Question On Gurmat Rehet Maryada (Damdami Taksal)

[CdnSikhGirl]

In the GRM there exists some satatments that are very hard to justify as anything but sexist. I would like someone to please clarify because some of you delcare that the GRM is THE RM of Guru Ji, and that it is infallible. You also state that women are not excluded from anything except Panj Pyare (that they are free to participate equally in every other seva and that women are seen as equals by Damdami Taksal) but statements like the ones I am about to post paint an entirely different picture. Not only is it not only Panj Pyare that specifically states 'Singhs' other positions of authority - all of them (Granthi, Akhand Paath etc.) - also state 'Singh' so therefore using the reasoning that Panj can not be women because it says 'Singhs' means you also have to restrict women from nearly every other seva as well.

It's not just in the context of Panj Pyare that states 'Singh' in GRM. Therefore, contradictory to what some of you have stated about DDT treating women as equals aside from Panj Pyare seva, women are actually restricted from almost ALL seva by DDT:

Quoted directly from DDT's OWN website, and their OWN copy of Gurmat Rehet Maryada...

Women can not prepare Karah Prashad, or recite Anand Sahib:

" Two highly disciplined Singh’s should prepare Karah Parshad and bring it into the presence of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Jee and then recite Anand SahibA prayer of bliss which was revealed by the 3rd Guru, Sri Guru Amar Das Jee "

Or act as Granthi:

"The Panj Pyare and Granthi Singh are to also clean their Kirpans and Karas with sand and then wash their GatrasKirpan holsters;"

...and it's not just Granthi for Amrit Sanchar either:

"After completing the verse, the Granthi Singh is to place the Rumala back over Sri Guru Granth Sahib."

Or birth ceremony:

"An Amritdhari Singh should get a Sarab Loh bowl and half fill it with water."

Or paathi during Akhand Paath:

"The Paathi Singhs are to wear clean clothing and must bathe before starting on their Paath seva."

Or Chaur Sahib Seva:

"One Singh is to do Chaur Sahib Seva whilst one is to go ahead of Satguru Jee…”

Or kirtan / Ragee.....even if there are no male Ragees:

"If Ragee Singhs cannot be found, then the Granthi Singh is to recite each Lav, place the Rumala over Guru Sahib and then recite "Satnam, Vaaheguroo" whilst the couple walk/circumbabulate around Guru Sahib."

^^^ THIS is why women are still unable to do kirtan at Sri Harmandir Sahib... the opposition was DDT and Sant Samaj. And THIS is why!!!!

Further reading of GRM brings to light some statements directly found within the Gurmat Rehet Maryada that outright states that women are beneath men:

GRM under heading Haraam – Adultery, sexual relationships outside of marriage:

"A Singh must look upon his wife as his faithful Singhni (follower). In the same manner a Singhni must look upon her husband as Parmeshwar (God)."

Damdami Taksal directly instructs women in the GRM to view their husbands as God, while the men view their wives as a faithful follower... a subordinate. She is not even instructed to simply view him as a leader in a family sense, but in a sense that his authority over her is the same as if he were God....or not even 'as if he were' but she is too look at him AS God!

Note: It has been suggested that this statement has some deep hidden meaning. However, Gurbani may contain metaphors and deeper meaning meant to be contemplated, but this is found in the GRM... Rehet Maryada is direct instruction to be followed! It is not meant to be some poetic and deep meaning, or else we could contest also the statement about Panj Pyares being 'Singhs' also being poetic! So if Rehet Maryada is a direct instruction, then it's clear what it is telling women to do.

Further investigation reveals more remarks in this light:

Here is another example… found in the GRM under the heading Fasting, where the entire meaning of the shabad in its original context has been ignored so that the exact opposite meaning of one tuk was misinterpreted to suggest that women should view their husbands as God. This I believe was the basis for the line I quoted above. However, when the entire shabad it was taken from is taken into context, it becomes apparent that the meaning was twisted to become something sexist.

