Bowing As A Sign Of Respect...

[paapiman]

If you cant show me in actual Gurbani why, or even explain to me why.... other than to only say "GRM says so" then you really are brainwashed.

You already know the answer. Anyways, here it is again:

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

ਧੰਨੁ ਸਤੀ ਦਰਗਹ ਪਰਵਾਨਿਆ ॥੪॥੩੦॥੯੯॥

Ḏẖan saṯī ḏargėh parvāni▫ā. ||4||30||99||

is the blessed 'satee'; she is received with honor in the Court of the Lord. ||4||30||99||

Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa

Waheguru jee kee Fateh

[paapiman]

Gurmat Rehet Maryada is not the be all end all and is not followed by marjoity of Sikhs... so basically your asnwer is... women must bow to their husbands because.......DDT says so!!! LOL And no other good... reason no reason that actually goes back to Sikhi or Gurbani.

Majority of the so-called Sikhs also don't get baptized, which is mandatory for a Sikh.

Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa

Waheguru jee kee Fateh

[CdnSikhGirl]

Like it or not Akal Takht is not only one of the five thrones of authority in Sikhi, but is the highest seat of authority. You might not like it, but it doesn't change that fact. Even I dont like some things they do... like fighting with swords drawn over microphones! Keeping women from seva at Darbar Sahib etc.

Butit doesnt change the fact that Akal Takht is the highest authority in Sikhi and they only recognize one Rehet Maryada... the Sikh Rehet Maryada... which took years of deliberation among all different groups of Sikhs to arrive at it's current state.

Fact: None of the rhetnammas or rehet maryadas can be traced with 100% certainy. You can not claim DDT's RM is THE RM of Guru Gobind Singh Ji. It's just not possible.

Guru Ji left us with his 52 Hukams... that was his own instructions for us in his own words... and even some people dispute the authenticity of the 52 Hukams!

We don't need to know if any single RM was THE RM though... because we have panthic decision. And we have SGGSJ to base it upon. And that's exactly what happened.

Sure, not everyone will be happy. But the things left out of SRM, are not being 'barred' to anyone. If someone wants to do more nitnem than the prescribed minimum in SRM, then they are free to do so and nobody will stop them! More the merrier! SRM is laying out the minimum that is required.

Regarding equality, SRM takes what is directly written in Gurbani... and nothing else. No outside cultural influence, no personal opinions on gender, but only Gurbani itself as the guide. It doesn't mean that wife if she actually wants to bow to her husband... nobody will stop her. But SRM makes it clear that husband and wife are equals and signs of subordination or submission are not required or commanded. Nobody is commanded to see another as God while they must lower themselves beneath that person. (Exception is Guru Ji).

So SRM is NOT bad... even for DDT. They are still free to practice a more restrictive RM if they so choose. But knowing that it is not REQUIRED based on Gurbani... thats where the difference lies. I would never stop someone from practicing Sikhi how they want to as long as they follow the minimum in SRM. If the opposite were true however, DDT would be forcing us to more restrictions based entirely on their own viewpoints of women and not on Gurbni.

So I dont know why you are so up in arms about SRM as it's seen as the minimum... its seen as what is required. While DDT RM is 'extra' which is fine if you WANT to do that extra... but nobody should be forced to! And women can choose to take Amrit from somewhere that uses SRM instead, if they wish to ever participate as Panj Pyares. (Again there is nothing in Gurbani to suggest that women can not or should not do this seva) And SRM is based purely on Gurbani meaning without outside influence from the various Jathas because being in a big group, all the jatha / taksal specific stuff had to be removed. What remained, was purely based on Gurbani only... the bits that they all had in common all along.

Like it or not... Akal Takht is the central Sikh Authority... if you don't recognize their authority then well..... I guess you are sitting somewhere outside of Sikhi.

[CdnSikhGirl]

You already know the answer. Anyways, here it is again:

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

ਧੰਨੁ ਸਤੀ ਦਰਗਹ ਪਰਵਾਨਿਆ ॥੪॥੩੦॥੯੯॥

Ḏẖan saṯī ḏargėh parvāni▫ā. ||4||30||99||

is the blessed 'satee'; she is received with honor in the Court of the Lord. ||4||30||99||

Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa

Waheguru jee kee Fateh

Twisting Gurbani tuks again... LOL

[CdnSikhGirl]

You are REALLY trying to drag that one misinterpreted tuk as justification to subordinate women and put them beneath men arent you?? Why are you so concerned about "putting women in their place" anyway??

