• Welcome to all New Sikh Philosophy Network Forums!
    Explore Sikh Sikhi Sikhism...
    Sign up Log in

Who Are Sikhs According To The Siri Guru Granth Sahib?

Status
Not open for further replies.

spnadmin

1947-2014 (Archived)
SPNer
Jun 17, 2004
14,500
19,219
The legal decision

High Court says unshorn hair integral to Sikh, but much larger threat looms now
Sach Kanwal Singh
TS1.jpg

CHANDIGARH: At a most poignant juncture of history when the Sikh quom is observing 25th year of the most dastardly attack on Sri Darbar Sahib, Sri Akal Takht and many other centres of Sikhism, and has watched the Indian machinations to save those guilty of leading killer mobs in 1984 that tracked, hunted, killed, maimed, looted and burnt alive hundreds of Sikhs, a superior court has now given a judgement that ostensibly will go far in furthering the struggle for Sikh identity.
But there is much more to the issue than meets the eye, as is always the case when it comes to Indian machinations.


In a major victory of sorts for the Sikh community, a three judge bench of the the Punjab and Haryana High Court ruled last Saturday that retaining unshorn hair is one of the most important and fundamental tenets of the Sikh religion, and the SGPC was fully justified in denying admission to a Sikh girl who plucked her eyebrows.


In its 154 page voluminous judgment, Justices J.S.Khehar, Jasbir Singh and Ajay Kumar Mittal upheld the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee precondition for maintaining ‘Sikh Swarup’ by students seeking admission under the Sikh minority community quota in institutions run by the religious body.


WSN's Interventionist Role
At one stage, the World Sikh News had to make a direct intervention to blow a cover from a deeply entrenched conspiracy under which the SGPC was misguided to take a pertinently wrong stance over unshorn hair. From behind the scenes, Punjab Advocate General HS Mattewal and his son Pavit Mattewal, in collaboration with certain elements from within the Sikh community, were able to prevail upon the SGPC to submit a highly controversial affidavit on December 5 in the Punjab and Haryana High Court when the court had asked the SGPC to define whether someone can cut his hair and still be considered a Sehaddhari Sikh.

Pavit, himself a clean shaven patit Sikh and a Legal Advisor to CM Parkash Singh Badal, had become a party in the case and had advocated that a Sehajdhari can keep trimming/cutting his hair. His father, a close chum of the ruling Badals, had earlier written articles in leading dailies advocating the right of vote for Sehajdharis, something opposed tooth and nail by the SGPC and the Sikh community as a whole.

The impugned affidavit virtually allowed those trimming/cutting their hair to be counted as Sehajdharis till they declared themselves to be Keshadharis. Later, after a coverted campaign by the WSN and a some public spirited Sikhs, the SGPC admitted massive bungling in the process leading to submission of that affidavit, sacked Sikh History Research Board Director Anurag Singh, and set up an inquiry committee to probe how the impugned affidavit came to be submitted in the High Court. Later, the SGPC submitted a new affidavit that was taken on record by the Full Bench. But the report of the probe committee never saw the light of the day.

Students whom the Guru Ram Das Institute of Medical Sciences and Research, Amritsar, had denied admission in MBBS on account of their trimming the beard and plucking eyebrows had tried to hide behind a facade that unshorn hair were not integral to being a Sikh.


The case saw SGPC being asked to define the term Sehajdhari, a task it messed up at one stage when the WSN was forced to expose a malicious affidavit as also the role of some prominent people, including that of Pavit Mattewal, CM Parkash Singh Badal's legal advisor and son of Advocate General H S Mattewal.



The Bench fully justified the requirement of retaining hair unshorn as a precondition for eligibility under the Sikh minority community quota.


“If the said religious community wishes to enforce the aforesaid norm as a precondition for admission, there is nothing wrong about it.” Speaking for the Bench, Justice Khehar said in this case, the sole consideration before the Bench was whether or not keeping hair unshorn was an important fundamental tenet of the Sikh religion.