Here is the correct translation - when taking into account the meaning of the FULL shabad in it’s entirety:

ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਜਿਨਿ ਪ੍ਰਿਉ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਕਰਿ ਜਾਨਿਆ ॥

Says Nanak, she who looks upon the Transcendent Lord as her Husband,

ਧੰਨੁ ਸਤੀ ਦਰਗਹ ਪਰਵਾਨਿਆ ॥੪॥੩੦॥੯੯॥

is the blessed 'satee'; she is received with honor in the Court of the Lord. ||4||30||99||

In contrast here is DDT’s translation of the lines above:
(http://www.damdamitaksaal.org/26-code-of-conduct)
Directly written in GRM, found under the heading Fasts:

ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਜਿਨਿ ਪ੍ਰਿਉ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਕਰਿ ਜਾਨਿਆ ॥
"Guru Jee says, she who looks upon Her Husband as the Lord, is blessed and has firm faith; great are

ਧੰਨੁ ਸਤੀ ਦਰਗਹ ਪਰਵਾਨਿਆ ॥

those wives and they are received with honour in the Court of the Lord."

Damdami Taksal’s translation does not make sense when you take the entire shabad as a whole:

This entire shabad speaks out against the practice of satee by Hindu wives on their husband’s funeral pyre. The Shabad is suggesting that the wives do not become filled with so much attachment to their husbands that they kill themselves when their husbands die….That the true satee is in continuing to live through the loss and instead to see the Transcendent Lord as her husband (as we are all instructed to do as soul-brides).

Damdami Taksal are taking it way out of context, ignoring the full shabad, and then translating those two lines wrongly to mean the opposite of what they actually do! They take it to mean that wives should view their husband as the Lord (in other words suggesting the wife should submit to her husband and be subordinate to him as though he were God).

It makes absolutely no sense in the context of the entire shabad, and besides that it goes against what is written in Gurbani about equality, status of women, and the fact that the SAME divine light is within everyone, males and females equally! It also sounds to me like an attempt to Bhraminize Sikhi as this concept of women viewing men as God is seen in Hinduism (Mahabharata/Smriti: husbands are the highest diety of their wives) and also Islam for that matter (Quran: Muhammad makes statement that if he were to have anyone prostrate anyone else it would be the wives prostrating their husbands).

SGGSJ however, speaks to the equality of gender:

Page 1020, Line 15
ਆਪੇ ਪੁਰਖੁ ਆਪੇ ਹੀ ਨਾਰੀ ॥
You Yourself are the male, and You Yourself are the female.

Page 96, Line 9
ਏਕੋ ਪਵਣੁ ਮਾਟੀ ਸਭ ਏਕਾ ਸਭ ਏਕਾ ਜੋਤਿ ਸਬਾਈਆ ॥
There is only one breath; all are made of the same clay; the light within all is the same.

Here is the full context of the shabad those lines were taken from so you can see the actual meaning:

ਗਉੜੀ ਗੁਆਰੇਰੀ ਮਹਲਾ ੫ ॥

Gauree Gwaarayree, Fifth Mehl:

ਕਲਿਜੁਗ ਮਹਿ ਮਿਲਿ ਆਏ ਸੰਜੋਗ ॥

In the Dark Age of Kali Yuga, they come together through destiny.

ਜਿਚਰੁ ਆਗਿਆ ਤਿਚਰੁ ਭੋਗਹਿ ਭੋਗ ॥੧॥

As long as the Lord commands, they enjoy their pleasures. ||1||

ਜਲੈ ਨ ਪਾਈਐ ਰਾਮ ਸਨੇਹੀ ॥

By burning oneself, the Beloved Lord is not obtained.

ਕਿਰਤਿ ਸੰਜੋਗਿ ਸਤੀ ਉਠਿ ਹੋਈ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥

Only by the actions of destiny does she rise up and burn herself, as a 'satee'. ||1||Pause||

ਦੇਖਾ ਦੇਖੀ ਮਨਹਠਿ ਜਲਿ ਜਾਈਐ ॥

Imitating what she sees, with her stubborn mind-set, she goes into the fire.

