10 Feb
So today about 30 people from a local Jewish congregation visited the gurdwara I attend. They were one of the best groups I’ve seen in a long time–lots of detailed questions and insights. One question threw me for a bit of a loop, though.
So you just told me that Sikhism is about 100% gender equality, and I get that, but why do men and women sit separately in the Gurdwara?
So a novice and dismissive answer to this question is, “yeah, it’s separate but equal,” but this ignores the fact that the phrase separate but equal carries a lot of weight in the mind of anyone that’s read about the American Civil Rights movement. In fact, someone in the visiting crowd offered this answer with a chuckle before I even started my response, indicating to me they knew the loaded history of the term. So I didn’t go there.
Instead, I answered with a story I’ve heard that explains the historic origin of the situation: When Guru Nanak was addressing the Sikhs, men would crowd right up to the front, leaving the women to settle for the back of the congregation. Sensing the inherent inequality, Guru Ji said, “Ok, guys, you get this half of the audience, and ladies, you get this half, so everyone has equal access to me.” Now I don’t know how true this story is, but a wise Gursikh told it to me and it does make logical sense.
Another answer I’ve heard but didn’t give this time is that it’s merely a protocol issue. If you start sitting girls next to guys, their minds begin to stray from the kirtan. By keeping genders separate we mitigate the issue. This response is hokey at best, so I didn’t even give it as a secondary explanation. Also of note, Gurdwaras in India are apparently so crowded there are no “sides” to the gurdwara.
My question to you is–do you like my story? Does it have any historical backing or did someone make it up? How would you answer this question?
4 Responses for "Separate but Equal in the Gurdwara"
I hadn’t heard the story before, and I liked it. It makes sense. What did your audience think?
I just wanted to add that I don’t have problems with the “hokey” secondary explanation. It makes sense too, though sometimes the women’s side is still noisier than it should be.
i was just talking to a friend of mine about this the other day. i actually think it doesn’t make sense at all to have gurdwaras gender segregated, and the younger generation (and our older allies) should try to put the practice to a stop. while i’ve never heard the first story you told about guru nanak, it is interesting, and takes into account the real gender inequality that existed at the time (and still very much exists today). also i’d add that i’ve been to gurdwaras where this is no “invisible line” between males and females and that i’ve never seen the gender separation enforced in any way. the way i’ve always thought about it is that it’s an old tradition (obviously) and habit that exists but isn’t actually based on sikh philosophy or practice in any way. in terms of the “distraction” issue, i do find it kinda ridiculous (though it’s the most common explanation i’ve heard). if you really want to check out the women at gurdwara while kirtan is going on, looking over to the other side is hardly going to stop you. also, the heterosexual assumption inherent in the “distraction” explanation bothers me.
don’t know if it’s true, but something I read once was that the gender separation is actually a victorianism! Families used to sit together, but the colonial british influence/corruption resulted in the divide. It should be noted that orthodox jewish services are also gender separated.
I’ve been to some Gurudwara Proragms were people did not sit like this, (AKJ things, the peopel sat where ever). I think when you have groups of very devoute people this sort of seperation falls apart.
I can see it being needed depending on the types of fellas that show up to some Gurudwaras, (esp in Punjab).
Leave a reply