paapiman

I think we should stop this debate now as there is no point in wasting our time further. You cannot deny that the akhree arth (without context) of the tuk above is that a woman should consider her husband as a lord. It's also been proven that akhree arth of a tuk can stand alone without uthanka and context. If you don't want to believe in it, it's your choice. A husband must definitely respect his wife. I don't believe that your thinking is bad or unethical. At the end of the day, if your actions are pious and good, you will be rewarded for that. Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa Waheguru jee kee Fateh

In the same way, why does not a mother bow to a son? Even Satguru jee used to bow to his mother. Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa Waheguru jee kee Fateh

Yes they can. I just found one. eyih iB dwiq qyrI dwqwr ] This tuk can stand alone and can also be linked to the previous tuk. If it stands alone, then it means that all gifts to all beings have been given by the Lord. I think you know the common arth of it. Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa Waheguru jee kee Fateh

Sister, I think you are getting emotional. A son respects his mother, the same way the wife respects her husband. To talk about subordination does not make sense. We can matha tek anyone as long as we do it with the right intention. The intention is the key. Is it giving respect or worship? When we matha tek to SSGGSJ, we do it with the intention that he is the incarnation of God. When we do it to our mothers, the intention changes. Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa Waheguru jee kee Fateh

I think many Gurbani tuks can stand alone too without uthanka or context. Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa Waheguru jee kee Fateh

Also, just for your info, there are Sikh women out there who consider their husbands as lords or believe in the concept of Pativarta dharam. My mother is one such example. She used to bow to my father (like one does to Gursikhs, parents, etc) when she was young. Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa Waheguru jee kee Fateh

Sati does not only refer to the practice of women being thrown into fire. There are different types of Sati. The foremost Sati is a lady who will die, on hearing the death of her husband. Example of this, was the wife of Bhagat Jaidev jee Maharaaj. I think the lowest level is a woman who does not commit adultery. Similarly, there are different levels for a Jati, which pertains to males. Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa Waheguru jee kee Fateh

Haha.. nah sister, I don't expect my wife to look upon me as God as I am a big sinner. I will respect her a lot, in case I get married (hopefully I don't get married). But I expect you to look upon your husband as a demi-god atleast, especially if he is a Gursikh. I will try to find out the uthanka for that shabad. More research is needed here on my part. Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa Waheguru jee kee Fateh

The relationship with the spouse will be that of a female friend, which is not possible for a Singh with any other woman. So it will be different from the relationship with one's mother or sister. Also, for procreation, at times the sexual act will have to be performed many times before the wife gets pregnant. This type of physical closeness is not possible in any other sort of relationship. Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa Waheguru jee kee Fateh

One can have love, deeper spiritual connection, sharing of energy, union and caring, even without physical sexual intercourse. Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa Waheguru jee kee Fateh

So according to you, all the Sikh historians,gursikhs,scholars, etc of that time forgot to mention about such a revolutionary event while they mentioned about women doing seva in langar, listening to katha, kirtan, etc, which were in a sense, less revolutionary. I challenge you to find any source of information (you will never find it) which says that women were in Punj Pyaray during tenth master's time. At Hajoor Sahib, women do not even qualify for khande da amrit. We can keep debating about this for a long time, but I don't think there will be a conclusion. Let's go to the main source. There is a clear tuk in Gurbani which states that a woman should look upon her husband as a Lord. ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਜਿਨਿ ਪ੍ਰਿਉ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਕਰਿ ਜਾਨਿਆ ॥ Says Nanak, she who looks upon her husband as Lord 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 know there is a deeper meaning to it, but you cannot nullify the akhree arth of it as Gurbani is all truth. If you do not believe in this akhree arth, then you should not believe in akhree arths of all Gurbani tuks as many tuks have deeper meanings to it. I challenge you to find a tuk in Gurbani which instructs a man to look upon his wife as a Goddess. Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa Waheguru jee kee Fateh

