Please read an Excerpt below taken from

"Sikhism and Tantric Yoga"
by Dr. Trilochan Singh (Link to entire book)

"Yogi Bhajan is using the sacred Sikh mantras and the sacred name of Guru Ram Das as a mantle for his Tantric Sex Yoga which will inevitably lead to mental and physical debauchery of those who take his brand of Sikhism contaminated by crazy sex-energizing asanas seriously."

Update Regarding Lawsuit, October 2, 2009
October 2, 2009

Dear Members of the International Khalsa Council,

It is apparent that there is a lot of misunderstanding, as well as misinformation, about the lawsuit involving Bibiji. On behalf of the Sikh Dharma International Board of Directors (SDI), as Chancellor, I am writing to provide you an update as to the status and details of the Trust v. Bibiji Lawsuit. This letter also includes information that was not provided to you in the email from the Sikh Dharma Stewardship dated September 17, 2009 (SDS Packet) which was sent to some of the Khalsa Council members via US Mail prior to the Khalsa Council meetings and then to the Khalsa Council e-group late on September 28, 2009. In order to more fully inform the Khalsa Council, here is a brief history of the legal proceedings and the SDI Board's due diligence in fulfilling its fiduciary duties to SDI in relation to a subpoena issued by Bibiji to SDI.

In looking at these materials, we must remember that while we relate to the Siri Singh Sahib as our spiritual teacher, he was Bibiji's husband. As a couple, they had legal and fiduciary duties to each other. The lawsuit is a personal matter between Bibiji and her late husband's estate and trust and we must look at these events from the perspective of a wife asking for information about what occurred when her husband handled their finances and what happened with their finances shortly before and after he passed.

During his life, the Siri Singh Sahib and Bibiji established a Living Trust Agreement ("Living Trust") which set out what would happen to their individual interests in their community property (their jointly owned assets) at their deaths. Under community property law, each spouse owns one-half of each item of property created and each dollar earned during the marriage regardless of whose name is on the property. The Living Trust Agreement (through various amendments made in February, March, and July, 2004) provided that at the Siri Singh Sahib's death, Bibiji's 50% share of all their community property would be held in a separate trust for her ("Survivor's Trust") and that most of the Siri Singh Sahib's 50% share of their community property would be distributed to a limited liability company (LLC) for the benefit of fifteen (15) members of his staff, called the Staff Endowment LLC ("Staff Trust").

A November 5, 2004 Memorandum from the Living Trust's attorney to Bibiji and her children which identifies the Living Trust assets and their disposition was filed in the Trust v. Bibiji Lawsuit. Attachment 1. One of the main assets of the Living Trust was the royalty income from Golden Temple for use of the Siri Singh Sahib's image and quotes on its products. This income was expected to continue for 75 years, but reportedly has been discontinued due to Golden Temple's removal of the Siri Singh Sahib's image and quotes from its products.

continued at post reply

See more photos and discussion on facebook at:
http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=108156&id=1214270541&l=5a22781e63

“Amid the legal infighting following Yogi Bhajan’s death, critics are offering another portrait of the Sikh leader.”

Please read an Excerpt below taken from

"Sikhism and Tantric Yoga"
by Dr. Trilochan Singh (Link to entire book)

"Yogi Bhajan is using the sacred Sikh mantras and the sacred name of Guru Ram Das as a mantle for his Tantric Sex Yoga which will inevitably lead to mental and physical debauchery of those who take his brand of Sikhism contaminated by crazy sex-energizing asanas seriously."

Update Regarding Lawsuit, October 2, 2009
October 2, 2009

Following the Siri Singh Sahib's death, the Trustees of the Living Trust were Sopurkh Kaur, Shakti Parwha Kaur and Kamaljit Kaur Kohli (the Siri Singh Sahib's and Bibiji's daughter). In September, 2005, Kamaljit Kaur resigned and was replaced by Ek Ong Kar Kaur of Los Angeles (the Chancellor's Office legal secretary).

