Rehat - Closing Arguments
Posted by Preet Mohan S Ahluwalia
Rehat - Closing Arguments
Posted by Preet Mohan S Ahluwalia on Sunday, 2/04/2001 1:31 PM MST
| Mr Sundeep Singh: I agree with your decision to post our closing arguments. Thanks for posting yours. Mine follow. CLOSING ARGUMENTS The discussion started on the issue of different organizations having different set of codes (rehat). Sundeep Singh is of the opinion that it should not be allowed. In my opinion, it should not matter if the rehat is based upon the SGPC (Akal Takhat) rehat. There is no reason to believe if a rehat based upon the SGPC rehat and reviewed by an SGPC appointed advisory committee - before its implementation - should VIOLATE the SGPC rehat. If it does then it only proves that the reviewers did not do a thorough job. More specifically Sundeep raised two issue: 1. Sikh Dharma's insistence on a vegetarian diet 2. Sikh Dharma's prohibition of menstruating women from administering amrit On the Question of Diet ----------------------------- The SGPC rehat has no specific clause for diet. One of its transgressions is "Eating the meat of an animal slaughtered the Muslim way" i.e Kosher meat Since there is no specific mention on the question of diet it can only imply that both vegetarian and non-vegetarian diet is acceptable. On the other hand, under the heading, 'Social and Moral Guidelines' the Sikh Dharma manual says: "The diet of a Sikh is the food of the Guru's Lungar (free kitchen) which is lacto-vegetarian. It includes vegetables, grains, fruits and nuts, as well as milk and milk products. Neither meat, nor poultry, nor fish, nor eggs, are part of the Sikh diet..." This definition highlights two important points: 1. Definition of Sikh-Diet 2. What Sikh-Diet constitutes It is evident that the SGPC rehat does not have a specific definition of Sikh-Diet. Neither do they have any specific reference of what diet should constitute. At most they have a transgression i.e. something that is not acceptable. Sikh Dharma manual has defined Sikh-Diet as "Guru-ka-Langar." In doing so they have added a new dimension which is not present in the SGPC code. After their definition of Sikh-Diet they have specifically mentioned what constitutes this diet. It is vegetarian. Keeping in view that their defintion of Sikh-Diet is Guru-ka-Langar and that langar, by tradition, is ALWAYS vegetarian, in my opinion they are NOT in violation of the SGPC rehat. This is so because SGPC rehat accepts both vegetarian and non-vegetarian diet. At most, it is Sikh Dharma's insistence that its members declare themselves as vegetarians. This should also mean that if someone intends to be a part of Sikh Dharma they need to be vegetarian or accept a vegetarian lifestyle. On The Issue of Menstruating Women ----------------------------------------------- In the SGPC (Akal Takhat) rehat there is no specific clause to describe a woman's functions during her period of menstruation. On the question of administering Amrit, the SGPC rehat says: "...Also present should be six committed baptized Sikhs, one of whom should sit in attendance of the Guru Granth Sahib and the other five should be there to administer the ambrosial baptism. These six may even include Sikh women. All of them must have taken bath and washed their hair..........The five beloved ones who administer ambrosial baptism should not include a disabled person...All of them should be committed baptized Sikhs with appealing personalities.." In the SGPC rehat it is clearly mentioned that women can administer amrit. It also states that none of the administering person is disabled. However, there is no specific mention of menstruating women. Also, all of the adminsitering people should be COMMITTED BAPTIZED Sikhs. Ideally, this would mean that they follow the Sikh way of life to its fullest. The Sikh Dharma manual states: "...Any Amritdhari Sikh who has maintained his or her Rehit, who has led an exemplary life, maintaining consistent bana, banis, simran and seva, who has not betrayed the Khalsa Panth, who is in good health (if female, should not be menstruating at the time), who can recite the banis accurately and quickly, can be chosen to serve as one of the Panj....." Sikh Dharma rehat also lays emphasis that administering people are EXEMPLARY (Committed) BAPTISED (Amritdhari) Sikhs. It also accepts women as a part of the administering team. The only difference being their emphasis that she should not be menstruating at that time. It also seems that they have used this as an attachment to the "Health" clause whereby all the administering people should be in good health. Something that SGPC rehat also recommends. Why did they do this, I'm not sure. The question that comes to mind is: Are menstruating women not in good health during the menstruation period. Personally, I don't know. I've never experienced menstruation. Unless there is a freak accident of Nature, I don't think I ever will. Atleast, not in this lifetime. Thank God for that! (it's just the thought that scares me) Due to lack of personal experience I would believe that this issue should be addressed by women and doctors who are aware of what goes on. The important thing is, if women members of Sikh Dharma agree with it then is there a problem. I don't think so. Since the SGPC rehat does not have any specific guideline, Sikh Dharma is NOT in violation of the SGPC rehat. As I wrote earlier, if women have an issue with this guideline then they have two avenues open to them: 1. Discuss it with the Sikh Dharma 2. If they are not satisfied then request SGPC and Akal Takhat to deliberate on this issue If SGPC updates its rehat by including a reference to menstruating women, then and only then, can we ascertain if Sikh Dharma is violating the SGPC rehat or not. Until that time they are in no violation. We are an intelligent community, it is high time we THINK and ACT intelligently. If it is an issue that most women are not concerned about then let it be the way it is. It is an issue that relates to their needs, they need to have a say. If they decide to overlook it, then so be it. If most women would want to consider a guideline then you have the option to make a request to the Akal Takhat for its consideration. Period! Both Sundeep and I agree that SGPC (Akal Takhat) rehat is SUPREME. There should be no doubt about it. Every organization that decides to formulate a set of codes for itself should HONOR the SGPC rehat and not circumvent it. Any action on their part which VIOLATES the SGPC rehat should be deeemed as a VIOLATION. Accountability should follow all violations. The Akal Takhat and the SGPC are requested to ENSURE that no Sikh organization practices codes that are in violation of the Akal Takhat rehat. They should have a mechanism in place that should check all violations. If we can accomplish all such checks there is no reason to believe that Sikh organizations will have a fun time undermining the authority of the Akal Takhat. To conclude, I agree with Sundeep Singh that Sikh organizations should title their rehat in such a way that it does not undermine the accepted SGPC (Akal Takhat) rehat. Rehat |
