Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article examines the Sūraj Prakāś (1843), a devotional historical narrative on the Sikh Gurus by Santokh Singh, to argue that the text mobilizes an Advaitic lexicon within a distinctively Sikh framework of Guru-centred devotion. Drawing on the intellectual training Santokh Singh received at the Giānīā Bungā in Amritsar, the Sūraj Prakāś systemically enumerates Advaita Vedānta concepts only to sublate them into Sikh practices of bhakti and service ( sevā ). The article situates Santokh Singh within a broader Sikh lineage stretching from Bhai Gurdas (1551–1636) and Mani Singh (1644–1738), while also setting his writings alongside wider early modern devotional Vedānta writers like the Assamese writer, Śaṅkaradeva (1449–1568). Using Michael Allen’s framework of a ‘Greater Advaita Vedānta’ and Rao and McCrea’s notion of an ‘Age of Vedānta’, the article demonstrates how Santokh Singh’s writings exemplify the devotional reworking of non-dual philosophy across sectarian lines. More broadly, it highlights how Sikh scholastic traditions were not passive borrowers of Vedānta but active participants in reshaping it, demonstrating how Advaita was a pliable, transregional idiom that could be domesticated through Guru-centred devotion into what may be called Sikh Advaita.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".