Jump to content
Guest Asiss

About sex

Recommended Posts

Guest Asiss

Hey guys I am a male teenager and I want to know that : Is oral sex for marriaged couples is correct? I have read many people reviews about oral sex. Almost all of the people thinks oral sex is good or correct. Is it legal? I want to know that in real life what a correct person do. Does a correct person thinks there should be oral sex in couples?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Akash

First of all, sex is only to be had between married couples - period!  In the marriage relationship, Guru Ji says you are allowed to 'multiply' your love for your own spouse as much as you want, but to go to the bed of another (even in your dreams) is wrong. So we can see that sexual relations between a husband and wife are perfectly normal.  Now here is where it gets tricky.  Some believe that sex should only be to procreate and so they would naturally think anything besides plain old vaginal intercourse would be out.  I am not of that thought. Married couples sharing their love through intimacy, is NOT the same thing as lust.  And it's not done purely for physical pleasure.  Between two people who have made the commitment in front of Guru Granth Sahib Ji, to spend their lives together and become 'one soul in two bodies', sharing intimacy can actually be on multiple levels. There is energy involved, so it's not just physical but also mental connection, emotional connection, and also spiritual. Spiritual how so you ask??? Because when two people's energies merge on that level, through love and devotion to each other, it mimics the merging of our energy to Waheguru.  On a small scale we are acting out that merging.  Bet you never thought of sex in that way before huh? But it is a HUGELY powerful emotional and spiritual connection involving primal energy. This is why is is NEVER meant to be used wrongly! Those who indulge in it for only physical pleasure are missing out on that spiritual and emotional connection that you get with your spouse.  It then becomes only Lust.  There is a BIG difference between LOVE and LUST. LOVE is perfectly fine... as Guru Ji says when he told us that 'multiplying' that love with our own spouse as much as we want is fine, but never to go to the bed of another (even in our dreams). The 'dreams' bit is the clue that there is MUCH more to sex than the physical act.  If even just dreaming about someone is wrong then why is it wrong? (If sex were only to create babies and nothing more, then why would fantasizing about it in your dreams cause any harm??) The truth is, it is not just a physical act!!!! There MUST be more at work during sex, on a deeper level, beyond the physical... and it involves that energy transfer at a deeply spiritual level. 
Now to answer your question, I think exploring each others bodies is natural in the context of marriage and between only husband and wife. If they choose to express that through oral sex, then I think its ok. They are after all, becoming ONE soul in two bodies.  So while some think that sex should only be for procreation and we should remain celibate otherwise, I don't think this way. I don't interpret Gurbani in this way.  In fact I think of sex as a much more sacred act than just to create children.  Because I view it as such a deep spiritual event between two people, it actually means MORE and is MORE reason to keep it sacred and between husband and wife.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saints of different dharms including Sikh dharm consider it to be a huge paap. So the answer is no. People who answer yes are thinking with their sense-pleasure seeking mind rather than any spiritual understanding or desire for knowing truth. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/30/2015 at 0:46 PM, Guest Asiss said:

Hey guys I am a male teenager and I want to know that : Is oral sex for marriaged couples is correct? I have read many people reviews about oral sex. Almost all of the people thinks oral sex is good or correct. Is it legal? I want to know that in real life what a correct person do. Does a correct person thinks there should be oral sex in couples?

According to Sikh principles (advanced), sex can be performed (by married couples) only for procreation and not solely for pleasure. Therefore, only vaginal sex is permitted in Gurmat.

Having said that, any sexual activity between couples is their personal choice. Even if a married couple indulges in sexual activity for pleasure purposes, it will be classified as a minor sin. One does not need to be ultra paranoid about it. Sri Satguru jee can forgive massive sins; this one is nothing compared to those ones.

The below topic is related to this topic. Gurmukhs procreating with a different technology, rather than indulging in sexual intercourse. This can be used to clearly prove that any type of sexual activity for pleasure (including between married couples) is prohibited in Sikhism.

Having said the above, it is a fact that suppressing sexual feelings can lead to psychological problems for some people. Thereby, case by case analysis might be required at times.

 

Bhul chuk maaf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, paapiman said:

According to Sikh principles (advanced), sex can be performed (by married couples) only for procreation and not solely for pleasure. 

Where are you getting this from? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
6 hours ago, dalsingh101 said:

Where are you getting this from? 

