This article was written in September 1997 when I was in the grip of the
language used by one of the great teachers, J Krishnamurti.
Hence, most of the phrases will seem very familiar to those who have read him.
I would like to revise this article in order to more fully embrace the issue,
which can only be a futile effort perhaps. Logic is hardly the decider in
real life.
But I still think I answered most of the issues which are usually raised in
this regard somewhat logically. It is very hard to change oneself, what to
talk of changing another. Hence, do not expect to change someone by
argumentation. It is easy to gather phrases, arguments, facts, figures and
witticisms which make one look like a winner in discussions, but that is
hardly what we aim at.
On the Sikh Custom of Keeping Long Hair
Harmanjit Singh
1 Introduction
It is said that the tenth Sikh
Guru (Master), Guru Gobind Singh, the one who actually initiated the
Kh¯alsa Panth (The Pure Creed), proclaimed that any one who belonged to
the Sikh religion would at least have to wear the five K's: Ka ch¯a (A
loose underwear), Ka d¯a (A steel bangle, sometimes usable as a weapon),
Kirp¯an (a small dagger), Kangh¯a (a small comb) and K¯esh
(long hair). The diktat of long hair is said to mean that one should not cut
one's hair at all, on any part of the body. These were only the necessary
conditions; a true Sikh being one who truly followed the religious teachings (as
given in the Guru Granth Sahib, the sacred book of the Sikhs) with his
whole heart and being.
It is not the purpose of this article to debate whether the tenth Guru
actually bade Sikhs to do this. What this article attempts to do is to shed
light on the orthodoxy inherent in rituals, ceremonies and customs, especially
if they are imbued with a so-called religious flavour. In recent times, there
has been a lot of outcry by the Sikh community over what it perceives as the
blasphemous and selfish attitude of the Sikh youth, who are refusing to wear the
five K's mentioned above for various reasons. This outcry has been expressed
most significantly as logical arguments and articles published in various
journals justifying and vindicating the assumed stand of Guru Gobind Singh.
There has not been a single article to date, probably because of fear, which
discusses this problem from the standpoint of the youth. An outsider is not
allowed comment on this topic because of the widespread ``religious
intolerance.''
This article will take many arguments put forward by the Sikh community and
will try to answer them. Thus, this article could be of some help to confused
youth who are ``afraid to hurt the sentiments of their parents.''
2 Authority and Freedom
Freedom cannot exist
where there is authority. One may accept authority in technical fields such as
Electronics and Medicine. But when dealing with issues of the human mind, with
the inner urges of man, it would be a most evil thing if someone wanted to make
every man agree to himself. Each man must discover happiness and truth for
himself. To rely on another for one's happiness, howsoever great he may be, is
to live a life in which there is no discovery and creation. Truth, unless
discovered by oneself, is not truth. If one assumes or concludes, there is an
end to all enquiry and humility. And then one lives in an assumed world, without
bothering to find out what is really True.
As such, religion, being the search for Truth, is the one thing in which
there must not be any authority. And unfortunately, it is the one thing in which
authority is provided at the very beginning. One relies on what a Guru or
a book has said. Rituals and ceremonies are at best a means of social and
communal harmony, and at worst the cause of the degradation of society, when
they become substitutes for enquiry and intensity. Most of us do not seem to
have this intensity to seek the Truth for ourselves; and so, we live our lives
hoping for grace or for the coming of a messiah.
Most of us, not being concerned with the profound, live life at various
levels of superficiality. Among the many issues on which we are ever ready to
fight is the efficacy and righteousness of our own set of rituals and customs.
This process of identification and its defense are very pleasurable, for they
give a certain vitality to our own self, and because they become the means of
our assumed greatness.
3 Duty and Self-centredness
One is
guilt-ridden when one is reminded of one's ``duty'' and is asked not to be so
self-centred so as to hurt others' sentiments, particularly of those who claim
to have affection for one.
It is no measure of health to be well-adjusted to a profoundly sick society
(Krishnamurti). To sustain the social structure, to respect the dictates of
society is to continue the misery of man. To remain in bondage, and to worship
that bondage, is not to live at all. It is obvious that the world is in a
horrible mess today. Corruption, decadence, violence, wars, the building of
arsenals, terrorism, the pursuit of more and more wealth and power and the
growing insensitivity are facts which do not need exaggeration.
And in such confusion, to be told to conform to the present society is
barbarous. And most people accept this barbarity because they are afraid of
their own future, they are concerned about their own security and pleasure; and
conformity as a slow death is preferable to them than a worth-while life, in
which they may starve. A girl who does not want to have sex with her husband is
afraid of what will happen to her if she leaves him, of what society will say.
