What's new

IAF cites religion for banning beard for Muslims

So Sikhs are not subjected to these 'couple of reasons' or God has given them some special abilities to perform well irrespective of beard?

You and Screaming Skull both come from the same country, yet telling us different stories. My suggestion would be to discuss this matter privately among two of you, reach to any one position that is also the position of your Government and than try to convince people here.

We dont need anybodys suggestion to discuss such matters privately as we have the basic understanding of what we are talking about..... Indian members here already given u enough answers to satisfy with. IF u want to get a PhD on this matter, we cant help u there.....its your job to do the dirty work of finding infromations from the Never ending source what we all call "GOOGLE."
 
.
So Indian military has dual standards, one for the Sikhs and one for the non-Sikhs.

I just explained you why. Call it dual standard or whatever you want. Sikhs make about 10% of the Indian army, please correct me if I am wrong, and were at the forfront of any battle that India faught since indipendence. Even British allowed that after they captured Punjab in 1850s. Sikhs made the bulk of the Indian army when largest volunteered force was created to fight during the world wars. If beards was not requirement for Sikhs, it would of been the same.

Sikhs did not want to wear helmets and IA allowed this to happen even though this involved the danger of loss of life. Military gear is there for a reason is it not? So where the discipline went?

Sikhs do use helments but they are specialy made. Sometime religion goes beyond safety. They are not breaking any decipline.
14b8a25234fb855747f7d50408284424.jpg
 
.
Yup gabbar,the patkas i think were introduced keeping the sikhs in mind......but they proved out to be the choice of even the non-sikhs aswell,because of their light weight and great resistence,they are made to withstand ak-47 bullets quite easily.......they are used by bulk of indian military and other forces mostly in jammu and kashmir....
 
.
Before educating me, please have a look at the contradictions among several posts.

1. It is all about military discipline. Facial hair (except for a well groomed mustache) is considered as a mark of indiscipline and brazen untidiness on the part of the IAF personnel. Even the Sikhs are advised to sport a well groomed beard.
Stress is on military discipline. This quote is in contradiction with quote #1, #2 (why Sikhs are not subjected to all this?), #5 (Muslims sporting beard at the time of recruitment are allowed to keep it).

2. Hindus or Christian whatever religion u believe in, EXCEPT sikhs, cant grow beard in Indian armed forces except some special forces( need confirmation).
Stress in “except Sikhs, no one else is allowed to grow beard”.

3. There are couple of reason for this, reasons of uniformity, hygiene, discipline, or tactical demands (such as the proper fitting and seal of a gas mask).This has to do with thier rules and principles NOTHING to do with secularism.
Stress is why beard is not allowed for non-Sikhs. So uniformity, hygiene, discipline or tactical demands not apply to Sikhs?

4. Heck Siks didnt even wore helmets during World Wars. They had choice that if they got shot in the head
Stress is on personal preference of Sikhs. Why same can not apply to non-Sikhs?

5. It says only those Muslims are prohibited from growing a beard who at the time recruitment didn't sport a beard. Does that make sense to you? It completely tears apart the argument that in Islam it is compulsory to grow a beard.
Stress is those Muslims who have beard at the time of recruitment are allowed to keep it. This is in contradiction to quote # 2.

Personally, I have no problem with beard or no beard. I don’t sport beard, I never did. I am only highlighting the contradictions several posters have on a single issue. For some, it is mandatory, for so and so reasons. For others, it is not; rather it is a matter of in which shape you appeared for the recruitment. I guess the similar arguments will be made during the court hearing.
 
.
The Decline of Beards in Warfare

The beard was, from the time of the caveman until recent memory, considered standard issue among soldiers throughout history. In modern combat the act of shaving was set aside mainly for gentleman officers and who more often than not shaved even their heads and eyebrows. One artillery unit of the 18th Century Austrian Army that was ordered not to grow facial hair was referred to by their emperor as "My Little Shavers" whenever they were mentioned. It is harder to find a picture of an American Civil War general without a beard than with one.

By the time of World War two military forces had mandated the prohibition of beards for reasons of uniformity, hygiene, discipline, or tactical demands (such as the proper fitting and seal of a gas mask)

Before 1939, British army troops were allowed, with permission from their commander, to grow a beard. Since then, the only soldier in the battalion allowed a beard was the combat engineer sergeant and colour sergeants who was allowed to keep a beard by tradition. In many British Commonwealth armies it is traditional that the Pioneer Sergeants attached to the infantry has a beard. This goes back to the days when they used to stick the slow burning fuze into their beards for safekeeping when assembling explosive charges. Today these men are responsible more for carpentry and military engineering than lighting fuses but the beards remain as a remnant of that past. Oddly enough these men also are usually issued chromed pioneer tools (axes, shovels, etc) and a work apron that they carry with them on parades. The navies of these countries also allow full sets of beards although currently this is under review.

