CdnSikhGirl

Wow I like this Sant Ji!  
"The Difference between men and women is not warranted by Sikh Religion"

The statement was made reference to taking Amrit, but the statement itself is all encompassing.  He did not say the difference is not warranted for Amrit (and he very well could have given that's what the subject matter was)... but instead he said, the difference is not warranted in Sikh Religion!!
Thanks for this find Paapiman! 

Actually I self-identify as a humanist. Not feminist.  I don't like seeing men put in disadvantage either.  Some of the situations mentioned on here where women take men to the cleaners in court etc.  I am against that too.  I think children need both parents, so I am more for equal / joint custody and equal bill paying when it comes to the kids - IF divorce is even necessary.  I am more for sticking together if at all possible.  You made a commitment, in front of God.  So try to work it out, instead of thinking grass is greener on the other side and leaving.  Most cases things can be worked through its just nobody wants to compromise.  Yes the 'old fashioned' or traditionalists just think the women should obey and do what the man wants.  Meaning he will not compromise. But unless he does (and her too) then yes it can lead to them parting ways.  He has to understand that marriage counselling etc won't just miraculously get her to obey his every whim. She is an individual too.  They have to learn to BOTH compromise.  But often times, neither one will budge and they split. It can't be all HIS way, and it can't be all her way either.  This is why I am for equality... they have to both compromise and sometimes its his way and sometimes hers. This is not feminism. This is humanism.  
But the way you guys paint it is that any model where the man doesn't have last say or authority = feminism.  Not only feminism but 'nasty western feminism' so you aren't happy unless the male has at least some form of dominant role over the female.  All else is seen as nasty western feminism lol.  But I don't see it that way... I see compromise, and mutual respect as humanism.  
 

Why does anyone have to promote anti drinking propaganda, when the Guru has already spoken on this matter?
You surprise me!  Who has been telling you that it's okay for men to drink but not okay for women to do the same? Which century are you from and what kind of sikhs are you interacting with?  Are you sure that you are actually interacting with genuine sikhs?  If you are, this kind of propaganda should not exist. You claim to be a sikh and also a 'westerner' but you simply refuse to accept the fact that it is the Sikh Gurus that are the pioneers of equal rights for women and men.  The Sikh Gurus taught equality for both sexes and a genuine sikh lives by these teachings!  I don't wish for anyone to say that they 'want to see in sikhi' something ever.  By saying this one  is implying that one is not happy with sikhi the way it is taught by the Gurus. We have no choice, we are not in any position to change sikhi as taught by the Gurus.  No one has the right to change anything about the teachings of the Gurus. If you are not happy with what you see in sikhi no one is forcing you to follow it and call yourself a sikh!!!  The Gurus taught us equality on every level ie gender, color or caste.  Who are we not to follow it and make bogus declarations as to what we would like to 'see in sikhi?
It is not sikhi that prevents 'bibies' from doing seva.  It is the men who claim falsely to be sikhs that are doing it and are fully supported by the women who relate with them. This has got nothing to do with sikhi. It is manmat of the ignorant masses that falsely associate themselves with this wonderful religion. It is the culture they follow which belongs to the Stone Age!  They are the duffers of the 21 century.
The Gurus have never called women impure because of their menstrual cycle or their ability to menstruate..  It is through this cylce and ability that a woman's body is able to give birth or experience pregnancy.  We are all born after the ovum has been fertilized.  When the ovum fails to fertilize, the levels of estrogen and progestrone decrease causing woman's body to shed the lining of the uterus wall.  So it is not rocket science to understand this simple female reproductive function. The two  hormones  thicken the lining of the womb to receive fertilized ovum thus preparing it for pregnancy.  Menstruation occurs when there is no pregnancy!  What is so impure about this?  Nothing!!  So, why would sikhi look down on women when it knows very well that procreation is impossible without female ovulation/menstrual cycle?  It doesn't.
I have grown up in a sikh household and I have never heard this BS from anyone that wives are 'inferior to their husbands and therefore should look upon them as God and obey them!'  THIS IS UTTER BS.  My father has great respect for my mother.  All my uncles treat my aunties with decorum.  I am the youngest of the six children and have three older brothers.  They have never been disrespectful to me or my other female siblings ever!  They argue all the time , no doubt, but never have they ever put any of my sisters or myself down.  If they ever did, I am sure,  my parents will never ever stand for it, full stop. They have always taught us to love and respect each other.  So. I have no clue where or which century you originate from, no idea! My mother is my father's soulmate and vice versa.  They are both amritdharies and they are so in tune with each other that is amazing! They can almost read each others' minds!  My spiritual training did not start somewhere in a gurdwara, it started right here at home with my mum and dad as my mentors!  It is so shocking to read what you have to say about the sikh people or sikhi.  All I can say is that you are not interacting with the genuine sikhs.  My father is my hero. He has worked hard and looked after us so well unconditionally.  I wish I could write about my father here but I can't, it will take me a long time to finish what I have to say.  My mother is my heroine.  She is the only woman I know that has no double. No one can match her. She is unique and I have learned everything from her, I wish I could write about her too, but I can't.  I have never seen my parents arguing about 'equality' or 'inferiority' ever.
 