Here are two translations... I will edit and add the rest later. I have about 10 different translations and ALL say see God as Husband... not see husband as God. Because I already showed you wehre it says God is equally in ALL of us. So having this one tul by istefl trying to subordinate women beneath men or to sugegst that only women should see men as God and not the other way around goes against rest of Gurbani! We are to ALL see God in EVERYONE!

Bhai Manoman Singh Translation:

ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਜਿਨਿ ਪ੍ਰਿਉ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਕਰਿ ਜਾਨਿਆ ॥

Kaho Nānak jin pari▫o parmesar kar jāni▫ā.

Say Nanak, She who looks upon the Supreme Lord as her Spouse,

ਧੰਨੁ ਸਤੀ ਦਰਗਹ ਪਰਵਾਨਿਆ ॥੪॥੩੦॥੯੯॥

Ḏẖan saṯī ḏargėh parvāni▫ā. ||4||30||99||

is the blessed chaste wife, and she becomes acceptable in God's court.

Dr Sant Singh Khalsa Translation:

ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਜਿਨਿ ਪ੍ਰਿਉ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਕਰਿ ਜਾਨਿਆ ॥

Kaho Nānak jin pari▫o parmesar kar jāni▫ā.

Says Nanak, she who looks upon the Transcendent Lord as her Husband,

ਧੰਨੁ ਸਤੀ ਦਰਗਹ ਪਰਵਾਨਿਆ ॥੪॥੩੦॥੯੯॥

Ḏẖan saṯī ḏargėh parvāni▫ā. ||4||30||99||

is the blessed 'satee'; she is received with honor in the Court of the Lord. ||4||30||99||

And... have you ever thought the possibility that even if you twist it backwards like you have... that its still not talking about PHYSICAL WOMEN. It's speaking to the feminine soul... SOUL BRIDES concept. Because the only true male is God and rest of us are referred to as female in Gurbani!

The 'SHE' spoken of in the line in your above interpretation would still not mean a 'physical woman' but instead would mean soul bride....Which ALL OF US are....male and female alike!!!! So then it would apply to you too!

We should ALL consider our Husband to be God. (not our physical husband) but ALL of us should consider our true spouse to actually be God. We (all of us male and female) are soul BRIDES, and GOD is the Husband Lord. Because ultimately our souls relation to God is our true marriage.

It still wouldn't be an instruction for a physical woman to see her physical husband as God!

Edited May 12, 2015 by Satkirin_Kaur

[sukrit kaur]

You already know the answer. Anyways, here it is again: 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 ਧੰਨੁ ਸਤੀ ਦਰਗਹ ਪਰਵਾਨਿਆ ॥੪॥੩੦॥੯੯॥Ḏẖan saṯī ḏargėh parvāni▫ā. ||4||30||99||is the blessed 'satee'; she is received with honor in the Court of the Lord. ||4||30||99|| Waheguru jee kaa KhalsaWaheguru jee kee Fateh

What I think about the meaning of shabad is little different.

As per my thinking,Gurbani focuses on one's true love only and only towards satnaam/parbrahm/almighty/satguru.Gurbani is the key/way to liberate the soul from Trap of Moh.I think to show infinite love towards any human being whether a wife or husband,brother or sister ,anyone is totally against the true message of Gurbani.So,how can Gurbani encourage to show infinite love towards spouse.

Here,I think SATEE is the soul(as female) irrespective of gender.So guru sahib says Kaho Nanak jin preyo parmeshar kar janea, means the one (as a female soul) who loves her True husband (satpursh/waheguru) as the greatest mighty 'ALMIGHTY' is the true satee.Here The wife is soul( begging for meeting his beloved one),Husband his True pursh and is referred as ' PARMESHAR' ,The supreme Soul/waheguru.

So such Loving soul is the true Satee,and she is blessed one ,and gets honor in the court of akal purkh.

So,Gurbani tells to love only one being,not to show love or get trapped in moh maya with husband,wife or any thing else.

Gurbani warns us to leave all worldy affections.So such Husband -wife affection as that Satee had,is too a form of MoH maya.Gurbani is against it.

