Kids Corner

Above: Dya Singh cools off in a spring in the jungles of Malaysia - when his legs were still untouched. Photo by T. Sher Singh

Roundtable

Dya Singh: Ruminations of A Hirsute Minstrel

by DYA SINGH

 

 

The following article constitutes the topic for this week's Roundtable Open Forum # 66.

 

Sunday, the first day of May, was the first day I took off the rather bulky heavy bandage to give my 'wounded' leg some air and also peruse the 'wounds' of surgery. After all it is invasive surgery.

The wounds look 'healthy' and there no unnecessary swellings or smells. But what revolted me was ... my leg from thigh down had been shaved. It was 'bald'! 

I had forgotten that the surgery staff would shave the knee for surgery as my permission had been sought, but what I did not expect was to have the whole leg shaved from the thigh down! The sight absolutely revolted me. It embarrassed me. I felt ... violated.

What is the big deal, we might all ask - even I - and I was surprised as to how much it affected me. I do have quite nice legs, if I may say so, but to see one of them shaved was disgusting! I found myself bandaging it up quickly before someone else saw it! It felt like being stripped naked!

I was astonished as to how embarrassed I felt!

Why this horrible feeling? Was it to do with some gene passed down from my Sikh elders and ancestors about unshorn hair? If that was the case, then why don't those from staunch Sikh backgrounds, who cut their hair and shave, feel the same way that I did? (I hear of 'metro-sexual' men who even shave their chests, backs, armpits, ear-holes, nostrils, other private parts, legs - all hair wherever they see it! And let's not get into the topic of what parts of their anatomy some women shave!)

How are they happily able to attempt to look like the majority around them and hopefully assimmilate into the 'mainstream' when I had so much of difficulty with one temporarily shaved leg? And that is not so because I am more religious than them. In fact some of them are my more enthusiastic supporters in my kirtan than those who claim a greater degree of religiosity by being fully keshadhari and amritdhari!

At the same time, as all of that was galloping through my mind, Menjit (my close friend in Malaysia) put in front of me, the latest magazine from the Naujawan Sabha Malaysia. I picked it up absent-mindedly and flicked through it. An article by I.J. Singh from New York caught my eye and suddenly I had a few answers.

The article was not directly related to my quandary but it had the answers.

We do live in a logical, scientific world in which we know that there is no real logical, scientific or marketable reason for long hair - then why my pre-occupation with it as a Sikh? In my days doing Sikh youth camps and interacting with our youth, we quoted examples like Samson of Biblical fame and the strength of his hair and so on, but even I never really ever convinced myself of such 'logical' reasoning.

My main reason for being keshadhari was because my spiritual Father, Guru Gobind Singh, who I admire very much, said so, and that gave me my membership into the Sikh family which I am very proud of.

But I.J.'s article provided some interesting insights. So I am unashamedly going to quote it quite copiously...

(IJ Singh's quotes are italicised. The underlining is mine)

Firstly, Religion deals with a reality that the senses cannot perceive and the intellect cannot fathom, yet with which the soul can commune. At that point is the awareness that one is in the domain of faith.

It makes a very interesting differentiation between 'faith' and 'belief'.

In belief someone else does the thinking for you. In faith you accept the truth not at someone else's say so, but because you have internalised it and endorsed it. Belief can mature into faith. From belief comes dependency but from faith comes strength. Remember that the dimension of faith is not that of science. 

True! I derive strength from my Sikhi. I live it as best as I can. In fact for me, my Sikhi is not only the religion I was born in but it also permeates through my 'culture'. In western countries, for example, when they talk of culture, they try very hard to leave religion out of it. I have difficulty with that because my religion is very much the key to my 'culture' too. (I do not wish to split hairs here on 'religion' and 'faith' and 'way of life', etc.)

India has produced many new religions like Jainism, Buddhism and Sikhism. Amongst these, only Sikhism remains as a distinct identity; others have reverted into the uneasy but comforting fold of Hinduism ... Sikhism too has lost some of its lustre and much of its pristine purity by its constant brushing with Hinduism.

If Sikhism has not been absorbed into the Hindu fold, it is not for want of trying by Hinduism, but due to two reasons. 1. Its distinct philosophy which is at odds with and bluntly scornful of many Hindu practices ..., and 2. The distinct external symbols which set the Sikhs apart in appearance and behaviour.

The most visible aspect of Sikh tradition and the most controversial are the external symbols. Not surprisingly, they generate the most intense internal debate and external concern  (and scorn).

I.J. then goes on to discuss our five 'K's' and of course our turban and hair. The main element is hair and not the turban which is tradition really but imposed by Guru Gobind Singh.

