santsevak

Saadh Sangat ji, I have a few questions about gurbani teachings. What does the bani that is given to us by our gurus say about science, physics and mathematics? Are sikhs instructed to pursue and gain knowledge and try to understand the universe around us (physics, math, chemistry, biology, etc.)? Or are Sikhs instructed to only focus on naam japna and not purse other topics? Also, (I am not well versed in gurbani yet, but I am learning) I have had many instances where if I ask a supposedly learned person about meaning of gurbani, the person just quotes some other passages from the bani as an explanation. It turns into some sort of cyclical definition. Instead, I expect the person to explain gurbani in a different language, perhaps modern gurmukhi. What is even more concerning to me is if one persists to ask for explanations by rephrasing in non-bani vocabulary, the person usually gets impatient, as if we are not supposed to question anytime a somebody quotes from the Sri Guru Granth Sahib. Charki Kala.

Sat Sri Akal, I am doing some background research on finding different choices to setup a digital flat screen display in a gurdwara which will greet the sangat as they enter. The objective is to display the daily vaak. At present, the one method I know about is to have a computer hooked up to a flat screen display with the display mounted on the wall and set up as a second display. With that, we can display the vaak using Sikhi to The Max II software. However, this requires one dedicated computer, a display with the computer and the large display to be mounted on the wall. I wonder if the hardware can be reduced while having a versatile system. Besides, I am not comfortable displaying the same text on screen for long periods of time since it may cause burning of those pixels. Can others share if they different or better idea on how approach this? Chardi kala.

What's wrong in migrants working in the Punjab? It is a free democratic country. Even if it were not, the practice would nevertheless be in conformance with Sikhi values. This kind of xenophobia is only spread by racists, independent of geographical location. You can replace "Punjab" with any other place and "migrants from Bihar" with any group of people and you have the most common form of racism. Also, why should migrants and Hindu's fear Sikhs? This misguided sensationalist and extremist view is what is one main thing wrong with some "Sikhs". In Sikh religion, all religions are accorded equal respect. One of our own gurus gave his life for the right of people to practice religion of their own free choice! If we have not learned anything even from that historic sacrifice, then we have failed as Sikhs, no matter how many paaths we do or how long our beard is or how sharp our shastar is. All these symbols just show hypocrisy if we haven't learned the lessons in our hearts and minds.

Totally agree (regarding decline of culture and language). It is as if there is no more pride in being a Punjabi anymore, no more pride in our history and culture. These things can be of immense value as an experience and in identification with each other. But please be under no impression that Punjabi culture and language is any safer abroad here. Very often I notice this "holier than thou" attitude in Sikhs living outside the Punjab in the sense that they are maintaining their culture and language better than the ones in Punjab. But this not true practically. ਪਹਿਲਾਂ ਸਾਨੂੰ ਆਪ ਮਹਿਨਤ ਅਤੇ ਯਤਨ ਕਰਨੇ ਚਾਹੀਦੇ ਹਨ ਪੰਜਾਬੀ ਵਿਰਸੇ ਅਤੇ ਭਾਸ਼ਾ ਨੂੰ ਕਾਇਮ ਰੱਖਣ ਲਈ, ਫ਼ੇਰ ਦੂਜਿਆਂ ਨੂੰ ਸਿੱਖਿਆ ਦੇਣੀ ਚਾਹੀਦੀ ਹੈ। Okay, be honest, how many of all the Sikhs here, who are in Europe and NA, can speak, read, write *and* type Punjabi properly? There is one more thing. I have noticed another practice amongs Punjabis living abroad. They try to freeze their culture and its knowledge to the levels which they had when they left the Punjab. That is just not practical. Cultures and languages change and evolve. I have not noticed as much corruption in Punjabi language as among Sikhs and Punjabis aboard. They usually belong to a rural demography who did not formally learn Punjabi in schools back in India or even abroad and have since then taught their street Punjabi to their children. Example: most of the Punjabis I have met abroad say "ਸ਼ੇ" instead of the correct word "ਛੇ" (meaning "six"), or say "ਬਿਆਹ" instead of the correct word "ਵਿਆਹ" (meaning "wedding"). When I try to correct them, they usually are in denial or just refuse to accept the correction. What is the effect? They try to freeze their spoken and written language to "preserve" their culture, while actually corrupting it to no end and thus causing more damage to the language!

