CdnSikhGirl Posted April 12, 2015 Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 I think many Gurbani tuks can stand alone too without uthanka or context. Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa Waheguru jee kee Fateh No they can't!! Or else one says "they do yoga" taken alone it seems as if yoga is condoned. 3HO does this all the time!!! But reading the full shabad it becomes apparent that it later says all these things (including the yoga) did not get them to God. Anyway late here I have to sleep. WJKK WJKF 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paapiman Posted April 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 So if people actually believe that then is being born a woman a punishment? Did your mom think maybe she did something wrong in a past life to be born as s female where she was put into such subordinate position? 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 are only supposed to Matha tek SGGSJ only!!! 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 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnSikhGirl Posted April 12, 2015 Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 (edited) 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. Edited April 12, 2015 by Satkirin_Kaur 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paapiman Posted April 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 No they can't!! Or else one says "they do yoga" taken alone it seems as if yoga is condoned. 3HO does this all the time!!! But reading the full shabad it becomes apparent that it later says all these things (including the yoga) did not get them to God. Anyway late here I have to sleep. WJKK WJKF 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 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paapiman Posted April 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 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 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paapiman Posted April 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 (edited) 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 Edited April 12, 2015 by paapiman 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnSikhGirl Posted April 12, 2015 Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 Because a child IS subordinate to their parent. A husband and wife are equals. You are suggesting the husband is the head over the wife as if he is in a higher position over her as if there is some sort of rank structure and she's beneath him. This is against Sikhi! Those are not husband and wife who merely sit together but who become one soul in two bodies. Same divine light in both equally. There is no heirarchy where men are above women. This is not Islam or Hinduism!!! 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 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnSikhGirl Posted April 12, 2015 Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 (edited) 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 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 Edited April 12, 2015 by Satkirin_Kaur 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhKhoj Posted April 12, 2015 Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 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 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhKhoj Posted April 12, 2015 Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 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. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singh123456777 Posted April 12, 2015 Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 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... Secondly women did many other things other than be in the kitchen for example they were kirtanis, katha vachaks, warriors etc... They wernt stuck in the kitchens to make us a sandwich Thirdly the damdami taksal ALLOWS women to do every seva except for panj pyara di seva... Last year I went to a taksali program and there was a female katha vachak who you could say was taksali... There were many taksalis at the same program... In satkirans mind she probably would have thought the taksalis would have beaten the female parcharak off the stage lol... Fourthly the Damdami taksal does not think of women less than men... I have met with many real Taksal students not taksali wannabes(mostly the wannabes are from the west who think they are so hardcore cause they are wearing a ddt hoodie on) who put women is such a high pedestal... The wannabes have no knowledge of the granths so they interpret stuff to their limited gyan... The sikh rehat marayada bans females from doing kirtan at darbar sahib... Talk about equality right! In my opinion the panj pyara should be done how it was done in 1699 with 5 men and 1 women... I am not sexist or a women hating pig I just like to stick to what happened back then.. It makes it feel original! I know satkiran will disagree with me.. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhKhoj Posted April 12, 2015 Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 Brother if you "I just like to stick to what happened back then.. It makes it feel original!" Why not go back to having One Takth? (Akaal Bunga). Why not abolish Jathedar of Akal Takth because historically we only had Head Pujaris (head 'priest') pre Singh Sabha Why not change the Nishan Sahib? and what not. 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. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singh123456777 Posted April 12, 2015 Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 ^^^^ Changing all those would actually be a really good idea and reverting them back to the original... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnSikhGirl Posted April 12, 2015 Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 (edited) Actually sikh rehet maryada does not ban women from anything. And Akal Takht had already ruled that women be allowed to do Kirtan at Sri Darbar sahib. It was DDT and Sant Samaj who kicked up such a fuss and opposed that it was never implemented. Besides that I still disagree that the only authority figures in Sikhi who denote what initiates are to follow have to be male. That's putting all authority on men and making women dependent upon men for spiritual progression. At least if they said it must be a woman to put the sugar puffs then if it was only men they couldn't do it. So it would be a bit better but not ideal. Because Guru Ji said that he will be present wherever there are panj plates. That would say that women are not good enough for Guru Ji to be present. Edited April 12, 2015 by Satkirin_Kaur 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paapiman Posted April 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 (edited) 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 Edited April 12, 2015 by paapiman 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paapiman Posted April 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 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 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 12, 2015 Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 This whole over focus on Rehit maryada business is been totally blown out of proportion. It has context, stages. But its been turned into dogma to the point where one has wrapped their head around it and gotten stuck in initial stages.. now the dogmatic notions of it have become hindrance in one's spirituality. Whichever scholars made rehit maryada obviously dropped the ball somewhere, totally forgot to include various context, stages include japji sahib khand stages/stages-state of mind, shabad as transcendental updesh-forewarning in bold just for many sikhs who follow rehit maryada so that we have some spiritual development framework as its listed in gurbani. Here is transcendental shabad for seeker to rise above from their perception of shariat-/tariqat (beginning level of dharma- rules/disciplines/rehit). Guru maharaj here redefines organized religions structural framework which were there to initially help but since they were turned into dogma by religious people, Guru maharaj here redefines it. This shabad pretty much applies to every religious people from all religions including sikhs as sikhs themselves are falling into same trap as many hindus, christians, muslims fell went into in the past. Sikh theology is revolutionary transcendental teachings with no dogma/pakhand but just pure inner love for divine, scarificing ego in divine love/truth, earnestness, teachings gets right to ultimate essence-truth of all. But unfortunately, many sikhs themselves are unable to take advantage as now sikhs are more abhramic cultural-religious than religious-spiritual-have no deeper connection with essence teaching of Sikh Dharma. Ang- 1083 saraa sareeath lae ka(n)maavahu || Let your practice be to live the spiritual life thareekath tharak khoj ttolaavahu || Let your spiritual cleansing be to renounce the world and seek God. maarafath man maarahu abadhaalaa milahu hakeekath jith fir n maraa ||3|| Let control of the mind be your spiritual wisdom, O holy man; meeting with God, you shall never die again. ||3 What does rising above from shariat(rehit) mean? It does NOT mean we abandon basic shariat(rehit) all together take off our kakar and sit in mountains-disconnect all together it just means we don't spent one single extra second thinking about it, engaging in it as basic shariat should become second nature, becomes naturally so seamless back ground process (as natural as taking shower). If naturally does not happen then without any questions its been turned into conditioning/ dogma by egoic conditioned mind. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paapiman Posted April 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 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 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 12, 2015 Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 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. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paapiman Posted April 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 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 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paapiman Posted April 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 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 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paapiman Posted April 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 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 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 12, 2015 Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 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 Dude, I wouldn't put it as hakum of our lord. It's not gospel truth hakum. Its relative hakum which is there as an option aid-as available tool only to one's aid to spirituality. If it resonates with people - great and if it doesn't its great too. We don't need to sound anglican christian..we are not christian. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singh123456777 Posted April 12, 2015 Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 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 FatehBro 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! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnSikhGirl Posted April 12, 2015 Report Share Posted April 12, 2015 (edited) Gurbani is for all not instructions for women on how to be subservient to their husbands. In context of the shabad the second translation is the one that's correct. But you can believe what you want. You said you don't plan on being married anyway so that's good. Edited April 12, 2015 by Satkirin_Kaur 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.