Pearson Edexcel Level 3 Advanced GCE in Religious Studies – Anthology
298T he issue of servic e at t he Darbar Sahib in Amrit sar is highly signific ant and is
in my estimation a turning point in the history of women’s roles and status in
Sikhism. A brief summary of the events is presented here. On 13th February 2003,
t wo Brit ish amritdhari (initiated) Sikh women, law student Mejindarpal Kaur and
Lakhbir Kaur, were refused the right to partic ipate in the Sukhasan proc ession (the
laying to rest of the Guru Granth for the night) at the Harimandir Sahib in Amritsar.
They were forcefully prevented from participating by two employees of the
Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC). Mejinderpal later noted that
‘‘I had always taken my equality for granted, because my religion promised me
that ...’’ (Pushkarna). T he t wo women immed iat ely lodged a c omplaint wit h t he Akal
Takht Jathedar and the SGPC (the institution responsible for the management of
mo s t gurdwaras in Punjab) insist ing t hat it was t heir right t o be part of all aspec t s
of worship and servic e (seva) at the holy shrine.
On 16th February 2003, two other Sikh women, Tersem Kaur from the UK and
Dr Harjit Hothi from Canada, were forc ibly refused partic ipation in the Sukhasan
proc ession at the Harimandir Sahib. At this point, two women employees of the
SGPC pushed the Sikh women visitors out of the line whic h was awaiting the Palki
(palanquin upon whic h the Guru Granth is c arried, c overed by a c anopy), thus also
preventing them from partic ipating in the Sukhasan proc ession. By July 2003, a
new development had occurred in that women were not allowed anywhere near the
Palki; instead, they were made to stand away from t he walkway. While a Sikh
woman watc hed the Palki from afar, she noted that non-Sikh men were allowed to
c arry the Palki, while she was barred from even c oming near the palanquin
(‘‘Women’s Seva Sinks Lower’’).
What has taken plac e in the meantime is t ruly remarkab le. Sponsored by a
number of groups, inc luding the Sikh Dharma of the Western Hemisphere and the
American Gurdwara Parbhandak Committee (AGPC) as well as ‘Voices for Freedom’,
a Sikh human rights organization based in Baltimore, a far-reac hing mobilizat ion
effort was gaining momentum. A petition was c irc ulated, requesting the Jathedar of
the Akal Takhat, the highest seat of authority in Sikhism, to allow women’s
u n t ra mme le d a c c e s s t o a ll f o rms o f seva at the Darbar Sahib (‘‘Please Support’’).
‘Voices for Freedom’ also sponsored a seminar on Sikh women’s roles and rights
and many of the Sikh organizations whic h attended it supported the idea of forming
an ‘International Sikh Women’s Forum’ to deal with the disc riminatory c hallenges
fac ing Sikh women (‘‘Sikh Organizations Worldwide’’). The topic has spurred an
intense debate, position papers, rebuttals, and on-going disc ussions, largely on t he
Internet. In response, a c ommittee was c reated by the Shiromani Parbandhak
Gu rd w a ra C o mmit t e e ( S GP C ) to attend to this issue; this committee, which is
mainly c omposed of men, c ould not reac h a c onsensus on the c ontroversial issue
(Bahia). What many c onsider t he most c ruc ial dec ision-making body of the Sikhs,
the Akal Takhat led by Jathedar Vedanti, remained silent on the issue of women’s
seva at the Darbar Sahib. Vedanti then referred the c omplaint to the SGPC, whic h—
he c laimed—had the authority to dec ide on the issue (Dhaliwal; Dutt).
T he issue of women’s full part ic ipat ion at t he Golden T emple is c omplex. For
many Sikhs in India and the diaspora, the fight for equality must be c ontextualized
within those most c entral of Punjabi Sikh values: modesty and honour. Lawyer
Kartar Singh Goshti stated in his representation to the SGPC that ‘‘it would be
immo d e s t for a girl and disparaging for her fat her, brot her, or husband if she
subjec ts herself to being pushed by men in a c rowd; even if it is to shoulder the