PAGE WISE MAY 2007 - Guru Gobind Singh Study Circle

commit an act of apostasy or to five up riding a
motor-bike. Punishment for disobeying military
command during the war was death, but the Sikhs
did not care for it. They refused and revolted
against the order. They refused to fight if they
were compelled to do so. The military command
and the law of the steel-helmet was at once
changed, giving exemption to the Sikhs. The
sanctity of the turban and their solemn vow that
they would, under no circumstances, wear
helmets meant more to them. The Divine law
clashed with the secular law, and the Sikhs stood
firmly by the Divine Law.
“We have very old documents of the Sikh
Code of Conduct in the British Museum,
particularly No. 14152 bb 2. It is entitled
Rehitnama Prahlad Rai and Bhai Nand Lal. The
first and foremost injunctions are : Cursed is a
Sikh (i) who visits prostitutes, (ii) gambles, (iii)
who smokes, (iv) who goes out in the society
without a turban or wears a cap instead of turban,
(v) who cuts or trims his beard and hair, (vi) who
eats meat, cut according to Muslim rites. Those
who contravene or transgress any of these
commandments are treated as apostate Sikhs. Any
backsliding is an act of heresy. They must seek
baptism again if they wish to become morally and
spiritually accepted Sikhs.
“My Lord, it was Edmund Burke, who said
that there are two and only two foundations of
law : utility and equity or justice. The law
compelling everyone to wear crash-helmets was
made with an eye on utility. I have seen with my
own eyes a number of people, wearing crashhelmets,
dying in motor accidents. Other parts of
the body are as vulnerable and sensitive to injury
as the head. But as far as the Sikhs are concerned,
the second foundation of law, that of equity and
justice, has been completely ignored.
“Human laws, no doubt, are made out of the
instinct of self preservation and are subject to
change where they infringe anyone's personal,
religious and cultural freedom. The Divine Laws
or religious laws grow out of the spiritual will of
man to conquer fear and death, to overcome
suffering and transience, and live in inner peace
and glory of eternity. The turban is worn by the
May 2007
Sikhs under a divine command of the Founders of
Sikhism, aiming to give them inspiration for
achieving such a state of mind and spirit.
“No Indian or British law can compel or
coerce the Sikhs to change this Divine Law of our
prophets, or modify it under any circumstances.
The turban is a part of this moral and spiritual
discipline and way of life, whose sole purpose is to
conquer fear and death. Nothing else, least of all a
crashhelmet, nay not even a steel shirt, a steel pant
and a steel coat can give that sense of moral and
spiritual power and security, which the turban
and the Sikh Code of Conduct, associated with the
turban, gives it. A Sikh who wears a helmet in any
form, abjures his faith morally and spiritually,
though he may continue to call himself a Sikh by
reason of his birth in a Sikh family. This law
compelling the Sikhs to wear crash-helmets is
unreasonable, infringement of the religious
freedom of the Sikhs in U.K., the majority of whom
are now the citizens of this country, which
believes and even loudly preaches democratic
freedom and equality for all minorities.
“Laws, said Plutarch, are like spider's web.
They hold the weak who are caught in their
meshes, but the rich and the powerful escape it.”
This law compelling everyone driving a motorbike
to wear crash-helmet is ornamental to all
Christians, but to the Sikhs it has proved to be a
spider's web. As weak and helpless victims of this
spider's web, the Sikh religious minority in this
country has come to this court for justice. Injustice
in this case has arisen out of a too literal and
absolutely secular constructions of the law.
The Sikhs have only two alternatives in the
face of such a law. They should either abjure their
faith in order to obey it, or they must break this
law till it is suitably changed or declared bad in
law by the courts. No self-respecting people can
accept the first alternative. It would amount to
signing the death warrant of their own faith and
culture.
“My Lord, the Sikhs who are accused of
driving the motorbike without wearing the
helmet, are not breaking the law wilfully. They are
on the other hand merely seeking justice and
resisting any conscious or unconscious attempt on
cwry kuMfw FUFIAw ko nIm@I mYfw ] jy quDu BwvY swihbw qU mY hau qYfw ]
36