ਪ੍ਰਿਅ ਸੰਗੁ ਨ ਪਾਵੈ ਬਹੁ ਜੋਨਿ ਭਵਾਈਐ ॥੨॥

She does not obtain the Company of her Beloved Lord, and she wanders through countless incarnations. ||2||

ਸੀਲ ਸੰਜਮਿ ਪ੍ਰਿਅ ਆਗਿਆ ਮਾਨੈ ॥

With pure conduct and self-restraint, she surrenders to her Husband Lord's Will;

ਤਿਸੁ ਨਾਰੀ ਕਉ ਦੁਖੁ ਨ ਜਮਾਨੈ ॥੩॥

that woman shall not suffer pain at the hands of the Messenger of Death. ||3||

ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਜਿਨਿ ਪ੍ਰਿਉ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਕਰਿ ਜਾਨਿਆ ॥

Says Nanak, she who looks upon the Transcendent Lord as her Husband,

ਧੰਨੁ ਸਤੀ ਦਰਗਹ ਪਰਵਾਨਿਆ ॥੪॥੩੦॥੯੯॥

is the blessed 'satee'; she is received with honor in the Court of the Lord. ||4||30||99||

I believe inconsistencies like this are what are breeding the feelings that women should be beneath men in some sort of divine hierarchy as was suggested many times on this forum.

Remember this is written directly in the Gurmat Rehet Maryada that many of you are demanding that everyone take as THE rehet maryada of Guru Ji. How can it be THE Rehet Maryada of Guru Ji when it goes so far against his teachings of equality, and takes single tuks out of context of the shabad they are from to misinterpret them into something that instead of uplifting women like was originally intended (as easily seen when the entire shabad is read in its full context), it instead puts them in to subordinate position? So how can it be stated to be THE Rehet Maryada of Guru Ji and how can it be claimed to be infallible when inconsistencies like this are blatently apparent, just by viewing the full shabad?? (in ANY language, English, or Punjabi) the shabad itself is what gives the context!

Remember that the quotes above are from Damdami Taksal's OWN website, from their OWN copy of Gurmat Rehet Maryada!

Or how about THIS doosey of an inconsistency for you: Sant Jarnail Singh Ji stated he is against women in Panj, but he stated that women should be allowed all other seva. So he actually spoke AGAINST what is stated in Gurmat Rehet Maryada. If indeed DDT's GRM is THE RM directly from Guru Ji himself, then why would SANT Jarnail Singh Ji speak AGAINST it??? It's obviously clearly stated that only Singhs can do most of the seva right??

Can anyone please explain??

Edited August 26, 2014 by Satkirin_Kaur

[chatanga1]

Can anyone please explain??

It's best that they explain their own maryada. Maybe you should get into touch with some Gyanis from the Taksals.

[Singh123456777]

...

Edited August 26, 2014 by Singh123456777

[CdnSikhGirl]

It's best that they explain their own maryada. Maybe you should get into touch with some Gyanis from the Taksals.

Actually I'd prefer all the experts on here who claim GRM as THE RM with direct lineage to Guru Gobind Singh Ji himself... I'd like those people on here to please answer my question. If they are quoting it as the direct word of Guru Ji, and they have full faith in it, then I'd really like them to answer. Thanks.

Actually I'd REALLY like savinderpalsingh ji to answer this!! Please! Pretty Please!

Edited August 26, 2014 by Satkirin_Kaur

[Singh123456777]

You hold a mean grudge don't you.

[CdnSikhGirl]

You hold a mean grudge don't you.

Imagine switching roles, how would you honestly feel?

[jaikaara]

ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਜਿਨਿ ਪ੍ਰਿਉ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਕਰਿ ਜਾਨਿਆ ॥

Says Nanak, she who looks upon the Transcendent Lord as her Husband,

ਧੰਨੁ ਸਤੀ ਦਰਗਹ ਪਰਵਾਨਿਆ ॥੪॥੩੦॥੯੯॥

is the blessed 'satee'; she is received with honor in the Court of the Lord. ||4||30||99||

my opnion is ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਜਿਨਿ ਪ੍ਰਿਉ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਕਰਿ ਜਾਨਿਆ ॥

means one who sees the Lord as His/her beloved ..i tell you the reason why i feel so ..there is no mention of stree which is woman ..so this is not looking gender specific.