I agree regarding the social and economic influences on Sikhs cutting their hair. I am glad you have mentioned rational explanations and accepted that there is indeed a problem and that today's Sikhs are diluting what it means to be a Sikh. Only The Punjab and Haryana High Court come to our rescue when it reminding us recently what trimming of hair means to Sikhs! Even before the onset of globalization and universal TV channels promoting popular hero images in which trimmed Sikhs were the ones shown to be glamorous (the common term used is cut-serds in India). Even before that, trimming and cutting of beard and kesh was rampant in people of rural background, jamindaars and workers like (but they weren't the only ones, mind it). IIRC, the justification at that time was that it was inconvenient to maintain their hair in harsh working conditions of the fields. See where this is going? This has led to others finding excuses as well, after all, if one group can justify it and get away with it, why cannot others? I am not sure how familiar you are with Punjabi culture, I am, and I can attest to it that in today's Punjab, trimming or cutting of hair among the youth is actually considered as a great and heroic deed among their peers! There is another social insight that you probably are not aware of. The question of popularity of Turban. It is getting popular for two main reasons: its glamor in movies and the fact that it is considered as a fashion statement. This mind set needs to change. It is very sad that youth are not appreciating other youth who have steadfast belief in their faiths, who do not trim their hair and wear Turbans not solely for fashion but as a sign of their faith. In my view, the following things need to be done: 1. Sikh youth must be taught to focus on education, especially in the Punjab, professional as well as about origins and teachings of Sikhism. 2. Our leaders must stop playing politics and come out against trimming of beards and hair of kesh (why did the High Court have to intervene and clarify all of this?). One reason they (especially the ones in the Europe and NA) are not vocal about it is for the fear of losing sangat in the gurdwaras and losing the money offered (ਚਡ਼੍ਹਾਵਾ). 3. Our gurdwara leadership must stop all the hypocritical non-sense that is common these days. It must teach, *while* practicing, the fundamentals and teaching of Sikhism. This means, creating leading examples for the next generation, not just preaching to others with holier than thou attitude. 4. Most important, Sikh fundamentals must be followed, including, but not limited to, the following. One universal God, belief in the teaching of our gurus and SSGS, all humans are created equal and have equal rights, no sexism, casteism must end (we are not Hindus, are we!), and respect for all religions of the world. ਚਡ਼੍ਹਦੀ ਕਲਾ।

While keeping in mind the definition of a Sikh that you just posted? 1. An increase in a trend does not mean that the total percentage has changed from minority to a majority. Example: % turbaned Sikhs: 20 in 2008, 21 in 2009. The trend shows increase, but the total percentage is still small. 2. Turbaned Sikh is different than one who does not trim his beard. But without the news source, it is difficult to understand what it was about. I tried but could not find the news article. But if this is true, I am really glad ... but it is no indication of being out of the woods yet. BTW, are you in the Punjab? I gave a link in an earlier post today. The biggest proof for me will be when I see our youth not trimming their kesh anymore or when I see that people away from the Punjab do not do away with their kesh and turbans for any excuses. That is the only proof that I can accept. ਚਡ਼੍ਹਦੀ ਕਲਾ।

Thank you for these. Much appreciated. Thank you for these also. I am quite interested in Bagdad references, I appreciate bringing my attention to these. I will check our gurdwara library to see if they have any relevant books. I already mentioned the practice how we, believing in the Sikh religion, are wearing our Kesh. So based on the definitions from the times of Sikh origins, can we say that Sikhs number only a tiny fraction of the people from Sikh background? This is taking into account that 70~80% of Sikhs in Punjab are trimming their beards and mostly all of those who are abroad do so.

