CdnSikhGirl

@amardeep Ji.... do you have any references on the women Masands? We already know 52 Masands sent out by Guru Amardas Ji were women. And several were in isolation working on their own under Guru's authority. One was actually in charge of all of Kashmir, and this is how I first came to hear about this subject, as you know my husband is from Kashmir. I have been trying to do some digging online and came across a few references that state the Masands were given authority to confer charan pahul. By all references, it seems that confering charan pahul was actually considered more restrictive than confering kande de pahul as it meant authority directly from the Guru. However kande de pahul gave this authority to the khalsa to act on behalf of Guru Ji. So it would make no sense that women were authorized by Guru Ji to confer charan pahul, and then be disallowed to confer kande de pahul, when women too were initiated and become khalsa... Put another way - I mean if women had previously been authorized by Gurus themselves to confer initiation (in form of charan amrit), then how can khalsa now have any right to say women are not allowed to participate in initiations? As Bhai Gurdas, Varan, I.23 is listed as the reference... Do you have any refernces on Masands / Charan Pahul that I can look up? Thanks...

On subject of instruments... when did harmonium become common use in kirtan? I thought originally it was stringed instruments and that in particular sarangi was used because it mimicked closest to human voice. (I actually want to learn to play sarangi... but I can't find one to purchase. Anyone know if I can get one from Toronto somewhere and shipped east?)

achatanga, it is you who is lying. You KNOW what you meant by that statement. Don't try to back track what the implication of it was and call others a liar because you were called on your views of women. Saying that family planning is not allowed in Sikhi = saying women's whole adult life will be filled with pregnancies, childbirth and breastfeeding. Its the same thing. And you know it implies that. But you are just holding on to this exact wording thing as if it matters LOL. Go rant to someone who cares! Amarjeet Ji please close this thread as obviously members like achatanga can't read the first post saying to refrain from this thread. Also, we can start a new separate topic to discuss the masands and 52 being women, and how they were given authority to administer charan amrit as a means to show that even though not written explicitly, may be evidence that no prohibition on women participating as Panj Pyaras. I have actually found a few more references!

I'm sorry you are just too dense to understand it. Guru Nanak said not to argue with fools... so I'm done with you. Your head is too thick to get anything through that there is a difference between lying and pointing out something that you meant. There was no lie in what I said. You know it and I know it... you are playing semantics to try and look cool. But its not working because everyone KNOWS thats what you meant. That women's place is at home having baby after baby because no birth control = babies. I'm sure you must at least know biology right?? Anyway I'm done with you. Rant and yell and make accusations all you want. It wont change that you are a rude inconsiderate, spoiled brat who doesn't understand the english language. You think I need to learn Punjabi? Here: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/implicature/ Your statement was IMPLICATURE of women going through pregnancy after pregnancy because no family planning IMPLIES that pregnancies will occur... one after the other... because the couple can not use birth control to plan out their families. Get it yet??? So by saying that family planning is not allowed in Sikhi you were saying that women who are married will undergo pregnancy after pregnancy. And with that... I'm done with you. Just avoid me on here and I will avoid you.

Until the Baisakhi of AD 1699, Sikh initiation ceremony, charan pahul, comprised the administering of charanamrit or charanodak to the novitiate. As Bhai Gurdas, Varan, I.23, records, this was the practice Guru Nanak introduced for the Sikhs. At the ceremony the novitiate quaffed water poured over the foot of the Guru and vowed to follow the religious and moral injunctions as well as the code of communal conduct laid down. Later, masands or local leaders, specially authorized by the Gurus, also administered charan pahul. - See more at: http://searchsikhism.com/panj-pyare#sthash.BcpL0X78.dpuf So masands were authorized to administer charan pahul. And 52 were known to be women including operating in isolation alone in these leadership roles. One was in charge of all of Kashmir. ALso... Amrit Sanskar or Amrit Sanchar or the Amrit ceremony is the Sikh ceremony of initiation or baptism. This practice has been in existence since the times of Guru Nanak Dev (1469 - 1539). During that time-period, this ceremony was known as Charan Amrit or Charan Phul or the Pag Pahul, the words Charan and Pag both signifying the foot of the teacher. During that time-period, the neophytes poured water over Guru's toe to be initiated into the fold. When the Guru was not present, the masands or the local sangat leaders officiated. A reference to initiation by Charan Amrit occurs in Bhai Gurdas, Varan, I.23, born 12 years after the passing away of Guru Nanak. So it makes no sense why all of a sudden women would be disallowed to administer kande de pahul when they had been authorized to administer charan pahul previously. It would be like Guru Gobind Singh Ji actually took away equality/rights for women that previous Gurus had established. (Paapiman won't see this so if someone can quote it the link is above and bibliography sources are listed at bottom of the linked page).