“…Thus viewed,on the basis of the undisputed factual position, that all the petitioners indulg in trimming their hair or plucking hair of their eyebrows, they can legitimately be denied of a benefit otherwise available to Sikhs,” the Bench said.



nn.jpg
“…We have repeatedly concluded…that retaining bodily hair unshorn is one of the most essential tenets of the Sikh religion. And as such, if a Sikh organisation or body decides not to extend any benefit,which is otherwise available to a Sikh,to a person who does not maintain his hair unshorn, its determination would be perfectly legitimate.”




“For the present controversy, we…hold that retaining hair unshorn is one of the most important and fundamental tenets of the Sikh religion. In fact, it is undoubtedly a part of the religious consciousness of the Sikh faith.”



The historical background of the Sikh religion, legislative enactments involving the Sikh religion, the Sikh ‘rehat maryada’, the Sikh ‘ardas’and views expressed by scholars of Sikhism, the Bench ruled, led to “one unambiguous answer, that maintaining hair unshorn is an essential component of the Sikh religion.” The Bench stated that under the Sikh ‘rehat maryada’, a Sikh is not permitted to dishonour hair, or even to harbour any antipathy to hair of the head with which a child is born. Dyeing one’s hair is considered to be an act of dishonouring hair.

The Judges pointed out that “it may be a matter of surprise,” that in their conclusion on the controversy, the Bench did not refer to the Guru Granth Sahib as the “basis of our determination.” The code of conduct is strictly contained in the Sikh ‘rehat maryada.


In this case, which saw marathon hearings, several advocates, like Rajiv Atma Ram, K.T.S. Tulsi, R.T.P.S.Tulsi, H.S. Phoolka, D.S.Patwalia, Anupam Gupta, Chetan Mittal, Gurminder Singh, Dr M.S. Rahi, Deepak Sibal and Navkiran Singh pleaded the case.


3 June 2009
 

Ozarks

SPNer
Jun 20, 2009
53
79
It would seem that the Sikh community at large is happy with having committees and legal bodies telling them what they want to hear. People who take a part of the Siri Guru Granth Sahib

रोम रोम महि बसहि मुरारि ॥
Rom rom mėh basėh murār.
and on each and every hair, the Lord abides.

and treats allegorical thought as literal and law. Building division and dissention to the point that what is meant to be a universal, unifying approach to the divine becomes so quarrelsome and bogged down that it suffocates itself and wonders what happened. There seems to be a group within the sphere of Sikhism who would rather mourn their martyrs than to celebrate their lives and the universality of the liberating faith that they helped found.
The Siri Guru Granth Sahib also says
ਕਬੀਰ ਪ੍ਰੀਤਿ ਇਕ ਸਿਉ ਕੀਏ ਆਨ ਦੁਬਿਧਾ ਜਾਇ
Kabīr parīṯ ik si▫o kī▫e ān ḏubiḏẖā jā▫e.
Kabeer, when you are in love with the One Lord, duality and alienation depart.
ਭਾਵੈ ਲਾਂਬੇ ਕੇਸ ਕਰੁ ਭਾਵੈ ਘਰਰਿ ਮੁਡਾਇ ॥੨੫॥
Bẖāvai lāʼnbe kes kar bẖāvai gẖarar mudā▫e. ||25||
You may have long hair, or you may shave your head bald. ||25||

Yet duality and alienation seem to be part and parcel with some. With whom do you suppose the Guru Nanak Ji would sit with and call brother those who would sit in judgment wrapped in their 5 K's as if jewels or with those who seek Waheguru focusing their lives on that relationship yet haven't even one "K" on them?
or perhaps my understanding is amiss.
 

vsgrewal48895

Writer
SPNer
Mar 12, 2009
651
663
89
Michigan
Dear Ozark Ji,

IMHO your understanding is correct spiritually but not politically in this age. There will always be some tension between those committed to finding the truth about code of conduct in a reasonably understanding way in the present and those with inherited understanding, who wants to preserve their blind religious way. This challenge has to be dealt with human maturity in a constructive and creative way with the younger generation in Diaspora, who will not blindly accept the present code of conduct established in 1945.