I want to know the same!  It's not in Gurbani that sex must be only for procreation. In fact Guru Ji says to multiply love (he is referring to sex here as we will see in in min) as much as you can with your own spouse, but do not even in your dreams go to the bed of another (so we can see that he was referring to love as sex).  So Guru Ji says sex between husband and wife is perfectly fine and sacred. It's important to note, he did not add the words...."but only for procreation".  More proof is that "husband and wife are not those who merely sit side by side, but those who become one soul/light in two bodies".  It's hinting at much more than a platonic relationship here. As said above, there is an energy transfer / sharing at a spiritual level when two partners come together as one.  Energy = Light.  In reality, the physical is illusion anyway and the reality is nonphysical... energy. So it's not hard to imagine this.  The only way two genders can cease to exist as separate entities and become one is through sexual union.  So I too am wondering where this idea that its only for procreation came from. To me, this idea is along the same lines are ascetics who go to the mountains to renounce living in the world. Guru Nanak Dev Ji openly spoke against this and advocated for living householder life while finding spirituality, not that of an ascetic.  However, some of the mentality coming out nowdays in Sikhi seems to be advocating the life of an ascetic and renouncing living life as a means to spirituality! This sounds less like Sikhi and more like Hindu influence.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are some geezers who are frigid, they are the ones who think that sex between married couples is only for procreation. 

 

As you allude to, dasmesh pita made the Sikh position unambiguously clear. 

 

There is another extract from Prem Sumarag (which I will post soon) that cautions against excessive shagging, but the frigid, weirdness that certain people are preaching doesn't really have any support outside of their own imaginations and fears. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Guest said:

I want to know the same!  It's not in Gurbani that sex must be only for procreation. In fact Guru Ji says to multiply love (he is referring to sex here as we will see in in min) as much as you can with your own spouse, but do not even in your dreams go to the bed of another (so we can see that he was referring to love as sex).  So Guru Ji says sex between husband and wife is perfectly fine and sacred. It's important to note, he did not add the words...."but only for procreation".  More proof is that "husband and wife are not those who merely sit side by side, but those who become one soul/light in two bodies".  It's hinting at much more than a platonic relationship here. As said above, there is an energy transfer / sharing at a spiritual level when two partners come together as one.  Energy = Light.  In reality, the physical is illusion anyway and the reality is nonphysical... energy. So it's not hard to imagine this.  The only way two genders can cease to exist as separate entities and become one is through sexual union.  So I too am wondering where this idea that its only for procreation came from. To me, this idea is along the same lines are ascetics who go to the mountains to renounce living in the world. Guru Nanak Dev Ji openly spoke against this and advocated for living householder life while finding spirituality, not that of an ascetic.  However, some of the mentality coming out nowdays in Sikhi seems to be advocating the life of an ascetic and renouncing living life as a means to spirituality! This sounds less like Sikhi and more like Hindu influence.  

 

 

Are you registered member of this forum?

 

Bhul chuk maaf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

same pleasure you can get by meditation so why do oral sex. but saying oral sex a sin, i don't think anything bad or wrong in oral sex unless you are hygienic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, dalsingh101 said:

Where are you getting this from? 

Katha. Daas is almost certain that it is from the katha of Gyani Inderjit Singh jee Raqbewale, who is one of the greatest scholars of the Panth.

 

Bhul chuk maaf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, amardeep said:

Let us widen the discussion with use of Gurbani and ithias.

Paapiman: What do you think is the reason the kavis of Guru Gobind Singh translated the Sanskrit Kama Sutra granths? .

For educational purposes. What do you think?

One could know everything about sex and still never perform the act. 

 

Bhul chuk maaf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, dalsingh101 said:

As you allude to, dasmesh pita made the Sikh position unambiguously clear. 

Are you talking about the tuk from the Charitars?

Bro, there are dozens of tuks in Gurbani which talk about Kaam.

Kaam is derived from the word "Kamna", which means desire. It does not indicate excessive desire. Having any desire (including sexual) in mind, is a sin. Some will be classified as big ones, some medium and some minute. Most couples will have to become a victim of lust, before they indulge in any sexual activity for pleasure. One can argue, lust might be needed for procreation too, but there is a difference, as the goal in mind, is not the same.

Uncontrollable/excessive desire is refereed to as "Tarishna" in Gurbani, which is a bigger sin.

 

Bhul chuk maaf

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, dalsingh101 said:

As you allude to, dasmesh pita made the Sikh position unambiguously clear. 

Are you alluding to Charitar 21 or the below verses?

Quote

sudh jab te ham dhari, bacan gur dae hamare,

put ihe pran tone praan jab lag ghat thare,

nij nari ke sath neh tum nit bodhaio

par nari ki sej bhul supne hu na jayo

Unquote [1]

[1] - http://www.patshahi10.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=393:the-history-and-compilation-of-the-dasm-granth-part-4&catid=34:english&Itemid=63

 

Bhul chuk maaf

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Akash

He is referring to where it instructs us to multiply the love between your own spouse as much you want but not even in your dreams to go to the bed of another.  There is no caveat added on there saying "but only for procreation".  I assume you are also not ok with birth control then? 