I am glad you are now paying attention to proper usage of my words. I will put this a bit more specifically. By definition, you are probably thinking about Amritdhari Sikh, Patit Sikh and Sehajdhari Sikh (more to come further below). Various important Sikh organizations have defined these terms. It is quite easy to find it on the web, here is one link: http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Patit and you are probably thinking about the main kurahits as well: "(1) trimming or shaving of hair, (2) eating kuttha or halal meat, i.e. flesh of bird or animal slaughtered in the Muslim`s way; (3) sexual contact with a woman or man other than one`s own wife or husband; and (4) the use of tobacco in any form." (there, that by itself shrinks the number of Sikhs to negligible levels!). And just to raise the stakes, SGPC also has this term Keshdhari Sikhs when it is related to the question who can vote in SGPC elections. That is all well and good. But recall that I had used the words like "now" or "present times" or "nowadays". It is not uncommon to see Sikh background youth getting married in Gurdwaras abroad when they support a nominal beard during the ceremony and shave it all off before the afternoon is over after the phere. Yet the couple is called a gursikh couple. Again, I am not saying how it was in the olden times, what I am stressing is that these days the general use of the work Sikh encompasses all these cases. I am not happy with it, but it is there. It is a fact. All my friends, many from rural Punjab, call themselves Sikhs in the census yet support no beard or a turban. You are right in the relationship of a beard and a Sikh as was original intentioned, but nowadays that it is all changing. What was a "must" then has become optional today. Hence why I used the word "should". It was not reflecting what was the practical situation some hundred years ago, but what it is now, today. How many patit or sehajdhari Sikhs have you met that haven't called themselves Sikhs? Try asking whoever is beside or near you right now. The best recent news I have had about this affair was by the Punjab and Haryana High Court which stated that people with unshorn hair are not Sikhs. It was a wonderful news. Unfortunately, it appears to have done absolutely nothing to curb the ongoing trends of beard and kesh trimming. And, besides, this ruling has no implication for Sikhs abroad for obvious reasons. But what was the result of the ruling? The students seeking admissions to Sikhs institutions (engg. medical, etc.) in the Punjab supported their beard for some months till the interviews and admission, and after that the business was back to the usual. Yet they are all called Sikh in daily life. Also noteworthy is the fact that SGPC itself did not really define a Sikh that way (http://www.nriinternet.com/NRIsikhs/SAHAJDHARI_SIKHS/2008/5_Mattewal_Tribune.htm, very good read). Regarding Guru =?= God, please take it up with these guys: http://www.gurmat.info/sms/smssikhism/gurus/ (based on the statistics given here , a Sikh with full beard and a turban is a minority in the Punjab!), or with these http://www.sgpc.net/gurus/gurunanak.asp. From the latter: "Nanak was an extra-ordinary and different child in many ways. God provided him with contemplative mind and rational thinking. " and also "God is Formless (Nirankar), the Sole, the Creator, the self-existent." I may not be a learned person in Sikh theology, but these guys are the authority, chosen by the Sikh sangat themselves! I learn from them many things. Therefore, I kindly request you to read these links. If you believe their information is wrong, it would be great if you can point it out to them and to have it corrected. Again, I am not going back to the "equality" of religions and their followers' rights, try as hard as you might, this is has already been discussed. ਚਡ਼੍ਹਦੀ ਕਲਾ।

" "(I am not sure the last line makes any sense, probably a messed up typo) You are conflating two different issues here. The latter I have already dealt with above. The former: numbers are used by politicians, not the other way around. If I say that vast majority of Sikh youth is cutting their Kesh, I am stating that based on my own observations. Do you disagree with this? These is the only context I have used numbers in. Quote me where I used them in any other context. Where did I say that Gurbani says that Sikhs can cut hair? In your other comments, you are now just beating a dead horse. I will respond for all those together below. In, short, here are the points that I have been discussing. First is that the current state of Sikhi is so diluted, that cutting of kesh has become a norm, go see any area in the Punjab, or go see any group of Sikh youths abroad (others have explained what is ideally required, and I accept that) ... a state which is extremely sad and unfortunate, but true. Second was regarding the equality of all religions in terms of their follower's rights (already resolved from others' inputs). Third was regarding the formlessness and life-cycle-independence of God. This last point is still unresolved to me. Others have posted pangtis that they say mean that Gurus were God. But there are clear pangtis that God has no shape and is limitless and free from life cycles. I am not saying any pangtis are wrong (as you are trying to imply), I am looking for resolution that puts the picture together which you are failing to help in. Instead of going on an on about me being wrong, perhaps you can use your intellect to explain how all those pangitis actually mesh together with one another? Regarding this topic and your attitude, I would like to ask you why do management of gurdwaras have so many non-Sikhs in them (most of them cut their Kesh)? Shouldn't our religious institutions be managed by us Sikhs ourselves? In fact, I would go one step further, I think all Sikhs should be required to read, write and understand Gurmukhi. But this is for a different discussion.