The Israeli Defense Forces prohibit both beards and moustaches unless the member is an Orthodox Jew and is required by religious purposes to be unshaven. Having "unshorn" hair i.e. beard & mustache is an integral part of the Sikh religion. In the Sikh regiment & the Sikh light cavalry of the Indian army, as you might expect, soldiers are actually required to have beards & mustaches. Sikh servicemen in most western militaries are permitted to retain their beards while in military service.

The Spanish Legion (known until 1987 the Spanish Foreign Legion) allows beards to be grown and most of the men in that 10,000 man elite unit have them as a matter of honor. These men are known the world over for their easter march in Malaga Spain, called the Cofradía del Cristo de la Buena Muerte (Brotherhood of the Christ of the Good Death). These men carry a heavy crucifix in one hand while marching through town singing their hymnal Soy el Novio de la Muerte (I am the Groom of Death's)

The United States the Army and Marine Corps banned beards on grounds of personal hygiene just before world war one but they are permitted for medical reasons, such as temporary skin irritations if needed. The US Navy allowed beards for centuries especially for submariners but consigned the practice to Davy Jones's locker in the 1970's. The US Coast Guard banned beards in 1986 however The Coast Guard Pipe Band allows retired and reserve members to have beards and appear in uniform (which includes a Kilt) while on service with that unit.

History, due to tactical reasons, is repeating itself in Afghanistan where the militaries of many of the world's armed forces hung up their razors again. Selected American and British ground units were permitted to grow full beards and have worn them off and on since 2002. Afghans equate beards with being a man and it was found that the local population took the soldiers more serious once they had grown them. This also permitted small units such as Special Forces recon teams and air control parties to blend in better among the local population. This is to remain the same as the armies of many moslem countries still maintain beards. When NATO reformed the Afghan National Army after 2002, the only two things that remained the same were the AK47s and, of course, the beards.

The Decline of Beards in Warfare: Increasingly banned in modern combat a rebirth is underway | Suite101.com

qsaark, Why is it so hard for u to understand eh?:crazy: its plain simple english.
 
.
@ qsaark:
Well I really dont know how clear can I be with this.
Key word here is "RELIGIOUS REQUIRMENT" and breard requirment is only applies to Sikhism.
 
. .
Before educating me, please have a look at the contradictions among several posts.

Stress is on military discipline. This quote is in contradiction with quote #1, #2 (why Sikhs are not subjected to all this?), #5 (Muslims sporting beard at the time of recruitment are allowed to keep it).

Stress in “except Sikhs, no one else is allowed to grow beard”.

Stress is why beard is not allowed for non-Sikhs. So uniformity, hygiene, discipline or tactical demands not apply to Sikhs?

Stress is on personal preference of Sikhs. Why same can not apply to non-Sikhs?

Stress is those Muslims who have beard at the time of recruitment are allowed to keep it. This is in contradiction to quote # 2.

Personally, I have no problem with beard or no beard. I don’t sport beard, I never did. I am only highlighting the contradictions several posters have on a single issue. For some, it is mandatory, for so and so reasons. For others, it is not; rather it is a matter of in which shape you appeared for the recruitment. I guess the similar arguments will be made during the court hearing.

You know what qsaark, you are turning this into a technical debate. Go ahead and highlight the inconsistencies if that is the sole reason you are posting here. But, I would expect better from a senior member like you who I know is neutral on most of the occasions.

Exceptions have to be made to every rule. One can not be rigid when you look at things from an administrator’s point of view. You can not let technicalities create rift in your organization. So, when you stress on the points made by certain posters regarding military, discipline, hygiene etc., it is all logical and makes perfect sense for say a US army or Australian army, coz they have people mostly from the same religion, ethnicity, culture etc. But, in the case of Indian Army, the diversity is much much greater and hence an administrator (the govt. and policy makers) has to accommodate every one’s preferences without diluting the core ethics of the armed forces, like discipline and uniformity. The policy makers try their best to enforce these ethics amongst the personnel but exceptions have to be made where they are absolutely essential. Sikhs (who according to Gabbar comprise of less that 10% of the total strength) sporting beard in IA is a similar exception. So, why is a similar exception not being granted to Muslims? Well, quite simply from an administrator’s point of view, you would need as little exception to your rule as possible and no exceptions at all if it can be avoided. The point, being the Muslims in the IAF did not have any problem with this rule. Even if they had they didn’t try to raise their voice until this PIL was filed. When the PIL was filed the problem came into the open and it is being discussed and argued in court. The IAF was only trying to avoid the unavoidable till the time it could. And now they say they will think about it (read report in post #6). In essence there is no discrimination based on religion in the IAF and it as secular as any organization could be in the world.
 
.
Yup gabbar,the patkas i think were introduced keeping the sikhs in mind......but they proved out to be the choice of even the non-sikhs aswell,because of their light weight and great resistence,they are made to withstand ak-47 bullets quite easily.......they are used by bulk of indian military and other forces mostly in jammu and kashmir....

They indeed are very pupular, especialy in Kashmir. They have been proven more robust than the other helmets IA have.
 
.

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom