, lhae. Mexican­Hindu families were central IO lhe Punjabt lmmlgmnt aJmmu­nity. The families employed other Punfabt woden or worked with them; they often ~ lodgtng and food for Punjabi men travelling tlvough. Thole PunfaW men who ... JN bechelon In the U.S. spent considerable lime In the mmpany ol the married men and terved u uncles or godpuen11 lo the many children In these families.

The chart below lhow1 the regionll aJneentntion ol family life and the ethnicity of spouses for the Punjlbl lmmlgqnts. In aouthem C..lifomla, where the pat majority ol married Punjlbis 1ettled, 93.. of the wives were of Hispanic origin, and the percentage of Hisptnlc wives elsewhere In the ltllte, while lower, was always above SOS; only 74 of the 378 wives were non­Hispanic In origin. The Rnt ret'Olded marriage I found was In lmA81al County In 1916; most Punjabi-Hltpanlc marriaga took ~in the 1920'L 11lere wu a <8tain degree of arrangement to these marriages-one liller married a Punjabi and then her listers and perhape her mother manted Punjlbts loo. Sisters often married partners In fanning and thelecouples lived In joint households out on the land they were leasing or pun:lauing. Thae a>uples mnstituted a distinctive biethnlc mmmunlty in the Imperial Valley.

First, let U1 1ee how friends and neighbors, members of the dominant Anglo culture in the Imperial Valley, viewed these Punjabi immigqnls. As many a>ntemporary IOUrces tell us, the men were tem\ed Hindus and initt.I prejudice against them was atrong. The Sikhs' turbans, in ,,.rticular, drew derogatory c:omm-

Pionar Voices From C.li/ornill 123

C.OU..liel

Yube

Sul•• s.c:n..-1o S.n)oequln

,._ 1\alare

IClnp

llnperlal

Sr-1e1 ol A1la• llMllM1 .. C.Ul ..... 1~1MI

Tn-of $pol.-

Hllpank I Attpo Ila I Indian I Amertc:an I Talll

........ -i

No • INo • No• INo •INo •IND•

45 5G.6l 2S 21.1 I t 10.1 I 9.0 I 2 2.3 I It ZJ.6

31 76.0l 11 22.0 I o o I 1 2.0 I o o I 50 13.2

LmAn ... l 221 9UI 12 s.o I 6 U

San Diego

o o I o o 1239 63.2

10TA15 JCN I0.414112.7 115 u t U I 2 .5 1371 ICIO

5ouRw: ICll ... ..._,d, , .... , ............... '"- GUiiy .... (wtlll ....... la. dvll •lld at.-..,..., ..... ....,,,.... whh ...........

ents and provoked inddents. Thus a novel about the Imperial Valley dftaibes the hot 1euon: "It begi• when lhe flnt rag­head is found laying face-down In mculvert. A heat-euidde,, the paper'll say, bul likely the poor slob only walked down lhe street in a squeaky pair of shoes. At a hundred and twenty, he could even have been knocked off for not squeaking ... " (Sanford, 1953:41). The prevalence of lhe term raghead led almoll all ol the early immigrants to take off their turtMns;I also, many wives preferred them turbanless (Sekhon, 1983; Garew•I, 1982; Shine, 1983). Only one Anglo informant referred to lhe old .

'.I, ,,

124 The Sikh Dillsporo

practice of wearing "rags on lheir heads" (Wheal, 1981), bu1 lhe lenn Hindu conlinues lo be used in the Imperial Valley. Now, lhe anecdoles recounled lend lo be fond ones, noting, for example, lhe mens' linguistic abilities. Thus the head of the Chevrolet agency from which m.ny ol the men bought trucks said ''Those Hindus le.med-one ol them llood there and talked Hindu to his brother, Mexican lo hll wife, and Englilh lo me-I liked thar' (Womack, 1981). The men wese also noted fOI' their hard work and generally good farming, although their lack of conce. 11 with the •ppea111nce ol field ad yard led lo local expreu1ons like "Hindu farming'' and ''WeU, I'd call that a Hindu jOb; do It over'' (Anderholt, 1982; S.vage, 1982). The point here is that no Anglo informant ever used the term Sikh lo describe the immigranls.'

