|
Patit Pavit Finds A Turban, SGPC
Finds Saviour In Him
Pavit
Mattewal's role in Sikh hair case was under a dark cloud but SGPC
holds function to honor the Mattewals, wants quom to be grateful to
Mattewals
WSN Bureau
 FATEHGARH
SAHIB: In a shocking development, the SGPC led by Avtar Singh Makkar
dropped all pretences and actually honored Pavit Mattewal, son of
Punjab Advocate General H.S.Mattewal, for ostensibly "winning" the
case in Punjab and Haryana High Court by "advocating" the Sikh
interests forcefully even though the factual position was that
neither Pavit was a counsel for the SGPC nor was his line of
argumentation really in favour of the SGPC's stance.
In fact, Pavit
Mattewal got himself impleaded in the case through a private
application and his role had come in for strong criticism. All
through the hearing of the case, Pavit Mattewal was himself
clean-shaven, he has himself never earlier sported long hair, did
not wear a turban and never used 'Singh' in his name. Then, it is a
wonder how he is being credited with winning the case for the SGPC!
But in blatant
remarks, Makkar said the entire Sikh Panth should be proud of Pavit
Mattewal and "Jinna vee maan kariye, thorra hai."
 The
SGPC specially convened a huge function to honour the Mattewals at
the auditorium of Baba Banda Singh Bahadur Engineering College in
Fatehgarh Sahib where Makkar said Mattewal argued the case "with
determination" and it was an example of the inner strength of a
Sikh. He also praised AG Hardev Singh Mattewal saying it was due to
his efforts that Sikhs have gotten the status of a minority
community.
Mattwals were
also praised for guarding the interests of SGPC's properties. Former
president of the SGPC, Kirpal Singh Badungar, said he hoped that
Pavit Singh Mattewal will do sewa of the Panth just like his father
Hardev Singh Mattewal. Among others who praised the Mattewals were
Akali Dal general secretary Sukhdev Singh Dhindsa, Randhir Singh
Cheema, Kuldip Singh Wadala, Didar Singh Bhatti and Satwinder Kaur
Dhaliwal.
|
Many were surprised to see Pavit sporting a turban and a beard,
since he has all these years been seen as a clean shaven patit
Sikh. In fact, a recent cover of a sister publication of India
Today magazine had featured him on the front page, a copy that
Pavit proudly keeps on his table. |
|
Many were
surprised to see Pavit sporting a turban and a beard, since he has
all these years been seen as a clean shaven patit Sikh. In fact, a
recent cover of a sister publication of India Today magazine had
featured him on the front page, a copy that Pavit proudly keeps on
his table.
Experts said the
SGPC's move to honour him was rather strange, given the fact that in
the High Court, he had propounded an extremely dangerous argument
claiming the first Sikh nine gurus did not believe in having unshorn
hair and laid no such injunction and thus while keeping hair was a
desirable thing, it was not essential for a Sikh.
 Even
as the high court bench comprising two Sikh and one Hindu judge
dealt with the quintessential query about relationship of unshorn
hair to being a Sikh, Pavit was seen as part of the attempts to
present a lot of liberal interpretation of the religion’s tenets. A
bid by the SGPC to do so earlier was reversed after much protests by
the Sikh intellectuals and the SGPC had to eat humble pie and
withdraw a controversial affidavit in the high court.
Pavit has
presented a 32-page synopsis on "Significance of unshorn hair in
Sikhism" which he had claimed was prepared according to instructions
of Giani Harinder Pal Singh, a Sikh cleric, who had during previous
hearings had touched an emotional chord by asserting that "those who
don’t want to stay with Sikhism are free to leave, but once they
leave, they shouldn’t claim to be a Sikh and crave for a place in
the religion." Pavit Mattewal even tried to negate the concept of
Patit and said the term implied fall from grace and was never used
by Gurus, but by a scholar and that too in reference to some women.
|
Pavit, by arguing that the Gurus never ostracized a disciple who
was unable to learn or who was slow to learn, had tried to claim
that if a Sikh did not keep unshorn hair, he does not stop being
a Sikh. His claims that he had consulted a scholar were blasted
by the same scholar. |
|
"Everybody is a
Patit till he becomes Khalsa or pure. Perfect Sikh is Khalsa. Tenets
cannot be confused with goal and the final goal is union with God,
to become Khalsa, to become Guru’s image,’’ Pavit had claimed and
wondered whether any reasonable differentiation could be drawn
between a Sikh and a non-Sikh on the basis of keeping or non-keeping
of unshorn hair.