ਧੰਨੁ ਸਤੀ ਦਰਗਹ ਪਰਵਾਨਿਆ

Satee means a true One ..the ritual wherein a lady would sit on her husband's pyre was also called Satee....it begin with ladies who kind of commited suicide to escape the invaders during mughal rule and then it was taken as tradition...there is no hindu scripture which insists on ladies committing suicide like this. they might talk about something that happened but that is not a rule ..and by the way ..Maharaja Ranjit Singh's wives had commited Sati. .

I will do some more research on this ..i am not a scholar ..however since i am born and brought up in India ..i am familiar with the language. I take advie of Gianis from Siri Hazoor Sahib too.

[jaikaara]

Now here is the entire bani :
http://www.srigranth.org/servlet/gurbani.gurbani?Action=KeertanPage&K=185&L=15&id=7868

ਗਉੜੀ ਗੁਆਰੇਰੀ ਮਹਲਾ ੫ ॥
गउड़ी गुआरेरी महला ५ ॥
Ga▫oṛī gu▫ārerī mėhlā 5.
Gauree Gwaarayree, Fifth Mehl:

ਕਲਿਜੁਗ ਮਹਿ ਮਿਲਿ ਆਏ ਸੰਜੋਗ ॥
कलिजुग महि मिलि आए संजोग ॥
Kalijug mėh mil ā▫e sanjog.
In the Dark Age of Kali Yuga, they come together through destiny.

ਜਿਚਰੁ ਆਗਿਆ ਤਿਚਰੁ ਭੋਗਹਿ ਭੋਗ ॥੧॥
जिचरु आगिआ तिचरु भोगहि भोग ॥१॥
Jicẖar āgi▫ā ṯicẖar bẖogėh bẖog. ||1||
As long as the Lord commands, they enjoy their pleasures. ||1||

ਜਲੈ ਨ ਪਾਈਐ ਰਾਮ ਸਨੇਹੀ ॥
जलै न पाईऐ राम सनेही ॥
Jalai na pā▫ī▫ai rām sanehī.
By burning oneself, the Beloved Lord is not obtained.

ਕਿਰਤਿ ਸੰਜੋਗਿ ਸਤੀ ਉਠਿ ਹੋਈ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥
किरति संजोगि सती उठि होई ॥१॥ रहाउ ॥
Kiraṯ sanjog saṯī uṯẖ ho▫ī. ||1|| rahā▫o.
Only by the actions of destiny does she rise up and burn herself, as a 'satee'. ||1||Pause||

ਦੇਖਾ ਦੇਖੀ ਮਨਹਠਿ ਜਲਿ ਜਾਈਐ ॥
देखा देखी मनहठि जलि जाईऐ ॥
Ḏekẖā ḏekẖī manhaṯẖ jal jā▫ī▫ai.
Imitating what she sees, with her stubborn mind-set, she goes into the fire.

ਪ੍ਰਿਅ ਸੰਗੁ ਨ ਪਾਵੈ ਬਹੁ ਜੋਨਿ ਭਵਾਈਐ ॥੨॥
प्रिअ संगु न पावै बहु जोनि भवाईऐ ॥२॥
Pari▫a sang na pāvai baho jon bẖavā▫ī▫ai. ||2||
She does not obtain the Company of her Beloved Lord, and she wanders through countless incarnations. ||2||

ਸੀਲ ਸੰਜਮਿ ਪ੍ਰਿਅ ਆਗਿਆ ਮਾਨੈ ॥
सील संजमि प्रिअ आगिआ मानै ॥
Sīl sanjam pari▫a āgi▫ā mānai.
With pure conduct and self-restraint, she surrenders to her Husband Lord's Will;