So are musical notes. So are tablas and various musical instruments. What is your point? So does religion, but religion can be easily used as a propaganda tool, just like extremist Muslims are doing (or extremists of any religion of the world, for that matter). My point is that one should not mistake tools with intentions. Guns do not murder people, they are inanimate objects, yet they can be used by people to commit crimes. Nagara and tabla are used in gurdwaras, but they can be used in any sort of music. Well, this is the only sensible thing you have written. If you are coming from the point that gurdwaras should not promote cultural events, then this can be a valid argument to debate. Given the role of gurdwaras outside the Punjab, it would think most of the people would accept that they play a significant role in the Sikhi society not limited to religious aspects. I say this based on my experience with the gurdwaras. Not that there are no difference of opinions. On a larger note, I think your original post came out as saying that dhol and related cultural things (bhangra, giddah, etc.) have no place in Sikhi. Is this correct? Perhaps I am mistaken. And I think that is what harminderkaur ji was referring to.

By "genuinely interested" I wanted to clarify that I was not being sarcastic by asking for exact citations. Besides, whoever resists giving citations shows that he is making empty claims without the will or resources to back them up. If you have the requested citations, why not give them and settle the argument? If you yourself have nothing substantial to contribute, then why are you barging in to the discussion? Furthermore, who in their right mind thinks that politics is number game? Looks like you are yet to be introduced to one of the fundamentals of the universe: mathematics and statistics, which deal primarily .. surprise .. with numbers. Politics nowadays is resorted to by the people who want to brainwash others who do not have critical thinking skills, or by people who want to gain votes, influence and power by hook or by crook. I do not hold most of the politicians in any high regard. I also do not put much stock in people who respond to request for explanations or justifications with emotional speeches, ad hominem attacks or straw man arguments. These are the kind of people who are doing the most damage to the Sikh religion today. I strongly believe that the more educated the Sikhs are, the more aware they are of their roots, the more comfortable they will be discussing and justifying their religion and faith and the better it will be for the religion in the long run. So, "Only five" ji, what substantial discussion are you bringing here? Or are you only good for ad hominem attacks instead of having the competence of dealing with the topic at hand? You haven't even specified what is this "trap" you speak of!

1. Can you please cite where this is stated as fact by a court of law? Also, which court? Please be complete and exact. 2. Can you please properly cite where you got the above pangti from? I am genuinely interested. Please refer to recent responses in this thread. We have already established what we mean by "equal" in terms of religions of this world. If you can find something in SGGS that actually clearly contradicts that, please quote is properly here (I am sure you won't find anything). Which facts are you talking about that I have twisted? The examples you have quoted just show that couple of cases in which people did not want to accept people with shorn hair as Sikhੇ. The second case is irrelevant, since it involved a non-Sikh. The fact I stated is that by far the vast majority of Sikh youths today are cutting their hair and doing way will full beard and turbans. And only a miniscule minority outside of the Punjab supports unshorn hair. How can you refute this fact? The examples you quotes are quite irrelevant to this actually. Similarly, each human being is of a religion to which his/her parents belong. As I said before, and I state again, just having unshorn hair does not make you Sikh, it might be a necessary condition to be a Sikh, but it is definitely not a sufficient one. Which part of this do you not understand? From what I have able to understand, you are of the opinion that whoever cuts his/her hair is not a Sikh. And I accept this as your opinion, no problem here at all. Also, could you please use proper English grammar and punctuation? It makes it difficult to understand you otherwise. But if you are more comfortable writing in Gurmukhi (I am sure you are), that would be even better. In fact, it would be awesome! ਚਡ਼੍ਹਦੀ ਕਲਾ।