The oldtimers l interviewed acc:epted the term Hindu-at least they certainly used it for themselves. They t.alked about the world they came into in tenns ol white, c:olored, Hindu, and Mexican; less oflen they talked ol the Japanese, lhe "Odna people," the Filippinos, Swiss, and Germans. One man said, "the Singhs came here, they're all one." When talking about legal problems and court cues some men used the lerm Aryan; one man, lets well educated, •Id "India people, Hindus, Punjab, come from the white nice." Some labels •roused oppoeition-one man talked about the need to reject the .. bel "Oriental" when people tried lo apply it to the Hindus. But none ol the "old Hindu'' whom I Interviewed talked specifically Moat Sikha; IOme ol them did differentiate Muslims flOlft the "other'' Hindus.'

It •striking that almost all ol the ~tionthip. developed by the Punjlbi men In California croued religious lines. The significant relalionships were: vlllapma1es, lhipmates, partners (In farming In the U.S.), alfffJMllra (godfathers to each other's children In the Calhollc~ "°"""',.,. •ystem), In-laws through their wives here, memben ol the Chadar party. None of these relationships were determined by religion. In many Instances Sikhs, Muslims, and Hindusweseco-membenol one of the above groupings.• Similarly with Institutions-the Sikh temple at Stockton, the Hindu store. In Califomla'1 rural towns, and the Hindu labor camps •round the st.ate were used by all

Pion«r Voices From C.lifamita 125

Punjabls regardless ol religion. (It may be true that work gangs, with one cook each, were usually mmposed ol members ol one religion). The Stockton Sikh temple, undoubtedly lhe cenll1ll lnslitution fiw the Punjlbls in California, just u undoubtedly featured political, social, and religioul events attended bySlkhl, Muslims, and Hindus (Wood 1966: 96). Mexican-Hindu and other wives and children also attended events at the Stoc:klon temple.' Even a Hispanic woman divorced from a Sikh wu wel­come to llay and eat at the temple, her daughter (Lucy Singh Abdulla, 1984) remembers. 1bcre wasa Hindustani Welfare and RefOl'm Astodatlon In the Imperial Valley with Sikh, Muslim.and Hindu members. 11 1.ess formally, all Hindus met In the lale after­noon in places like the Holtville Park or the curbside in Calipatria to rest and t.alk. Many Anglos remember the excited voices and high energy ol these Hindu group meetings.

Most of the relationships above were new; some resulted from coincidence (shipmates) or farming arrangements in California (partners). TheGhadar party was founded in California and drew In mostmenascontributon. Theyalsosentmoneybac:k to their 'Villages for schools but not, In my data, for religious Institutions. Other new relationships were a ~ ol family life. Most of the wives were Mexican Immigrants or Mexican-Americana, and many were lets of lileers or related

. women. Hence Punjabi men became relatives by marriage; hU9-bends attached lo female, Splnlsh-speeklng kin groups. The lan­guage ol lhe home, ol lhe women and children. was Spanish; only the older bop who worked In the fields with Hindu crews 1!9med aome Punjabi (and aome of these bop were Mexican stepeona).11 The childrens' n1mes, on birth certificalel and certainly their nicknames. were Hispanic with few exceptions. u Punjabi men aometimes had Hispanic names themselves, for example Andreu for lnderSingh,and Miguel for MaghyarSlngh.

MOit ol the women the Punjabis married were Catholic. The ~ s*rticipated In thec:omJM4raio(rltual kinship) system ol the Cattdlc chun:h-this meant appearance in a chun:h and *lion In Its official books on the ocxaiion of the child's ba or marriage. Since these godparent relationshipe linked

