Frequently asked questions
Q. Is abortion allowed in Sikhism? Well, most of the people will say no it is not allowed, but may I know where is it written in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji that it is not allowed. Secondly, it is said by Yogiji (yogi Harbhajan Singh), that a soul only goes in a child which is in its mother's womb after 120 days thats approximately after 4 months. So can we do abortion before that, as there is no soul in the child during that period of time? Every religion condemns abortion and I too think it is a cruel act to do but can I have solid reasoning to it.
Answer. There is no specific advice about abortion in the Gurbani. However, the life of human is considered the most valuable which will not be available even in the so-called next Janam, because there is no second time or third Janam as human. It is only this life which one has to get maximum utility of it.
Now abortion:
There are many factors to be considered for abortion, i.e. Scientific and Health factors, and Social and Moral factors:
1. Scientific and Health.
Scientifically, sperm from male carrying half the set of genome fertilizes an egg from female which carries half the set of genome and zygote is formed. It starts dividing and enlarging which is known as fetus which ultimately develops into a new human which carries the half of the set of genome of father and half of the set of genome of the mother. The child is the next janam of father and mother scientifically.Scientifically, there is no soul and there is no particular time when the soul will enter into the developing child. Jogi Harbhajan is absolutely wrong. There is also no mention in the Gurbani when the soul enters into the developing child, although there is a lot of mention of soul in Gurbani. The soul in Gurbani has been used as a metaphor/allegory/simile, etc. not as a real fact.Aborting an embryo or developing child at any stage is killing a human being.
From the health point of view, if the child to be born is carrying a set of genes which can create health problems the abortion is justified. If the child birthis dangerous for mother the abortion may be justified. In rape cases, the mother does not want produce any child having the bad genes of the raper, abortion is justified. There could be many more other factors on health bases of mother or child that may allow abortion.
2. Social and Moral.
These are the rules of the society, group of people, family. They have to decide what will be the effect on the social and moral life of the mother and herfamily.
Political Issues
Ayodhya - Who has the rights?
Here's a leaf from history, and possibly a lesson, for those insisting the Babri site be handed over to the VHP because they believe a Ram temple existed there. In Lahore's famous Naulakha Bazar there still exists the Gurdwara Shahid Ganj Singhnian which earlier housed a mosque built in 1722.Despite the fact that the existence of the mosque - demolished in 1935 - had never been doubted, the Privy Council ruled in 1940 that Muslim rights over the property had ceased since the 12-year time during which it could have been restored to them had elapsed.The judgment of the Privy Council - the highest appellate body in British India - survived Partition and the creation of Pakistan. Today, the gurdwara is one of the religious places jathas from India visit every year during their trip to Sikh holy places across the border.In rejecting the demand of appellants Anjuman Islamia for restitution, the Privy Council made it clear that since no one had sued within a statutory period to eject the person possessing adversely the property belonging to the wakf, plaintiffs ``born 100 years later'' claim any rights. ``The land cannot be recovered by or for the mutawali and the terms of endowment can no longer be enforced,'' it said.The litigation over Shahid Ganj was very similar to the one being contested by Hindus and Muslims over `Ramjanambhoomi'. Shahid Ganj came under the Sikhs after Lahore was occupied by them in 1762. Sikh rule ended only in 1849, after British annexation. A part of the mosque was turned into a shrine for Bhai Taru Singh, who along with other Sikh women and children had suffered religious persecution. When the British came in 1849, the mosque was still with Sikhs.Then litigation began. In 1850, a case by Nur Ahmad, claiming to be a descendant caretaker of the masjid, came to nothing as he had been long out of possession. On June 25, 1855 Ahmad brought another suit in the court of deputy commissioner, Lahore, against the Sikhs, which was also dismissed.In 1925, the Sikh Gurdwaras Act was passed and the Shahid Ganj Gurdwara included as a Sikh shrine. Various parties made claims to the gurdwara but the Sikh Gurdwaras Tribunal held that it stay with a committee of management for the notified Sikh Gurdwaras at Lahore. But on July 7, 1935, the building of Shahid Ganj was demolished, minutes of Privy Council say ``by or with the connivance of its Sikh custodians'', leading to riots and disorder in Lahore.Then came another plaint in the court of the district judge, Lahore on October 30, 1935, against the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee. But this was a curious plaint for it made no claim for possession of the property or ejectment of the defendants or for restoring it to its hereditary owners. It asked for a relief ``claiming a declaration that the building was a mosque in which the plaintiffs and all followers of Islam had a right to worship, an injunction restraining any improper use of the building and any interference with the plaintiffs right of worship and a mandatory injunction to reconstruct the building.'' This was dismissed by the district judge and later by the high court in 1938. Finally, it came to the Privy Council.