The long hair strictly symbolic, with no pragmatic use or value in the market place remains the centrepiece of Sikh identity. I do not know if Guru Gobind Singh so intended, but in the subconscious dimension of their being, the Sikhs have somehow created a hierarchy of these symbols - the long unshorn hair have come to occupy the highest position.

A Sikh historically and now, declares his presence by this gift of his Guru ... no matter how Sikhs change and what demands are placed upon them, as long as there are those who call themselves Sikhs, there will be long haired Sikhs in the form that Guru Gobind Singh gave them. 

It can be one man's comfort and inspiration as easily as another's jest and scorn.

Thus ends I.J.'s article.

I saw Bhai Taru Singh's 'khopri lehauni' and 'bandh bandh kattvaye, khopriaan lehaiyan' in a new light. I felt one with all of them. That was, and is 'my family' and hair is a natural part of my psyche and being, notwithstanding what anyone else says. I stand with pride in front of my 'turbanned' ten Gurus, and even though I might sometimes allow my human weaknesses to fall below the measuring bar of 'amrit sanchar', I know I belong to that family (Sikhism) - and proud of it.

The hair on my shaved leg will grow and I shall be able to display it proudly one day, but deep down I know a little better where I stand as a Sikh.

Footnote: For those interested - No, I shall not be taking 'amrit' again because of my shaved leg. I believe 'amrit' once taken does not break. A 'Sikh' can have moments of weakness and misdemeanours, but 'amrit' once taken should be considered as a 'rite of passage into responsible-hood for one self'.

I believe strongly that 'amrit' must be taken by a Sikh 'once' in his or her life time. To shirk that responsibility by self-admitting that 'I will not be able to maintain it' is a miserable cop-out which in my mind is irresponsible and self-defeating. To those who administer 'amrit' all I can say is - stick to the necessary requirements and try not to make it unachievable and beyond the reach of the ordinary Sikh youngster.

To Sikh youngsters who wish to know my own private views about 'amrit', feel free to write to me personally. I will be happy to respond to you, but write to me only if you are considering taking amrit - otherwise you will be wasting my time and yours.

POINTS TO PONDER

We would love to hear from our readers as part of this week's Roundtable Open Forum. 

What are your thoughts on the issues raised by both Dya Singh and Dr. I.J. Singh?

 

May 24, 2011

 

Conversation about this article

1: Devinder Singh (India), May 24, 2011, 10:11 AM.

Both amrit and unshorn hair are 'identity' issues that are settled more or less for you as children. Born into an amritdhari family, you take amrit. Born into a mona household, you do not place too much premium on unshorn hair. A Christian is 'born again' when he is baptized with water and 'blood'. I baptize you with water, said John the Baptist, where he was dunking people into the river Jordan. Amrit is just a ceremony, just as baptism with 'blood' at the church is. Baptism with spirit is what matters. Our preachers waste columns on identity issues that have emotional appeal but are not the sole relevant part of Sikhi. I am being consciously provocative to draw reasoned responses. Can we get down to the business of leading good lives? That is the proper business for preachers.

2: Balkar Singh (Italy), May 24, 2011, 6:31 PM.

Sooner or later, most of us will be confronted with such a situation. Thank you for sharing it with us so vividly. I know it has taken a lot of courage on your part to write this piece, being a "raagi", albeit a new-age one, and a solid Sikh. And a million thanks to sikhchic.com for connecting us all across the continents: Just look at the miracle you perform! Dya Singh is in Australia, writing about his recent experience in Malaysia. He cites I.J. Singh's recent piece, posted from the U.S. And I, here in Italy, get to learn from you ... courtesy sikhchic.com, ensconced somewhere in Canada! How many continents does that cover?

3: I.J. Singh (New York, U.S.A.), May 24, 2011, 8:51 PM.

Balkar Singh ji, it really is an amazingly connected and wired world now - a true village. How things have changed; mindboggling yet inspiring! Incidentally, the essay from which Dya Singh so generously cited is an old one; it is from my first book of essays published a good 15 years ago.

4: Nirmal Singh Nilvi (Texas, U.S.A.), May 25, 2011, 9:22 AM.

I am like Devinder Singh ji when he says "Can we get down to the business of leading good lives?" I also feel and admire the miraculous aspects of life in 2011, that Balkar ji thoughtfully added and I.J. Singh ji endorsed. The rest, I believe, is up to each one of us to choose and decide. I truly hope, sooner or later, we shall get to that stage. Each religion preaches this, we simply ignore it in practice, and the beat goes on. I plan to remain religious; but often find atheists demonstrating more respect to individual choices than religious minds and in complete disregard of their faith's canons. Religion becomes inspiring when spoken (not preached) without that obsession (preaching). Prophets did a good job in compiling scriptures for us to internalize and practice faith tenets. That is a heck of a task and a burden for an individual to carry in one life. We need to hold the preachers' feet to the fire and slow them from unloading their burden till they demonstrate their preaching being in sync with practice in their lives; before letting them continue making a nice living on our dimes.

