gupy

Like I said before the personal beliefs and practices of the organisers is a seperate issur from the content of the talk.

If you have any points to make about the content, please do...

WHAT A GREAT QUESTION : contraception

Surely all the people tallking about reducing kaam and love without need for sex would say contraception is a pure act of sin?

Does anyone know what the official stance on this issue is by various organistaions (i.e. Taksaal, AKJ, Nanaksarias, etc...), do they give one?

I'd imagine in this social context it may be a issue of 'rehit' ?

And one last point:

isn't it the case that 'sexual desire' is what Guru warns you against, NOT SEX ITSELF???

Obviously in which case contraception is all good (it's even free these days!!!

never mind guv, u can always send one this way

to aguptkaur,

why do you persist in childish comments???

To everyone else,

Try to resist, this is a great thread don't reduce yourselves to mindless huirling of abuse.

This topic has been discussed many times before, and to summarise :

5 ks :

Sikhs today (almost all of them), modern day scholars and sants, version of dasam granth with 5 k reference

Other :

Historical texts pre 1900s, 18th/19th century rehitnamas,Tanakhahnamae, sarbolh guru darbaar and practical applications fro shastar vidiya

My conclusion:

I think it unlikely 5 Ks were the original prescribed rehit, however it was prob a well observed practice implicitally frm the original rehit. I.e. Kangha would have been common for most people in general, and kara is a useful shastar. However to call it a formalised rehit for all is not very probable. I think it was made to be so prominent in the last 100 yrs to aid the overall evolution of the khalsa into what the reformists wanted. I.e. a strong unifying Sikh identity with various socio-political advantages.

Inshort i think for most people who have studied primary sources of Sikh history, and have a more 'grounded' understanding of what the Khalsa is (as opposed to todays romantic ideology) then the above issue, is in effect a none issue.

What about other q's, like the Sahajdhari identities.

Do you think Udhasis are Sikhs (equivalent to Khalsa) ?

fact you got singhani's in budda dal with full facial hair where removing of any hair is "kurehit" in budda dal maryada proves uk nihang bringing up their own personal views into this NOT any maryada then again you got more pseduo nihangs in india and abroad creating their own dera, maryada selling/buying farla behind of jathedar santa singh ji....

doesnt really surpise me that much.

please don't associate the content of this talk with Buddha Dal or Nihungs. This IS NOT about that, and your view about UK or indian Nihungs (or just modern day Sikh sects) haven't got anything to do with this topic!

So as you often say yourself, stick to the topic !

Ok sehajdhari women issue put aside.

Okay... at least thats okay, 90% of work done. To re-emphasize this point for those who are unaware, sahajdhari most generally refferes to Sikhs who are NOT intiated (amrit-dhari), which is a COMPLETELY accepted and EQUAL form of Sikh practice.

Can you name 1 single "Amrit Instituation" who allows amrit-dhari sikh woman to remove facial hair???

on this point i must reffer you to another aspect of the talk,

- Women and amrit sanchaar (i.e. non-existance of evidence suggesting women took amrit from Guru himself)

Guru Gobind Singh (as far as the research shows) did NOT initiate women in the form we are accustomed today.

Let me make this point clear now to avoid confussion. You MUST understand this from the view point of what the (khanda ki pahul) Khalsa represents, and what amrit is. In the sense of Khanda intiation, the Khalsa is a purely militaristic organisation. In this context the issue and history regarding women is understandable.

Khalsa and amrit as DEFINED by the Adi Granth (GURU GRANTH SAHIB) is far more general reffering to those who are lietrally pure and is a spiritual description. This has no physical intiation, and of course men and women can be Khalsa in this sense. With or without facial or any other hair.

In fact if you are to imply that all GOOD sikh woman should NOT remove facial hair, then I belive that is a serious misinterpretation of Gurbani and Sikh history.

Removal of hair from any part of body is direct contradiction of teaching of "Siri Guru Granth Sahib Ji" because we as sikhs suppose to over come "Roop mad" along with Raj mad and 5 vices within yourself.

This is only a particular interpretation

I don't think we singhs have any business telling Sikh women what to do. Sikh women know themselves witihin. It's a intention behind of this act matters.

The talk wasn't designed to say here is what it means to be a Sikh woman.

It was there to show what the sanatan world was like. And removal of facial hair is acceptable in it. This is NOT just a comment about men or women, it is a general stance (i.e. about sahajdhari identity). Yes NO ONE has the right to say women should remove facial hair or not.

We're only presenting (with respect to modern day sikhism) an alternate and historically based potrait of Sikh women.

thanks for that beast...

in time along with other talks hopefully the talks will be available on the sarbloh sites

the following is a review written by one of the audience :

(if anyone else wishes to write one who attended please feel free)

The controvesial talk presented by Nadar Singh on 'Sanatan Sikh Women' was both refreshing and illuminatiing. He made some very important points such as the notion of western equality is not the same as the eastern, this is something we all need to understand when we interpret old traditions from the east from western standpoints. His charasmatic character and vast range of archive and research material on Sikh history is umatched in this country.

