Jump to content

shastarsewak

Members
  • Posts

    27
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by shastarsewak

  1. Paapiman Veer, Thanks for reply, but for me, this is the end of discussion. You have categorically accepted that woman is lower than male just because there is no Tuk in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, which shows how little you know. Well, brother, you have a very long, very rough road ahead. But I can suggest you as member of Sangat, there is no shame in changing your attitude, I hope some day you agree to change and Guru ji will show you the right way.
  2. Paapiman: quote: 'But, I would like to see Gursikh females show utmost respect to the Gursikh males (treat them as devtay).' unquote is this utmost respect limited only to females or it also includes males( treating wives as God)? Why you are dodging the answer by including mother? Forget the mother scenario for a while.
  3. Paapiman: Veer Ji, the ongoing behas would end if you agree to just one more thing, not just because we ask you to, but from bottom of your heart, do you agree that out of Love/respect a Man can also bow to wife? And if bowing is a must do thing(assume mandatory or voluntarily), out of Love/respect both should do it - you agree?
  4. Paapiman ji, let's say both meaning are right, She who looks upon husband as lord, or She who looks upon lord as husband You are still stuck with Akhri arth, in this tuk Guru ji is not certifying that a woman is below any male, I have forgotten the exact shabad may be someone in Sangat knows : it goes like this: "Sakhi parmaarth mahapurkh, updesh sabhna layee sanjha" meaning, Mahapurkhs, when they use some allegorical reference, it is meant for all, and it always have a broader meaning. So, in the above Tuk, Guru ji is not addressing to sikh-females but to the "Soul-bride", technically speaking, a Soul-bride is both male and female, it signifies the intent of a person must be true, it means even a male with true love for Waheguru ji can be Sati. Veer, there is nothing wrong in retreating, Kindly end this behas. This behas will end only if you decide one basic thing, ask yourself, then let sangat know 1) do you believe Rehat Maryada says "women are lower than males"? 2) Forget the interpretations you have made of Rehat MAryada, do you personally believe a woman is lower than any male? 3) Out of Love and respect, are you willing to bow to your wife, even if it is not mentioned in Rehat Maryada?
  5. To Satkiran: Bibi ji, you are just getting deeper into unnecessary chaos. Mind is so powerful, Munn would always want to deceive you, take you away from Sikhi or Sikhs or meditation. I agree, there are mistakes(known or unknown) in Taksal book (or books), there may be several other mistakes in several other books. Why do you forget the source? Waheguru - the one who doesn't have any religion at all? Munn is so creative that it need only few keywords, it will write a story instantly, say the keyword is Fear, it will build an enemy fort just outside your gates, and you will see yourself guarding the towers, and intruder is already there inside the fence.. it has already reached your treasure room - - your peace! (before you read this word, it was already there!!) I'll tell you the truth, there are few things I feel some taksalis over-do it, but at the same time I have learned a lot from Taksali singhs, Like guru says, take what you like, leave the rest, but never let anyone pull you into game of "Nindya", like some people are doing here. Which means, if there is something wrong somewhere, you should contact the Jathedaar of that particular Jatha /Chaauni /institution and seek explanation, then you go to Sri Akal Takht Sahib, if you are still not satisfied, like I said before, call home, do an Ardas and ask Waheguru ji for help, you will get your answers. "Gunna ka hovay vaasla, taan kadh vas layee je, je gunn hovan sajana mill sanjh karije, Sanjh karije gunn keri chodd avgun challiye" ~ Ang 765 if you want you can learn from them if you find anything useful, leave the rest in the box. I'm not asking you to give any time to taksal, but give time to this thought, you are not married to a taksali singh who wants you to consider him as a God, then why worry about such things? Generally speaking, I have rarely come across a case where a true "Singh" wants to be considered as God, a humble sikh would always want to be a "Sewak". Like General Macarthur said "A General Wife is General's General" Such respect is automatically given, when in true Love. But, for a male who wants to be considered as God, such a disposition is craving of heavily maya-infested mind, it cannot be love. In Punjabi culture this problem exists, where male is always right, but if you ask around, even this practise is slowly dying, it will be dead soon. I used to get worried a lot, why we are not doing enough, WE are letting the quality go down, we must fight the Masands - see we are talking about symptoms and actions, we forgot to include the source-healer - Guru, Guru also knows what is going on, but Guru is silent, Guru is not sending "Singhs" to do the "Sodhaa" of sikhs trying to destroy sikhi from inside. Perhaps a war scenario is being repeated here, once after 