ਮੈ ਅਵਰੁ ਗਿਆਨੁ ਨ ਧਿਆਨੁ ਪੂਜਾ ਹਰਿ ਨਾਮੁ ਅੰਤਰਿ ਵਸਿ ਰਹੇ ਭੇਖੁ ਭਵਨੀ ਹਠੁ ਨ ਜਾਨਾ ਨਾਨਕਾ ਸਚੁ ਗਹਿ ਰਹੇ
Mai avar gi*ān na ḏẖi*ān pūjā har nām anar vas rahė. Bėk bavnī haṯẖ na jānā nānkā sac geh rahė.

I have no other spiritual wisdom, meditation or worship; the Name of the Akal Purkh alone dwells deep within me. I know nothing about religious robes, pilgrimages or stubborn fanaticism; O Nanak, I hold tight to the Truth.
-----Guru Nanak, Raag Bilawal, AGGS, Page, 844-1


The rest of the article can be read at this link http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/sikh-sikhi-sikhism/24312-sikh-symbols.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Admin

SPNer
Jun 1, 2004
6,689
5,244
SPN
I have not seen it stated but I think an uncut beard could serve as a constant reminder of ones commitment or faith. I cannot think of any hair more itchy and irritating than an unruly moustache or beard. Elegant as it may be. :)
Dear Ambers, i am in an unknown territory because i simply do know how it feels after shaving... :whisling: but i think i can still reply to your question, practically... :ice: My apologies if it hurts anybody's sentiments... but practicality is what Sikhi all about...

Now, please tell me what is the purpose of all those endless range of after shave lotions that flood the market? People use them to keep their shaved skin areas cool and calm and free from irritation... This irritation is caused each time you shave... So to say that irritation or itching is only caused by keeping hair is an uneducated comment.

And if you are really not in a mischief mood, then what you are talking about is one-time small amount of timeframe when you try to grow your hair back after years of constant shaving and using after shaves to control the irritation and itching each time you shave and then when you allow them to grow and they are like less than one inch or something and they are stiff and hard and create irritation to the skin because of their rough edges. But all that is soon gone when they have reasonably grown and your doubts are gone and as your love for the Guru takes a prime seat in your life... :wah:

Dear Ambers, you can count on me, I, as a Sikh born into Sikh faith by birth and who has never ever trimmed my huge beard... :yes:, has never ever felt any irritation and itching while taking care of them and nurturing them.

As far as asking questions like it is no where mentioned in Sri Guru Granth Sahib to keep hair or all, i always present is very simple anology to deal with such an argument...

A simple analogy:

Do we consider Adi Granth Sahib ji as the eternal Guru of Sikhs? if yes, then we follow what Guru Gobind Singh Ji asked us do.

Do we consider Guru Gobind Singh ji as Sikh Guru? if yes, then we follow Him/His Orders/His commandment or we not?

Do we consider 5Ks as the Order of Guru Gobind Singh ji? if not, then we do not consider Guru Gobind Singh Ji as our Guru/Master.

And, if we do not consider Guru Gobind Singh ji as our Guru? then we do not consider Guru Granth Sahib ji as our Guru as it was Guru Gobind Singh ji who ordained Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji the only Sikh Guru.

Can we be pick and choosy?
smile.gif
 

Tejwant Singh

Mentor
Writer
SPNer
Jun 30, 2004
5,028
7,188
Henderson, NV.
Ozark ji,

Guru Fateh.