On can imagine why he is a thorn in the imagination of mainstean Sikh thinkers as he offers a alternative and somewhat more authentic portrayal of sikh history which is supported by sikh scripture and visual representaions. The talk concentrates on Mirabhai A women who's saintly work has been written out of modern Sikh history, which in fact the same process has also happened in Christianity. For Sikh woman and feminist this must be a great point on which to support Nadar Singh 'a man talking about women'. However the talk takes an unexpected turn when he states that none of the gurus initiated woman with amrit into the khalsa, further that woman do not have to wear bana the sikh dress simply for sanatan women a Kara be sufficient as an external identity marker. Immediantly, one is shocked as these are points which differ greatly from the general consensus of the Sikh community. Is he suggesting that women can still be practicing sikhs if they do not take amrit and do the above? if so then he should be catious of the reprecussions of these points, however true they may be!

What Nadar Singh is attempting to do is to re-write Sikh History by undoing the work of colonial and particularly the work of the Singh Sabha reformers, this type of work which has already began with Oberoi's key work something which Nadar Singh has obviuosly read. He presents to the Sikh youth a 'alternative sikhism' which rests upon the revival of 'Sanatan Sikhi'.

However is this simply another sikh sect amoungst others? What are his objectives and aims in plugging 'Sanatan Sikhi'? He seems to deconstruct sikh identity barriers and opens up Mclead's classic Question on who is a Sikh? but at the same time he is creating new barriers and identity by defining who a 'Sanatan Sikh' is! If at the same 'Sanatan sikhi' is about universal and diverse beliefs then according to this ambiguos definition everyone is a 'sanatan sikh'. In my view overall Nadar Singh's Sanatan movement will be the next big thing for Sikhs in the diaspora in the next few years, he is re-introducing the historical battle between Sanatan Sikhs and Tat Khalsa Sikhs once again. His work will no doubt force us to re- evaluate and question our Sikh history. religion and identity. Good luck to him!

Sanatan Sikh Women’s Seminar

Overview of the topics discussed

Mirabhai :

- An account of her life through the use of different oral traditions found in different parts of India.

- The use of her writings in the Bhanno Bir of the Adi Granth

- Reflection on her bani compared to the rest of the Adi Granth

- Discussion on how Krishna can be viewed in relation to the Adi Granth writings

- Discussion on Mirabhai's identity as a Sikh vs. Hindu concept (i.e. sanatan tradition)

Historical sources :

- Use of frescos depicting Sikh women

- Discussion on women’s roles and identities as a result

- Quotes from texts (including Adi and Dasam Granths)

- The presentation of women as empire builders, organisers, musicians and poets

- Women and amrit sanchaar (i.e. non-existance of evidence suggesting women took amrit from Guru himself)

- Women and institutions such as 5 k’s

Conclusions :

- Women’s issues such as removal of hair on body, in the context of the plural identities that existed in the past

- Women’s equality (i.e. one of spiritual equality)

- The differences between men and women (i.e. temporal)

- How and why the definitions/roles/identities/practices of women changed and where influenced by the Tat Khalsa Singh Sabhia reformists

This is just a quick overview. I will soon have more in depth article and also written criticisms from those who attended the seminar

Thank you

people should all be embracing each other and making love

... theres just not enough love in the world !!!

PEACE DUDES!!!!

proof .... oh deary me, poor child, if thats your idea of proof

thank GOD your not a court judge (or a mathematician)

If you'd like to take a few more days out educating yourself, i'd recommend you do so.

Its interesting that these pictures and lots of others like them have rababs in them.

The thing that amazes me most about Siksh ( and ultimately illustrates the MASSIVE lack of heritage) is the fact that hardly anyone cares or knows anything about this sangeet and the instruments that go with it.

Can any of you even imagine what shabads of Guru Nanak Dev sounded like with rabab and bekavach??? Not to mention actually SUNG in proper Raag (druphad styles) !!!

Not the bollywood antics of today tho!!!

Guys, this has seriously degenrated... lets get backk to the topic, the original criticisms were very insightful!

Also its NOT fair at all to slander someone/ something without any proof.

If these people are guilty of such things, and you lot are suppose to be real Khalsa, then tighten them Kushereh, sharpen those mini-kirpans, put on your kara (to remind you of unity) and take out the EVIL :twisted:

Or take guvs advice to the number to call is

999

thats not to difficult for you, is it??????

Excellent post Nirjana,

I'm interested to know what your opinions would be for steps forward. Although there are similarities, there are many differences also. The biggest one being us and our environment.

Hopefully these issues can be discussed appropriately and rationally, now that we have a much higher level of general understanding and oppurtunities.

Like i said i do very much agree with your comments. I will always do my best to keep anything i'm involved in as impartial and unbias as possible.

I hope Thursdays Sanatan Sikh Womens seminar will be a true reflection of this.

... one last thing...

