Sheeba Singh

By: Sheeba Singh

© Panjabi Byte, January-February 2010, Vol. 1, Issue 2

“So you are from India?…. Are you Hindu?”

An inquiry most South Asians are faced with by people when living or traveling abroad. As a Sikh, it almost becomes a redundant task to have to run the average person through Sikhism and the religious diversity India embodies. Most of us, who are not Hindu, wind up walking away from such situations shaking our heads in disbelief. The attacks against Sikhs, have only taught the west that ‘turban equals terrorist.’ It is unfortunate we are surprised, as Sikhs, when a ‘foreigner’ knows what Sikhism is.

As a collective, India has done very little, if anything, at a global level to educate the populace about its diversity- in ethnicity, culture and religion (to name a few). The laws echo the same homogeneity- contributing the confusion in the matter.

The Anand Marriage Act, was formulated in 1909 to recognize the Sikh way of life and acknowledge the marriage practices of the religion. Differing from its other religious counterparts, it enabled a recognition of the diversity that persists amongst Indians even today. Unfortunately, at the time of India’s independence, the Act was repealed and losing its legal validity. Since then, Sikhs have been marrying under the HIndu Marriage Act, denying themselves the pride of Sikhism through formal (legal) recognition.

On the same grounds, Joginder Singh Sethi filed a petition with the courts in India alongside ten other Members of the Commission in order to make amends to Article 25(2) to provide- in actuality- “Right to Freedom of Religion.” Article 25(2) misconstrues the notion that Sikhism, Buddhism and Jainism practice the same traditions, culture and beliefs as that of Hinduism. Through this, Harbans Singh Aujla claims that Hinduism easily gobbles up the former religions, detaching them from their own identity and recognition which is much deserved and needed. Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists, with no choice in the matter, marry under the Hindu Marriage Act, in India. When immigrating or traveling to a foreign country- confusion is often created for such couples who recognize themselves as the aforementioned, but married under a legislation that grounds itself solely in Hinduism. The petition outlines that the same do not recognize Sikhism and treat Sikhs as belonging to Hinduism.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights guarantees each individual the freedom to religion. Such an act, if left unchanged, denies Sikhs, Jainism and Buddhists this universal right. With no fault of their own, Sikhs face humiliation and risks of being denied Visas, employment admissions and insurance in/to other countries- often with added harassment. Harbans Singh Aujla adds that Sikhs living abroad have begun to speak their mind, and this has enabled the recognition and awareness of Sikhism. The Indian government, often convuluted in its ways, has been unable to devise the means for every group to do so through its ‘narrow’ laws.

A common civil code, as declared in the petition, will help the cause of national integration by removing the contradictions based on ideologies. The law should be universal in providing the same esteem to every Religion within the country. In order to do so, the act should be re-instated, either to include every religion that is dependent on the law/act or rid itself of one specific (dominant) group in order to avoid unnecessary bias and discrimination of other groups.