Very nice! BTW, I thought it was clearly understood and obvious that by "equal" I did not mean to be equal in the literal sense, but in the sense of their equivalence to show people the right path and for peoples' right to practice them. You have nicely elaborated what I had in my mind when I wrote that all religions are equal. And thanks for the counter examples showing that all religions were considered by our gurus to be equally important religions for their respective followers. From Sikh history, it is clear that Sikhs never forced anyone else to turn to Sikhi (as did Mughals tried to convert people to Islam, e.g.). It was that people turned to Sikhi of their own volition. I hope this settles the issue of whether only Sikhi is a true religions or all religions are "equal". Now, coming back to the topic at hand, where do we go from here when only a tiny minority of Sikhs has retained their Kesh? Is Kesh practical anymore? I understand the theories that been put forward (oh, btw, I don't think Sikhi has any concept of heaven or hell, everything is right here in person's life), but today's picture is very different. I have been noticing that the usual practice for the youth is to cut their hair when it is more convenient and to to keep them later when the pressures have died down. As real life examples, I know a number of older people who cut their hair when they went abroad from the Punjab, did their jobs, earned their living, but in later life, usually after retirement, they started to keep their Kesh and giving sermons on Sikhi in gurudwaras. Clearly, at that time they were not subject to social pressures which they were in earlier part of lives. I am not sure how to resolve this. If the justification is that "Oh, life was tough for them at that time," then that just doesn't cut it. One only has to think about the Ardas we do regularly in Gurdwaras to see what sacrifices people actually went through for not cutting their hair. In short, the general perception in today's Sikhs seems to be that it is okay to cut your hair yet believe in Sikhism. Very sad and unfortunate, but this is a fact of life today. Even in a gurdwaras in the UK or North America on Sundays, one can count Sikhs with unshorn hair on one hand. Situation in India is not as bad, but it is not rosy either there! As far as can I see, Sikhs with unshorn hair are dwindling away.

Thank you for a very interesting reply and related quotes. I suppose this is going to give me new material to learn! I have some very important question regarding what you wrote, but I do not want to stray from topic at hand. So, regarding the question of hair, where do we stand based on what you wrote? It appears that it should be an open and shut case, kesh cutting => straying from path of joining with God as recommended by Sikh religion => not a Sikh. On a related note, what are your views regarding most Sikhs cutting their hair in their youth (for any number of reasons, but generally for perceived convenience and looks) and then "rediscovering" the path of Sikhi in older life and suddenly turning into absolutes and telling everyone else not to cut their hair. ਚਡ਼੍ਹਦੀ ਕਲਾ।

You are right in the sense that all Sikhs should not cut their hair. I am not contesting that. But the keyword is "should not". If you read my post completely within the context, you will see I tried to make two points. The first was kids' behavior issues at teen years. Do you agree to point or not? The second point was related to current issues with Sikhs and equality of religions. Have you been to the Punjab recently? More than 75% "Sikhs" have cut their hair in one form or another. If they are not Sikhs, it should be clarified. Are you familiar with the state of Sikhs outside the Punjab? I would wager that more than 95% have cut their kesh. Are they still Sikhs? Moreover, are non-amritdharis also Sikhs? Who is a Sikh? On the flip side, our gurus have taught us that all religions of the world are equal. Do you agree? There is another point I tried to make, just having Kesh does not make you a Sikh. Based on a Sikh religion, is may be considered as a necessary condition but it is by no means sufficient one. On a human level, being a non-Sikh does not make you any lesser of a human being. All human are created equal, as taught by our gurus. Please reply by reading my whole reply and do not pick any part out of context. This helps in a mature and thoughtful discussion, instead of fanatical claims and fear mongering. ਚਡ਼੍ਹਦੀ ਕਲਾ।