You write:

It would seem that the Sikh community at large is happy with having committees and legal bodies telling them what they want to hear. People who take a part of the Siri Guru Granth Sahib

रोम रोम महि बसहि मुरारि ॥
Rom rom mėh basėh murār.
and on each and every hair, the Lord abides.


and treats allegorical thought as literal and law. Building division and dissention to the point that what is meant to be a universal, unifying approach to the divine becomes so quarrelsome and bogged down that it suffocates itself and wonders what happened. There seems to be a group within the sphere of Sikhism who would rather mourn their martyrs than to celebrate their lives and the universality of the liberating faith that they helped found.
First of all Rom, Rom means each pore. All humans have pores but not all humans have hair sprouting out from their pores. What happens when one becomes totally bald? Does that mean Ik Ong Kaar stops "residing" on the bald spots, the Creative Energy that is omnipresent?

Hence, your analysis above is misguided and very subjective and seems to have some hidden agenda which you should try to express in an honest manner as you claim to love Sikhi way of life.

The Siri Guru Granth Sahib also says
ਕਬੀਰ ਪ੍ਰੀਤਿ ਇਕ ਸਿਉ ਕੀਏ ਆਨ ਦੁਬਿਧਾ ਜਾਇ
Kabīr parīṯ ik si▫o kī▫e ān ḏubiḏẖā jā▫e.
Kabeer, when you are in love with the One Lord, duality and alienation depart.
ਭਾਵੈ ਲਾਂਬੇ ਕੇਸ ਕਰੁ ਭਾਵੈ ਘਰਰਿ ਮੁਡਾਇ ॥੨੫॥
Bẖāvai lāʼnbe kes kar bẖāvai gẖarar mudā▫e. ||25||
You may have long hair, or you may shave your head bald. ||25||
What do you understand by the above Shabad ? Who do you think Kabir ji was talking to? Please express it in your own words.

Yet duality and alienation seem to be part and parcel with some. With whom do you suppose the Guru Nanak Ji would sit with and call brother those who would sit in judgment wrapped in their 5 K's as if jewels or with those who seek Waheguru focusing their lives on that relationship yet haven't even one "K" on them?
or perhaps my understanding is amiss.
It seems that you are implying that all those who wear 5k's as their jewels and pass judgment on others than the ones who do not have any k's.

Interesting prejudgment on your part to say the least and a bit arrogant too as you are pretending to play Guru Nanak. One wonders why!?

How many people like that have you met? Please share your experiences with them that made you reach this conclusion or is it founded on your own personal bias?


Regards

Tejwant Singh
 

Ozarks

SPNer
Jun 20, 2009
53
79
Aman Singh Ji,
If I may ask about some of your points...

"Do we consider Adi Granth Sahib ji as the eternal Guru of Sikhs? if yes, then we follow what Guru Gobind Singh Ji asked us do."

Does Siri Guru Granth Sahib talk of the Khalsa? The only place I can find it is here:

कहु कबीर जन भए खालसे प्रेम भगति जिह जानी ॥४॥३॥
Kaho Kabīr jan bẖa▫e kẖālse parem bẖagaṯ jih jānī. ||4||3||
Says Kabeer, those humble people become pure - they become Khalsa - who know the Lord's loving devotional worship. ||4||3||

Which would seem to say that those who lovingly worship God are Khalsa.

"Do we consider Guru Gobind Singh ji as Sikh Guru? if yes, then we follow Him/His Orders/His commandment or we not?

Do we consider 5Ks as the Order of Guru Gobind Singh ji? if not, then we do not consider Guru Gobind Singh Ji as our Guru/Master."

