Gupt Singh

nice shabad.....would baymukh count as a monnah? or a non gursikh?

Bani Guru, Guru Hai Bani, Guru ji says "A Gursikh must only marry another Gursikh". Its perfectly alright in Sikhi to marry someone of another caste, culture, race, skin colour, or whatever else. But one of the 52 Hukams from Guru Gobind Singh is "Give your daughter to a house where Sikhi exists" and just before that it says "Do not give her to a clean shaven". The same thing applies to men obviously. Its nothing to do with racism. Marry a black, white, yellow, pink, whatever over colour your want. Read the Guru Granth and it (constructively) criticises all religions for their acts. Guru Gobind Singh outright calls himself an "idol breaker" in Zafarnama :) and says "Hindus have set up false religions" I think in Chaupai. Guru Nanak often talks about how Halal and circumcision are just plain WRONG......and theres even a shabad showing how Adam and Eve theory makes no sense. Guru Granth Sahib says that after Sikh marriage (Anand Karaj, which is incidentally originally for Gursikhs only) the two souls become one (in Lavan i think). During Anand Karaj both partners pledge their alleigance to the Guru Granth Sahib. How are you going to pledge your alleigance to teh SGGS if you dont even follow it? And if you want to get a non Sikh marriage (ie in a Church) then the marriage will not be recognised in Sikhi. If the two souls become one, and one believes there are many Gods (contradiction to the fundamental Mool Mantar in Sikhi) or has a Semetic background, then there is a clear conflict in views. Im probably going to sound harsh and talibanistic to most the members here, but then again some of hte members here dont really base their views on Gurbani but on what seems alright to todays society. If you really value Sikhi then youll only want to marry someone who is a Gursikh and probably has a higher spiritual level than you so you can learn from him/her........not some random other girl/boy based on short term emotional feelings. Do you think Guru Gobind Singh would marry a Muslim or Hindu? Would Baba Deep Singh come home after a long day of battering Mughals to his Christian wife

whats in hte 1698 bir from hazur sahib? i know theres a 1696 bir of the dasam granth........but how can there be a sarbloh granth from 1698 when the khalsa was created in 1699?

snigga have you actually seen the kartarpuri bir? it has blank pages all over it has torn out pages it has crossings out of shabads miswritten and corrected alot of the authors (mahallas) dont even match the damdami bir (ie the one we use today) the above are a FACT......whether or not it definately contains rattan malla i will have to find out....but the above are definately a FACT. is this the work of guru arjun? MAHAN KOSH does describe a kartarpuri bir. and it doesnt match the one we have today! rattan malla, even RECIPIES appear in old birs. its a FACT. loads of birs have extra material. why cant you accept this? can you prove it to me otherwise? can you explain why the rags in ragmalla and SGGS dont match up? why the grammar makes no sense? why the numbering system is wrong? for the top 2, no one has ever explained. for hte last question, weak explanations have been given. all of gurbani is 100percent infallable. and for some strange reason, ragmalla doesnt stand up to this. why?

narasingha nah i dont think i will thank mr santa singh, since he tried 2 rebuilt akal takht with filthy money :x what type of nihung are you talking about? real nihungs are the safe ones in india that dont go around taking drugs or sacrificing goats on vaisakhi......neither do they worship chandi or whatever else....and believe me plenty of these types of real true nihungs exist......as bikramjit singh said......the concept of a hidden text is just an easy was to stop people asking questions...... no the sgpc would not have "castrated" the dasam granth or the sarbloh granth. they havent touched the sarbloh granth cuz santa (claus) singh hasnt exactly made birs of it widespread. they have only left out triyah charitrer from the dasam granth and thats because its a touchy subject with alot of people.....id like to see you read out some of the stories in there to a woman in the sangat............ why dont you two "scholarly" people try and refute bikramjit singhs argument instead of just say "OOOOOO BLASPHEMY RAM RAMI!!!!"

I dont think hes depriving himself, the Nihungs are depriving us all of the Sarbloh Granth with its status as a "secret" text. Who decided it was a secret text? Guru Gobind Singh? It hasnt been fully attributed to him, never mind ascribed to him as a secret text :roll:

i must have asked you 20-odd times if you believe in the rattan malla or not which is important if you want to discuss the rag malla and you never replied the taksali website has been officialled OKed by baba takhur singh, present jathedar (acting jathedar !?!?!) of the damdami taksal.

yep, the heretic bloke who even baba kartar singh bhindranwale and baba gurbachan singh bhindranwale (as well as baba jarnail singh etc) respected his utmost...................is baba ji(s) wrong in his opinion on bhai sahib?

what you are saying is we must judge polygamy by 18th century punjab standards. i disagree because i believe the gurus and their actions were divinely inspired and not just due to the society at the time. if we were to judge sexism by 17th century punjab is wud be seen as ok. people like to emphasise how modern sikhi is and how it threw off the shackles of the backwards punjabi society.......but we have found 1 point that so far no one has been able to tackle very well.......and we are saying its ok because other people did it at the time....... the gurus didnt really require companionship as such. they were too engrossed in their connection with waheguru. emotional bonds for the gurus were non existent. i would see no reason for saints such as bhai randhir singh, baba gurbachan singh, etc to have multiple wives. come on....someone knows the answer :evil:

what would be the function of an additional wife? could women have additional husbands? considering how much everyone puts down punjabi culture for infanticide, sexism, bhangra etc...........culture and society are not valid explanations. if the gurus wives did infanticide would you just say "its the society at the time"??? there is a more logical explanation, im sure of it . the ideas of society are not always rational.