Quite right. I also was thinking of the same thing while going over it just now. Coming back on topic though, I think I really like the reply by Wales85 which was the most practical given in the context. He is absolutely right that at this school age (teens till you go to a univ., where these petty considerations are usually not present) is the most crucial and impressionable. Peers will always find one excuse or another to pick at you. Facial hair and turban are just a bit more obvious targets. If you get rid of these, you will have to face similar problems for other obvious differences (skin color, non-brand clothes, accent, vocabulary, intelligence, stupidity, glasses, long height, short height, large weight, small weight, ... what have you). This is just part of that age. The real question should not be if I want to keep my hair, the question should be how do I stay clear and determined in my faith. If one cuts his/her hair under peer pressure, where does one draw the line? Drugs, cigarettes, binge drinking, promiscuity, shop lifting ... just to blend in one may have to indulge in all of these! You see, this is not a question for a young Sikh, it is a question for any youth who is different from the "norm". Schools should be educating the kids so that these kind of behaviors are minimized, that all kids are alright even if they appear different. And that one has much higher goals in life than to compete for better clothes or to get laid most often last year, etc. The moment we get comfortable with our appearance and accept that that is the way *we* like it and that is the way *all sane* people will like it too! People who pick on these kind of differences are just not yet mature enough. Now, regarding if Sikhs must keep their hair. I honestly do not know the real answer now a days. Just having one's beard and kesh does not define a Sikh. Note that our gurus taught us that all religions are equal. So they accepted all of them. They also taught that God is one. Given these two teachings, one can conclude that the real goal of life should be to lead a good life for the betterment of all beings ... since all religions teach this in one way or another. Religion is just a choice of each person. Sikhs choose to be of a certain appearance. That doesn't mean people without beards are any lesser than others.

Those are interesting quotes. Since I do not fully understand all of this in their context, I am going to discuss this with some learned Sikh scholars that I know. Having said that, I always understood that this meant that Guru is to be considered equivalent to God with relation to moral teachings and religious leadership. Moreover, don't you think these lines contradict the very first line of SGGS? ਚਡ਼੍ਹਦੀ ਕਲਾ।

I am not very familiar with SGGS. Could you cite a few pangtian/lines that state that? More clear the statements the better. In contradiction to your claim, however, Sikh gurus are considered as children or messengers of God. God, as I wrote in an earlier reply here, is *clearly* stated in Japji sahib as being free from life cycle, formless and timeless being.

Parna in India is considered informal (as far as Sikhs go, it is informal even outside India). So if you are going to be dressed for some occasion, a Turban is recommended. For informal times or sports stuff, a parna will do. Also, while riding a two wheeler, a proper Turban or a helmet is necessary. A parna can earn you a ticket (chalaan). Having said that, if you are not able to tie a proper full Turban, don't fee bad, a parna is fine for you. Instead of worrying about this, I would say go ahead and enjoy and learn while on the trip. Perhaps you can ask somebody over there to help you learn how to wear a Turban. Have a nice trip and bring back tons of photos!

You are correct. Whoever says so is plain wrong and is spreading wrong messages and misinformation. Right there, on the very first page of SGGS, the very first line, it is written that God is self existent and doesn't go through a life cycle of birth and death. ੴ ਸਤਿ ਨਾਮੁ ਕਰਤਾ ਪੁਰਖੁ ਨਿਰਭਉ ਨਿਰਵੈਰੁ ਅਕਾਲ ਮੂਰਤਿ ਅਜੂਨੀ ਸੈਭੰ ਗੁਰ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦਿ ॥ One Universal Creator God. The Name Is Truth. Creative Being Personified. No Fear. No Hatred. Image Of The Undying, Beyond Birth, Self-Existent. By Guru's Grace ~ (from http://www.srigranth.org/servlet/gurbani.gurbani?Action=Page&Param=1) None of the gurus were God. In my understanding, all Sikh gurus are considered as messengers of God. ਚਡ਼੍ਹਦੀ ਕਲਾ।

