Who Reads the Hukamnama and Who Serves the Langar
At a city gurdwara with a Sunday attendance of about 400, the committee has invited Bibi Harpreet Kaur, an Amritdhari schoolteacher who teaches Gurmukhi at the gurdwara's weekend school, to read the hukamnama at the main diwan. Two of the eleven members object: 'in this gurdwara a woman has never read the hukamnama.' They also object that the same Sunday programme lets a family of weaver-caste background, recently arrived from a nearby colony, prepare and serve langar. The objectors say they will resign, and that three families who together pledge about ₹2 lakh a year will stop contributing. The granthi supports both the hukamnama invitation and the langar seva but does not want the diwan to become a public quarrel. The president asks you, a member of the youth wing, to prepare a short written note for the committee meeting.
1. Is there any basis in gurbani or Sikh maryada for restricting the reading of the hukamnama to men? Explain what the committee should decide.
Read the worked answer
There is no such basis. The hukamnama is the Guru's word opened for the whole sangat after the ardas; it is read aloud on the sangat's behalf, and the Sikh Rehat Maryada does not confine that reading to men or to a granthi. Sikhism has no priesthood: the granthi is a sevadar, not an intermediary between the Sikh and the Guru.
Gurbani settles the wider question. Guru Nanak Dev in Asa di Var asks why anyone should call her inferior from whom kings are born, and the same composition condemns those who speak ill of women. The shabads of the Bhagats reject pride of birth and treat all human beings as one. A rule that a woman may not read the Guru's word to the sangat contradicts what the Guru's word itself says.
The claim that 'it has never been done here' describes a local custom, not maryada. A custom that contradicts Sikh teaching is exactly what a committee, as trustee, is expected to correct. The decision should therefore be to proceed with the invitation, announced simply as normal practice rather than as a concession, with the granthi briefing Bibi Harpreet Kaur beforehand on the practical procedure so that Sunday runs smoothly. A quiet, well-run first occasion will do more than any debate.
2. Apply the same reasoning to the objection about the family of weaver-caste background preparing and serving langar.
Read the worked answer
The reasoning is identical, and the objection is more serious, because caste division is precisely what the langar institution was built to destroy. Guru Amar Das required pangat before sangat so that no one could eat by rank, and the gurdwara's four doors and open kitchen have no caste condition attached to who cooks, who serves or who sits. In Sikh teaching no birth group is ritually pure or impure, so there is no question of a family 'polluting' the kitchen. The objection rests on a hierarchy gurbani rejects.
The committee should accept the family's seva warmly and make it ordinary. Practical steps: pair the family with an experienced sevadar for the first two Sundays so that the work is learned rather than tested; publish the seva rota openly so that no single group comes to 'own' a particular duty; and ensure that serving and eating are done in one pangat, since the objection tends to reappear at the point where people are seated.
The committee should also say plainly, in its minutes, why it decided this way. If the objection is not answered on principle in writing, it will return next month in another form, attached to another family.
3. How should the committee handle the threatened resignations and the withdrawal of the ₹2 lakh pledge?
Read the worked answer
Handle the money and the resignations as two separate matters, and settle neither by trading principle.
On the pledge: contributions to the Guru are offerings, not shares carrying voting rights or a veto over maryada. The committee should note politely that it hopes the families will continue to give, and that if they stop, the budget will be cut to fit the shortfall, beginning with non-essential items. It should not, however, hint that the decision depends on the money, because saying so invites the next donor to test the same lever.
On the resignations: do not bar anyone. Meet the objectors privately, with the granthi present, hear them out, explain the gurbani reasoning, and give them time. If they still wish to resign, accept it courteously, record it as a difference of view and keep the door open for their return. If they persist and the dispute spreads, the committee may seek guidance from the Akal Takht or the SGPC, which is a proper route for a maryada question.
Finally, put the reasons in the minutes as a question of principle, not a factional win, so that the decision cannot later be undone or misdescribed. Transparency is the committee's best protection.