Why did Satguru Sri Guru Gobind Singh jee Maharaaj NOT allow women in Panj Pyaray, even though some women had reached Brahamgyan? On the other hand, women were given rights to do seva in langar by Satguru jee himself. Follow Satguru jee OR follow so-called SRM? Choice is yours. Panth cannot accept anything which goes against the hukam of Satguru jee. Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa Waheguru jee kee Fateh

The tuk in Gurbani, related to father and mother is meant for us. Singh saab, please do not apply that tuk to guru saheb himself. Satguru jee is the incarnation of GOD. If modern science can create babies without male intervention, why cannot GOD do it? Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa Waheguru jee kee Fateh

Let me ask you a question. How come the so-called SRM does not mention about Sampat paath? Sampat paath was taught to the Singhs by tenth master himself. How come, it is missing in the so-called SRM? How can the panth accept an incomplete document? Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa Waheguru jee kee Fateh

Even if all GURUDWARAS in the world start following the so-called SRM, it does not make it the maryada of the panth. There was a time in Sikh history, when some corrupt people in gurughars did not accept parshaad made by so-called low caste people. Would you accept that as a part of maryada? Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa Waheguru jee kee Fateh

Women have given birth to babies WITHOUT male intervention in the past. Foremost example of this is, Shromani Bhagat Baba Kabeer jee Maharaaj. Bhagat jee's mother was a virgin. Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa Waheguru jee kee Fateh

Singhs never consider women as inferior or not worthy. Men will always need WOMEN to take birth. At first, a Sikh would need a WOMAN to give him birth but later on, a woman (and a man) would need FIVE GURSIKH MEN to give her/him a new birth. One birth by women and another by men. Sounds like equality. Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa Waheguru jee kee Fateh

Khalsa jee, please read below the sakhi of Jin Datt. It is from a non-Sikh website but it should be an eye opener. http://www.jainworld...irtues/ch16.asp After reading it, one can only imagine the life of a Gurmukh couple. Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa Waheguru jee kee Fateh

I agree that Maharaaj gave full authority to the panth which means that sects which started from that time must be given precedence over other cults/sects which sprang up later. Orthodox sects would include Nanaksar, DDT, Nihangs, Sevapanthi, Udhasi, etc Whatever happened during the times of Satgurus (which was approved by the Satguru) was perfect. No authority in this world can change that, including the panth. We should all follow that blindly. First example - Women were allowed to do seva in the langar. No person should restrict them from doing it. Second example - Women were NEVER allowed to be in Panj Pyaray, even though there were women at that time, who had reached the state of Brahamgyan. No person should change that. Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa Waheguru jee kee Fateh

If it was ONLY about DDT, I would have thought about it. But all orthodox sects of Sikhism (DDT, Nanaksar, Nihangs, etc) have more or less the same views regarding women. How do you reply to that? How can we start following sects/cults which started many years after the tenth master? Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa Waheguru jee kee Fateh

Good points Singh Saab. Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa Waheguru jee kee Fateh

No problem. Humans like me always make mistakes. Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa Waheguru jee kee Fateh

I feel (might be wrong) that you cannot fathom a happy marriage without sex for pleasure. Please read below the sakhi of Jin Datt. It is from a non-Sikh website but it should be an eye opener for you. http://www.jainworld.com/book/tenuniversalvirtues/ch16.asp After reading it, one can only imagine the life of a Gurmukh couple. SEX does not bring Gurmukh couples together, GURBANI does. Gurbani is the medicine. I have already mentioned earlier that eating food for PLEASURE is also a sin in Gurmat. Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa Waheguru jee kee Fateh

There is currently NO one Sikh Rehat Maryada. The so-called Sikh Rehat Maryada was not accepted by the panth. How can the orthodox sects of Sikhism accept a maryada which takes out two main Gurbanees from the nitnaym? There are many more issues other than this. Please listen to the scholar below. Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa Waheguru jee kee Fateh

Bro, I don't think we will be able to sustain a healthy body by eating leaves only. Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa Waheguru jee kee Fateh