Answer. There is no specific advice about abortion in the Gurbani. However, the life of human is considered the most valuable which will not be available even in the so-called next Janam, because there is no second time or third Janam as human. It is only this life which one has to get maximum utility of it.
Now abortion:
There are many factors to be considered for abortion, i.e. Scientific and Health factors, and Social and Moral factors:
1. Scientific and Health.
Scientifically, sperm from male carrying half the set of genome fertilizes an egg from female which carries half the set of genome and zygote is formed. It starts dividing and enlarging which is known as fetus which ultimately develops into a new human which carries the half of the set of genome of father and half of the set of genome of the mother. The child is the next janam of father and mother scientifically.Scientifically, there is no soul and there is no particular time when the soul will enter into the developing child. Jogi Harbhajan is absolutely wrong. There is also no mention in the Gurbani when the soul enters into the developing child, although there is a lot of mention of soul in Gurbani. The soul in Gurbani has been used as a metaphor/allegory/simile, etc. not as a real fact.Aborting an embryo or developing child at any stage is killing a human being.
From the health point of view, if the child to be born is carrying a set of genes which can create health problems the abortion is justified. If the child birthis dangerous for mother the abortion may be justified. In rape cases, the mother does not want produce any child having the bad genes of the raper, abortion is justified. There could be many more other factors on health bases of mother or child that may allow abortion.
2. Social and Moral.
These are the rules of the society, group of people, family. They have to decide what will be the effect on the social and moral life of the mother and herfamily.
Political Issues
Ayodhya - Who has the rights?
Here's a leaf from history, and possibly a lesson, for those insisting the Babri site be handed over to the VHP because they believe a Ram temple existed there. In Lahore's famous Naulakha Bazar there still exists the Gurdwara Shahid Ganj Singhnian which earlier housed a mosque built in 1722.Despite the fact that the existence of the mosque - demolished in 1935 - had never been doubted, the Privy Council ruled in 1940 that Muslim rights over the property had ceased since the 12-year time during which it could have been restored to them had elapsed.The judgment of the Privy Council - the highest appellate body in British India - survived Partition and the creation of Pakistan. Today, the gurdwara is one of the religious places jathas from India visit every year during their trip to Sikh holy places across the border.In rejecting the demand of appellants Anjuman Islamia for restitution, the Privy Council made it clear that since no one had sued within a statutory period to eject the person possessing adversely the property belonging to the wakf, plaintiffs ``born 100 years later'' claim any rights. ``The land cannot be recovered by or for the mutawali and the terms of endowment can no longer be enforced,'' it said.The litigation over Shahid Ganj was very similar to the one being contested by Hindus and Muslims over `Ramjanambhoomi'. Shahid Ganj came under the Sikhs after Lahore was occupied by them in 1762. Sikh rule ended only in 1849, after British annexation. A part of the mosque was turned into a shrine for Bhai Taru Singh, who along with other Sikh women and children had suffered religious persecution. When the British came in 1849, the mosque was still with Sikhs.Then litigation began. In 1850, a case by Nur Ahmad, claiming to be a descendant caretaker of the masjid, came to nothing as he had been long out of possession. On June 25, 1855 Ahmad brought another suit in the court of deputy commissioner, Lahore, against the Sikhs, which was also dismissed.In 1925, the Sikh Gurdwaras Act was passed and the Shahid Ganj Gurdwara included as a Sikh shrine. Various parties made claims to the gurdwara but the Sikh Gurdwaras Tribunal held that it stay with a committee of management for the notified Sikh Gurdwaras at Lahore. But on July 7, 1935, the building of Shahid Ganj was demolished, minutes of Privy Council say ``by or with the connivance of its Sikh custodians'', leading to riots and disorder in Lahore.Then came another plaint in the court of the district judge, Lahore on October 30, 1935, against the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee. But this was a curious plaint for it made no claim for possession of the property or ejectment of the defendants or for restoring it to its hereditary owners. It asked for a relief ``claiming a declaration that the building was a mosque in which the plaintiffs and all followers of Islam had a right to worship, an injunction restraining any improper use of the building and any interference with the plaintiffs right of worship and a mandatory injunction to reconstruct the building.'' This was dismissed by the district judge and later by the high court in 1938. Finally, it came to the Privy Council.
posted by jasdeep_grover26 at 1:30 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home