Who is Sehajdhari? A Question as Old as the 1925 Sikh Gurdwara Act

Who is a 'sehajdhari'?



CHANDIGARH: For the past several years, the Sikh community has been besieged by confusion and legal conflicts in the absence of clarity on the term 'Sehajdhari'. The present development arising out of withdrawal of a notification by the central government is all set to create further confusion.

Community leaders point that the original Sikh Gurdwara Act of 1925 had three basic terms related to Sikhs - amritdhari Sikhs, keshdhari Sikhs and patit. Amritdhari being those who had partaken Amrit, prepared and administered according to the tenets of Sikh religion and rites, at the hands of panj pyaras. Keshdhari were those who were yet to partake Amrit and evolve into the 'pure' form of Khalsa.

The leaders, quoting various amendments in the Act, say that Patit, or apostates were those who being a Keshadhari, trimmed or shaved the hair or beard, or who after taking amrit, commits any one or more of the social evils described in the Sikh rehat maryada (code of conduct) governing Sikhs. It inherently implied that that keeping hair is the basic identity of a Sikh, besides being one of the five 'K', which an Amritdhari Sikh have to maintain).

A similar definition was presented in the HC by the SGPC in 2008, during a case involving admission of a Sikh girl into an SGPC run institution. Her case was eventually rejected after the community leaders and legal experts decided the definition of Sikh, wherein only a Keshadhari could be called a Sikh. "A person born into a Sikh family cannot claim to be a Sehajdhari by trimming or cutting his/her hair, beard or eyebrows in any manner," the SGPC affidavit stated.


"Sehajdhari term came to be included in the Act in 1959, when Pepsu states were merged in Punjab. The word is a combination of two terms 'Sehaj' (gradually) and 'Dhari' (loosely translated as 'evolving'), or someone who evolved slowly as Sikhs,'' says former general secretary of SGPC Manjit Singh Calcutta, citing Mahan Kosh, the Sikh encyclopedia. "It means that persons outside Sikh religion, who want to embrace Sikhism gradually through the phases of Keshdhari and Amritdhari, can be called Sehajdhari. Those who are born in Sikh families, but who get their hair shorn are 'patit' and not 'sehajdharis'."

However, many, including Sehajdhari Sikh Federation president Paramjit Singh Ranu, who had filed the petition in the high court, question this interpretation. "Those born in Sikh families, who had never maintained hair, could not be called 'patit', and only the amritdhari Sikhs, who cut their hair can be called 'patit'.''

With traditional community leaders opposing the entry of those who do not abide by the Sikh rehat maryada, the conflict is likely to continue.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/sikh-sikhi-sikhism/36842-who-sehajdhari-question-old-1925-sikh.html


http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/i...ow/9830416.cms

 
Do share your immediate thoughts or reactions on this issue? We value your views! Login Now! or Sign Up Today! to share your views with us.. Gurfateh!

Related article

Chandigarh, September 2

Even after 86 years of legislation to administer historic gurdwaras, the debate over recognition of Sehajdharis as Sikhs continues. Though the term Sehajdhari Sikh finds no mention in the more recent Acts, including the Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Act or the Acts that govern Takhts at Hazur Sahib (Nanded) or Patna Sahib, it was incorporated in the original Gurdwara Act: 1925 in 1959 by including Section 2(10-A).

The debate over the issue becomes centrestage every time elections to the SGPC are held.
In the first 12 or 13 elections to the general house of the SGPC, Sehajdhari Sikhs exercised their right to vote. They were defranchised in 2003 when the general house of the SGPC passed a resolution to that effect. Subsequently, the Union Home Ministry put its stamp of approval on the general house decision on October 8, 2003, notifying that Sehajdhari Sikhs were no more part of the electoral college of the SGPC.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=36842

This notification was challenged by the Sehajdharis in the Punjab and Haryana High Court. They, however, did not get any reprieve as the 2004 SGPC elections were held without restoration of their voting right.

Since the withdrawal of right to vote was notified in 2003 and the 2004 elections were held without Sehajdharis on the electroal rolls, the withdrawal of the notification now would have created both legal and social problems.

Histrorically speaking, the term word Sehajdhari finds no mention either in any of the Sikh granths or the Sikh Rehat Maryada. In 2008, when the issue of defining a Sikh was taken up by the Constitution Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the Gurleen Kaur vs SGPC case, the Sehajdhari issue figured nowhere though references were made to Amritdhari” (baptised) Sikhs, non-baptised Sikhs and “patit” Sikhs , those who have cut or plucked their hair.

The Bench had concluded that only those who maintain “Sikhi swarup” and follow the Sikh Gurus, Guru Granth Sahib and do not believe in any other religion or faith can be considered as Sikhs.

Even at that time, though the SGPC had submitted an affidavit defining Sehajdhari Sikhs, it was later withdrawn following objections from various quarters. While the Sehajdharis maintain they follow the Sikh tenets, they do not agree with the definition of the SGPC .

Other schools of thought clubbed the Sehajdharis with traditional Punjabi Hindu families that raised their eldest son as a Sikh. Another difference of opinion between Sehajdharis and the SGPC has been over “patit” Sikhs. Some believe that those who deviate from the “rehat” after getting “baptised” become “patit”. The Sehajdharis, however, subscribe to the belief that any non-baptised Sikh who cuts hair or plucks hair is “patit”.