n-Hindu couples almost entirely to each other (only a few

126 The Sikh C>Uuporo

Mexican couples were called upon, usually relatives ol the wife), and men of one religion stood as godfather to the children of men of another religion, these relationships are best understood as hclpingtoconstitutethePunjabl-Hispankcommunity.1111.eydid nol integrate Punjabi men into the C.thollc church any more than attendance at the Stockton templeewen11 Integrated non-Sikhs into Sikhism; in both cases, an OllenllWe rellgloua institution was being used by and for the mmmunlty." Few if any men converted to Catholicism; in the one ase where conversion Is claimed, the man "also remained a Sikh and wuc:remated when he died" (Sanga, 1981). But Sikhs, Muslims. and Hindus who stayed in marriages with Catholic women frequendy coneentect to a Catholic wedding (usually ye119 after their lnltlal dvil mar­riage). 11.e wives, with a single exception, did not convert lo the religions of their husbands.'' The children were encouraged by their fathers to take an interest in Sikhism, Islam, or Hlndulm\ but few fathers were able.to teach systematially or well about their religions. Most of the men were not well educated; there were few, perhaps no, religious specialists among them. Al*>, they worked long hours, had littletlmetoinstruc:ttheirchildren In Punjabi or in religious matters, and left religious b'aining up to their wives.

Almost all of the ~n allowed or actively encouraged their children lo be brought up as Christtans, and they viewed this very positively. As Susanna Mesa Rodriguez Singh •id, "Well, Cod gives a lot of different languages, you know, but I don't think so many Gods," and her husband Moola Singh affirmed, ''Only one Cod." Moola Singh expounded on this when ulred Jf he hadn't wanted his children brought up In his religion: "No, I didn't, I don't care. The church here may be C.tholic. that's OIC; the story of Jesus Christ is OK; you go your churc:h, I go my church; one God. To make their living, people make different churches, different ways. Not different religions. Make different names ... believe God, only one God" (1982). ·

The interviews with wives and children of the Punjabis let us see how these family members identified the Immigrant men. Was Sikhism (or Islam or Hinduism) a major feature of the immigrants' identity? Here we need to distinguish among the

Pionctr Voices from C.lifomitl 127

couples on thebuis olresldenceand thewife'1ethnldty,beca111e where the Mexican-Hindu wives were las concentrated there wu greater emphuis on the men's religious heritages. In the northern and C2nb'al valleys, where Anglo and Black wiYa diluted the Hlsp9nlc dOIMlllc wlture charaderillk ol family life In the Imperial Valley, and wherethefewrallndlanwiva Uftd. one he.rd lllghdy more about Indian bellefaand pndceL "And In the Imperial Valley, too, thole few pioneers who married while women or who later brought over wlva from India (after 19", when the Jaw changed) looked down on thole who married Hlsp9nlc women and on their children; they differentiated thenllelva from the Mexlcan-Hlndua In many ways, Including an emphasis on the men'• religious affiliation."

But despite such stratifbllon, there are generalizations about the men which one heerd from all of the wives and children. The men were di9custed primarily In terms ol the relationships that crossed religion and In termaol penonal characteristics thought to apply to all Punjabis-the children pve them nicknames in Spanish, English, or Punjabi emphasizi111g these Punjabi characteristics. 11 That 11, the women these men married learned more about village, ship and p1rtnenhlp groupings than they did about Indian rellgtons orc:asta, and this Is true for the children as well. The one eueptlon to this generallution, and It Is an Important exception, mma with the end of the life cycle, when the old men died (this will be dl9cuued at the end).

Molt wives and wklowa talked knowledgeably about thar husblnds' vlllagn. ney could name the other men who came from thole village; and, from ot.rvatton ol thete groupe ol men, they opined that some villages were noted for cleanliness, othen forgoodcooldng,andsoon(Shlne•Raendez, 1982). They could name their husbands' shipmates; they could ~ partnerships over the years. The aons and daughters knew the9e things too. Thnegroupingslncluded Muslims and Hinduauwell as Sikhs, and such Inclusion ocaisloned nocomment; but when the godparent and In-law relationships came up, Inclusion of men of different religions was sometimes remarked upon.