 

'Whitey' is a deliberately degrading and racist remark... just FYI. 
p.s. I never refer to Punjabis as 'Browny' or other deragatory terms...
 

Bhakti and shakti should go hand in hand but the problem is that either people are too Bhakti oriented and throw away bana and shastar etc or people are too shakti oriented and just only wear bana and shastars and don't care about Bhakti. There has to be a balance 

It's a small community here. Maybe 100 or so regulars and of those many are older aunties etc and the younger ones are more students who don't have extra time.  The youngest kids many can't speak Punjabi themselves.
 
So I am stuck with books on Punjabi which are usually just the alphabet and a word for each letter.  Doesn't matter how many times I look at the alphabet it won't help me understand what someone says... It would be like trying to learn English and all you can find is:
A - Apple B - Bat C - cat with a photo of a cat an apple and a bat.  See my point (look at the attached photo - THIS is what I was given when I asked someone at the Gurdwara about learning Punjabi - there is no sentence structure, no vocabulary beyond one word for each letter, no conversational things like common phrases, no verb conjugations etc)? 

All I have seen her do is challenge certain views on women and she used Gurbani to do so. How is that insulting anything? You however have directly insulted women over and over on this site. Women that our Gurus put on equal level to us.  What is she supposed to do when you are suggesting women are not even fully human, that they are downgrades to males? It's an insult to suggest that our Gurus gave equal rights to Sikh women?? This is first I have heard of this!  Sikhism does NOT put females beneath us. What kind of false information are you spreading anyway? What kind of 'ethic' treats women so lowly?? Gurbani says straight out that we are to all see the divine in each other.  Tell me how much respect YOU deserve saying that women are not even fully human, are half men and a downgrade?  
I know her outside of here on Facebook.  She does not disprespect anyone, she only gets frustrated at how some Singhs treat women and want to give women less rights, less privileges, a lesser position while looking down their noses at them. And believe me, I have been lurking here for awhile, and your lowly views of women are pretty obvious!  Besides suggesting women are not even fully human, you have also made suggestions that women should not be given any authority to make decisions, you have said some pretty deragatory things about women.  And you think YOU deserve respect?!!!!  
Our Gurus did not want this for females.  It's YOU who are insulting Sikhi because of your own chauvenist views.  I'm sorry but I had to come here and comment when I heard about this.  I do not look down on women at all and I actually work in support of young girls group here in Germany.  I have no idea what religion you are following but it's not Sikhi. 
 