Apparently, shortly after the Siri Singh Sahib's death Bibiji learned that more substantial charitable gifts had been made from their community property over the years and shortly before the Siri Singh Sahib's death, than she had been aware of. These very large gifts had come out of their community property, and decreased the amount of their joint funds at the time of the Siri Singh Sahib's death. This therefore had reduced the assets available to fund her Survivor's Trust. Bibiji asserted that the excess gifts made by the Siri Singh Sahib without her knowledge should be charged against only his half of the community property funds (most of which were going to the Staff Trust), rather than against their joint community property funds, basically so as not to reduce her 50% of the joint community property funds.

Bibiji's attorneys sent letters to the Trustees asking them to re-allocate the amount of the Siri Singh Sahib's excess gifts so that they would come only from his half of the assets (which were to go to the Staff Trust) and to reimburse her Survivor's Trust for the amount that it had been reduced by the excess gifts. Her claim prevented the Staff Trust from being funded and distributed. On September 12, 2007, Bibiji's attorney, Surjit Soni, sent the Trustees' attorney a revised claim against the Staff Trust in the amount of $2,979,195 (slightly lower than the amount shown in the SDS Packet). In determining this amount, Bibiji applied a 15% Dasvandh tithing rate to her and the Siri Singh Sahib's income and requested that donations over this amount be allocated only against the Siri Singh Sahib's 50% share of the community property.

In October, 2007, the Trustees sued Bibiji (Trust v. Bibiji Lawsuit) by filing a Complaint asserting that Bibiji had no valid claims against the Staff Trust or Estate and that asked the court to require her to move forward with her claims for re-allocation of the Living Trust assets or to withdraw them so that the Staff Trust could be funded. Bibiji filed an Answer to the Complaint and included in that Answer a Counterclaim asking for an accounting, alleging that the Trustees had breached their fiduciary duty to Bibiji and the Living Trust, and asking that the Trustees be removed and independent trustees be appointed. This is the only lawsuit between these parties. Bibiji has not filed a separate lawsuit, rather she has counter-sued in the lawsuit filed against her. On April 25, 2008, Bibiji's attorney sent a letter to the Trustees asking, among other things, for information about the Siri Singh Sahib's and Bibiji's possible ownership interest in the eight main for-profit and non-profit corporations. This is some of the same information later requested directly from these corporations by subpoenas issued by Bibiji.

In February, 2009, Bibiji filed a petition to have the Siri Singh Sahib's Last Will and Testament admitted to probate. Probate is the legal process to give effect to a Will and determine what was owned by the deceased at the time of death. She again asked the court to determine whether all of her and the Siri Singh Sahib's assets had been accounted for.

The Trust v. Bibiji Lawsuit moved forward without direct involvement of any of the businesses or non-profits until March, 2009 when Bibiji subpoenaed records from all the various entities established or inspired by the Siri Singh Sahib. A subpoena is a legal document that requires that information be provided by the person who holds the information in order for the other party to prepare for trial. The subpoenas were very broad, seeking 40 years of records from each of the corporations, including information requested in the April 25, 2008 letter.

continued at post reply

Please read an Excerpt below taken from

"Sikhism and Tantric Yoga"
by Dr. Trilochan Singh (Link to entire book)

"Yogi Bhajan is using the sacred Sikh mantras and the sacred name of Guru Ram Das as a mantle for his Tantric Sex Yoga which will inevitably lead to mental and physical debauchery of those who take his brand of Sikhism contaminated by crazy sex-energizing asanas seriously."

Update Regarding Lawsuit, October 2, 2009
October 2, 2009
The Board of Directors of Sikh Dharma International has been diligently looking after SDI's interests in relation to Bibiji's subpoena ever since the subpoena was served on SDI in March, 2009. At that time, New Mexico attorney Tom Bird was retained and paid for by Unto Infinity to represent all of the nonprofit entities which received subpoenas and to move to quash the subpoenas, which means to have the court declare the subpoenas dissolved so no response would be required. In March, 2009, the SDI Board specifically asked Mr. Bird whether the Board needed to take any action in relation to Bibiji's position as a member of the Board in light of the subpoena and he advised the Board that "although her presence on the board might be awkward or uncomfortable, I did not believe that the subpoenas themselves created a duty to remove her." (included in SDS Packet) On May 2nd Bibiji provided a note to the Board briefly explaining the basis of her counterclaim. She also stated: "None of the subpoenas issued in the case are for any purpose of asserting any claim against SDI or any other non-party. I have asserted no claims against SDI or any other non-party." Attachment 2. SDI and the other subpoenaed entities are "non-parties" because they are not parties named in the lawsuit. The only parties to the lawsuit are the Trustees and Bibiji.