The definition of Sikh had generated an animated debate at a time when the draft of the All-India Gurdwara Act was being approved. At that time, the SGPC had endorsed the definition of Sikh as mentioned in the Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Act.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=36842

Looking back, Sehajdharis, especially those in some parts of western Punjab (now in Pakistan), were recognised as Sikhs as they believed only in Guru Granth Sahib and gurdwaras. Since the Sikhs enjoyed some special facilities at that time, the same were extended to Sehajdhari Sikhs. It is part of history that certificates issued by the SGPC got them recognition as Sehajdhari Sikhs. They all followed Sikh rites and rituals.

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2011/20110903/punjab.htm#8
Rajneesh Madhok

Spnadmin Ji,if the terms origin was related to a geographic occurence could it then not be applied to those born or brought up in the West. As those poor souls must be allowed time to assimilate.(A long shot but worth a try )I much prefer the shorter label too ,as I already have adopted it as my identity!

a person BORN into a SIKH Family...growing up in Sikhism..still trims his beard and shaves, cuts his hair etc...what "sehaj" is that ?? Most of such actually had dataars and long Hair..well into their TEENS..before they went and CUT it ( as we can see from frequent news emdia articles..)..so how are they "sehaj"...trying to ENTER Sikhi ?? They are LEAVING Sikhi...
Those in teh WEST born in Catholic, Jewish, Christian etc etc families..grew up NOT SIKH...well into their TEENS only decided to embrace SIKHI ands began to wear datsaars keep eksh etc...and chhak Amrit...they are NOT sehajdharees as well..they CROSSED the LINE IMMEDIATELY from NON_Sikh to SIKH...this is similar to one who converts to Islam..Christianity etc...there is NO "sehaj".....enter Islam slowly over a few years..?? One has to recite the Klama, undergo circumciison(unreversible) and declare oenself Muslim..and thats it...why sikhi is treated differently..??
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=36842
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=36842

Its just an EXCUSE to be "sikh" and yet NOT be SIKH ..just Bow to Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji BUT dont Follow what its Gurbani Says.....have a cake and eat it too...GENUINELY SEHAJDHAREE wILL make a conscious decision to STOP SHAVING..and never shave again...start follwoing Gurbani immediately...like those in the WEST do...CROSS the LINE !! or DONT.

Totally agree with giani Jarnail Singh ji that nobody can be born a Sikh.

This can be proved using Gurbani.

If one is born into a family of doctors that doesn't make he/she a doctor, he/she will have to go to university and get the relevant qualifications.

One has to learn Gurmukhi, maintain rehat, abstain from intoxicants, have good moral character, have amritvela and do paath of required banis.

If one is desperate to vote in SGPC elections surely that person will make an effort to keep kesh, read bani etc.

Keeping kesh does not constitute a Sikh, this is just one part of being a Sikh. If that Sikh still takes intoxicants, has bad morals, doesn't read bani he/she can never be a Sikh.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=36842

By the way, this not attack on Sehajdhari's, a Sehajdhari is a person that is genuinely walking on the path towards Sikhi, these type of Sehajdhari's I love. However as SGPC is such an important institution, I only want genuine Sikhs participating in the elections. Badal and Sarna are not interested in the chardikala of Sikhi, they only want to win, by any means neccessary. They will use this Sehajdhari clause to get votes from Hindus, Muslims etc under the name of Sehajdhari, this is just plain corruption.

Thats why in my opinion, SGPC votes should be reserved for baptized Sikhs only, how is somebody going test whether so and so Sehajdhari is genuine or not, its impossible. Make the voting system as simple as possible, this will help cut out the corruption.


Rabb Rakhe

There are only two types of Sikhs,

• Amritdhari fully compliant with the Sikh Rehat Maryada
• All others through birth, through choice to slowly become one, non-amritdhari, previously amritdhari that no longer comply per Sikh Rehat Maryada, etc.

List Number 1: Let there be a registration of Amritdhari Singhs worldwide and a simple process to take their name off such if the fail and be added if they become.
List Number 2: There should be a second list of other Sikhs and that should be the end of it.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=36842

You create more distinctions you will damage and divide the community into untold fragments and forever.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=36842

Sat Sri Akal.

The definition of Sikh:
Any human being who faithfully believes in:
i. One Immortal Being,
ii. Ten Gurus, from Guru Nanak Sahib to Guru Gobind Singh Sahib,
iii. The Guru Granth Sahib,
iv. The utterances and teachings of the ten Gurus and
v. the baptism (or initiation service) bequeathed by the tenth Guru, and who does not
owe allegiance to any other religion, is a Sikh.
In religious terms, a Sikh is defined in Chapter 1, Article 1 of the Sikh Code of
Conduct ... Keshdhari Sikhs who wear the turban do not cut their hair and wear
beards but may or may not be ... constitute part of the Sikh ethnic community. ...
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=36842
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=36842
On the other hand, quite a few Sikhs keep the Kesh and wear the turban who are
not ...
http://www.shrg.net/publications/toolkit/SIKHS-v2.pdf

Rajneesh Madhok

Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=36842

Ambarsaria Ji,If there is only one God then there can be only one Sikh.The distinction is more a physical one , when I had a long beard I could not get married and was rejected by 3 western minded girls !eventually an Amritdari family girl was 'lucky 'and accepted .When I later shaved that was a big shock to all of my inlaws!They thought they had chosen a proper Sikh boy.When we get together and take photos I look like the odd one out!