You are actually acting like a spoiled child chatanga! Its like you are a child saying "no girls in my blanket fort" and then your sister wants to come in your fort so someone says that you had said that your sister could not go in the blanket fort. And then you get all pissy and upset because you didn't say EXACTLY that your sister couldn't come in your fort. But .....you had said no girls could come in your fort and your sister is a girl, so the end result is the SAME THING! Without saying those exact words, you said that your sister was not allowed in your fort. Understand??? I can't believe I am actually having to explain this to a grown adult!

I did not anything about lying! said LEARN WHAT I WAS TRYING TO SAY! DAMMIT! You are an idiot! You said "Family planning is not allowed" that is the SAME THING AS SAYING "women must go through pregnancy after pregnancy after pregnancy" are you dense??? The IMPLICATION OF NO FAMILY PLANNING is that she will be either pregnant of breastfeeding her entire adult life until menopause. Are THAT dense that you can't understand that??? It's not your exact words, but that is what the implication is... so it's the SAME THING as if you said it! I never said "chatanag said these exact words....blah blah blah" I said he said that..... with the tag "He said that family planning is not allowed" because this is the inivitible IMPLICATION OF SAYING FAMILY PLANNING IS NOT ALLOWED! You must be the densest person on here that you can't understand associations and implications of what you are saying! How can you say that family planning is NOT ALLOWED in Sikhi, and somehow rectify that the natural result of no birth control is babies... babies, and more babies!??? Stop being such a rude inconsiderate person! And actually UNDERSTAND what people are saying and LEARN the IMPLICATIONS of what you are saying, and not focus just on the exact wording. If you want to end your association with the forum go ahead! I won't stop you!

I think this was written when the girl would inivetibly move in with the in-laws. Not applicable today as most couples don't live with inlaws and instead have their own apartment or house together. I think that's why it was referring to women, because the woman would be the ones usually moving into the home of the inlaws. So thats why it was specified. But yes, according to Akal Takht edict in 2007, a Sikh (male or female) must marry a Sikh. So a Sikh male can not marry a non-sikh female either via Anand Karaj. This came about after the protests of mixed faith marriages in Gurdwaras in UK in recent years.

@chatanga1 Though you didn't use those exact words, you said that family planning is not allowed. If family planning is not allowed what do you THINK the result will be????? Saying that family planning is not allowed is the SAME THING as saying she should just accept that she will be basically a breeding machine going through pregnancy after pregnancy! You can't escape the fact that no family planning (birth control) means that pregnancy is inivitible (unless she has something wrong). So how can she ever pursue a career if she no sooner finishes one pregnancy and breastfeeding and then gets pregnant again? And that continues until she physically can not have babies anymore?? So while you did not say exactly those words, and I never said you said those exact words... I said and please learn extrapolation and paraphrasing.... that by saying family planning is not allowed, you are making the statement that women will be pregnant or breastfeeding their entire adult lives from marriage up to menopause. Because THATS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU CANT USE BIRTH CONTROL!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Please don't get so hung up over exact wording of things... its apparent what you MEANT! Because the only other option is abstinence. And how many married couples do you think can maintain a loving close relationship if their interaction is totally platonic??? I'd say virtually NONE! Why even be married then?? Do you SERIOUSLY expect after 1 or 2 kids, that a husband and wife married only a few years, will become entirely platonic after they have a couple kids, and never touch each other again??? Be realistic!!!! For that matter, as soon as she becomes Pregnant, then they should abstain right? Even more, only roughly 5 days per cycle is a woman even fertile, so sex outside of those 5 days shold be avoided too right? Since they'd be having sex knowing there won't be a chance of pregnancy. How many married Sikh couples do you think abstain as soon as she is pregnant, or avoid the times of month (majority) when pregnancy can not happen? Also, please show us where Gurbani etc state that married couples can ONLY partake in that act to procreate. So yes, you never said exact words that women will be pregnancy after pregnancy and breastfeeding their entire adult life. But the IMPLICATION of no family planning (which you DID exactly say) is exactly that! That women are doomed to be only breeding machines and pregnancy after pregnancy after pregnancy. And a ton of unwanted kids that people can't afford. Show me ANY Sikh family who wants like 10-12 kids these days! Gurbani speaks against lust and overindulgence, when it becomes like an addiciton for only physical pleasure. It degrades what sex is supposed ot be. However, sex is not merely physical pleasure. And between a huband and wife in marriage, is not considered LUST. It's an act and expression of love between two people and in itself can be a divine act as two people literally merge. It's a powerful union that goes way beyond physical. That's why it is reserved for a married couple because doing it for only physical pleasure degrades what it means. A husband and wife can @Guest Ji... hehe I know who you are I think. You are on opposite side of the country from me (BC) and trade RMS?