... i apologise for my spellings ( u kno how it is when ur in a rush )

also to reply to sidak who said

"But remember, this is a academic talk looking at historical evidence and facts, not hear say. "

Sorry, but where did Niddar gain his Bachelors/Masters/PhD from, and will this presentation be accompanied by an academic paper so those of us who can't attend can at least get an idea of the 'historical evidence' and 'facts' that will be presented ?

To present the wroks of academics, does not require a PhD. I will restate again that we will be using resources from museums, private collections etc, quotes from academics i this field and other historical evidence. Our aim is to avoid the 'hear say' knowledge that is widely accpeted elsewhere.

Nihung Niddar Singh may no have a MA/PhD/etc, however he is an individual that has conducted a wide range of research and inspired others to persue academic studies (such as PhDs and writers) in these fields.

Please remember that these events are not the sole invention of Nihung Niddar Singh. Moreover, they are the result of a team of individuals who have worked hard in resourcing and preparing this event.

To make up yur own minds, and give a criticism of the content please feel free to come along. For those who can't we will provide some format of digital recording.

There has been a change to the radio show. There will no longer be a discussion on BBC radio asian network on tuesday a5th 11am.

The discussion will hopefully take place at some point after the Thursday seminar at Warwick University, which has NOT been changed.

So see you all there on thursday night for the Sikh womens seminar.

yes i do...

thank you

N30 S!NGH wrote:tableji wrote:NEO it comes down to the definition of sikh..

bro sometimes you can can't held modern day maryada over siri guroo granth sahib ji because it contradicts with the teaching... please look into examples i have given- Raja Janak(Male) and Rani Tara(Raja Hari Chand Wife)

Im not talkin about current maryada....im sayin that we shud look into Guru Ji to find out what Guru Ji has given as definition of sikh, nothing else..

You will see at the seminar that Adi Guru Bani will be focused on.

... but maybe in a form your cutomed to, i.e. example of Mirabhai.

Heres the flyer for the next one.

Check out the deatils on the thread related to this topic.

my two cents worth:

The mish mashing of Khallistan and Human rights violations will always be the reason why no one will evr take what happened as a serious human rights violation!

And further more for what its worth, Khalistan and the concept will pollute this community ever more.

The evnts of 84 were the severist mistakes made by the 'sikhs' concerned that I can recall from a common sense point of view.

A similar incident happened in Iran not long ago between suni s and shia muslims. The result the same. I wonder how many sikhs would of viewed that scenario the same???

If people think dancing is a form of seduction, then YES dancing is bad.

But if your a normal person, who is hormone and emotionally balanced its okay.

I mean its not as though bhangra involves dancing on a pole half naked.

If indeed we have such a quotation, and therefore work on the assumption that the 5 Ks were the original rehit communicated by the Guru to the Khalsa, then we must ask ourselves the following.

Why are there no references to the ideal of 5 K's in nearly all texts concerning Sikh History (written by Sikhs or foreigners)?

I'm not saying the 5 individual items were never worn , however this idea of them being essential in oral/ written rehit can be challenged.

My references are as follows (rehit namas):

- Tanakhah-nama

- Prashan-uttar

- Prahilad Rai

- Chaupae Singh

- Desa Singhs

- Daya Singhs

- Sau Sakhi

- Prem Sumarag

- Gur Bilas

- Sarbloh Granth

I'm not going to get into the argument of authenticity as such. However the above wroks, although with inaccuracies, ALL fail to recognise the 5 K's as an ideal for a Khalsa.

Moreover, we have writtings of :

- Polier

- Grewal & Habib

- Malcolm

- Santokh Singh

- Cunningham

The texts which support include Macauliffe, but even Kahn Singh Nabha is initially hesitant on the matter.

Only 20th century texts are absoulte on the concept.

In my view there is so much evidence against, that for the 5 k's to have been so paramount can not be affirmed positively.

And just to sanatan Sikhi in general, in the Dasam Granth written by Shaheed Baba Deep SIngh Ji, it says "nisani sikhee ee panj harf asat" kaf. So than in this sense how can any udasi who runs around in a G-String be considered a sikh when he doesn't wear a kachera? Likewise for anyone who doesnt wear a kara.

Dasam Granth DOES not talk about 5 K's. Only 'panj shastar'. Moreover Sarbloh granth, goes furtehr in terming htem as three articles not five, naming them as kack, kesh and kirpan. NO mention of Kara.

Frther more, there is no pre-twentith century text (i've seen) which refers to 5 K's. In fact nearly all QUALIFIED scholars acknoweldge it as a recent eventuality and nothin more.

As for Gatka, well:

'Gatka is for shastar Vidiya,

what the vaaja is for Raag vidiya,

and what the Tat Khalsa is for meaningful education.'

You can happily quote me on that one!!!

My plea to anyone is not to judge anything on reputation and hear say, but to critically analyse it. I'm confident with this approach the likes of Gtaka, and modern day kirtan an finally be acknowledged as being 'primitive' forms of an original vidiya.

Another quote of mine you may want to use:

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS GURMAT SANGEET OR SIKH SHASTAR VIDIYA. They are systems incorprated and modified by the Sikh gurus, but whose origins are SANATAN......