It is my understanding that when Guru Gobind Singh Ji formed the Khalsa not everyone joined. I have failed to find where he said that they were not Sikh or sent those who did not join away. I have read several places where it appeared the two terms were used almost interchangeably, however only while in the Khalsa's company. Perhaps so as to bear in mind that they were a part of Sikhism and not a part from it.
I understand the formation of the Khalsa. http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/1194578/masandGuru Gobind Singh ji had lost his father to Aurangzeb. Many of the masands (who had been placed in charge of the defined sangats) had become quarrelsome or corrupt. This helped break that power and the presence of the Khalsa became an instrument of ahimsa except in dire circumstance. But to completely change the entire sangat from desperate times come desperate measures to be sure, but to change it so radically from what the previous Gurus lived and died for? I think he knew what he did and out of concern for what else might take place he put the Siri Guru Granth Sahib in charge. As he was the Guru in charge in his time the Siri Guru Granth Sahib is in charge in ours. It is the final word and it seems to be silent on the need of the Five K's. To look outside of it would be to ignore its position as the presiding Guru of the Sikhs.
Of course, this is just my opinion. A humble follower of the Creator by whatever name you choose.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Ozarks

SPNer
Jun 20, 2009
53
79
Tejwant Singh Ji,

"First of all Rom, Rom means each pore. All humans have pores but not all humans have hair sprouting out from their pores. What happens when one becomes totally bald? Does that mean Ik Ong Kaar stops "residing" on the bald spots, the Creative Energy that is omnipresent?"

Not at all. I must admit to requiring a translation so the quote I posted (the 'Rom, Rom' one) is not of my translation. I agree though, the "every hair" approach is allegorical and not mine.

"Hence, your analysis above is misguided and very subjective and seems to have some hidden agenda which you should try to express in an honest manner as you claim to love Sikhi way of life."

Misguide, perhaps in translation, but I seek wisdom and posit ideas and questions. No more than that. I love much of the Sikh wisdom I have learned. So much so it is hard to see some of the conflict that takes place over trivial or egotistical issues.

"It seems that you are implying that all those who wear 5k's as their jewels and pass judgment on others than the one who do not have any k's."

That was actually in reference to this link to were I was directed on page 2 of this thread.

"Interesting prejudgment on your part to say the least and a bit arrogant too as you are pretending to play Guru Nanak. One wonders why!?"

Mine is not to pass judgment, as I did not, I just ask questions. Perhaps you feel as I do and think that Guru Nanak Ji would sit among both and not see a difference unless their action dictated a different response from him.

"How many people like that have you met? Please share your experiences with them that made you reach this conclusion or is it founded on your own personal bias?"

Like what? Who say who is or who is not a Sikh? Just what I have read. No Sikhs (that I can find) live near here. Unless you would count me, which I don't know that you would. Not a judgment issue, I really don't know if you would is all. The nearest Gurdwara is over 3 hours away. So here is the place I go to learn and toss around questions and ideas. My understanding of Sikhism may not be perfect, but I am always will and eager to learn.
Sat Nam
 
Last edited:

Tejwant Singh

Mentor
Writer
SPNer
Jun 30, 2004
5,028
7,188
Henderson, NV.
Ozark ji,

Guru Fateh.

My post:
"First of all Rom, Rom means each pore. All humans have pores but not all humans have hair sprouting out from their pores. What happens when one becomes totally bald? Does that mean Ik Ong Kaar stops "residing" on the bald spots, the Creative Energy that is omnipresent?"

Your response
Not at all. I must admit to requiring a translation so the quote I posted (the 'Rom, Rom' one) is not of my translation. I agree though, the "every hair" approach is allegorical and not mine.
But you did look for the translations as the ends to your means to prove some kind of point rather than the other way around.

The same thing or if one can call it a trick is applied by you when you found KHALIS in Kabir ji's salok to your response to Aman ji to prove your own conclusion. Yet, under the same token, you failed to respond to my questions about Kabir ji's salok that you posted in your post.

One wonders why this selective posting if you claim to ask questions! It seems you find your own answers first as the ends then you want to justify the means by choosing selective parts of Gurbani. Your posts state that quite nitedly.


My post:
"Hence, your analysis above is misguided and very subjective and seems to have some hidden agenda which you should try to express in an honest manner as you claim to love Sikhi way of life."

Your response:

Misguide, perhaps in translation, but I seek wisdom and posit ideas and questions. No more than that. I love much of the Sikh wisdom I have learned. So much so it is hard to see some of the conflict that takes place over trivial or egotistical issues.
I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you seek wisdom, then if that were to be true then why jump to your own conclusions as you have done in the post? It seems self contradictory.