And she accepts her fate as inevitable.
So, duty has nothing to do with conformity. If this is understood, then one
can begin to find out what it is that one ought to do. But that understanding
requires tremendous intelligence, not merely an acceptance of what this article
is saying.
Freedom is not self-centredness. To be concerned with one's own desires, and
to be able to fulfill them, is not freedom. Freedom is the complete absence of
fear, nothing else.
To want or wish another to follow one's own beliefs is surely not love. And
that is what most parents wish of their children. Who is self-centred, a boy who
wants to wear his hair short, or his father, who wants him not to cut his hair?
Just because one is born in a family of so-called Sikhs, one does not have to
be that oneself. To demand another to be a Sikh is self-centredness. To seek
freedom from one's conditioning and deeply held beliefs and fears is not.
4 Conditioning and Logic
A conditioned brain
cannot think rationally. To think from a conclusion or a belief is not to learn.
Most of the advocates of the five K's are so conditioned by their own beliefs
and sentiments that they are not capable of an objective discourse on this
topic. Equally incapable of an objective discourse is one who is reacting
against the five K's, because he also is acting from his own conclusions.
Let's take, one by one, the arguments put forward by the orthodox Sikhs. Not
wearing the four K's other than hair is not frowned upon much these days.
Actually, not wearing the Kirp¯an and the Kangh¯a is very
widespread today. Most of the arguments are related, therefore, to the keeping
of long hair. It is these arguments with which we are concerned. Emotional pleas
and, in this case, the motive behind them, have been discussed earlier.
4.1 The argument from Nature
``To have
hair is natural for man and for woman. It must have some functionality, even if
our limited intellect cannot see it. The function of many glands is not known,
but even then we do not have them operated out of our body. So, keep hair.''
If being natural, in this case, means accepting the primal form of one's
own body, then it is equally natural to have long nails and to remain nude
even in winter. Naturalness is not a justification of anything. Human beings
are made to have intelligence. They are not animals who cannot think for
themselves and so are forced to accept ``nature''.
So, the best thing would be to experiment: by cutting the hair and seeing
the effects, if any. If what is meant is that the intellect is so limited that
it by nature cannot find out the significance of long hair, then it really
means that the significance is on another plane, at best, and so is
unimportant on the plane we live.
The reason why we do not put the glands out of our body is because we do
not feel any discomfort due to them. If a person feels discomfort due to his
long hair, he is surely free to cut them short.
4.2 The Argument from Gender
``It is
manly to have a moustache and a full flowing beard. For a man, it is good to be
manly. It is bad to look like a woman when you are a man, so Don't Shave.''
Though it is true that women do not have hair on their face (in general)
and that it would probably be good if there were some means of differentiating
males from females in the social context (though it requires further
discussion), it is equally true that one very rarely mistakes a clean shaven
man for a woman. The clothes sufficiently differentiate between a man and a
woman. Also, there is no need in this case, for a beard (what to say of a
full-flowing one), unless one wants, for some reason, to differentiate people
a kilometre away. What is needed is a sufficient means of
distinguishing, and anything more than that is a matter of personal choice.
One can try to enhance one's sexuality by one's clothes and through the use of
various perfumes as well as by exhibiting the most striking dissimilarity of
them all, but surely all that is superfluous for this purpose.
Actually, long hair are a socially prevalent characteristic of women.
Hence, this argument cleverly does not mention hair at all.
4.3 The Argument from Sacrifice
``Guru
Gobind Singh and his sons died to protect their hair. You are so mean as to
discredit that sacrifice for your trivial reasons. Hence, Keep Hair.''
Guru Gobind Singh and his sons fought for freedom, of which their newly
established customs were a symbol. Today also, one must seek freedom, which
may mean defying one's parents or the clergy. Freedom may have a different
symbol in different contexts. It would be considered some kind of freedom in
the erstwhile USSR to be able to believe in God, and public expression of
atheism would be considered the same kind of freedom in a Christian society.
It is freedom which is important, and not a particular symbol.
A great many people have given up their lives for a cause. Many have died
to protect an unjust regime, for example. Sacrifice proves the commitment of a
man; it does not obligate another to be committed to the same cause. Though,
frequently, it does inspire one to do so.
4.4 The Argument from Discipline
``It is
good to live a disciplined life. It is a test of discipline that you can keep
long hair and can take care of them. Hence, Keep Hair.''
No doubt, a life of effortless order is a sign of health. But discipline,
which is enforced by oneself or by another, does not imply a free mind. Order
is not discipline. A slave is disciplined, but his world is in disorder.