The women and children were certainly conscious of reli­gious, caste, and regional differences stemming from the Punjab

- ------ ~ --~~~~~~~~~~~~----~~~~~~~~~~~~--~------------------

128 Tiie Sikh Diospo"'

and spoke about them. Often. however, I had to elicit such infor­mation by direct questions; and they could not name people In those categories readily. Most wives seemed to know less •bout Punjabi society than did the children. Many wives, securely based in female kin groups here, had UltlecuriOllty about the Punjab; the knowledge they gained w .. •pedldal and often came from other wives or their hubllnda' Mchelor .-r1nera. Some state­ments from wives follow to lllultl'ate thle: "When we opened the door and saw him in that turban, we thought he wua Turk, but we asked him in anyway" (Lala C.rewal, 1981). "My husband was a member of theSinghreligion ... hewu20-21 yanolderthan mebut thisracedoesnotlookold .... Myhulblnd'spartnertold me that if a Muslim came to the door. the Hindu would not let him in but would talk to him outside" (TeresaCarewal, 1981). "Oh, yes. we ate beef. but there was another kind of Hindu, called Mohammedan. and they didn't eat pork" (Lucy Sekhon, 1982). "Her three husbands were all Mohameds, though I'm not sure. one couldn't eat beef and another pork..... (Emma Smiley fi Verdie Abdullia Montgomery. 1982). "My husband told me the Hindus and the Pakistanis do not like each other in India, but here they are all united" (Sophia Din, 1981). And finally, one mother trying lo help her daughter marry another Mexican-Hindu to whom the father objected: ''We're all Americans heR, what Is this caste thingr• (Elizabeth Deen Hernandez quodng her mother, 1981). This last was a theme voicedbymanywi'ft!9and widows. their role as sodalizen of their husbands In America. " 1bey deliberately downplayed what they did knowof PunJabl IOdety since they tudged It dysfunctional (a view lhued by IOme husbands).

In contrast to their mothen, molt IOftS and daughlen were intensely curious about their Indian heritage and mnember vividly what their fathers told them. And they learned things in a negative way In the course of growing up; that is, u they socialized with other children, and particularly u they began dating. their f al hers' opinions about those of different caste and religious background were loudly voked. Some statements from children about distinctions among the Punjabi men follow : "lbe Rams and Singhs were different castes" (Ram, 1983). "The Kathris (Khalris) were the most educated and wealthy, there were some

Piontitr VoictS From C.li/ornitl 129

called Bohmans (Brahmans), and most were Wol'ken, low-clau Juts (Jats)" (Puri, 1984). "Our Dad wu liberal, he wu one who usodated with Mohanunedans, and we did too, and with Med­caftl; (another Mexican-Hindu) m.de our Ufe mllerable, lhe bpt telling us we were Hindus and lhouldn't aSIOdate with Mexicans" (Resendez, 1982). '-0.d didn't mre whu we married IO long u they were working men" (Sidhu Villuenor, 1982). ''Did didn't really care who married, but when my sister Carmelita picked him, he said, 'Why a Khan? .. (Sidhu, 1982) "Did didn't want me to marry him, we were Rajputs and his family were Rae. (Arain)" (Hernandez. 19'1). "Deel didn't want me to many a Do.INI but ldld anyway" (Ral, 1981). "l'here were two who were Chuhns, you know, unk>uchable, and they mme to the puk too but the other men made fun of them" (C.rewal CHI, 1981). ''My Dad was a Hindu" (Din, 1981). ''When there were too many people to get on the bus, usdarkieshad togetoff,and I went home with Sarah Mohamed, there I saw a hookah for the first lime, only the Mohammedans had them" (C.rewal Gill, 1982). "And there were other Muslims. villager or Olde typetwecalledChachls,and those Khans from the frontier" (Mallobox, 1982) ... We were Pathan; there were Rajlput (Rajput) Muslims and other con­verts" (Abdulla, 1983). ''My Did turned Mexican. He brought us up, six or aevew•boys and one girl, after mother died. He didn't teach us much about India, when he •ld things we all just laughed at him. lix or 1even boya. not much chance ... " (Francisco Singh, 1983). ''Oh yes, the Stockton temple- lhars where we met the Khan kids eftry year, coming over from Phoenix to pick peaches" (~ma. 1983). As thele quota show, there wu certainly some aocial distance between the Sikh, Muslim. and Hindu men and their families, • but I found equally or more significant divisions by class within the Mexican-Hindu commu­nity, 11 which some of the! quotes above also indicate.