 

I was elected last year for 2015 treasurer position.  I have been attending the Gurdwara here nearly every week for almost 5 years now.  One thing we have which is good is the projection screen and all the shabads are on there with Gurmukhi, Romanized, and English translation.... Same like the LCD screens at Darbar Sahib. 
Yes 3HO does things very differently.  Some strange that I just would not feel right doing. Like I have seen videos of them with turbans removed and swinging their kesh around while dancing wildly to Gurbani. I have seen some of them doing idol worship to Siri Chand statues etc and on FB Sikhism group someone posted photos of an Amritdhari couple being married by Hindu customs around havan complete with sindoor.  But they had 5 k's and turban too.... It was in Rishikesh I think.  Their Darbar always involves yoga some of which can be borderline sexual in nature.  It's entirely a different hybrid between Sikhi and Hinduism so it's just not what I am looking for.  And pls don't think I am saying anything bad about Hinduism... I just think mixing two religions can be bad for both (and confusing). 

^ agreed. SRM is inclusive of the entire panth, and should be respected as such.
Couldn't have put it better myself.....Oh wait, I did! ;)

I think most important is follow SGGSJ - our only Guru.  If you become Amrtidhari, follow the RM that given to you by Panj Pyaras.  You are actually BOUND to the one that THEY pass to you.  Will this cause some to shop for the jatha that most suits them? Yes... it will.  Does that matter in the grand scheme of things? No... because ultimately this journey is a PERSONAL one.  Sikhi is not so much about outer rehet.  It's inner rehet which matters most.  Outer rehet is meaningless if it actually takes you AWAY from your personal INNER path.  After all, each and every one of us, is traversing this journey ultimately alone!  And as someone else put it earlier, stick to the jatha or group that most matches how you are travelling the path.  
 
For me, Sikh Rehet Maryada is the best one as far as being unified.  Because it does not preclude reading more banis, it does not preclude ending akhand paaths etc with raagmala, it does not prevent you from doing longer rehras sahib, or adding more to sohila etc.  It's giving the minimums.  Now, that is more inclusive because DDT members could still do everything they do, and still be within the SRM.  Same can not be said the other way around.  We should focus on our OWN journey, instead of trying to enforce things on others.  This is why the minimum requirements are the best to have laid out in a written format, and then let jathas who wish to be more restrictive to add on top of that.  Most cases this works just fine.  If we take the most restrictive RMs however, and try to enforce that on the panth, what you will end up with is FAR FAR fewer people ever taking Amrit. Some of you might say well they don't deserve to be Khalsa then if they can't follow the most restrictive RM.  But then you are actually encouraging exclusivity instead of inclusivity.  Amrit Sanchar is not a certificate of purity.  It's the beginning.. not the end result.  It's a license to learn and not the degree so to speak.  You don't want to scare all your prospective students away to the point that very few will ever take Amrit. So it's better to have what the minimum requirements are in writing, and then have individual decide where to go after that (as long as it's not backwards).  
Those who keep saying over and over that SRM was not accepted by the entire panth, keep forgetting that the other RMs were not accepted by the entire panth either!  In fact many more follow SRM than follow the jatha specific RMs. There are far more Sikhs around the world who do not associate with specific jathas or sects than there are who do.  And SRM can be followed by ALL sects without causing issue... when it says read 3 nitnem banis in morning, that is the minimum. Its not stopping anyone from reading 5!  Etc.  SRM says raagmala is part of bani and should be included in SGGSJ.  However reading it as part of akhand paaths etc it says is up to who is doing it.  So it's not stopping DDT for example, from including it at end of akhand paaths.  See my point?  The ONLY issue which might be of contention is that SRM stresses equality of gender, and full participation by women in seva, including Panj Pyaras.  So yes, by excluding women, they would be going against it on that one issue.  
So yes, SRM does deserve respect as it's the most inclusive of all of the RMs.  All jathas can pretty much follow SRM without breaking it, and still follow their jatha specific things.  SRM was written the way it was specifically to BE INCLUSIVE of all the sects as much as possible.  So even if one does not follow it, they should respect that it took over 13 years, and over hundreds Sikhs to complete with aim on being all inclusive as much as possible, and creating an RM as the base RM or minimum for all Amritdhari Sikhs.  Those who try to say it was never accepted by "all" of the panth, conveniently forget that the RM they follow was also not accepted by "all" of the panth either.  
Please respect all of the RMs, but follow the RM that you were given at Amrit Sanchar.  And don't try to force jatha specific RMs on others outside of those jathas.  All of them should not be purposely disrespected over and over with things like "so-called" etc. because in the case of SRM it was arrived at by Guru Panth... which is embodiment of the Guru.  Please remember that.  
 