Mattewal
submitted that as far as the issue of unshorn hair was concerned,
“there is a degree of desirability, bordering on essentiality, to
keep long hair and that there is no compulsion or express code of
conduct for maintaining the same as far as the first nine Gurus are
concerned”.
 Pavit,
by arguing that the Gurus never ostracized a disciple who was unable
to learn or who was slow to learn, tried to claim that if a Sikh did
not keep unshorn hair, he does not stop being a Sikh.
M S Rahi, now
deceased, had termed assertions made by counsel Pavit Mattewal
before the Bench on October 22, 2008, as fraught with danger for
Sikhism in so far as its distinct identity was concerned, besides
pushing its followers towards assimilation with other communities.
Experts said the
latest move was a clear attempt by the Mattewals to project Pavit
for a larger role and to ensure that the legacy of the elder
Mattewal passes on to the younger one. Mattewals’ affiliations with
the Radha Soami cult are well known.
| |
Pavit quoted him; he slammed
Pavit and told the truth
WSN Network
Pavit
Mattewal had also come under sharp criticism when regarding his
claim of consultations with Giani Harinder Singh when the latter
strongly refuted the claim and said Mattewal completely
misrepresented him. Giani Harinder Singh even filed an affidavit
submitted before the High Court saying he "never engaged Pavit
Mattewal, Advocate, as my counsel and whatever synopsis he has
submitted in this Hon’ble Court was never prepared on my
instructions at all, as he did not show me what he had written
and submitted to the Hon’ble Court." He said that Mattewal
"totally misrepresented my views on the importance of unshorn
hair during the Guru period (and) did then mischief without
consulting me."
Giani
Harinder Singh's expose of Pavit Mattewal had come shortly after
the AG's son's role was exposed behind a controversial affidavit
submitted by the SGPC defining a Sehajdhari. That affidavit had
to be withdrawn when Sikh scholars confronted the SGPC top brass
and the ruling Akali Dal who had to deal with much egg on the
face.
Giani
Harinder Singh had said Mattewal's submissions were "totally
unwarranted and at variance with my views on the importance of
Keshas in Sikhism."
Giani
Harinder Singh had also accused Pavit Mattewal of trying "to
confuse and confound" the court "mainly with the purpose to
weaken the case of unshorn hair." He said: "Guru Gobind Singh
only formalized what was already there in Sikh scriptures and
Sikh traditions."
"Mr. Pavit
Singh Mattewal has deliberately and out of mischief mugged up
the translation of Kabir couplet, quoted at page 8. He, to suit
his selfish ends mistranslates second part of Kabir’s Salok as
if Kabir Sahib was justifying one’s keeping long hair or having
one’s head shaved off...Pavit has deliberately chosen to place
this hymn of Kabir (S.G.G.S. p. 1365) separately... Even Bhaktas
were all for keeping of unshorn hair."
In a rather
blunt criticism of the SGPC too, Giani Harinder Singh said it
was "unfortunate that it should have been for the SGPC to come
clear on the issue." Instead, he said, it was left to scholars
like him "to be straight forward in the matter."
Giani
Harinder Singh even nailed the straight lies by adding that he
"did not tell him (Pavit) at any stage that an exhausted study
of religious texts and authoritative tenets of religions is
required and the applicant (Giani Harinder Singh) would address"
the court.
"The
applicant had already addressed ...on 20.2.2009 and had
explained the whole position of the significance of unshorn hair
in the total perspective of Sikh history," Giani Harinder Singh
said.
|
|
| |
The
Saviours?
 Even
as the SGPC called the Mattewals as saviours of Sikh interests,
H S Mattewal is one of the strongest advocates for giving
Sehajdharis the right to vote under the Sikh Gurdwara Act 1925,
and even wrote an article in The Tribune. As for the role of
Pavit, the Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee (DSGMC) even
came out with a booklet on the role of the Mattewals in the
entire imbroglio created by the submission of a contrived and
wrong affidavit before the Punjab and Haryana High Court which
the SGPC was later forced to withdraw.
At one
stage, Dal Khalsa had asked that Pavit Mattewal's role in the
High Ciurt case should be probed.
|
|
21
October 2009
|
Read Also