Most of the remarks above about Indian categories had to be elidted by direct questions, but the wives, widows, and chil­dren spoke freely and frequently of characteristics they felt were shared_ by all Punjabis. HarJ work was something all Punjabisdid: the men "worked all the lime," "they worked loo hard." "People were poor then, we had no money; the Hindus worked hard, they made good husbands;" "the Hindus were farming cotton there,

'I

t

l t

130 77ae Sikh DU&sporri

and when Lupe's parents saw that, saw that they were bossmen, they didn't object lo the 1n11TUge after thal" Hindus "worled harder than Mexican men and didn't go out drinking; they drank at home, at least they were home." ''l'hey bought dolhes and shoes for their stepchildren, unlike Mnkan men who wouldn't take care of those children:• Dmpile lhls lut statement, most testified that the men lpenl money nluctantly. They kept lhe household money and doled tt out a1 they NW flt. Some called them frugal, many called them ltlngy and wone: "tightwads," "mean bastards." "X starved his family, kept them poor;" "Y gave his wife and kids a hard time, lcept them down,-'' ''Z wanted to use his money for land, Mom had lo wait until he went tolleep and then she went through his pockea lo get UI money for schoolbooks." One woman "got fed up and left;" another "got tired of cabbage and left him;" and IOon, The men allO had Ibid ideasaboutahc proper behavior of their wives and 1n1ny women descrtl'd or divon:OO because of restrictionl on their drae, their attendance at dances, or visits to reletivea and frtenda. Lest we think that the men failed to share any rea"eetional activitiee with their wives, one should note that 1n1ny bought Vlclroluorgramo­phoncs; one widow fondly recalled tac:hlng her leCOIMI Sikh husband to dance, just the two of them at home (Sekhon, 1982). But it was generally agreed that the mens' favorite reaeettons were politics and drinking. and most engaged in plenty of both. They also fought (chiefly with each other, anything from litigation to murder), though it ls hard to1ep1raletheirvtolence from that around them in California's farm towns. One woman, twice marril'd to Sikhs and twice widowed (and not from fights), moved from the Imperial Valley rather than mnany again there because "I was always afraid."

The Punjabi men got mixed reviews u fathers, bu1 even affoctionate children who inherited property made remarks like "he was hard, he didn't talk a lot to me," or "he was a grouch, all Punjabis are grouchy." The childrens' views of their parents are complicatl'd--much of the interview material shows the ways the children of runjabis changed their views of their ethnic identity over the life cycle, their "ambiguous ethnidty" (Benson, 1981: 134-144; Leonard, 1988). But that is another topic; here the focus must be kept on the men.

Piorwr Voices from California 131

As the men aged, their religious Identities received added emphasis. This occurred pardy because of important changes in the political context (Brass. 1985) and pardy because of life cycle changes <Wolf, 1984). A major external impetus tostrenglhened religious identity was the independence and partition of India and Pakistan in 1947. These developments brought beneendoua pride and pleasure to the old Punjabil In the U.S., men ID kmg deprived of meaningful dtizenship in any counby. The9e deftl­opments also resulted In a new name, Spanish-Pakistani, for lhe families of the Punflbl Muslim men who 'had married Hilplnlc women. This wua lharp new dlfferentlalic)n within the pioneer community, one accentuated by the arrival of many new South Asian Immigrants after the 1~ liberalization of US. Immigration law. An lnftux of Punjlbis brought up in a w:ry different, highly polltidr.ed Punflb brouiht • new mnsdousneu of religious boundaries to the agtng pioneen (La Brack, 1988; Leonard, 1988).

As for life cycle effects on rellgtouS Identities, many quotations dtcd earlier showed that both regional and religious affiliations wcwe made explicit as the children began dating and getting married. Other occasions on which religious Identity received emphasis arose as the old men tried to impo1e food preferences and pr:ohibitions upon their grandchildren. :a But the most significant slftngthcning of religtousidentitycame In a w:ry private way and because ol impending de.th.