bikramjit singh thanks for that informative post a while after i heard it was a "secret text" i had my doubts..........guruji brought the guru granth to the masses after bahmans kept a monopoly on their texts (i think one of the gurus likened the vedas to a bit of water hidden away, and gurbani as rain falling on everyone everywhere) so there is no reason why anyone would have a monopoly on anything else.....

we shudnt question our gurus, but no1 as yet has provided an answer to WHY guru ji had more than 1 wife. dont say "culture" or "took them under his wing"......there is a reason no1 has mentioned yet that explains why it was neccesary to have more than 1 wife.......hmmmmmm.......

hahahhaa............lalleshvari..........u are acknowledged on most sikhi message boards as being the no1 perv, occasionally pretending to be a girl and sometimes trying to justify it by saying "theres stuff like that in triyah charitrer so its orite for me to do it"........so its kinda rich coming from you..... on the official damdami taksal website it says "WIVES/CONSORTS". why dont u use your scholarly dictionaries and look up all the different meanings of consorts, and why it has been used in addition to wives.

sum1 needs to ban lalleshvari. the fact that u can call a mahapurkh satguru a pervert just proves the fact that you are a retard. i bet your a shia muslim undercover (or maybe a bahman u never know)

guru harrai didnt have 8 wives, he had 8 'consorts'. most were celibate "nuns" who chilled with him.

jus cuz u aint gurmukh enuf to feel a difference between eating as a bibeki or non bibeki doesnt mean that part of the rehat is not important.....many of your favourite snaataan sikh akali mahapurkh nihung singhs follow sarbloh bibek.... rather than taking the p*ss out of the parts of the rehat we are not disciplined enough to follow, we should admit our faults and not mock them. i know sikhs who live in the western world and will even get their water from springs sometimes and htey feel a difference from it...... since your a (pseudo) scholar ill give u sum evidence supporting sarbloh bibek: macauliffe talks about the small community in amritsar (i think) which refuse to intermarry w/ bahmans etc and maintain the original rehat, of which includes sarbloh bibek.....says this in the sikh religion under banda and its present condition" on p72 and 75 of pyare singh padams book - bhojanaad moundit naal chhakey tankhaiyaa - bhai daya singh, one of hte original panj......if one is not allowed to eat with people who have done kurehits after amrit then its also probably desirable to eat stuff which hasnt gone thru their hands at one point or another....... and on p75 "one should eat out of sarbloh" etc etc

hey hey hey r u lot bibeki amritdhari gurmukh singhs/singhnees? all of you? if nt, dont worry about others, worry about yourselves. i used to be a bit pro-missionary but then i saw the big picture - if its in someones karma to be a sikh then it is. if it isnt then it isnt. after death it is not the end, its a circle. so a mad rush to get as many sikhs as possible isnt neccesary. MI im not dissing you or criticising you, but i dnt think your amritdhari yet (neither am i) maybe we should concentrate on sorting ourselves out and becoming sikhs of the guru before we try and bring others in. maybe write a book, or give speeches at your gurdwara to get the current youth attracted into sikhi, but theres no point tryna get more people when you already have shakey foundations......

niranjana yeah i read parasaraprasna its a good read agree w/ pretty much everything said here........we should question why we change ourselves from our natural form, not why we retain it

niranjana i agree. no one has answered this question for me either. although its been semi-implied that women take amrit in rehatnamas hukamnamas, etc ive never heard it blatantly been said, or that the word kaur is used. im not against women taking amrit or being called kaur, but ive never really seen any puratan accounts.

ok i think bikramjit singh has won now.............now.......lalleshvari.....ANSWER: :?: :?: DO YOU BELIEVE IN THE RATTAN MALLA? :?: :?: why/why not?

bikramjit, you know ur stuff man!!! props 2 u! lalleshvari u still aint answered, do u believe in the rattan malla?

um i didnt say u cant wear pants underneath if ur a lady bt i did say u cant replace kachere with pants.......... im sure theres a sakhi wear guru gobind singh told a lady to wear keski and kachere and never remove them.......... im nt understanding kirpan de amrit......are you saying that kirpan de amrit has a different set of kakkars to normal amrit? isnt that even more heretic than the evil modern ram rae akhand keertan jatha? what historical evidence is there for kirpan de amrit? ive never seen any puratan accounts of it....maybe you can enlighten me.......

OOOOOOOO bikramjitsinghs got a good point there keep on discussing whatever ur discussing bt just tell me lalleshvari......do you believe in the RATTAN MALA or not?

well he looks healthy.....looks like hes got a raisin in his left eye lol

what exactly do u wear bhai? skintight jeans lol i dont see any probs with kachere, baggy boxers etc. if u want to go back to old skool kiddies pants then u can, i think they are nasty....still remember the day i gave them up a fair few yrs back neither do i see what hte problem with women wearing kachere are. kachere arent made of 10 inch thick material, its just thin cotton. how is it going to bulge out at the sides? unless your wearing a miniskirt, obviously, and in that case the kachere legs would prolly pop our under the miniskirt ive gt a feeling my interpritation of kachere is different to you guys.........long, knee length undergarment made of thin cotton and enough material at the front to cover your "modesty" when they r wet.