I have personally witnessed women in Panj Pyaras.... and know that it's happened numerous times. So you can't say "today" there are none. There are numerous AKJ who have done so. 3HO does it regularly. And many Gurdwaras that have no affiliation with specific sampardas have had women in this role... and I know specifically of several in recent years in Kashmir. And as Amarjeet Ji said before, only small percentage of Amrit Sanchars were actually documented as to who was involved, and then too only Amrit Sanchars that involved historically notable Sikhs who were taking Amrit. That leaves a LOT of amrit sanchars with no documentation at all as to who the panj pyaras were. So you can't say "No women" --- all you can say is that in the small percentage of amrit sanchars that WERE documented, there were no women mentioned. And since most historical writing was centered around the military aspect of Sikhi, there is a whole chunk of history missing outside of that. It's very likely with thousands upon thousands of amrit sanchars that happened in last few centuries, with only a very small percentage being written about, and that too the notable ones involving military aspect, the majority of Sikhs would not have even been accurately depicted. How can you say there were no women, when there is so much history not even mentioned??

How is beai freaked out about something showing pride?? lol I was worried it was something medical and not related to meditation / simran! I just wanted to know if anyone else heard the same things.... or do you think I should get checked out??

There's nothing to suggest they didn't either...

So you in your OWN words, just justified the existence of DIFFERING REHET MARYADAS for different groups! Those of us who are not Nihang or DDT, follow Sikh Rehet Maryada! AKJ follow their own (which is basically SRM with a few tweaks). I don't care if people want to follow a specific sect themselves... but when they make statements that something is 'against Gurmat' then please all I ask is to specify that it's according to THAT SECTs RM that you basing this on, and at least acknowledge that there are others with differing views. And I will do the same from now on... can you agree??? You just said that differences in RMs exist for different groups. Right! So, when you say that women can not be in Panj Pyaras, then specify that it's THOSE sects who that rule applies to, and NOT others, who follow a different RM. That's all I ask! Same with menstruation... if a Bibi wants to belong to DDT, then she obviously has to follow DDTs RM which says she can't do seva. But don't try to say it's a rule for ALL Sikhs as SRM does not specify this at all. Please don't make this an SRM slamming thread. As you know that MANY MANY Sikhs are subject to it. Just please make distinctions when you say something is anti-gurmat specify which RM you are referring to. And we can all live in peace!

Well.... they are!!! LOL Test bacteria in blood from menstruation (while still in the body), vs the average beard. Which do you think will turn out to be dirtier??

Its not that I feared these sounds...I have heard sounds before like roaring, static, and other times very similar to the sounds NASA recorded during flyby to Jupiter... like weird electromagnetic wave type sounds. But this was different and first time I heard it. I didnt fear it as such but what freaked me out was that they did not stop immediately when I got up and stopped simran. They had gotten loud actually. And I could still hear it when I was walking around for a few mins! Then they faded over about 15 mins. So thats why I was a bit freaked out. I thought I was actually experiencing tinnitus or auditory hallucinations or something...