ਤਿਸੁ ਨਾਰੀ ਕਉ ਦੁਖੁ ਨ ਜਮਾਨੈ ॥੩॥
तिसु नारी कउ दुखु न जमानै ॥३॥
Ŧis nārī ka▫o ḏukẖ na jamānai. ||3||
that woman shall not suffer pain at the hands of the Messenger of Death. ||3||

ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਜਿਨਿ ਪ੍ਰਿਉ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਕਰਿ ਜਾਨਿਆ ॥
कहु नानक जिनि प्रिउ परमेसरु करि जानिआ ॥
Kaho Nānak jin pari▫o parmesar kar jāni▫ā.
Says Nanak, she who looks upon the Transcendent Lord as her Husband,

ਧੰਨੁ ਸਤੀ ਦਰਗਹ ਪਰਵਾਨਿਆ ॥੪॥੩੦॥੯੯॥
धंनु सती दरगह परवानिआ ॥४॥३०॥९९॥
Ḏẖan saṯī ḏargėh parvāni▫ā. ||4||30||99||
is the blessed 'satee'; she is received with honor in the Court of the Lord. ||4||30||99||

[jaikaara]

The 'Husband' spoken about is Akaal...

[savinderpalsingh]

You hold a mean grudge don't you.

You hold a mean grudge don't you.

yea i sensed that long ago , while researching i found her debating on same thing , if there wasnt even a debate would purposely lead to it . lol

Imagine switching roles, how would you honestly feel?

no penji .

the idea is to heed and if you have given head to guru then you dont question .

penji no offense and yes i agree its like a grudge,

if you learn more about our culture and learn gurmukhi and santhya and the meanings , it would be better then lashing out on each and every single thing

Edited August 27, 2014 by savinderpalsingh

[CdnSikhGirl]

Except... This is not each and every thing.. its only the mistreatment of women by only a small group of Sikhs.

Since when did discrimination become a part of Sikhi that everyone should just 'accept'? It may be Indian culture to put women beneath men, but it is what the Gurus strongly taught against. Everything they worked for on equality.... And as soon as they were gone it went right back. It's a shame. At least its not ALL Sikhs, its only small group.

Here locally the Gurdwra has seen twice in the last revent years an ENTIRELY female management committee. Not just one or two positions but ALL of them. And every other year at least one female member. Usually its women doing kirtan, not men. Nearly all the time its a woman who does Ardas. Hukam is about 50/50. They are all Punjabi btw. I imagine you'd just cringe in the Gurdwara here then... seeing the women doing that...

Oh, and I would never 'just accept' to view my husband as God, while I am the little follower. We are equals. One soul in two bodies. Only Waheguru Ji deserves to be seen as God. No man is. Even though we posses the divine light... ALL OF US EQUALLY male and female both, individually we are not God. There are no hierarchies, women are not beneath men in the eyes of Waheguru Ji.

And you never even attempted to answer... That says a lot.

Facebook? I was not aware we were friends? I only post on my own page and it's blocked to anyone I don't have added. And I don't usually post Sikh related stuff on there as many of my fb friends are coworkers etc.

Edited August 27, 2014 by Satkirin_Kaur

[savinderpalsingh]

no i am not in your friendlist but yes , i saw it happening .

i choose to leave the rehat to be explained by a taksali sing himself , but none the less

there is no grudge in sikhism , every maryada has a reason for it , because culture and religion go together

i understood that , there are many oral traditions in india which we follow and some we question but if you find the right person .

and do a lot of reading it all makes sense.

remember you are in sikhism to fill your cup with knowledge

how will it be filled if you have soo much already there, even if someone tries to put there something . it will spill out

to learn something new one must empty their cup

our mind plays tricks, its already ready with counter answers to counter the questions placed !!

its more hard for westerners to grab the concept because somethings never make sense ,

however give it time , you just took amrit .

keep your head at gurus feet and with time you will get it .