What if a wife has had the children she wants and wants no more? Should she refuse advances of her husband after that point? Should they then no longer be married and instead start a platonic relationship as sister / brother? Or how about a woman who has had such a traumatic birth first go that she is traumatized now and wants no more children? It's easy for us to say we are open to children every time we have sex but my wife first time round was so traumatized she will never have another.  It was hard for me to imagine but she went through nine months of being ill to her stomach, swollen feet, stretch marks, urinary incontinence, then the birth she went through excruciating pain which traumatized her, she tore from one end to the other into her rectum, causing lasting pelvic floor injury including yes more urinary incontinence, fecal incontenence, hemmorides, a total of 108 sutures, chance of later uterine prolapse, lasting pain with sex, and after the birth and long recovery going on 6 months she is still experiencing pain.  But you'd think after the birth she would finally be done with it, but no. Now she has persistently painful engorged breasts, cracked painful nipples and is basically just miserable in life. Childbirth is not something that we should advocate women go through over and over again or else their entire adult life will consist of real physical suffering on a large scale. I was not even aware until she gave birth just how much suffering she would endure for our daughter. 

Paapiman, should we now become sister and brother? I married her because I feel a connection with her, on a deeply emotional and spiritual level. We will lose that if according to you, we can only have sex if she is willing to go through all that suffering again (while also risking her life). She is physically and mentally traumatized from it, she could have died from blood loss. I would be traumatized too if it were me that had to go through it and I love my wife enough that I wish I could have been the one to! We have a daughter our one child, and I won't put my wife through it again. But I don't think the answer is to now look at each other as only brother and sister and forget we ever had that connection.   

We have to stop looking at women as only tools for breeding.  And sex goes way beyond procreation. Its an expression of love and closeness between a husband and wife. IN that context I think its up to them how they want to express that love. Guru Ji did not specify that we could only express it certain ways or if the wife was willing to endure torture every time. 

No I am not a registered member and I don't really want to register. I was here reading something else but I felt the need to comment on this. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/30/2015 at 2:39 PM, Guest Akash said:

First of all, sex is only to be had between married couples - period!  In the marriage relationship, Guru Ji says you are allowed to 'multiply' your love for your own spouse as much as you want, but to go to the bed of another (even in your dreams) is wrong. So we can see that sexual relations between a husband and wife are perfectly normal.  Now here is where it gets tricky.  Some believe that sex should only be to procreate and so they would naturally think anything besides plain old vaginal intercourse would be out.  I am not of that thought. Married couples sharing their love through intimacy, is NOT the same thing as lust.  And it's not done purely for physical pleasure.  Between two people who have made the commitment in front of Guru Granth Sahib Ji, to spend their lives together and become 'one soul in two bodies', sharing intimacy can actually be on multiple levels. There is energy involved, so it's not just physical but also mental connection, emotional connection, and also spiritual. Spiritual how so you ask??? Because when two people's energies merge on that level, through love and devotion to each other, it mimics the merging of our energy to Waheguru.  On a small scale we are acting out that merging.  Bet you never thought of sex in that way before huh? But it is a HUGELY powerful emotional and spiritual connection involving primal energy. This is why is is NEVER meant to be used wrongly! Those who indulge in it for only physical pleasure are missing out on that spiritual and emotional connection that you get with your spouse.  It then becomes only Lust.  There is a BIG difference between LOVE and LUST. LOVE is perfectly fine... as Guru Ji says when he told us that 'multiplying' that love with our own spouse as much as we want is fine, but never to go to the bed of another (even in our dreams). The 'dreams' bit is the clue that there is MUCH more to sex than the physical act.  If even just dreaming about someone is wrong then why is it wrong? (If sex were only to create babies and nothing more, then why would fantasizing about it in your dreams cause any harm??) The truth is, it is not just a physical act!!!! There MUST be more at work during sex, on a deeper level, beyond the physical... and it involves that energy transfer at a deeply spiritual level. 
Now to answer your question, I think exploring each others bodies is natural in the context of marriage and between only husband and wife. If they choose to express that through oral sex, then I think its ok. They are after all, becoming ONE soul in two bodies.  So while some think that sex should only be for procreation and we should remain celibate otherwise, I don't think this way. I don't interpret Gurbani in this way.  In fact I think of sex as a much more sacred act than just to create children.  Because I view it as such a deep spiritual event between two people, it actually means MORE and is MORE reason to keep it sacred and between husband and wife.   

