Gurbaj Singh Multani, a Sikh student in Québec, was playing during recess when, oops, his kirpan, a ceremonial Sikh dagger, fell out of his clothing. The mother of another student noticed, and minutes later the principal of the school, Danielle Descoteaux, informed Gurbaj that he would not be permitted to attend the school so long as he continued to carry this “weapon” on his person.
The school board agreed with Descoteaux’s initial reaction, stating that the kirpan violated its code of conduct, which prohibits the carrying of weapons. The boardÂ’s council of commissioners upheld that decision, but told Gurbaj and his parents that Gurbaj would be permitted to wear a kirpan-shaped pendant or a kirpan that was made of some other material (e.g., plastic or wood), not metal. Gurbaj’s father sued, claiming his son’s rights under the Canadian Charter were violated.
The Supreme Court of Canada unanimously sided with GurbajÂ’s father, holding that, “The council of commissionersÂ’ decision prohibiting [Gurbaj] from wearing his kirpan to school infringes his freedom of religion,” as guaranteed by Section 1 of that Charter.
The Court described the importance of this specific right as applied to Gurbaj:
Religious tolerance is a very important value of Canadian society. If some students consider it unfair that [Gurbaj] may wear his kirpan to school while they are not allowed to have knives in their possession, it is incumbent on the schools to discharge their obligation to instil in their students this value that is at the very foundation of our democracy. A total prohibition against wearing a kirpan to school undermines the value of this religious symbol and sends students the message that some religious practices do not merit the same protection as others. Accommodating [Gurbaj] and allowing him to wear his kirpan under certain conditions demonstrates the importance that our society attaches to protecting freedom of religion and to showing respect for its minorities. The deleterious effects of a total prohibition… outweigh its salutary effects.
Balancing an individualÂ’s general right of conscience (manifested by religious expression or moral objection, for example) against competing considerations of the general public, such as health or safety, is a difficult and problematic exercise, one which will not result in a satisfactory outcome for all interested stakeholders.
Complicating matters is the fact that, as Dahlia Lithwick noted recently in Slate, “The right of conscience, ultimately, is a subjective one.” And, as the Supreme Court of the United States stated in addressing an individual’s refusal to receive a mandatory vaccination for smallpox:
Real liberty for all could not exist under the operation of a principle which recognizes the right of each individual person to use his own, whether in respect of his person or his property, regardless of the injury that may be done to others.
Similarly, some argued that GurbajÂ’s kirpan presents a safety threat to others in the school and that his religious beliefs, however sincerely held, do not outweigh this threat:
[GurbajÂ’s] presence at the school prompted about 30 parents to yank their children from school in protest, insisting that a kirpan was a dangerous weapon.[link]
On the other hand:
The Kirpan is an ingrained part of the Sikh religion…. The Kirpan has been an integral part of the Sikh religion since it’s early inception and has a very sacred religious symbolism for Sikhs. To suggest that it is a ‘dagger’, or a ‘weapon’ or merely a cultural symbol is both misleading and offensive to Sikhs.[link]
Gurbaj and his family should be thanked for taking this case all the way up to the Supreme Court, and for convincing that Court to hand down a decision that protects the rights of all Canadian Sikh students. Respek.
A point of personal privilege: I would like to thank the ballers at SM, particularly Sajit, for inviting me to contribute to this important substantive forum. I noticed that some of the commenters called for a female or lesbian/gay guest-blogger. I am neither, but I hope that I will able to present a unique perspective to certain issues and enrich the existing intellectual dynamic on this exceptional site. Let’s do this!
Amitabh,
I think the problem, as you’ve alluded to, is the fact that racial and religious caricatures are still regarded as being acceptable in India, both in the entertainment industry (films also do this) and in people’s everyday lives. I don’t know if in some cases it’s a matter of “mockery actually motivated by affection”, or if it’s the fact that ridicule of those who are not perceived to be in a position to defend themselves is felt to be a perfectly acceptable way to behave (and if they object, they are told to “lighten up” — although the reaction would not be so amenable if the situation was reversed, of course).
I think that this attitude is bad enough, but the situation becomes even worse and, indeed, acquires sinister overtones when people’s religious practices are also deliberately misrepresented, because it then turns into propaganda.
As you and I have discussed previously on Sikhnet (or at least you may have read my occasional comments there on the subject), it’s curious why Islamic religious practices are also not similarly distorted in such programmes — not that I think they should be, of course, but I’m drawing an analogy here. Having said that, though, in the Hindutva fantasy world that is Balaji Telefilms and the Star Plus channel, religious minority groups are all but invisible — you would think that India wasn’t actually the 2nd-largest Muslim population country in the world — and those that are portrayed, such as Sikhs, are depicted as being “Hinduised” beyond all resemblence to reality.