At the end of the old mens' lives, their c:oncems about death mounted. The old men who had property liked to be driven around It and worried about Its disposal;» the propertied and thole without property worried alike about the proper dispoNI of their bodies. Here again the wives and widows took a poeition different from the children. Over the years, many wives had viewed donations lo theChaclalrparty and the Stockton·temple •• diverslonsofthefamilyresources,andumenapproac:hedtheend of life, templeofficerssometimesapproached them for ftnallarge bequests. The wives rescnal'd this. And there was an even more personal matter. The widows often wanted to bury their husbands In the Mexican-Catholic section of the local urnelery, where they themselves would be buried and where infants and

"" childrm already had ~-en buril'd (including Sikh-fathered

----~------~-----------------11

132 The Sikh DU.Spor11

children). The husbands' Punjabi friends and the children knew what was religiously required and desired by the dead man. In the case of Sikhs and Hindus, it was cremation, with a dinner some time later; in the case of Muslims, burial in a '1iindu" plot, with Punjabi Muslim pallbearers and proper preparation ol the body. The biethnic nature of the commu.uty, the C.tholidsm of the wives which condemned crem.tton, INlde one's fate Uncertain, and a death often brought heartbreak for some family members, M

The goddaughter ol an Hispanic widow told of the traumatic seizure olhergodfathcr'sbodyfrornhlswiclow'shouseby Hindu (Sikh) countrymen afler his death (Brinkman, 1981 ); other people lold me which Sikhs had been buried by their ignorant or willful widows.

Perhaps most poignant were the tales three Mexican-Hindu sons told of their fathers' fears and their own l°Onttl'N about the proper observances after death. One son. lgnonnt of much about his father's culturebutawareoflheoldman's desire for a proper cremation 11nd ceremony, dcspcr•lely tried to get bldt on the mailing list for the "Sccki" temple he had not attended or contribuled lo for decades (Rudolfo Singh, 1981). Another told of attending, wilh his falhcr, the funeral of a fellow Muslim whocle ignorant wife and sons had not made the proper arrangements; his father look over, insisted upon helping to carry the coffin himself, and afterwards suffered nightmares that the same thing might happen lo him (Niaz Mohamed Jr., 1981).

The third son had a story ol conmct with the older Sikh men who ran the El Centro temple. When his father died, he knew whllt had to be done. His father had told him: "Two things. crem.tion and the dinner thing, that's all I care about, not the rest ol it. but do those things and do 11,em soon." He tried, approaching the Sikh men and requesting that arrangements be made, but he was put off repeatedly. When a gr11nthi was finally brought down from Stockton, they wanted to hold a committee meeting lo see who should pay the fare. Protesting that his father had given money all his life lo the temple and that he would rather pay himself fhan have a commillce debate the issue, the son paid immcdiately.\But then the dinner was put off in a similar fashion, and finally lhe'°'1 contacted the Slockton temple directly and offered $500 for

Pionen Voica From Qdi/omitl 133

someone lo "come down and hold that dinner''. So the prdlU came and the Mexican-Hindu 1on paid, bypuslng and humiliat· ing the old Sikh men in the Imperial Valley by doing so. The '°" has enpyed turning down their requeHI for temple donaliolw since: ''Whenever they come for money, I throw that In their faces" (Chell, 1983).

These tales make two points. First, nole the ilOlated, private nature ol this religious Identity at the end of life, lhe farol the old men and the intensity with which they c:ommunlcated it to their children. In these three cases, the sons relOlved to any out their fathers' wishes despite considerable personal lgnonnt-e ol what wu requiled. Second, the three tales allO .eveal that, whlltner solidarity had existed earlier among lhe men who bought plots together or arranged for cremations and t'erello.les, the men had not built teligious institutions which were ongoing. which included their deSc:endants. • Their rellgtous beliefs had remained private, their own; they had not penuaded their wives to conform to them or transmitted them to lheirchllclren. To IOme extent, their religious bcliefsaffected thesodal behavior ol family members, but primarily in a negative fashlon-whllt should not be eaten, who should not beaten with or elated or married. The men could attempt to enf0tte prohibitions but they had no 1ra1n1.., teaching materials, or time, and even more Important. their children did not know Punjabi (or Anblc:) 111ffidently to learn from them and their texts.• The Institutions they founded In California, Sikh and Muslim. hllve required fnlh blood fnJm India and Pakistan to continue funcdonlng. (khan, 1981; Chakravorti, ·~).

