paapiman

If wearing some color was discouraged it would have been there in bani, or atleast there would have been hints?

Are you 100% sure that there is no reference to red or green color in Gurbani (including Sri Dasam Granth Sahib jee)?

Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa

Waheguru jee kee Fateh

Same with "not having sex with a muslim woman", so its okay to have sex with a Hindu woman? No, it was the context for we were at war with Muslims and there were high chances of Muslim women falling in Khalsa soldiers hand, and the injunctions were to prevent sexual abuse of female prisoners.

Good point.

SRM is the purest form of rehat we have, altough there are some errors in there too but far less than Taksal or other sampardas which present a cultist view. For me Taksalis and Missionaries are same

So you think you are above Srimaan 108 Sant Gyani Gurbachan Singh jee Khalsa Bhindrawale (author of RM)? or Srimaan Sant Baba Nand Singh jee Maharaaj?

How can taksalis and missionaries be same? Can you please explain? I understand they can reach the same spiritual level by doing bhagtee.

Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa

Waheguru jee kee Fateh

Paapi, ninda and telling the truth are two different things.

So when Guru Nanak called Babar a Jabar Guru ji did ninda? Oh no but Guru Nanak Sahib were god incarnate so human rules don't count

JHOOT NA BOL PANDEY SACH KAHIAI

Bro, you cannot deny that there is a lot of truth on that website. If one says, it's all false, how can that be true?

Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa

Waheguru jee kee Fateh

And yeah sure wearing red and green is evil.

I am trying to find a sakhi related to the color of clothing (which I heard from a Saint). I don't think it is evil to wear red of green, but rather not recommended in Gurmat.

Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa

Waheguru jee kee Fateh

lol so a website Sarbloh is your source.

Bro man, I heard it from a Taksali Singh too. One cannot say that all the content on their site is false. I think that would be classified as ninda, a heinous sin in Sikhism.

Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa

Waheguru jee kee Fateh

You do know that the site you used as reference is a site which has the same ideology as niddar...

Bro man, I heard it from a Taksali Singh too. One cannot say that all the content on their site is false. I think that would be classified as ninda, a heinous sin in Sikhism.

Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa

Waheguru jee kee Fateh

Bro, well why would it change all of a sudden?

I don't know. I will talk to a Sikh scholar about it when I get time. Here is the proof.

"The Khalsa initiation for women, as in Budha Dal, is separate from the men in Hazoor Sahib. The Amrit is prepared by just reading ‘Japji’ and six verses from Anand Sahib, and wielding a ‘Kard’ (single-edged sword or knife) only" [1]

[1] - http://www.sarbloh.info/htmls/article_samparda_hazoori6.html

Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa

Waheguru jee kee Fateh

Regarding inequality

Sikh women led congregations at Gurus times. Were appointed as preachers by the Gurus. Led battles (many western countries still don't allow women in infantry). We've had Sikh females leading Sikh countries (Patiala state had a female PM). Women have historically performed Kirtan at Harmandar Sahib

Satkirin Kaur, don't be discouraged by these people. They have not realised what Sikhi is about yet and are stuck in the rituals and traditional un Sikh though.

I never said that women cannot be appointed as preachers or lead battles or become ministers. They can do it all except the ones, not authorized by Satguru jee. Biggest one being, not to be in Panj Pyaray.

Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa

Waheguru jee kee Fateh

Bro my grandmother took khandey di Pahul from hazur sahib in 1980... My brother in law's cousin sister got khandey di Pahul from hazur sahib in 2013... It's something you heard but I have people in my own family who took Amrit from hazur sahib!

Bro, I think it was during the times of Srimaan 108 Gyani Gurbachan Singh jee Khalsa Bhindrawale (jathedaar of DDT) that he observed it. It might have been before 1980 then. But, this practice definitely existed.

Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa

Waheguru jee kee Fateh

Bro, I meant without male intervention in a physical sense. Even then, modern science claims that they can create babies without men. Please read below.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-79711/We-create-babies-men-claim-scientists.html

What other things I said are unscientific? I am curious to know.

Bro, please don't discriminate against people from India. India is a country with enough smart people. That was stereotypical, which I believe is a sin in Sikhism. I don't mind it but we are here to learn from each other.

Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa

Waheguru jee kee Fateh

If you are indifferent too, or dislike or are scared of sex, simply don't get married.

Don't tell other married couples not to have sex mate!

No point in getting personal bro. Let's just focus on the topic. What do you think about the sakhi above?

Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa

Waheguru jee kee Fateh

I think we should not debating about this issue. We can keep stretching this.

In conclusion, there are two arhts (there might be many more) of the following tuks.

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 husband as a lord

Or

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,

If you don't want to believe in the first arth, its your choice. First, is for any woman on how to live a married life and the second one applies to all humans.

I will request you to find the uthanka for this shabad too.

Do you have any other concerns regarding DDT RM, other than gender inequality?

Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa

Waheguru jee kee Fateh

Regarding red portion in rehitnama..this need to be properly contextualized, its very basic beginning relative conduct at initial stage out there to help seeker meant to be used as aid - one can refrain from wearing red if color effects their state of mind if we were talk about gunas- red seem to fall in rajogun. Bhai dya singh ji in his rehtinama classify lifestyle of sikh in three different categories- gristhi(rajogun/satogun), behingum(satogun) and akaali nihang(rajogun/balance of satogun/tamas)-soorme to prevent sikhs falling from same pitfalls as many other dharamis sharia panthis have.

Our youths seem to be turning some basic contents rehitnamas (due to lack of contexualization, fail see things in stages, different aspects) into crazy anglican christian like ten commandments or some crazy pandit turning things into bhraminvad, or some crazy mullah who idiolize haddith to the point where they start using hadith principles as yard stick to measure someone spirituality totally ignoring stages within dharma, essence teaching.

I am afraid some of our youths are falling into same sort of mindset sharia mullahs are following- let hadiths take precedence over gnosis teaching of quran. etc.

You are right in a sense bro. We must not be very strict on such kind of an issue as there are bigger demons to conquer. But, if a person refers to not wearing red as weird, then we must at least guide that person as it is a hukam of our lord.

Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa

Waheguru jee kee Fateh

Even if u take it by itself it's saying to view the transcendent Lord as your husband. (Soul bride) NOT to view your husband as God!

Nobody should be looked upon as God except God or else we are told that the divine light of God resides in ALL equally. So nobody should consider anyone else higher on the totem pole so to speak.

I get the impression you are fairly young and have been subject to a lot of cultural influence that put women beneath men. So you look purposely to interpret Sikhi as also putting women beneath men. I can tell in your wording and tone that you consider yourself above me simply because you have male genitalia.

All I can tell you is that I have had some deeply spiritual experiences through simran and otherwise where I have experienced a glimpse that oneness spoken of. I have been outside my physical body and experienced that perspective... Which has no gender. I hope you someday also experience it.

A child is subordinate to a parent only because they are still growing. Once an adult they are equals. Though a child will always look up to their parents because they raised that person. A husband is never above his wife. They both contain the same divine light of Waheguru Ji equally and they are both adults. What's between someones legs does not denote their position in some rank structure. I wish you could see this. I truly hope someday u do. I have likely been studying this longer than u have been alive (if my estimate on your age is correct). And I have had spiritual experiences happen to me on their own all my life. I remember being in out of body state at 8 yrs old as if it was normal part of life that everyone experienced. I didn't know at the time that those experiences are rare.

I truly hope you see the truth and not go through life with an inflated Ego thinking you are above women and privileged simply because you happened to be born male. If you do you are missing the point that ALL is ONE

I think we should not debating about this issue. We can keep stretching this.

In conclusion, there are two arhts (there might be many more) of the following tuks.

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 husband as a lord

Or

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,

If you don't want to believe in the first arth, its your choice. First, is for any woman on how to live a married life and the second one applies to all humans.

I will request you to find the uthanka for this shabad too.

Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa

Waheguru jee kee Fateh

I agree that SRM is not right in stopping women from doing kirtan at Harmandar Sahib but its still better than most sects with weird laws such as not wearing red/green and other weird stuff with no Sikhi basis.

Satguru jee instructed Khalsa not to wear red. There is a sakhi associated with it too. What is so weird about it? Scientifically speaking, colors do affect a human mind.

Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa

Waheguru jee kee Fateh

In one of the posts papimaan wrote that women aren't qualified to take Amrit at hazur sahib.. This is actually really wrong.. I know many Bibis who took Amrit from Sri hazur sahib( not the kard Amrit but the khandey di bata amrit)...

Just to clarify...

I am pretty sure bro, I heard that women did not receive Khanday da amrit at Hajoor sahib. Maybe, they stopped this practice now. I am not sure. They used to get only Kirpan da amrit.

I can find the source for it, if you like.

Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa

Waheguru jee kee Fateh

Satkirin, it is nice to see someone using their Bibek Budhi (discerning intellect) before accepting something as the truth. That is what Gurbani tells us to do, we can't follow sects or Jathas blindly just because they seem to get authority from the fact that they were established during the Guru period. Anything contrary to Guru Granth Sahib is un Sikh, even if it does seem to have historical basis.

I would like to congratulate you on your decision to take Khande Di Pahul from a Gurdwara which follows the SRM and not man made or cultist Rehat.

To all the ones proclaimining Bhagat Kabeer had a virgin birth, Guru Sahiban had kids without sexual union (& Jesus had a virgin birth)... Read Gurbani:

The infinite Hukam (Cosmic Law) fashions human body with beautiful features from father's semen and mother’s blood (eggs).

Guru Nanak Dev Ji, 1022, GGS

Mother and father create a child through sexual union according to the Hukam (Cosmic Law) ~ biology of the reproduction of life.