Perhaps they should also start doing namaaz towards Mecca 5 times a day or visit Catholic priests regularly in order to ask for “forgiveness for their sins”, for all the relevance to Sikhism these activities actually have.
Anyway, before I sound too much like some kind of fundie, let me re-iterate that my point was regarding the depiction of certain non-Sikh practices as being part of “mainstream” Sikh behaviour.
You certainly do, not that there is any thing wrong with it. The mainstream sikhs are not a homogenous bunch either. The spectrum of behaviour with them like any other group is quite wide.
This is actually true, 95% of ethnics voted against seperation. I think the Quebec thing was one of the main reasons why Trudeau decided to open up immigration in the 60s.
I have never seen Sikhs here in the UK engage in any of the aforementioned non-Sikh practices. Not even the more liberal, clean-shaven, alcohol-drinking types. I cannot speak for the US; other Sikhs here on SM are in a better position to comment, although based on previous conversations with US-based Sikhs, as far as I am aware such activities are unknown amongst Sikhs there too.
Anyway, this thread is about the Canadian kirpan issue, so I won’t expand my post any further as I don’t want the debate to get too far off-topic.
I have never seen Sikhs here in the UK engage in any of the aforementioned non-Sikh practices.
When was the last time you visited India? I attended a Kumbh Mela a few years ago and there were a MAD number of Sikhs acting like Hindus, going from shrine to shrine, and worshipping with a great deal of fervency. I am not sure what “sect” they belonged to.
but these television shows deal with Sikhs in India not Sikhs in britain or the united states. Many Sikhs in India go to Hindu temples and vice versa. I have seen many Sikhs at the Birla temple in Hyderabad. Anyways this sort of treatment is not restricted to Sikhs. As Shyam Benegal points out the entertainment industry has a tendency to do a lot of this stuff in the name of secularism. so in all bollywood movies you have Hindus running into churches {especially in Swizzerland} and making the sign of the cross, or Hindus going to the gurudwaras or Golden Temple, or Hindus going to a mosque or Muslim shrine to pray. Hinduism is tolerant in this regard and there is no problem worshipping at someone else’s place of worship but sometimes bollywood has taken it to the extreme. But hey, if you choose to believe in God, God is everywhere.
Its curious that Sikhs are shown bowing to idols (or symbols) and such, causes issue (offense) with some, while at the same time they want to defend other “symbols”.
I spend 4-6months/year in india my home is in chandigarh and it would be an eye opener for you to come and see the diversity in sikhs in punjab itself.
Jai,
My first cousin is married to a Sikh in US of A. He met her in US of A. She practises in lot of beliefs you told a Sikhi would never do in US of A.
With due respect, you should stop watching soap operas and breath some fresh air. If you are in Oregon ever, I’ll take you some funky clubs. Cultural discourse using soap opera is like discussing US of A using “Bold and Beautiful”.
Well they are free to defend their idols, the issue is not when some one says my way is better/correct. The issue is when they deny that their faith has a large number of adherents who follow it differently and this denial is something i see more in canada then india(where the diversity in culture is more obvious). I think its a leftover effect from the khalistani era. They created a more fundamental(ie homogenous) view and myth was created, even though the fight is over the effect is till there. from what i have read in some websites UK seems more like canada.
Guru Gobind Singh had 3 wives all this is doccumented and is disccussed (though not fully accepted) in punjab but not in canada. You can discuss this topic more freely in punjab than in canada. You would be threatened with voilence for discussing this over there. The %age of Sikhs in india who are liberal(as in open to discussing issues like the above mentioned case) is higher when compared to those from canada. US sikhs are a mixed bunch but i suspect that they have more in common with canadian attitudes than the punjabi attitude.
Guru Gulab Khatri:
It’s obvious that Sikhs in India grow up surrounded by Hinduism and Hindu practices/culture. For example they all know Ramayan/Mahabharat, etc. They do follow more of a composite culture. In Canada, Sikhs had the freedom to raise their kids without Hindu touches. The Canadian-born generation grows up in a non-Hindu environment; their cultural inputs are either Canadian/Western on one hand, or Sikh on the other (due to Bollywood they do get exposed to some Hindu material). So to those kids, Hindu idols, Hindu epics, Hindu temples, etc. are largely foreign. That being said, I do know some Sikh people (in the UK) who have Hindu pictures in their home, and many Sikh families do not cook beef at home even in Canada. I guess my point is, it’s natural that Sikh kids raised in Canada would have a very different orientation in regards to religion/culture than those raised in India.
Kush,
I don’t watch Indian soap operas. I know of the one I mentioned because my parents have access to the various Indian satellite channels at their house, and I’ve come across that programme and indeed a number of other shows depicting supposedly-devout Sikhs participating in religious practices divergent from core Sikh tenets, if I happen to be in the same room when one of these shows is on. You and I know may know that shows like The Bold & the Beautiful and Kesar are unrealistic portrayals of the environments they focus on, but in the case of the latter, there are people who do not know this, especially those who have little contact with real-life Sikhs and have next to no knowledge of the religion or its history, apart from possessing a vague awareness of the name of Guru Nanak (and even he hasn’t been left alone by Star Plus, God help us).
As you probably know from my various postings here on SM and especially from my 55s (and occasional tongue-in-cheek flirting with some other female SM participants), I am not exactly narrow-minded and neither am I some kind of stern “fundie”. I have said repeatedly that I am an above-average-Westernised Indian guy who tries to be a decent individual in his daily life but makes no grand claims to piety. I come to SM to broaden my mind by chatting with desis thousands of miles away, most of whom I have found to be extremely intelligent, well-informed and good-natured people (including you, as I have said on a number of previous occasions), along with engaging in some light-hearted banter as a “time-pass” and, hopefully, make some kind of positive contribution from the perspective of other participants too. I deliberately refrained from commenting too much on this thread regarding the core issue of the kirpan because, along with feeling that the major points had already been made by other Sikhs here (and I had also already posted a couple of thoughts on the parallel Pickled Politics discussion whose URL I posted here earlier), I did not want to get dragged into yet another of “those” arguments on SM which had become depressingly familiar to me since Diwali last year. As you rightly said yourself, it’s best to keep one’s participation on SM light-hearted and reasonably fun.
My thoughts regarding the depiction of Sikh religious practices in the Indian media — an irritant even to many highly liberal Sikhs here in the West, never mind about those who take their day-to-day practices of the faith far more seriously — was intended as a brief response to the commenter who stated that there is no pressure on Sikh identity whatsoever back in India. My following posts were replies to Fusion as a courtesy in response to his quick query, followed by Amitabh as I am familiar with him from the Sikhnet discussion forum and we have had friendly talks about numerous topics there already. In fact, in terms of some aspects of his personality he has more in common with you then you may realise. I mean this as a compliment.
As mentioned during the time I dropped the “Singh” from my SM handle, I’m just a normal guy living a normal semi-Westernised life in London, and have no desire or authority to be regarded as an example of “ideal” Sikh piety in the mould of someone who really is dedicated to walking in the path of Guru Nanak and Guru Gobind Singh (and the other 8 Gurus in-between). However, as far as I am concerned, Sikh religious principles are sacred and should not be distorted or deliberately misrepresented, especially in the entertainment industry.
Jai,
You should visit US, and we’ll check out some “bo*****” in Eugene and Portland. We have to be careful in SF though but Saheli will provide inside tips about the flavor of the clubs – unless………..
I know you are a liberal guy.
One of the reasons I left India, I could not stand soap operas there – you know Mahabarta and Ramayana. If I ever see an American soap opera at the dentist office, I start gagging before I am on the chair.
All of them cater to no demoninator – not even the lowest demoninator.
If I am ever in UK, I’ll look you up. I am flying to India and Pakistan in few months but these days, one uses those direct flights – from United and American with no lay over.
However, as far as I am concerned, Sikh religious principles are sacred and should not be distorted or deliberately misrepresented, especially in the entertainment industry.
So you are saying that all those Sikhs who visit Hindu temples or Muslim shrines, observe some Hindu practices are not “real” Sikhs and are distorting true Sikh teachings? And is the entertainment industry distorting it if they are merely reflecting the reality of what some Sikhs in India do? It’s not as if those characters don’t exist. Maybe some Sikhs would disagree with you that they are distorting the teachings? Sikhs aren’t exactly quiet when it comes to challenging portrayals of their religion or what they see as discrimination example: French turban controversy, kirpan controversy, Sunny Deol movie (including some violent protests), UK play. haven’t heard of any major Sikh complaints in India about their portrayal in these soaps in regard to Hindu practices. Anyways, next time i meet a Sikh in a Hindu temple i will ask them if they think they are distorting Sikh religious principles.