 

In conclusion I think at this point for many Punjabi Siks it is virtually impossible for them to separate Sikhi from Punjabi culture ...and become angry sometimes to the point of viciousness if anyone tries to practice Sikhi without all the Pinjabi cultural aspects dating back to the time of the Gurus fully intact.... so no I do not think they are ready for Sikhi to be a Universal religion.  Which is a shame because I believe Gurbani taken alone does not require Punjabi culture practices and even speaks against many!  And so many people around the world could benefit from simran, Kirtan etc.  So it's sad... 

There is n 3HO here and I am not into yoga lol or wearing all white... my sangat here are all Punjabi but they follow Sikh Rehet Maryada and nobody is limited from doing anything. I am in fact on the Gurdwara Management Committee here locally - as a Gori - at a nearly all Punjabi Gurdwara.  I dont have any desire to abandon these people nor adopt a yoga / Sikhi hybrid.  I don't think there is anything wrong with doing yoga... but I just wouldn't feel comfortable mixing it with kirtan, ardas etc.  And I like to wear colourful suits :)
And I thought ridding ourselves of duality IS positive... how can it be at all negative??
 
 
 

I guess what I find difficult with *some* sects in Sikhism is that Sikhi is supposed to be about ^^^^that  ONLY Akaaall ---- 
There is only ONE in existence and that ONE IS ALL.  ALL IS that ONE.  To me, duality is not the way to find that ONE. To me, the way to find that ONEness is to practice ONEness in daily life.  I guess that's where I have trouble seeing how traditional Indic customs of placing restrictions on one gender, while giving the other gender full privileges, to me that is causing more duality, reinforcing more separateness... " you look different than me therefore I'll give you less opportunities" kind of thing.  When I strive to look for ONEness and inclusiveness to break that duality, it seems like these sects put up roadblocks that instead reinforce duality by trying to tell me over and over "YOU can't because you are female and I CAN because I am male"  when what I see is there is no you and I.  There is only Akaal Purakh.  I see only that light within each person, and not the temporary gender.  In my whole life I have never imagined telling a guy that I will disallow him to do something because he is a male.  I kind of giggle about the Mother thing... because a male can be just as much a parent, participate just as much in raising a child.  Who carries and gives birth is meaningless... or else adoptive parents would never have a bond with their adopted children.  It's not who gives birth, but who actually raises a child that is their parents.  Men and women can both do that equally.  But it's participation in the religion itself... it's when you read something which says to see ALL with single eye of equality and that the divine light is equally in ALL, but then you have adherents who practice it totally differently - to the point they tell me the way I have been practicing it is wrong - and that this way which only perpetuates more duality doesn't make sense to me.  The ultimate truth is ONEness.  Not male and female.  The ultimate truth is ONE.  not two (genders or otherwise).  So I get a bit frustrated when Singhs wish to create more duality by telling me "You CAN'T because you ARE female"  I am not female... I a soul who is genderless who is temporarily inhabiting a female gendered body.  My soul is the exact same as yours, so in matters relating to religion, we should be equally treated.  Those who say "no WOMAN gave her head that day as an excuse..." I see NO WOMAN, I see NO MAN.  I only see separate instances of the ONE same light.  My intention is not cause any insult. I am trying to show people this reality.... but I feel I am being dragged back into duality more... Is Sikhi about creating more duality....did I miss something?  I thought Sikhi was about REMOVING duality! 
 