Guru Nanak Dev Ji, 989, GGS

The current so-called SRM is man made as it was made by a bunch of scholars and not accepted by the panth.

The tuk in Gurbani, related to father and mother is meant for us. 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 (in a physical sense), why cannot GOD do it?

In Gurbani, one is refereed to as a keera(insect) and kiram(worm). Will you apply that to Satguru jee?

Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa

Waheguru jee kee Fateh

Here is where you are wrong. Animals don't have sex for pleasure. They are the ones who do it only for procreation. They do it by pure instinct drive and not for the reason to be close to their spouse. They are driven by pure instinct only and not a thought to derive pleasure. An animal could care less if there was pleasure or not. They only know that they are driven to do it when it's breeding season.

Humans are above that because we have no breeding season where we instinctively breed. For us there is an intimate connection with our spouse in the act.

You have us and animals confused...

IJJ Singh is correct.

Can you please provide any sort of reference to prove that animals do not perform sex for pleasure?

Please read below. It proves that they do it for pleasure. Humans have been given intellect to evolve spiritually, which is not possible in animals.

http://www.livescien...-enjoy-sex.html

You have put the human body (a jewel) below that of animals.

Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa

Waheguru jee kee Fateh

Can you please provide any sort of reference to prove that animals do not perform sex for pleasure?

Please read below. It proves that they do it for pleasure. Humans have been given intellect to evolve spiritually, which is not possible in animals.

http://www.livescience.com/9631-animals-enjoy-sex.html

You have put the human body (a jewel) below that of animals.

Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa

Waheguru jee kee Fateh

Here is where you are wrong. Animals don't have sex for pleasure. They are the ones who do it only for procreation. They do it by pure instinct drive and not for the reason to be close to their spouse. They are driven by pure instinct only and not a thought to derive pleasure. An animal could care less if there was pleasure or not. They only know that they are driven to do it when it's breeding season.

Humans are above that because we have no breeding season where we instinctively breed. For us there is an intimate connection with our spouse in the act.

You have us and animals confused...

IJJ Singh is correct.

Can you please provide any sort of reference to prove that animals do not perform sex for pleasure?

Please read below. It proves that they do it for pleasure. Humans have been given intellect to evolve spiritually, which is not possible in animals.

http://www.livescience.com/9631-animals-enjoy-sex.html

Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa

Waheguru jee kee Fateh

I presume you are talking about in-vitro fertilisation?

Modern science CANNOT produce babies without male sperm.

Bro, where are you? In India? Some of things you say about science are way off the mark?

Bro, I meant without male intervention in a physical sense. Even then, modern science claims that they can create babies without males. Please read below.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-79711/We-create-babies-men-claim-scientists.html

What other things I said are unscientific? I am curious to know.

Bro, please don't discriminate against people from India. India is a country with enough smart people. That was stereotypical, which I believe is a sin in Sikhism. I don't mind it as we are here to learn from each other.

Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa

Waheguru jee kee Fateh

If we are in a loving relationship with our spouse and view sex as a gift from God then sex is beautiful -- it's a blessing. If we see God in our spouse, then any interaction with our spouse is worship of God. In many places in SGGS Guru has compared union with God as a carnal relationship where Sikh is the bride and God is the groom:

ਮਿਠਾ ਬੋਲਹਿ ਨਿਵਿ ਚਲਹਿ ਸੇਜੈ ਰਵੈ ਭਤਾਰੁ ॥ Her speech is sweet, and her way of life is humble. She enjoys the Bed of her Husband Lord. (SGGS 31)

ਸਦ ਹੀ ਸੇਜੈ ਰਵੈ ਭਤਾਰੁ ॥ She enjoys her Husband Lord forever on His Bed. (SGGS 357)

If sex was bad, then why would Guru compare a bad thing to something so wonderful as being one with God. If there was even an iota of sin in sex then Guru would not have used sex as a metaphor for union with God.

Waheguru ji ka Khalsa, Waheguru ji ki Fateh

Satguru jee has also used various yogic terms in Gurbani. That does not mean that Satguru jee is promoting hath jog. In the same way, sex is not being promoted by Satguru jee if he is using it as a figure of speech.

Sex is not bad as long as it is used for procreation. If it is used for pleasure, then I think there is no difference between a man and an animal.

Also, sex has numerous bad effects on the human body. If Satguru jee wanted, he could have made sex very pleasurable and it would have no bad effects on the body. But this is not the case. It is very pleasurable but takes a heavy toll on the human body.

Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa

Waheguru jee kee Fateh

That suggest heirarchy. Respect should be mutual. Why the husband not bowing to the wife? What gives him right to deserve more respect than her? There is no support for that view in Gurbani at all (save for your misinterpreted tuk) Husband should equally respect the wife.

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

That suggest heirarchy. Respect should be mutual. Why the husband not bowing to the wife? What gives him right to deserve more respect than her? There is no support for that view in Gurbani at all (save for your misinterpreted tuk)

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