One must conclude that Punjlb6, not Sikh. Muslim. or Hindu. was lhe ldenltty most me.ningful to lhele pioneers Jn the Uniled States. It may be thllt Mexican-Hindu family life was largely responsible for this, since It was such a dominant force In the Ufe of the immigrant men. Its systematically blethnlc natute cllNded attention to differences ol language and nalional origin, not religion.·But even among the bachelor men In the north, the group least ~ffectcd by the family society, rellgtous divisions were relatively unimportant for the first deodes hete. In this cue, it seems that more recent political events In South Asia and the

. - -- - ~ -·

!! J .. i I 111"1 1 JI .... JI - ...... .t ·1.1 :II

.. I . J 1 J .1 I J J I J I . • ~ I i J

-1 fli 1Jti. J'i1" • e I" ... !JJ - If 'I f .CJ.?--!

H Hf HU &!uf if H di 111 I a I &f H itH JU • .. 0 ... " lfl - ... - -

I! ~ 'I ji §Hji fill 'Ji;i l'HiH' H .t .. .c: Q .1· i I flH "'I*• i •s :-... :; rJ JI,, ;§ - i!l 1 r .101 J. i. !1f ~ 'IJ!f JJ li Cl) '! ~ j IH tit iJ•1'1 ;,If ,IJ l1.1·&f H

; - J' ·i • I I - ~f!I I 1 ~ .5..2 ~ 2 ld lh ~!i;il :;1 i f Jp l!fijld Ii !I c: .~t .n f 1.: 11 .. i ' ~ Jlii rr= u .~ j i E..; Jh hs .liid 111!!! h1111s~~1:J~ ~~ E.,. s .. l

.!.! iJt Jn 1~HJ1 !ru! tH~ 1~UHj! if --,, '! ; flt j ] .. i f l Ii =.., ¥ r. .. , u ii •• .I J ~ Jf .sl ~ 2 < ~ " z f J! U1 fl I Hi f Jp 1 iJ:•r t i 11 ljl. i~ ~ '.2 "' .. 1J 1•1U·H~1~111J •·f- :&.sl[j;d H c ::I . 2 0

2 l.. - 1 = ~ 5 Ji & 1 ' :s I:! 1 - l j i f ! ii l ~ i i l J A . ~i ;') ~ .2

" lfl - le .. "' • ....

- =- --=== a:m - - . -- ~ ~.:;;... - -- ..

• - • -

f i i i I i i I 1 l lit f i ~ .

> :z: > J j

t=- i , .. ,,,"'I ,, J .. , [~1: ~ • 1 l • r ! I • - ; l l . ~ • t I I

: I I i I I I ~ ~ I I f;'I

i i i J j [ [~·If . i

l~i• if! 'l 1 ~! i==1r ti(') • I.!' l i. t ·~ . .. I • "' I c ! • -J r ~ a.·:~ if i. I !"

-\' ';_ I J ~ ljfi ,. f '1! ih i~ rjf ·~H d·

s:f~ IJ,1 ... , '1} Jitii 1d > j l f J I ~f f c a. : 'i w :. I I a." • ( r r ... j r .,, ~, 1r ! !,

i!'f• 'J'[ i ~·it i I - r f ! I I ~ I • ~ ~ '11 i. j! i i ~ ;, •

-

J'} i!i d ,1 h!~ ,., . i Ii ~' if 1J ! : H i J! 1· 1 f !f IJ UI f a.• . ~ a. .. f,, . .,! ii

l i ( i [ { f if j { i If J ! '* ~· • r f ; I ~

' ! t ~ t , ! I _ ~ i ~ i ~ I l I t 1 "' ' ~· Q I ~ .,,

J • • J • j • ; • ; ; • i J i 11. I ~ I a •• I ~ Q

J i ' I I I Ji -..;;; -

Cl

,.. ·. I I ~

• I ~ I I s·

t l I! I I ( i I I i·1 I Ii f i I I Ii i ~ ,,,,.,, i Ill l I' II

l ~ 1 § I • i • \ ! ! ~ I . ~ J I I ! i • ; .. ~.: f , •• :. .- i'" ,. l ' • -: • • • .: I Iii • • • . J -~

/

.. .