[CdnSikhGirl]

ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਜਿਨਿ ਪ੍ਰਿਉ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਕਰਿ ਜਾਨਿਆ ॥

Says Nanak, she who looks upon the Transcendent Lord as her Husband,

ਧੰਨੁ ਸਤੀ ਦਰਗਹ ਪਰਵਾਨਿਆ ॥੪॥੩੦॥੯੯॥

is the blessed 'satee'; she is received with honor in the Court of the Lord. ||4||30||99||

my opnion is ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਜਿਨਿ ਪ੍ਰਿਉ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਕਰਿ ਜਾਨਿਆ ॥

means one who sees the Lord as His/her beloved ..i tell you the reason why i feel so ..there is no mention of stree which is woman ..so this is not looking gender specific.

ਧੰਨੁ ਸਤੀ ਦਰਗਹ ਪਰਵਾਨਿਆ

Satee means a true One ..the ritual wherein a lady would sit on her husband's pyre was also called Satee....it begin with ladies who kind of commited suicide to escape the invaders during mughal rule and then it was taken as tradition...there is no hindu scripture which insists on ladies committing suicide like this. they might talk about something that happened but that is not a rule ..and by the way ..Maharaja Ranjit Singh's wives had commited Sati. .

I will do some more research on this ..i am not a scholar ..however since i am born and brought up in India ..i am familiar with the language. I take advie of Gianis from Siri Hazoor Sahib too.

Exactly... and when taken in context of the entire shabad it becomes apparent that its not telling women to view their husband as God. However, Damdami Taksal, in their GRM, outright tell Singhs must view their SInghni as their faithful follower, while the Singhni is to view her husband as God. And it's because of the last two lines in the quoted shabad. Their translation makes it sound like subordinate and subservient women are what pleases God and that she must be in submissive role to her husband who she is to consider as God.

But this is in the ineffable infallible GRM that savinderpalsingh ji says is directly Guru Gobind Singh Ji's word. That translation puts marriage into a master / slave relationship rather than a marriage of equal partnership on the same spiritual path that embodies the 'one light in two bodies' mentioned in SGGSJ.

[CdnSikhGirl]

no i am not in your friendlist but yes , i saw it happening .

i choose to leave the rehat to be explained by a taksali sing himself , but none the less

there is no grudge in sikhism , every maryada has a reason for it , because culture and religion go together

i understood that , there are many oral traditions in india which we follow and some we question but if you find the right person .

and do a lot of reading it all makes sense.

remember you are in sikhism to fill your cup with knowledge

how will it be filled if you have soo much already there, even if someone tries to put there something . it will spill out

to learn something new one must empty their cup

our mind plays tricks, its already ready with counter answers to counter the questions placed !!

its more hard for westerners to grab the concept because somethings never make sense ,

however give it time , you just took amrit .

keep your head at gurus feet and with time you will get it .

What I get from Sikhi is equality... I read GRM fully so I could learn... to see your view point. All I was after reading it was angry.

Even you yourself said that DDT did not discriminate women, only with Panj Pyare... so I read to see what they said... and then found all the other instances of 'Singh' and saw that women are excluded from nearly everything by DDT (except of course cooking the rotis for the men).

I'm sorry savinderpalsingh ji, I must go by SRM because its in my opinion the closest that espouses what the Gurus taught. And my feelings are based on Gurbani. You are free to follow whatever RM you want though. Just please try to look past the culture, and look at the actual religion and always ask if it makes sense with what is written in SGGSJ.

[savinderpalsingh]

your anger is the wall between accepting and filling cup with more knowledge , it took me time to get over it

i have been trying to find a gurmukhi version of rehat maryada but cant find one

however the detailed version gurbani darpan written by Sant Gurbachan singh ji bhindranwale , so far i have not came across anything written like that in it

pramjit singh ji anandpur wale says

there are 2 people

premi - who loves

and

nemi - who just does it as a chore or task

the permi - doesnt arue or question , the permi says "oh guru ji said? i will do it "

the nemi - people like me , who just do it as a task

be a premi not a nemi

Edited August 27, 2014 by savinderpalsingh

[jaikaara]

First of all ..about that tuk...it is not describing laws of marriage ..

[Singh123456777]

Imagine switching roles, how would you honestly feel?

Honestly not bad. I would if I was a feminist like you. Understand that men and women will always be different no matter what you say.

