humanist
SPNer
French Government’s Misunderstanding of the Term ‘Religious Symbols’
Apropos the case filed by certain students in France regarding the controversy about the wearing of ‘patkas’ or turbans or ‘chunnis’, a convincing ‘legal ground’ (argument) may run as under:-
With regard to the above issue the Sikh religion does not prescribe any religious symbols—it is the other way round.
Homo sapiens are born with certain corporeal attributes—which include, inter alia, the hair on the scalp and around the chin. A human, being in his holistic form, cannot be called a “religious symbol” because, by definition, a symbol is either an ‘add-on’ or a ‘shear-off’, e.g. the circumcision by the Muslim males and shearing of hair by certain religious denominations—nay, no religion in the world explicitly prescribes the shearing of the hair; even the Hindu gods, like Lord Rama & Lord Krishna (and even the Hindu ‘rishis’) are depicted in the pictures as wearing the hair in its Natural length.
Hence, it is the non-Sikhs who have created “religious symbols”, if any, with regard to the objects in issue (controversy).
As far as the wearing of patkas goes, it is a way of keeping the hair kempt—one way of doing so is shearing the hair. No one way is better than the other— either medically or in civility; however, spiritually it can be demonstrated that long hair act as the ethereal antennae and, therefore, most of the renowned thinkers (philosopher & scientists) chose, and continue to choose, to wear long hair. Hence, the Sikh Gurus, too, favoured the wearing of the hair in its natural length.
Thus, long hair does not fall within the ambit of the term “religious symbols”, nor does the way it is being kept kempt—to treat it otherwise is not only unjust, unreasonable, irrational, unfair and a gross miscarriage of justice, but also warrants a class-action under the International Law before the International Court of Justice on the ground of injury by the State to the Basic Human Rights of the Sikhs who are citizens of France.
Prof. Gulshan Bajwa
N.B.: I am sad to inform that immediately after the above controversy appeared on the Internet and before the French Court's verdict, I had sent this Article to a sikhsite (namely, sikhnet.com)-- who unfortunately refused to publish it. Thereafter, I requested its moderators to at least intimate its contents to the Ld. Counsels for the Sikh boys whose case was coming up for arguments in the said Court. Alas! They did not do so in time-- belatedly, the French Sikh 'jatha' (at present in Delhi) is now veering round to calling 'turban' as a "natural dress" of the Sikhs!
Apropos the case filed by certain students in France regarding the controversy about the wearing of ‘patkas’ or turbans or ‘chunnis’, a convincing ‘legal ground’ (argument) may run as under:-
With regard to the above issue the Sikh religion does not prescribe any religious symbols—it is the other way round.
Homo sapiens are born with certain corporeal attributes—which include, inter alia, the hair on the scalp and around the chin. A human, being in his holistic form, cannot be called a “religious symbol” because, by definition, a symbol is either an ‘add-on’ or a ‘shear-off’, e.g. the circumcision by the Muslim males and shearing of hair by certain religious denominations—nay, no religion in the world explicitly prescribes the shearing of the hair; even the Hindu gods, like Lord Rama & Lord Krishna (and even the Hindu ‘rishis’) are depicted in the pictures as wearing the hair in its Natural length.
Hence, it is the non-Sikhs who have created “religious symbols”, if any, with regard to the objects in issue (controversy).
As far as the wearing of patkas goes, it is a way of keeping the hair kempt—one way of doing so is shearing the hair. No one way is better than the other— either medically or in civility; however, spiritually it can be demonstrated that long hair act as the ethereal antennae and, therefore, most of the renowned thinkers (philosopher & scientists) chose, and continue to choose, to wear long hair. Hence, the Sikh Gurus, too, favoured the wearing of the hair in its natural length.
Thus, long hair does not fall within the ambit of the term “religious symbols”, nor does the way it is being kept kempt—to treat it otherwise is not only unjust, unreasonable, irrational, unfair and a gross miscarriage of justice, but also warrants a class-action under the International Law before the International Court of Justice on the ground of injury by the State to the Basic Human Rights of the Sikhs who are citizens of France.
Prof. Gulshan Bajwa
N.B.: I am sad to inform that immediately after the above controversy appeared on the Internet and before the French Court's verdict, I had sent this Article to a sikhsite (namely, sikhnet.com)-- who unfortunately refused to publish it. Thereafter, I requested its moderators to at least intimate its contents to the Ld. Counsels for the Sikh boys whose case was coming up for arguments in the said Court. Alas! They did not do so in time-- belatedly, the French Sikh 'jatha' (at present in Delhi) is now veering round to calling 'turban' as a "natural dress" of the Sikhs!