In court proceedings and filings in May and June, 2009 in response to the efforts to quash the subpoenas, Bibiji's attorney, Mr. Soni, raised issues related to ownership of the various corporations that he had raised in part in his April 25, 2008 letter to the Trustees' attorneys. As discussed below, Mr. Soni subsequently provided written and oral explanations of Bibiji's position, expressly stating that she was not seeking the return of any charitable contributions from the non-profits or making any claim against the non-profits' assets.

On June 25, 2009, the SDS wrote SDEI requesting that it address Bibiji's Board membership in light of the subpoena. The SDEI chairman, Deva Singh, wrote to Bibiji who forwarded the email to her attorney, Mr. Soni. In Mr. Soni's June 27, 2009 email to Deva Singh of SDEI, he stated; "The disclosure of the limited information sought is no threat to the entities from which the information is sought and no claim is being made against any of those entities." Attachment 3.

Beginning on June 30th, Roy Lambert, the attorney for UI and SDS, sent several emails advising SDI's Board to remove Bibiji both as a member of the Board of Directors and as the Bhai Sahiba of Sikh Dharma (an officer of SDI) unless she provided a General Release to the corporation. (included in the SDS Packet) A General Release is a document that confirms that the person signing it will no longer make any claims as to whatever is in the Release. The basis Mr. Lambert gave for removing Bibiji in these (and subsequent) emails to SDI was that she was supposedly making a claim against SDI and its assets, and that she therefore had a conflict of interest with SDI that made it inappropriate for her to remain as a member of SDI's Board. However as noted above and in particular further below, Bibiji (and her attorney) repeatedly have stated in writing that she is not making a claim against the nonprofits or their assets, that her subpoenas merely seek information, and that any claim for reimbursement to her half of the Living Trust as a result of excess donations by the Siri Singh Sahib to any of the nonprofits is to be paid from the Staff Trust and not by any of the nonprofits.

continued at post reply

Please read an Excerpt below taken from

"Sikhism and Tantric Yoga"
by Dr. Trilochan Singh (Link to entire book)

"Yogi Bhajan is using the sacred Sikh mantras and the sacred name of Guru Ram Das as a mantle for his Tantric Sex Yoga which will inevitably lead to mental and physical debauchery of those who take his brand of Sikhism contaminated by crazy sex-energizing asanas seriously."

Update Regarding Lawsuit, October 2, 2009
October 2, 2009
On July 4th the SDS sent SDI a letter (dated July 1st) with another copy of the subpoena, reiterating Mr. Lambert's advice (included in the SDS Packet). At my request, Mr. Lambert sent me the Release on Monday, July 6th, which I forwarded to Bibiji and Mr. Soni, her attorney along with a copy of the SDS's July 1st letter. On July 12th I sent a status report to Gurucharan Kaur (UI's and SDS's Executive Secretary) (included in the SDS Packet). On July 13th Mr. Soni sent me a lengthy letter detailing his concerns with the Release. Attachment 4. On July 20th Mr. Lambert called me and stated that despite Mr. Soni's letter for strategic reasons they wanted to keep pressure on Bibiji (to take a leave of absence or sign the release) through the end of the month. This was just weeks before the beginning of depositions of her and the Trustees which they apparently hoped to prevent by pressuring her to settle her claims. I sent Mr. Lambert a more narrowly drafted Release which he rejected the next day.

I then sent Mr. Lambert a draft Leave of Absence document for Bibiji to step down temporarily from her duties as Bhai Sahiba and as an SDI Board member. There were several versions revised by Mr. Lambert to require that Bibiji agree to a Leave of Absence without pay and benefits. I sent an email to Mr. Lambert on July 24th raising concerns about the legality of forcing Bibiji to step down without pay and benefits in light of the claims set out in Mr. Soni's July 13th letter. In an email dated July 27th, Mr. Lambert summarily rejected those concerns. Attachment 5. Mr. Lambert's proposed Request for Leave of Absence was sent to Mr. Soni for review, but there has been no agreement to the Request for Leave of Absence.