[CdnSikhGirl]

savinderpalsingh ji, one of the gifts I have been given by Waheguru Ji is in my singing. To be told by anyone, that because of my gender I am not allowed to do kirtan, would be devestating. AT least its only at Harmandir Sahib that they have affected.

I can not imagine never doing kirtan except in the quiet of my own home alone. While some men who can hardly hold a note on pitch are allowed simply because they are men..... Kirtan is meant to be shared.

Where you and I differ, is that I see the Indian culture and Bhraminism crept into the GRM, where you think it's Guru Ji's wishes. If nobody ever speaks out about injustice, things will never change. Do you think that Iraqi people should just accept ISIS? How about the women who are covered head to toe in black? People being crucified etc. SHould they all just 'accept it'? My test of whether something is true or not is when I compare it to Gurbani. GRM did not pass that test as you can see above on the statament of women seeing their husband as God. The shabad was taken out of context. Its easily seen when you read the whole shabad... even the original Gurmukhi.

Further regarding just accepting things, you keep mentioning Sant Jarnail Singh Ji in yur earlier posts. He himself spoke against the Gurmat Reher Maryada in the same video that everyone posts... aside from the Panj Pyare issue, he actually stated women should be allowed to do all other seva. This is in stark contrast to the Gurmat Rehet Maryada that states only 'Singhs' can do nearly ALL seva.

So which are you following? You once asked me how could I go against what Sant Ji said... which is right? GRM or Sant Jarnail SIngh Ji (who was educated by DDT)?

[CdnSikhGirl]

First of all ..about that tuk...it is not describing laws of marriage ..

I fully agree!!!

But they are using it as such! they twist it from saying "who views the transcendent lord as her husband" (which has nothing to do with marriage - to - "who views her husband as God." and include it in the marriage section of the GRM.

[jaikaara]

Men will be Men

[jaikaara]

Satkirin ji ..please check msg box

[CdnSikhGirl]

Honestly not bad. I would if I was a feminist like you. Understand that men and women will always be different no matter what you say.

Maybe I am really a man then??

Maybe I should get gender reassignment surgery so that the outside will match the inside? lol

[savinderpalsingh]

women can do kirtan and many classical bibi ji's who do amazing kirtan .

even at harmandir sahib , muslims and other religion people used to do gurbani kirtan before sgpc , changed RM

there is no bhramanization in DDT,

regarding that line as god

i didnt see it anywhere , in detailed maryada by Sant Gurbachan Singh ji .

thats why i said, i choose too leave it to be explained by taksali singh himself

[Singh123456777]

There is a sucham concept about it as well. Women have periods and they won't be able to do any seva when they are on their period. I have a mother and sister who both do Prakash and sukhasan of guru ji but they never ever do it when they are on their period because of reasons only a women knows. If you say that women can do seva when they are on their period then you don't care about sucham.

[CdnSikhGirl]

women can do kirtan and many classical bibi ji's who do amazing kirtan .

even at harmandir sahib , muslims and other religion people used to do gurbani kirtan before sgpc , changed RM

there is no bhramanization in DDT,

regarding that line as god

i didnt see it anywhere , in detailed maryada by Sant Gurbachan Singh ji .

thats why i said, i choose too leave it to be explained by taksali singh himself

It wasnt SGPC who changed it... SGPC were the ones who ruled that it was allowed.

"The Damdami Taksal, yesterday outrightly rejected the proposal for allowing the baptised women to perform kirtan [hymn singing] inside the Harmandir Sahib, the sanctum sanctorum of Golden Temple.

The Damdami Taksal's resolve to oppose this move was also supported by the Sant Samaj, a conglomerate of Sikh preachers headed by Baba Sarbjot Singh Bedi, at a function here on the occasion of the death anniversary of Sant Kartar Singh Bhindranwale.

It may be recalled that the S.G.P.C. had last week taken the decision to allow women to perform kirtan inside the Harmandir Sahib. The decision had been taken at a meeting of the S.G.P.C.'s Religious Advisory Board."