|
SGPC
defines Sehajdhari, opens floodgates for non-Sikhs
Experts’ report totally ignored, all experts in rage, but no one’s
speaking out
SGPC Executive told HC it considered experts'
report on Dec 3 when none existed
Sach Kanwal Singh
CHANDIGARH:
Finally, and perhaps knowingly well the consequences, in one single
swoop, the SGPC has fulfilled a decades-old wish of the RSS-BJP and
the Hindutva brigade of secularising the Sikh religion, its
institutions, gurdwaras, and theology.
 In a cleverly drafted affidavit submitted to the
Punjab and Haryana
High Court, filed in response to a directive of the HC to state
clearly "as to whether or not a person who cuts his hair and/or
shaves his beard is a Sehajdhari Sikh", the SGPC has said that a
Sehajdhari Sikh, once he becomes a Keshadhari Sikh, cannot
cut or shave his hair. The media in
Punjab reported the affidavit's contents while totally
missing the import of the twisted formulation by the SGPC of
definition of Sehajdhari Sikh.
The SGPC counsel claimed that he was filing the affidavit
after accepting in toto the recommendations of an expert panel set
up by the SGPC. But most members of the expert panel now hold that
not only has the SGPC completely subverted the letter and spirit of
its recommendations but has also opened floodgates for non-Sikhs to
claim themselves to be Sikhs.
Also, the SGPC affidavit now effectively renders a large
number of Sikhs, born to Sikh parents, as patits. Perhaps a correct
fact, but totally irrelevant to the purpose of the affidavit. All patits now
have to be necessarily kept out of any benefits accruing to anyone
for being a Sikh -- say, for example, for purpose of admission into
Sikh minority educational institutions -- while all non-Sikhs can
simply declare themselves to be Sehajdharis who have still not
decided to become Keshadhari, and thus have to be considered as
Sehajdhari Sikhs.
|
Operative part of the SGPC affidavit submitted in the High
Court
As per
Section 2(10-A) a Sahajdhari Sikh is a person (i) who performs
ceremonies according to Sikh rites, (ii) who does not use
tobacco, Kutha, Halal meat in any form, (iii) who is not a Patit
(Apostate), and (iv) who can recite Mulmantra (Proem to Sri Guru
Granth Sahib). The word Sahajdhari consists of two words Sahaj
= slowly; dhari = to adopt. Hence Sahajdhari Sikhs are those
novices who were born in non-sikh families, and who expressed
their desire to adopt Sikhism slowly and gradually, adopt its
doctrines, ethics and tenets with belief in Shri Guru Granth
Sahib and Ten Gurus. A Sahajdhari, therefore, is a novice who
has entered the path of Sikhism, and he will continue to be so
till he fully accepts the moral and spiritual vows of Sikhism,
to be called a practicing Sikh professing Sikhism. Once a
Sahajdhari becomes a Keshadhari Sikh, he under no circumstances
by cutting/trimming his/her hair, beard, eye-brows in any manner
can claim to be a Sahajdhari Sikh. Similarly, a Sikh born into a
Sikh family cannot claim to be a Sahajdhari Sikh by
trimming/cutting his/her hair, beard or eye-brows in any manner. |
|
The WSN has conclusive evidence that such clever maneuvering
and drafting has not happened by any chance or mistake or legal goof
up, and was the result of a sustained effort to corrupt the
definition of the Sehajdhari Sikh.
Consider the sequence of events:
1. The issue came up when an SGPC run college refused
admission to a girl saying she cut her hair and therefore cannot be
considered a Sikh. Once someone took the plea of being a Sehajdhari
and claimed that unshorn hair are not essential in Sikhism, and
once the neo-Sehajdhari lobby also intervened, the High
Court, vide its order dated 29.9.2008, directed the filing of an
affidavit "based on a resolution passed by the S.G.P.C" asking
whether or not a person who cuts his hair and/or shaves his beard is
a 'Sehajdhari Sikh' if he performs ceremonies according to Sikh
rites, does not use tobacco or Kuttha in any form, and can recite
the 'mool mantra', with reference to Section 2(10-A) of the Sikh
Gurdwara Act 1925.