In the meantime, on July 10th, a Special Master appointed by the court to resolve the subpoena issue in the Trust v. Bibiji lawsuit issued a Report narrowing the scope of the subpoena to Sikh Dharma International and the other corporations to only require some types of documents and only documents dated from January 1, 1998 to the present. An opposition was filed by the subpoenaed entities (SDI and the other nonprofits). After a further hearing on August 12th, the court ordered that the subpoenaed materials were due to Bibiji no later than August 26th. SDI along with the other nonprofits submitted the subpoenaed information by that deadline. However, SDI was not able to review any of its Board minutes from the period prior to the Siri Singh Sahib's death to determine for itself they should be delivered to Bibiji as none of them were on file at the Chancellor's Office in Los Angeles. SDI was denied access to its own Board minutes, which were in the possession of Roy Lambert and UI, by Siri Karm Kaur who stated in an August 24th email: "When the SDS has confirmed that SDI is in good standing with their sole member and upon their subsequent request, we will compile copies of what is in Schwabe (Mr. Lambert's law firm) and UI's records re: SDI for however the SDS would like them stored."

At the same time the Bibiji subpoena matter was going on, on August 3rd SDI sent a letter to UI raising legal concerns regarding another situation - the SDS's replacement of the Sikh Dharma of Phoenix Board of Directors. Mr. Lambert, in an August 12th email, rejected SDI's concerns and went on to discuss his perception that the real problem was SDI was not cooperating with the SDS and stated: "Without cooperation it may be in Sikh Dharma's interest that SDS consider board and officer replacement."

SDI heard nothing further regarding the Bibiji subpoena until the SDS' September 17th packet. Anticipating that it would be brought up at the Khalsa Council meetings, I forwarded the packet to Bibiji's attorney, Surjit Soni, and he provided the attached letter dated September 21, 2009 directly addressing the SDS's statements in its packet. Attachment 6. Contrary to statements in recent Khalsa Council e-group communications, Mr. Soni again confirms that if any additional funds are later found to be due to Bibiji, it is her intent that they come from the Trust assets, not from the assets of the non-profits. He states in bold type: "Bibiji has repeatedly stated and repeats again, she is not seeking any non-profit which has received any property or money from SSS before he died to return any such gifts or contributions."

continued at post reply

Please read an Excerpt below taken from

"Sikhism and Tantric Yoga"
by Dr. Trilochan Singh (Link to entire book)

"Yogi Bhajan is using the sacred Sikh mantras and the sacred name of Guru Ram Das as a mantle for his Tantric Sex Yoga which will inevitably lead to mental and physical debauchery of those who take his brand of Sikhism contaminated by crazy sex-energizing asanas seriously."

Update Regarding Lawsuit, October 2, 2009
October 2, 2009
It was also learned at the Khalsa Council meetings that the SDEI Board received only the one email of June 25th from Gurucharan Kaur (UI's and SDS's Executive Secretary) advising SDEI to remove Bibiji from its board. The SDEI Board has not removed Bibiji from its Board and, unlike SDI, apparently has received no further communications from Mr. Lambert or the SDS insisting that it do so.

On September 29, 2009, the Judge in the Trust v. Bibiji Lawsuit denied the Trustees' motion to dismiss Bibiji's counterclaim for equitable reallocation. The trial is currently set to begin on October 19, 2009 and continue on October 20, 21, 26, and 27, 2009.

This is an ongoing legal proceeding. Based on all the information provided to the SDI Board, the Board has to date concluded that Bibiji's subpoena did not create a conflict of interest with SDI and that the negative national and international impact of removing Bibiji as the Bhai Sahiba and as a member of the Board is not in the best interests of Sikh Dharma International or the Sikh Dharma community as the matter now stands. In reaching this decision the Board relied on both Mr. Soni's representations that Bibiji is not claiming any assets of SDI or the other non-profits and Mr. Bird's July 20th advice: "I told [Roy Lambert] that, although I believed the law in this area insulates good faith exercises of judgment in relation to decisions like the removal of officers and board members, I had a bit of difficulty concluding that no possible justification for allowing Inderjit to remain as a board member and officer could be conceived in these circumstances."

As this case progresses through the courts, Sikh Dharma International will continue to work with its attorneys to protect its interests.

Sincerely,

Amrit Kaur Khalsa
Chancellor, Sikh Dharma International

continued at post reply