The Conditional ₹15 Lakh Gift
The eleven-member committee of a gurdwara in a market town has ₹4 lakh in its building fund. A local contractor offers ₹15 lakh towards a new langar hall costing ₹22 lakh, on three written conditions: the hall must be named after his late father; langar cooked in that hall must be served only to 'Sikh families of the town' and not to the 40-odd migrant labourer families who eat there daily; and the committee must give him a letter supporting his bid for a municipal contract. Meanwhile the existing langar hall roof leaks, ₹60,000 a month is needed to run the langar, and three migrant families have asked for ration for the winter. One member argues that ₹15 lakh will solve everything and that 'the donor's money, the donor's rule'. Another warns that refusing will look arrogant and the money will go to a temple instead. The granthi asks for a written opinion before the Sunday meeting.
1. Applying Sikh ethical principles, should the committee accept the ₹15 lakh on these conditions? Reason through each condition.
Read the worked answer
Take the three conditions separately, because they are not of equal weight and one of them cannot be cured.
Naming is the least serious. A plaque of gratitude for a donation is common practice and does not by itself harm Sikh teaching, provided the gurdwara remains the Guru's and the panth's, and the name does not become a contract term or a permanent claim of ownership. This condition alone could be negotiated.
The second condition is fatal. Guru ka Langar is open to all by its very design: Guru Nanak Dev's kitchen at Kartarpur fed whoever came, and Guru Amar Das insisted on pangat before sangat so that no one could eat by rank or birth. A hall in which food is served only to one community would not be a langar hall; it would be its opposite. Accepting this would make the gurdwara an instrument of exclusion, and the migrants would be excluded in the Guru's name, which is worse than being turned away elsewhere.
The third condition is also fatal. A letter supporting a tender in exchange for money makes the gurdwara a party to favouritism and compromises the committee's accountability to the sangat. Sikh teaching on honest conduct (kirat) forbids it, and the committee would be trading its good name for ₹15 lakh.
With two of three conditions unacceptable, the gift cannot be accepted as framed; dropping one condition does not restore it.
2. How should the ₹4 lakh and the monthly langar need be prioritised in Sikh terms?
Read the worked answer
Sikh priorities are set by need and by the institutions the Guru founded, not by what will look impressive. Langar and relief of want come before expansion and decoration. So the order should be: repair the leaking roof so the langar hall stays usable; keep the ₹60,000 monthly langar running without a break; give the winter ration requested by the three families; and treat the new hall as a later, staged project.
This follows from vand chhakna, the duty to share one's earnings, and from sarbat da bhala, welfare for all. A committee that builds a grand hall while turning hungry families away has inverted the langar itself, and no marble fixes that. Guru Amar Das's insistence on pangat shows that the physical arrangement of eating together is part of the teaching, not an optional extra.
Practically, the committee should publish a one-page budget at the Sunday diwan showing income, the roof repair figure, the monthly langar cost and the ration cost, and ask the sangat for kar seva (voluntary labour and materials) and small monthly pledges. Local labour can cut the ₹22 lakh estimate substantially. Funds given to the gurdwara are held in trust, so receipts should be issued and accounts displayed; that transparency is itself a Sikh obligation and will bring in more than the lost gift.
3. How should the committee reply to the donor so that the refusal is principled and respectful?
Read the worked answer
Reply in writing, promptly, and without moralising at the donor. Thank him sincerely for the intention, then state the three points plainly.
First, langar is open to everyone who comes, without exception, so no donor's condition can be attached to who is served; explain what langar is for, since his condition may come from a misunderstanding of the institution rather than from ill will. Second, the committee cannot give a testimonial connected to a municipal tender, because that would use a religious body's influence for a private bid, and it must be able to account to the sangat for every such act. Third, the committee would be glad to record a gift on a plaque of gratitude, and would be glad to accept an unconditional donation of any amount, or a donation earmarked for acceptable purposes such as the roof repair or the grain store.
Leave the door genuinely open and invite him to a langar and a meeting; a donor who understands the institution may well give without conditions. What must not happen is quiet bargaining, where the naming right is traded down and the exclusion is softened into a compromise such as 'Sikh families first', which would be the same breach in gentler words. Record the decision and reasons in the minutes.