Why? Besides, it is tantamount to being sexist. I think you are going to the other extreme. First you wrote that women are being considered the main problem here. Now you are stating to keep them out of this altogether, implying that they should not be considered a factor. However, the reality is somewhere in between these two extremes. The fact is that there are Sikh girls/women who do clearly state that they don't want to be with a guy with a turban and a beard. And, just to be clear, my friends have experienced this not just in North America or Europe, but also in the Punjab. There is no better way to deal with a problem other than trying to understand it clearly first. But, this is most likely going off topic. To continue the discussion, may I ask you to start a new thread please? ਚਡ਼੍ਹਦੀ ਕਲਾ।

er ... you either didn't understand clearly what I wrote or you have misquoted me, I am assuming the former. Just to clarify, what I wrote meant that they are also a factor (and not that they are *the* factor). And it is a clear factor, mind you. There are many others, major ones. Outside India, the major reason is that Sikhs' experience the need to assimilate with their peers. They also need to get jobs. There are many subtle and not so subtle forces here that lead the Sikhs to shun their hair and turban. This falls under racism I believe. Then there is another reason, that of feeling cool. If have spent enough time in India, you would have noticed that when a Sikh guy cuts his beard and does away with his turban and hair, he is called a cool guy by his friends .... "ਘੈੰਟ ਬਣ ਗਿਆਂ!". This is extremely common in villages with people owning agricultural land and working in fields. But no one is cool if he supports full beard and a turban!

Yes, I totally agree. I only wanted to stress that the report also included the facts that the school in question apologized promptly and had a patka as uniform till class X and then a turban in XI and XII, but hindus-did-it sayers conveniently skip those details. Your other point is also true. Most of the youth in the Punjab have shunned their hair. The usual practice now appears to be to first trim one's beard when it starts to grow, and then to cut the head hair as well as one reaches late teens. Most of this appears to be due to following of western fashion and to appear handsome to girls. And most of the Sikh girls refusing to marry guys with beard and turbans just make it even worse. I think it is safe to say that what Mughals could not do, the modern fashion has done to the Sikhs -- to make them remove their turbans and cut their kesh. Quite a sad state of affairs.

Excellent! Thank you. The references confirm what I have been suspecting all along: A school tries to do something illegal, faces resistance and oppositions, bows to the demands of reason. This is precisely what happened here (the principal apologized, another source). There was a protest and the very next day the school apologized. Problem solved in day, it didn't even need to go to a judicial court in India! Now, if only we could make France do the same :-) The latter fact, the solution to the problem, was being conveniently missed in the discussion. And that was my beef with this whole thing. A doomsday scenario was portrayed by stating that Sikh youth are being forced to not wear turbans, instead of describing the incident in a factual way. BTW, even in many Sikh schools in the Punjab, it is a common practice that students wear patkas till the VIII class and turbans thereafter.

I am not very familiar those schools, only through friends. Please post here what you discover in your inquiries. On a related note, I do recall this, however: Turban in the schools Also, I know some friends who were students in christian schools in the Punjab. All speak wonderful Punjabi. The schools did, however, focus on Christian based moral teachings (reading the Bible, celebrating Christmas with vigor, etc.). I also have many friends who have studied in various Sikh public schools. These schools were similar, focused on Sikhi values while teaching morals. Aall students sang shabads in the morning, did Japji paths during Guru Nanak Devji's gurpurab celebrations, learned the protocol of being in presence of and reading the Sri Guru Granth Sahib, yes, including Hindu and Muslim students! My point in all this discussion is that it appears that there are many propagandists trying to spread the fear of other religions among the Sangat with inflammatory speeches. Usually, if anyone tries to ask for more information or casts any doubts any claims in their arguments, he/she is casts are a non-believer in Sikhi, instead of being given an explanation in a logical and reasonable fashion, you know, like educated people are supposed to! The same thing is happening in other religions. All these brain washing attempts are actually pushing the youth away from the teaching of our Gurus. The fundamental teaching that all religions are to be respected, that all humans are equal, and to work for a better life for everyone is not being taught at all in our gurdwaras now a days. All I see are petty fights, bickering between people of different casts, trying to inflame feeling against people of other religions. These religious nut jobs are not really doing any seva for the Sikhi, they are actually working for its detriment. I think one of the best ways to counter these kind of situations is to read SGGS ourselves and to learn its teaching by ourselves. There are plenty of resources on the internet to do so. There are numerous learned people to ask for explanations ... they are not obvious because they are not as noisy in gurudwaras.