Please note, I prefer bearded men - which is a given... but since weère on subject of cleanliness (I think beard bacteria is actually turning out to be worse than any issue with menstruation!) "UPDATE (5/4/15, 3:28 p.m. ET): Turns out the beard bacteria situation is worse than we initially thought. ABC affiliate KOAT Action 7 News wanted more info on the topic, so they asked microbiologist John Golobic to swab and analyze beard hair from several willing participants. The news report from last Thursday (April 30) reveals some of the beards contained bacteria “similar to those found in fecal matter.” Golobic told the news channel that if particles like these were present in our water, the water facility would have to be closed down and disinfected.:" http://www.mtv.com/news/2106390/beard-study-germs-bacteria/ The blood from menstruation however, is essentially same as while in the body, until it comes out and is exposed to air é external bacteria. So internal protection renders the issue moot. Beards however... eeewwwwww. Bacteria profiles the same as fecal matter??!! yucky! If you are concerned about cleanliness and uncleanliness while doing seva of SGGSJ, maybe all Singhs should refrain from it with those bacteria farms hovering over our Gurus pages! "Carol Walker, a consultant trichologist from the Birmingham Trichology Centre, said having facial hair can lead to more frequent skin infections and to germs being passed on to others. Beards harbour more germs because facial hair is courser than other hair, so traps dirt and germs more easily, she explained. She told MailOnline: 'Beard hair; it’s courser. It has the shape of a bayonet, a round, convexed bottom and then comes up the side to a point. ‘It becomes curly and smooth, it tends to have more bends and kinks which trap dirt. ‘The cuticles on the hair – which are like layers of tiles on a roof - trap the germs and grease ‘Hair around nostrils and mouth is well-placed to harbour bacteria. She added that people have a habit of over-handling their beards, meaning they can spread bacteria to their mouths. She said: ‘If their hands are dirty, they transfer dirt from their hands on to their face and mouths. ‘If someone eating dairy products it can get stuck in their beard and become a bit rancid. ‘There can be a lot of Stepholococci [a group of bacteria that can cause illness] if someone’s got a cold.’ She has noticed people developing skin conditions due to their facial hair. She said: ‘Some people get skin infections, caused if they have a lot of scale build up or eczema from the bacteria in their beard. ‘If someone has a cold, a runny nose it can trickle down and be trapped in the nose , mustache, beards hair. Food drink can dribble down too.' Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2991865/Are-beards-unhygienic-Facial-hair-riddled-bacteria-spread-germs-trigger-infections-experts-claim.html#ixzz3zmUJcl5e

And there you have it! I guess women (should they get married) our only purpose is to be a breeding machine... pregnancy after pregnancy after pregnancy. Since a woman's whole adult life from marriage to menopause would be filled with either pregnancy or breastfeeding, a career would be virtually impossible. (because I mean show me ANY male... Singh or not... who would stop having sex with their wife after one or two kids... if you think you can Chatanga, you're very very wrong! Sex is a natural part of bonding between husband and wife, in itself can be a divine act. take it away and they may as well not be married. Show me ANY SINGH who would stop relations with his wife as soon as she is pregnant, and will stop having sex with his wife alltogether after they have the kid/s they want!! You will NEVER find one) I'll leave it up to you to tell all the Sikh women in the world including @GurpreetKaur that they don't need any education because their "place" is stuck home barefoot and pregnant their whole adult lives. (btw Gurpreet bhenji is an engineer, maybe you can tell her she didn't need to get her engineering degree because if she gets married she'll be either pregnant or breast feeding for the next 20 years!) btw Pregnancy is very very hard on the woman's body! It's not a walk in the park with nausea, swelling, incontinence etc. and you want all women to perpetually be in this state! To produce so many kids that you can't afford to feed them all... while you get to leave the house all day and leave her to deal with a bunch of squabbling kids. Right... sounds like a great life for women! NOT! Secondly, please don't just say something is against Gurmat. Show actual reference in Gurbani where it actually says this! I have never seen anything! Also, Sikh Rehet Maryada does not say anything either! And any rehetnama etc around at the time of the Gurus would not have said anything at all on the subject because birth control was not available then. So inclusion in any RM is only recent (at least as recent as when birth control became available). btw the Gurus KNEW sex was a normal part of human existence. They also knew that completely refraining is near impossible for ANY human as avoiding it actually creates lust! Moderation in a marriage prevents lust. And by the way, sex between husband and wife as an expression of love is not the same as lust. I believe Akal Takht cleared this a few years ago: Birth control to prevent pregnancy so you can have illicit sex outside marriage is not allowed. Birth control as family planning between husband and wife IS allowed. Look around you, most Sikh families have 1 or 2 kids... maybe a 3rd if they can afford it. If no birth control were used at all, most families would have LOT more than that! And you'd never see any Sikh women outside the house let alone having careers. And yes, prevention of cycles is perfectly safe!!! Its been proven! Why go through a cycle if you don't plan on having children anyway? Lots of woman have pain etc during that time, and this stops it. You are saying they should just endure the pain? You should not even be commenting on it being a male. You will NEVER EVER know the burden placed on women. Waheguru gave us science.... hey getting older and having heart problems etc is natural too... should we stop giving people high blood pressure medications etc too?