2. The SGPC set up an expert panel of seven members, headed
by SGPC general secretary Sukhdev Singh Bhaur. These members were to
formulate the definition of Sehajdhari Sikh and recommend it to the
executive committee.
3. The members met on November 26 at the Kalgidhar Niwas in
Chandigarh.
Before the discussion started, one of the members, Anurag Singh,
circulated an unsigned two para note, in the form of a resolution
which was of course ignored at that point but one of
the sentences in the note should have been a dead giveaway of
the intentions of at least this one member.
Even before the discussion could start, Anurag Singh had
written that the note was a result of "a detailed discussion on the
issue amongst members and other intellectuals present."
| |
For years,
the RSS has been pushing the line that Sikhs are Keshadhari
Hindus. With the latest affidavit of the SGPC submitted to the
High Court, it is now clear that the premier body of the Sikhs
has virtually made all Hindus as non-Keshadhari Sikhs. |
The note circulated by Anurag Singh said: "There is no
statutory requirement as per the aforementioned definition in
2(10-A) for a Sehajdari Sikh to keep unshorn hair. However a person
who being 'Keshdhari Sikh or Amrit Dhari Sikhs becomes Patit as per
the disqualification provided in Section 2(11) cannot be treated as
Sehajdari Sikh as per the definition contained in Section 2(10-A) of
the Sikh Gurdwara Act, 1925."
4. Anurag Singh heads the Sikh History Research Board, and
his sway over the SGPC president Avtar Singh Makkar is well known.
He is widely known as Makkar's man.
5. The November 26 meeting decided to stick to the 1938
formulation of Sehajdhari as per which the day and the moment a
non-Sikh decides to become a Sehajdhari, it shows an intention to
embrace Sikhism and that he has started on his way towards becomes a
complete Sikh. From that day and that moment, he cannot cut
his hair and should start observing all Sikh rites and continue on
his path of Sehaj to become a Sikh.
6. There is thus no timegap between someone becoming a
Sehajdhari Sikh and then becoming a Keshadhari Sikh.
7. Anurag Singh, and WSN sources confirm that Punjab Advocate
General H S Mattewal, were pushing for the line that a Sehajdhari
Sikh does not necessarily have to be Keshadhari Sikh. Anurag Singh's
stance was that a Sehajdhari Sikh can take an indefinite time before
becoming a Keshadhari Sikh, and only when he once becomes a
Keshadhari Sikh, he should not cut his hair.
8. Interestingly, there was no written resolution passed by
the November 26 meeting, it was verbally agreed that the 1938
formulation would be drafted by Dalmegh Singh as unanimously agreed,
and would be sent to the SGPC executive committee which was to meet
on December 3.
9. The drama happened when the SGPC executive committee was
presented a strange formulation in complete denial of the
unanimously agreed position and created confusion. It was drafted by
Anurag Singh. It said Sehajdhari Sikh, once he becomes Keshadhari
Sikh, cannot cut his hair. But did not state that as per this, a
Sehajdhari may decide not to become a Keshadhari all his life and
thus can keep on cutting his hair and be counted as a Sehajdhari
Sikh.
|
Row makes
Sukhdev Singh Bhaur's position untenable
The latest row has made SGPC general secretary Sukhdev Singh
Bhaur's position most untenable as he was present in all three
meetings. Bhaur attended the Nov 26 meeting of the seven experts
in Chandigarh, he was present in the executive committee meeting
of the SGPC on December 3 and was again present in the December
4 meeting of the experts in Amritsar.