My post

"It seems that you are implying that all those who wear 5k's as their jewels and pass judgment on others than the one who do not have any k's."

Your response:
That was actually in reference to this link to were I was directed on page 2 of this thread.
Error 404: Page Not Found


Ozark ji, But still your implication is unfounded and laced with bias.

My post:

"Interesting prejudgment on your part to say the least and a bit arrogant too as you are pretending to play Guru Nanak. One wonders why!?
"

Your response:

Mine is not to pass judgment, as I did not, I just ask questions. Perhaps you feel as I do and think that Guru Nanak Ji would sit among both and not see a difference unless their action dictated a different response from him.
Let me post your initial post again.

Yet duality and alienation seem to be part and parcel with some. With whom do you suppose the Guru Nanak Ji would sit with and call brother those who would sit in judgment wrapped in their 5 K's as if jewels or with those who seek Waheguru focusing their lives on that relationship yet haven't even one "K" on them?
Of course it is passing judgment on all those who wear 5k's by implying that all of them judge others and look down on non- Sikhs who do not wear any k's.

Do you mean it is famine or feast? One wonders why you did not take those into consideration who keep their unshorn hair and yet not taken kandei di pahul which again shows your intentions of justifying your conclusions with the subjective means.You at no point talked about their deeds in your initial post.

My post:

"How many people like that have you met? Please share your experiences with them that made you reach this conclusion or is it founded on your own personal bias?"

Your response:

Like what? Who say who is or who is not a Sikh? Just what I have read. No Sikhs (that I can find) live near here. Unless you would count me, which I don't know that you would. Not a judgment issue, I really don't know if you would is all. The nearest Gurdwara is over 3 hours away. So here is the place I go to learn and toss around questions and ideas. My understanding of Sikhism may not be perfect, but I am always will and eager to learn.
What I asked you was that if you had met any Amritdhari Sikhs in your life who have ill treated you for some reasons and flaunted their 5K's in an arrogant fashion to you for you to come to the conclusions that you have expressed in your post.

Anyway,thanks for proving my point. Your judgment is simply based on some preconceived notions rather than any personal experience with Sadh Sangat at any congregation or meeting and sharing what you have to offer with some Sikh families in person.

Regards

Tejwant Singh
 

spnadmin

1947-2014 (Archived)
SPNer
Jun 17, 2004
14,500
19,219
Many thanks Tejwant ji for incisive analysis once again! I have decided to close this thread and give you the last word in so doing.

The thread began with a fair question and one which can be answered through a thoughtful and reflective study of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Maharaj. No such thing happened. As the thread developed one or more professed non-Sikhs took on the task of lecturing the SPN forum, instead of asking sincere questions.

A number of troubling developments ensued. The thread began to look like a apologia for counterbalancing the sehajdhari path against that of keshdhari and amritdhari Sikhs. I was fooled. There are a number of false dichotomies that are lurking in the background, such as the notion that banee and bana can be considered as distinct options. Or that the jyote and the insights that follow from Guru Nanak are different from the those of Guru Gobind Singh.

Equally troubling is the continued use of verses from Sri Guru Granth Sahib Maharaj to "prove" the thesis of individuals who are not even Sikhs but presume to lecture the forum audience regarding truths and fallacies, and to challenge fundamental concepts, or give a personal spin to their importance.

It is my obligation to note that we do not do Sikhism any justice if we harvest verses in order to demonstrate that our opinions are suported by Gurbani. It is from Gurbani that our thinking should be refashioned. It is also regrettable that verses are being taken out of the context of shabads to prove points that are not gurmat but opinions of their authors. This is a sure sign that the thread has taken off in a manmukh direction and is full of inaccuracies and misapprehensions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

❤️ CLICK HERE TO JOIN SPN MOBILE PLATFORM

Top