:(
 
 
 
 
 
 
jus kidin

What brought me to Sikhi:

- Concept of  Nirgun / Sargun
- Concept that ALL is ONE and that ONE IS ALL = Creator IS the Creation and the Creation is within the Creator
- Proof in SGGSJ that matter and consciousness and intrinsically connected (Ang 21 - everywhere I look I see the Lord pervading in the union of Shiva and Shakti, of consciousness and matter) So for me concept of feminine and masculine are just "principles" 
- Concept that all of this is illusion = science agrees as matter is not really the solid 'stuff' we think it is... electrons randomly pop into and out of existence seemingly randomly - but not really... double slit experiment showed us consciousness creates matter.  
- Concept that we are not just drops FROM an ocean, but we are actually IN that ocean and have just forgotten we are here = meaning we ARE the ocean and we only need to reconnect to the source)
- The barrier keeping us from realizing we are still in the same ocean, is Ego.  The sense of individual separate identity.  The 'Harkiran' in my case is false. The consciousness which is EXPERIENCING and DOING through the character called Harkiran is actually Creator, and this is the same for every single person, animal, plant, even mineral. 
- Concept that ALL is equal.  Any sense of hierarchies or statuses are Ego created.  Hence, there is no low caste, or high caste.  It's in our silly human perceptions of separateness.  This includes gender.  The gender is temporary.  The Divine Light is within ALL hearts.  

Understanding this, I know culture can not be avoided as Sikhi is a very ethnic religion. However I can also see how the religion is completely separate from the culture.  So while I acknowledge Indic customs exist, I also acknowledge that they are not part of the religion itself. Meaning, while most Sikhs were born into the culture and practice those cultural norms, I was not, and since religion is separate from the culture, I do not have to follow the culture itself - or at least entirely.  I don't think this means I have to give up Sikhi as Chatanga1 would have me do.  While I understand in Punjabi culture many women are subordinate to their husbands, it doesn't mean that to be a Sikh women, you MUST be subordinate to men.  It's not the fact that some women are subordinate to their husbands etc. that is the issue... the issue is in trying to force ALL women into this lesser role.  If it's done by choice that's fine... but since it's not actually commanded in Sikhi.   I even proved Paapiman is in contradiction to even himself, as he says women are to see husband as God, but then he says the Gurbani instruction to see God in ALL, is only for Brahamgyanis, qualifying his statement by saying "I am incapable of seeing God in All, so what do you want me to do?" meaning, he is trying to support that the Gurus told women to do something that only a Brahamgyani is capable of?  That means if she DOES see God in her husband, then she is actually much higher spiritually than her husband, unless he too sees God in his wife (and they both see God in everyone not just each other).  So that tuk he quoted can not be taken in that context or it causes a contradiction.  

I don't see anywhere in Gurbani that commands women to 'obey' and that men just get to enjoy being treated like Gods simply for being male.  I understand some people follow that culturally.  But the philosophy of Sikhi itself does not contain the culture.  So I don't see how I need to obey anyone simply because they are in male form and I am in female form. In fact I dont spend much time thinking of the physical at all, because I am always thinking on the spiritual level, and the metaphors, rather than these false statuses etc.  While some are so caught up in the physical 'rules' etc they seem to have forgotten the spirituality in the process.  Chatanga1 and Paapiman both concentrate so much on trying to make women obey them, they have completely forgotten to see all equally and see the ocean for what it is...  
Anyway the only thing I disagree with are those who seek to subordinate women by force or coercion as a requisite of Sikhi when it's not  
And I advocate the FULL --- yes FULL participation of women in their own religion.  And that includes Panj Pyara seva... because I see the ocean when I look around and not the separate drops.  If that makes me wrong, I still don't see anything in Gurbani itself which contradicts it, so I don't think I am doing anything wrong.  And I am following Sikh Rehet Maryada.  I have not broken any part of it.  
And I recognize that both Paapiman and Chatanga1 embody God as well...  though maybe they are put here as challenges on the path.  I am not sure... but they have not brought me out of chardikala as of yet despite their trying.


 

But they need to realize that with anything good on social media they will have a good number of followers (any) and that would add to their responsibilities on what they say and promote.
BBC stunt was great.

Both of you drop the subject. I'll send you to the naughty box if you guys don't behave. It's starting to get annoying.