Just to let you know, yes its perfectly safe to wear menstrual cups for 12 hours. And its perfectly hygienic (being invented by a doctor!!!) Do what you want... none of it affects me anyway as nearly my entire adult life I have been on hormonal meds which stops cycles all together. Not for birth control (although they are birth control) but simply because being military and being at sea for long periods, its more convenient not to even have a cycle! Unless you are planning for a baby why even bother with menstruation at all!!??? So for me it never would have been an issue. I have not had a cycle since my teens and I am 40! There, there's the solution to rid women of all this uncleanliness! Go on hormonal birth control unless actively planning for a baby! Then the SInghs won't think we are so unclean! What I am talking about is your (and several others views here) about uncleanliness etc are not actual "rules" in Sikhi (they are attitudes and opinion mostly from the Singhs) so they should not be touted as actual RULES when they are not. And Gurbani speaks against idea that menstruation is anything bad anyway. You can try telling someone they are "not allowed" to do something and weather you are telling them they are "impure" or "unclean" doesn't matter because the issue is you are still excluding them for YOUR perceived ideas of what uncleanliness is! You want to talk smell??? The far worst smell I have smelled at the Gurdwara were men with body odour! Or how about people wear so much perfume or cologne they give you a headache? How about people with bad breath? Here is something member Sukrit Kaur said last time this subject came up: The Gurus were married... SGGSJ is NO different than the human Gurus right? Do you think the Gurus told their wives to stay away from them during this time?? Certainly they KNEW about menstruation since they also had children with their wives! And something so important as menstruation being a taboo for being around the Gurus / SGGSJ which IS GURU, certainly they would have written this somewhere in Gurbani!?? But the only things in Gurbani are actually speaking AGAINST such nonsense. I know I can't change your mind.. all you think is "gross" about women natural body functions and Singhs keep using it as a reason to discriminate such that some of the Bibis are starting to think they are gross themselves because they hear it so much from you guys! It's really sad! Live how you want... but I think you are missing the point. Waheguru Ji doesn't care about all this. You can wash all you want, and will still be covered by MILLIONS of bacteria!!! Virtually EVERY human has eyelash mites, tiny particles of skin fall off constantly. And beards??? Beards were tested and found to be bacteria farms!!! And you are worried about a Bibi who might be menstruating and using proper hygiene products?? LOL

I don't know what a shainey is... but yes like bells thousands all being rung at once and continuously... Only other thing I can compare it to is maybe a bunch of wine glasses with people running their fingers around them all at the same time. You know that high pitched resonance that happens when someone runs a wet finger around a crystal wine glass? Like that but many at once. Or bells.... its like the resonance of the bells more than the striking sound. Sound of a tibetan singing bowl is close too... (actually I have one of those here). So it's like pure resonance I am hearing and not something being struck or shaken....if that makes sense.

Yes, there are accounts of many men AND women who took amrit on the first day in 1699, including witnessed by a spy to the moghul emperor who specifically wrote he witnessed thousands of men AND women that day take baptism by the sword. Also, there are references to when Mai Bhago took amrit for sure. So yes women did take amrit. What are you trying to suggest? That Sikh religion was meant for only males??

I have heard "sounds" during meditation / simran before... and I say sounds but I know they were not physical. But those were more like static, electricity like, and stopped as soon as I lost concentration on it. I was doing about 1 hr simran/meditation this evening, completely alone... and something happened that actually scared me. I heard sounds, but it was different this time. It started as like faint bells, I actually thought something was off in the distance outside or something. But it got louder. And it was high pitched and sounded like thousands of bells being rung at the same time over and over. Like brass bells like the ones used for christmas carols (for those in the west you know those big hand held bells in different notes and tones) well it was like those but thousands all at once. I stopped repeating "waheguru" physically because the sounds got to be too much and I continued in my mind, but the bells did not go away. I even got up and walked around and stopped simran, but I could still hear it!!! It lasted another few minutes and went away after I turned the TV on to have some other sounds. I can't hear it anymore now (about 15 mins later). But it scared me. I thought I was experiencing tinnitus or something that something is wrong with my ears maybe. There was no sound in the room or nearby it was completely quiet. I had the lights off. I didn't hear the sound until about 45 mins into quiet simran alone. At that point I had relaxed enough to really not even feel my physical body and since it was dark I was kind of giving myself sensory deprivation a bit. The sound was no joke - like thousands of bells all at once. When it got louder it even kind of 'hurt' my ears (even though I know the sound was not even physically there). And it did not stop when I turned the light on and got up and even walked around for a few mins! So this is freaking me out a little bit. Has anyone else experienced this during Simran??