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Guest Akash said:

Paapiman, should we now become sister and brother? I married her because I feel a connection with her, on a deeply emotional and spiritual level. We will lose that if according to you, we can only have sex if she is willing to go through all that suffering again (while also risking her life). She is physically and mentally traumatized from it, she could have died from blood loss. I would be traumatized too if it were me that had to go through it and I love my wife enough that I wish I could have been the one to! We have a daughter our one child, and I won't put my wife through it again. But I don't think the answer is to now look at each other as only brother and sister and forget we ever had that connection.   

 

You already have had sex with her, how can she become your sister? Why are you asking such a silly question?

If you really love your wife, then pray for her. Do a sehaj paath for her. Do malas of mool mantar for her. Do ardas for her. This is Gurmat.

 

Bhul chuk maaf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think certain people are closet homosexuals and are twisting Sikhi to try and wiggle out of an inevitable arranged marriage with a women.  

 

It's better these poofters come out of the closet - before they ruin some women's life (and their own). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/3/2016 at 7:51 PM, dalsingh101 said:

Where are you getting this from? 

Shabad Guru surat Dhun Chela by Giani Sant Singh Maskeen at page 101 to page 102.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of you lot are gay or at least aren't attracted to women.  

 

Face it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, amardeep said:

Let us widen the discussion with use of Gurbani and ithias.

Paapiman: What do you think is the reason the kavis of Guru Gobind Singh translated the Sanskrit Kama Sutra granths? .

It's clear that most people have no idea about the spiritual meanings of ''Kama sutra"............sexual intimacies can be forms of worship if you understand them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, dalsingh101 said:

Some of you lot are gay or at least aren't attracted to women.  

 

Face it. 

yes, they are and they just go around trying to 'indirectly' justify themselves..

I'm gonna be blunt and offensive here because I get fed up and annoyed hearing the old  "oh, I feel like a woman trapped in a man's body...or I've always been a girl inside a boys body all my life.".........I mean, this really irritates me because they are basically saying "God made a mistake...he put me I the wrong body!".....go sort it out and work on living out your karams,...,because GOD does NOT make mistakes...period!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Akash
2 hours ago, dalsingh101 said:

I think certain people are closet homosexuals and are twisting Sikhi to try and wiggle out of an inevitable arranged marriage with a women.  

 

It's better these poofters come out of the closet - before they ruin some women's life (and their own). 

Hahahaha this made me LOL

1 hour ago, dalsingh101 said:

Some of you lot are gay or at least aren't attracted to women.  

 

Face it. 

Snicker! 

38 minutes ago, Lucky said:

It's clear that most people have no idea about the spiritual meanings of ''Kama sutra"............sexual intimacies can be forms of worship if you understand them

Exactly this!!! It goes beyond the physical. Sexual intimacy is powerful on levels beyond the physical, and this is why is must never be misused. But in the context of marriage between husband and wife its perfectly fine, no matter how the two share that intimacy. The point is, they are expressing love and not lust. Love is powerful. In fact I might go as far as even suggesting the point of everything IS love. 

31 minutes ago, Lucky said:

yes, they are and they just go around trying to 'indirectly' justify themselves..

I'm gonna be blunt and offensive here because I get fed up and annoyed hearing the old  "oh, I feel like a woman trapped in a man's body...or I've always been a girl inside a boys body all my life.".........I mean, this really irritates me because they are basically saying "God made a mistake...he put me I the wrong body!".....go sort it out and work on living out your karams,...,because GOD does NOT make mistakes...period!

 

I think a lot of this stems from the restrictions placed on each gender. Who is to say the colour pink for example is only for girls? Who is to say that car toys are only for boys? Why can't we just remove all the gender stereotypes and then allow people to be who they are, and that might stop a lot (not all obviously) but it might stop a lot of the gender identity issues.  If a girl wants to be a mechanic, or join the military let them. Don't place restrictions on them. If a boy wants to play with baby dolls, let him. To say that either is restricted to one gender is entirely a social construct. We as humans made those stereotypes. We can remove them. Then a boy can still be a boy, while playing with dolls. A girl can still be a girl while learning to fix cars.  Then maybe they won't reject their gender. Obviously this doesn't cover homosexuality or gender identity in its entirely. But does address some of the issues.  I say treat humans as humans not put them into boxes we create. Every opportunity should be given to every individual. 

No God does not make mistakes, but one could argue in the opposite direction that those who identify as the opposite gender, are that way precisely because God made them that way, and since God doesn't make mistakes..... you get what I am trying to say?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

If a boy wants to play with baby dolls, let him. 

Screw that! 

 

I mean, I know what life is like, occasionally some of the toughest guys I've known have had some really effeminate, b1tch-ass sons. But called me old fashioned, call me a dinosaur - I still say the ideal is having boys that are strong and masculine. 

 

We've got enough faggoty apnay as it is. We need to combat and avoid this modern gora metrosexual bullsh1t - not jump into it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×