Do u mean 3HO??

A person can get all the protein they need from a vegan diet pretty easily. 

Wow guys, what she is advocating is not against Sikhism at all. To see everyone equally despite differences, is this not what the purpose of Amrit was? To put everyone on the same level and rid the Khalsa of petty differences used as excuses to limit some people? Correct me if I am wrong but gender was included in this.  What I can see is that what she wants to see is not asking for your manhood in a jar!  She wants Singhs to respect Singhnis on the same level as them (meaning not be seen as somehow lesser), and to have the same opportunities to do seva.  Why is this so difficult for some of you to even fathom accepting? It's not like having a Singhni do seva equally alongside of you is somehow harming you at all. There is no restriction in gurbani placed on souls born into a female body. All these nonsense restrictions are purely cultural and will be our demise.  Nobody wants to be made to feel lower than someone else.  Everyone wants to be included and have the same opportunities.  If you have an older brother, think how it felt growing up being made to feel second best all the time.  And not by your Mother.  Who do all young boys most want to be accepted by as an equal?  Their older brother.  In reality the younger brother is not lesser and boys all grow up.  The difference is, you are advocating seeing girls being second their whole lives.  And is it their fault they were born into a female body? We should be encouraging our sisters, our daughters. Not making them feel like they deserve less than us.  
For the record, I agree with her on the marriage issue that in Sikhism, the wife is not seen in a lesser position to the husband and I am a married male.  Husband and wife have equal authority.  I would never expect my wife to blindy obey me, and I always help in domestic chores. My wife is anything but submissive, and I cherish her for that because she actually has passion and drive to accomplish things in this rare human form we have obtained.  Many wives choose to be submissive or are brought up to be submissive because of are Punjab roots (and if they are happy with that, its fine but should not be forced) but it is not actually a part of Sikhism.  I recognize the difference between culture and faith.
And I agree that women should be able to do all seva including Panj Pyaras. There is no reason they can't. Our goal is to escape duality, and in reality we are genderless.  So to put restrictions on some and say you can't do this because you are a woman, means you cant see beyond dualistic thinking yet. In actuality all of us are Akal Purakh in Sargun form as separate entities.  Our task is to realize our existence as Akal Purakh in Nirgun form.  How can you do that when you seem so stuck on male vs female? Let it go Chatanga. She is closer to this reality than are you, and she is actually following what our Gurus have taught regarding humanity, and I think it scares you because you are still stuck on trying to fabricate reasons why male is better or deserves more than female.  You have to learn to let it go.
She has done a lot to inspire others by actually living what our Gurus taught about equality, what they taught about the divine within us all.  She was in news across the world, and paved the way for young Sikh girls to tie distar in the military. She did this, standing out and at risk of ridicule by not only everyone she knew in the military but also desire what we born into Sikhism might think.  What have you done? Don't you think that took a bit of bravery? She deserves more respect than being called the names you have used, which make me embarassed to be from same culture as you.
And for the record, many born into Sikh families in the west can not speak fluent Punjabi either.  Should we all just up and leave Sikhism? Is that what you want?  
Oh and I also follow the Sikh Rehet Maryada so feel free to call me names too.  It won't matter to me. 
 

Some of you will find this entertaining.  Interview was from last November, but The Sikh Review printed it in the Sept 2015 issue.  I don't care if my real name is in it (previous and new one both) I don't have anything to hide.
However, I am praying that there won't be any personal attacks either through the Sangat here in person etc...as a result of my posting this. Please keep your negative comments / attacks to here only. 
 

I am praying this does not escalate...some are suggesting this could end up escalating to 1984 all over again.  To everyone who has family in Punjab I will pray for you.  Even my inlaws and husband are in India though they are in Kashmir not Punjab.  

Majority?? Last I looked it seemed numbers were closer than that... But happy if it is!!!

Majority?? Last I looked it seemed numbers were closer than that... But happy if it is!!!

BREAKING NEWS: CBC AND CTV HAVE CALLED IT A LIBERAL MAJORITY!!
 
AKAAL!!