5: G. Singh (U.S.A.), May 25, 2011, 3:43 PM.

I don't know what the term 'scientific' means in the spiritual realm, but the logic for hair is definitely there. We also keep believing that unshorn hair was made part of Sikh identity by Guru Gobind Singh. I disagree! Unshorn hair has been part of the Sikh identity from earlier days and the reason for it is also found within gurbani. Perhaps that could be our conversation piece for the next Talking Stick. Gurbani gives us directions to find Him. He is not outside but inside. If we keep that in mind, then the purpose of hair becomes obvious. The difficult part is living according to Guru's teachings! "har ma(n)dhar har jeeo saajiaa maerae laal jeeo har this mehi rehiaa samaaeae raam ||" - "The Dear Lord has fashioned the body as the temple of the Lord, O my dear beloveds; the Lord continues to dwell there."

6: I.J. Singh (New York, U.S.A.), May 25, 2011, 8:55 PM.

With G. Singh, I too am confused by the label "scientific" in the context of spiritual matters. Science serves to decode the laws by which life and creation operate. It can help me construct a nuclear bomb; it can tell me how to conduct experiments in genetic engineering. Should I make the nuclear weapon or not or when should I use it, or if at all, well, that is not for science to say. It can tell me what the cost of constructing and using it would be in terms of life on Earth but not if I should do it or not. Similarly for cloning or terminating a pregnancy. Should I use scientific technology or not and when I should use it is not in the domain of science but is an issue of Ethics. And that's where religion and spirituality should come in. Religious beliefs need to be logical, internally consistent and hue to both commonsense and scientific views of the world. Scientific "truths" too need to be internally consistent and logical; they also need to be demonstrable by evidence (like evolution) if not entirely replicable. Yet these scientific truths are tentatively held. To me religion and science are not enemies but complementary, like two sides of a coin. This is a fascinating issue and I have a longish essay along these lines on this site that readers are welcome to peruse and critique.

7: Dya Singh (Melbourne, Australia), May 26, 2011, 12:15 AM.

Thank you, T. Sher Singh ji. You encourage me to continue writing! I.J. Singh ji's writings are an inspiration and shall be relevant for a very long time, especially for English-reading/ speaking Sikhs. I am also encouraged by the readers' responses. Now well into the 21st century, we need to look 'outside the box' and perhaps make Sikhi of greater relevance to our youth and future generations. It is always refreshing to log onto sikhchic.com.

8: Prakash Singh Bagga (India), May 26, 2011, 2:03 AM.

There is a need for critically understanding the concept of creation of the Khalsa by Guru Gobind Singh.

9: Brijinder Singh (New York, U.S.A.), May 27, 2011, 12:59 PM.

I would like to know what is the meaning of 'Amrit', beyond the initiation into the Khalsa. Will drinking it make me a better person, and will I feel any different after I drink it? If we are allowed to re-take Amrit, does that in any way diminish its significance? Also, I am intrigued by I.J. Singh ji's statement: "The long hair strictly symbolic, with no pragmatic use or value in the market place remains the centrepiece of Sikh identity." I am sure there is a reason why Guru Gobind Singh gave us long hair. If it was merely to solidify our external identity, then there are other means by which we can distinguish ourselves. I have my own views on this matter, which involve the much discussed Hukam and Haumai. However, I was wondering if I correctly ascertained the gist of what I.J. Singh ji has said.

10: Prakash Singh Bagga (India), May 27, 2011, 1:23 PM.

I think that the actual reference for the process of initiation into Khalsa is "Khande-di-Pahul". Its being referred to as Amrit is a much later development.

11: I.J. Singh (New York, U.S.A.), May 27, 2011, 3:47 PM.

Brijender above raises some interesting questions about the critically important symbolic value of our articles of faith rather than their standing in the market place. It is a longer consideration and I have an essay on how the relative place of each may have changed over time. The essay represents my limited view of history on such matters that in reality are transcendent. Do send me a note on ijsingh99@gmail.com and I'll be happy to send two essays by email. They are from my first book, "SIKHS & SIKHISM: A View with a Bias."

Comment on "Dya Singh: Ruminations of A Hirsute Minstrel"









To help us distinguish between comments submitted by individuals and those automatically entered by software robots, please complete the following.

Please note: your email address will not be shown on the site, this is for contact and follow-up purposes only. All information will be handled in accordance with our Privacy Policy. Sikhchic reserves the right to edit or remove content at any time.