Interestingly, Bhaur also signed the December 4 resolution of
the experts while the affidavit submitted before the High Court
only talks of November 26 meeting's report, a report that no one
had signed. How will Bhaur explain the December 4 meeting, the
resolution of December 4 and his own signatures on it if he
indeed was a party to executive committee's decision on Dec 3
and why did the affidavit not even mention the fact of December
4 meeting?
Clearly, only one of the two positions of Bhaur can be correct:
either, he agrees to Nov 26 and December 4 position of experts,
or he agrees with the affidavit submitted to the High Court on
the basis of executive committee meeting of which also he is a
member. He cannot have two opposite positions at the same time. |
|
10. When the media reported this on December 4 morning, many
of the seven member panel were furious and Makkar buckled under this
pressure and convened an emergency meeting of the panel on December
4 itself at
Amritsar in Guru Nanak Niwas at 2 pm. It was here that the real face
of the entire conspiracy was unveiled. Members like Bibi Kiranjot
Kaur, Prof Suba Singh, principal of Shaheed Sikh Missionary College,
Dr Jasbir Singh Sabar, G.S.Lamba and even SGPC general secretary
Sukhdev Singh Bhaur were
themselves angry about how the recommendation of the expert
panel was subverted.
11. After many verbal duels, a formulation was drafted. This
was signed by all the members of the expert panel except Anurag
Singh who refused to sign it because it made sure that a Sehajdhari
Sikh can in no case be permitted to cut his hair on the grounds that
he has so far not become a Keshadhari Sikh. With this, the cat had
come out of the bag. The WSN is in possession of a copy of this
December 4 resolution signed by expert committee members except
Anurag Singh.
12. It is not known why the expert committee members did not
expose or take upon Anurag Singh and why they did not make him state
his reasons for not signing the resolution despite being present?
Also, why he was not asked his reasons for not signing particularly
because the December 4 resolution of the expert committee was in
consonance of the November 26 meeting's outcome of the same
committee and he had participated in both?
13. On December 10, on the day of the 60th anniversary of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the SGPC counsel went ahead
and submitted an affidavit that violated the Rights of an entire
community to even keep an eye on its gates. Filed by SGPC Secretary
Harbeant Singh in response to the HC's directive in C.W.P. No.
13282 of 2008-12-10, the affidavit not only said that a Sahajdhari
is prohibited from cutting his hair only after he becomes a
Keshadhari Sikh, but also added that any Sikh born into a Sikh
family cannot claim to be a Sehajdhari if he cuts his hair and he is
to be considered an apostate (patit). While the SGPC affidavit
indeed defines a 'patit' correctly, the HC had not asked for any
such explanation. On the single point which the HC had raised, the
SGPC has messed up badly.
14. Further, the SGPC affidavit in the HC claimed that the
SGPC Executive Committee considered the expert committee report in
its meeting on December 3 and the affidavit was being filed after
such a consideration.
15. The fact remains that the Executive Committee simply
could not have considered any report of the expert committee on
December 3 for the simple reason that no report of the expert
committee was drafted or signed by any member. Also, the affidavit
does not even talk about the December 4 meeting of the expert
committee where the issue was discussed again, and where the written
report was drafted and signed. It was this report that Anurag Singh
did not sign.
16. Legally speaking, the entire saga makes SGPC also guilty
of perjury because it is claiming to have considered a non-existent
report, and it is not telling the court about a signed report of the
same panel that directly contravenes the contents of the affidavit
presented to the High Court.
But one thing
that the RSS lobby long looking for ways to penetrate into Sikhism
has achieved with this legal cover of a corrupted definition of
Sehajdhari is that any number of non-Sikhs can simply memorise the
Mool Mantra and declare themselves as Sehajdhari Sikh. And all
Sehajdharis may decide never to become Keshadharis and keep on
cutting their hair and be counted within the fold of Sikhism.
| |
All expert committee members signed the December 4, 2008
resolution which is at complete variance with what the High
Court was told. Sukhdev Singh Bhaur, member of the executive
committee, also signed this.
|
|
10 December
2008
|
Read Also