Discipline does not mean arbitrary rules. The rules must have some
validity and usefulness in daily life. It would be an equally good test to
keep long nails, for example.
4.5 The Argument from Culture
``You will
be alienating yourself from your culture. You will not be welcome in most social
gatherings. Symbols like these keep a society tightly together and one can
easily identify outwardly with others in the same society. Hence, keep Your
Hair.''
If the culture contains something I don't like, I must have the freedom to
change it for myself. And I must then face the consequences, whatever they may
be.
It is true that harmony in society is a worthy goal, but this goal must
not mean compromising on personal freedom. Society exists for the individual.
But, today's society, which is the centuries of customs and prejudices, is
crushing the individual. The individual then no longer is. Giving significance
to outward symbols as a means of social harmony is fraught with dependance and
conflict. If others respect some trait, it does not mean that I am obligated
to have that trait. And also, I must then face disrespect or disrepute. To say
that society should not then frown upon me is irresponsible. One must respect
others' freedom as strongly as one does one's own.
I feel sorry for people who will judge me by how I wear my hair. To judge
another person is brutal. And to judge by such trivial signs is downright
stupid.
If individuals do not change, society will never change. Culture will not
change by itself. A conformist, who is afraid of public opinion, can never
bring about the ending of anything.
4.6 The Argument from Armed
Readiness
``Guru Gobind Singh gave this uniform of five K's to the Sikhs
so that they could have the physical discipline and uniformity required in an
armed conflict with an aggressor. You have shown yourself incapable of this
discipline and unmindful of the safety of the society.''
Though an armed threat to society is not unimaginable today, seeing the
fragile state of the world, preparing for war can only lead to war. It is true
that uniforms and enforced discipline lead to a quality of obedience and
outward order, which is very useful in an armed conflict, such discipline does
the far greater harm of stultifying the mind of an individual. One can then
act as a good machine, but one is no longer a creative and happy human being.
One must ask the deeper question of why there is a threat at all? Isn't it
because the cultures and men are separated and hostile? If so, isn't the
significance given to outward symbols and rituals one of the prime causes of
this separation? If something ties me and my friend together, it necessarily
divides the two of us from the rest of the world. We cannot merely be thinking
of our ``own'' people, if we are fully responsible, we will embrace the whole
world as one family. But we don't do that because we expect the world to do
that first. We expect someone else to come and make us brothers. This is not
being responsible. To change the world, one must change oneself.
4.7 The Argument from Experience
``We
are more experienced than you. We also thought like you at your age. But now, we
are wiser. And now, we think people like you should not cut their hair.''
This is really an argument based on the authority of age and experience.
Wisdom, of all things, has no element of authority. Humility is part of
wisdom. Though, it would be dangerous to mistake an expression of humility for
wisdom. So can one ever advise another? One can only inform
truthfully. The rest is to be left for the other.
Is there a rational basis for your opinions or are you just tired of the
``alienation of society'', among other things?
People of all ages want to look good, but it is perhaps more insistent in
the case of youth. Looking good so that others may have a good opinion of
oneself is a petty way of manipulating dumb people. But there are some to whom
beauty and grace come naturally, and who want to look good for its own sake
and not to achieve something else. To thwart this sensitivity is not healthy.
You were wrong then, as you say now. You may be wrong now, which you may
realize later. Must I move with your whims? Is it not for you, rather, to
understand your own compulsions?
4.8 The Argument from Habit
``You will
soon get used to long hair, though you may be feeling a little pain at present.
Be patient and don't do anything hasty.''
A similar argument may be used for slave labourers or to child
workers. If this means that there is some long-term gain for some
pain in the short term, then it has to be specified what the long term gain
is. If that is just being "normal" and "acceptable", then that may or
may not be important to the person in question.
Obviously, pain and its acceptance over a long time will make one
insensitive. Insensitivity does not make for a healthy mind. It is
rather evident that the upkeep of long hair takes more time and effort than
that of short hair. Over time, one can get used to that kind of wastage.
5 Epilogue
Does this article seem
utilititarian in nature? Does this ignore "love for one's religion"?
Oh yes. Because to command another to love something which one loves
oneself is ... self-love.
Most of the adult people are afraid of losing their respectability in this
corrupt society. It is the youth, who have among them ones who are still
sensitive and intelligent, who have to build a new world. This issue is just a
hint of what lies far beyond, where authority in all its deceptions is really
seen to be the evil thing that it is.
Life is not to be lived in conformity. It is only the few who live without
fear, and so in freedom, who really live. Rest of us just decay and die.