2-3 battles "Khalsa" got so proud that it can win any battles on its own, it doesn't need any help, Guru from a distance was listening, Singhs were claiming to be formidable, lightning fast etc etc., soon battle erupted, The first few waves of Singhs got "Thrashed", they got wiped out, Bhai Daya Singh came running to Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji, "Maharaj, we are losing the battle, Singhs are dying, they cannot even raise swords a bit, they are getting slaughtered", by that time the enemy had already taken control of battlefield, Guru Sahib replied to Bhai Daya Singh, "Khalsa was so proud, it can win any battle on its own, let them win for themselves!" Bhai Daya Singh ji asked for forgiveness on behalf of Singhs, Guru ji said that Khalsa has/will be able to win battles only with help of Guru, but since it was too late, most of the Singhs had died, Guru Sahib sent an Arrow towards the sky, Khalsa army re-took the battlefield. The moral is, if there is something wrong in Rehat Maryada, if it is not as per Gurmat, we must rely on Guru Sahib, we must do an Ardas, and let Guru Sahib sort this out himself.
  6. SatKirin Bhenji, Please let me read this Gurmat Rehat Maryada, this is sort of new information for me. The commentary in blue section - I believe it should have been "fully immerse themselves in serving their husband/wife and seeing their husband/wife as God". I wonder if this text was added with knowledge of core committee of Taksal or webmaster added his personal views. The interpretations I made were my own which I have learned from Katha about husband-wife Soul-bride-Waheguru relationship. I agree with you strongly, that Gurbani doesn't say women are inferior, if there is anything inferior it has to be our "Chotti Soch". A woman as an individual can get united with God, gender does not play any role, but Sewa/Love/devotion/Faith does. In marriage, husband and wife are a team working for a single goal that is to unite with Waheguru ji. Also, it is true, when you actually love your spouse, you want to serve them automatically, not because it is some required mandatory practise, but because of "Chao" and acknowledging presence of Waehguru in spouse. The same "Bhavna" logic goes when you are serving in Langar hall - tapda twaa becomes Waheguru, jhoothay bartan becomes Waheguru, whom you serve out of love, the same logic goes when you are in Chaauni - cleaning after Horses, getting them pathay/chollay becomes an act of loving, in other words true bride truly serving Waheguru. But at the same time, with respect, isn't it possible that meaning you have deduced from above mentioned Pankti is bit biased - to me this pankti does not say that woman must see her worth as an individual, and additionally a.p.m.u the message is not about uplifting of women. I believe the message is actually about serving God truly that makes one a true Sati, not the false practises, which could be forced upon by family or culture or done because of any other benefits.
  7. Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa Waheguru ji ki Fateh! First of all, if any male interprets the meaning of this shabad as recognizing the fact women should be subservient or women must stay in their control, he has already lost the blessings of Guru Sahib. As per my understanding, Gurbani revolves around one the facts to give our head(ego, intellect) to Waheguru. This shabad also revolves around giving ourselves truly to Waheguru out of Love. I believe Guru sahib ji said this shabad to signify the fact that Sati pratha doesn't certify that woman(as a a person) was true to husband OR it is not necessary for a woman to get Sati, just to prove that she was actually a true wife. "She who looks upon the Husband as Lord" or "She who looks upon Lord as Husband" both are valid. When a woman (out of love and devotion) believes her husband is lord, she has already learned to be a Sati. The same goes for male too, when he sees his wife (out of love and devotion) as Lord he becomes a Sati too (being Sati refers to state of devotion, hence not gender limited). Also, for the soul-bride who sees Lord as Husband has already learned to be a true and blessed Sati, and accepted in court of Lord. Satkirin_Kaur: Respectfully Bhenji, without any provocation - I wonder if it really means women must be seen as subordinates or controlled in this line as you interpreted - "Guru Jee says, she who looks upon Her Husband as the Lord, is blessed and has firm faith" I believe this message is not about uplifting women as you described in this line: - "It's actually telling women that they have worth as an individual, that their worth is not attached to their physical husband". Again, as per my understanding, it is more about "intent" of a person to be true to the cause, mere actions doesn't make one "Sati" but true Love makes one Sati (gurmat-sati - which could be female or male as well) Could you kindly provide instances where Dam Dami Taksal Singhs used this shabad as you described, twisted for their own agenda. I'm not aware of such cases, an individual Singh as a person could interpret as you mentioned, but Dam Dami Taksal as an institution would believe in such things - I find it very hard to agree.
×
×
  • Create New...