(May be I'm wrong.Please do correct me If I do so!)

Gur fateh!

[sukrit kaur]

As I finished writing, and posted the above post,satkiran ji had already posted so.LOL.BTW,Correction has been done!

[CdnSikhGirl]

Sukrit Kaur bhenji, look at my post just above I put the same meaning at same time you were posting that!

Edited May 12, 2015 by Satkirin_Kaur

[sukrit kaur]

Yes you're right satkirin penji. Wrong interpretation of Gurbani has been pointed out! That's really good!!

[das]

First of all, please ponder what this website has become? I used to come to this website to get some great topics on Meditation, and in general Spiritual stuff (regardless of religion) but now mostly I find Male vs Female debates. Come on people, don't do that......I try to be out of these discussions but I still have a so-called Mind which wants to post in favour vs against. Bottom line is: Please keep your equality and non-equality concepts to yourself.

Secondly, my understanding for the above mentioned Shabad is: Almost everywhere in Guru Granth Sahib Ji, GuruJi has taken examples from our normal life to make a point for God. Examples are always presented in a simple manner to which everyone can relate to. e.g In Ancient times (regardless of religion/caste/creed), mostly husbands (males) are being considered as higher authority. I'm not saying this is right or wrong, I'm just stating the general fact in this world in the past times. Satee means: who is faithful to one's husband by heart, speech and actions. Satee also means: A woman who immolates herself on her deceased husband's funeral pyre. Basically, both the definations are same at the core: She who thinks that her husband is the ONLY world, her husband is One that she feels is God and there is no point being without God; All the energy is spent on the person who you consider as God (physical husband).

Now, keeping the above defination of Husband and Wife; GuruJi is making a point taking the Physical example of that kind of Husband and Wife. I guess here we are missing the whole point: The core of the Shabad is NOT about the Waheguru/God or Husband or Wife. The core is the LOVE (unselfish) and SURRENDER. The shabad is about a PROCESS and NOT about the tools to achieve the process.

Now, let's answer this: What's wrong with considering one's husband/wife as God?
No one can aim at Sky; one needs some object to aim. Same way, how could we love something which we don't understand? We do say God is this and that, he is Nirankar, present everywhere etc. etc. but we (I'm also included in we) could not understand His true Saroop and without Truly understanding the Saroop and/or Charactertics, one cannot Love. So, the STARTING point is Love His creation, your immediate surroundings be it your Husband, Wife, Children, Children, Parents, fellow humans. And there is nothing wrong is treating a husband as God initially, he is just a tool to put your concentration upon. Same thing goes for Wife, there is nothing wrong is treating a Wife as God. Bottom line is: learn the Process.

Even for the real path, the very first requirement is to consider your Guru to be The God. We do need something to aim at: even so-called Katarpanthi (rigid religious people) who says that Guru Granth Sahib Ji is our Guru, they do concentrate on the Guruji or say Shabad. Shabad is not the God but still we're concentrating on it because: God's name is greater than Himself. So, all in all, everyone needs to learn the process using some tools and no person is the same; you cannot put everyone on the same boat. One thing could work for some but for another different tools might work. For some wives, considering one's physical husband as God might work but for other treating his wife as God might work. It is because they are at different Spiritual levels and we need to understand that. The real lesson is: We're in a prison (very complex Matrix/Maya) and we should use whatsoever tools we can to be on the CENTER path to God.

Why since the creation of universe, male is considered higher?
The real cause for treating Husband as God did NOT come from Manu Laws. It's way before that. When Kaal asked God for the seed to populate his world, then God created Adhya/Maya/Shakti/Female-principle/SEED and instructed her to go to Kaal (male force) and create this universe. So, in other words, the seed/female (not yet in physical form) was created for the sake of creation and was instructed to follow whatever Kaal says. Maya is responsible for the impermanent and illusory world, but people are beguiled by her and remain separated from God. It is the Maya who hid the secret of her REAL source (Absolute God) and pretended Kaal being the God. This is also the reason that sometimes it is said that women cannot be trusted. Here I'm not suggesting Right vs Wrong; I'm merely suggesting the core of this universe.

One Saint has given the following flow-chart to achieve Salvation:
1. Do the company of Sant/Mahapurash/Saint (the one who is already One with One).
2. If you cannot do that, then do Naam (Meditation); Dan/Charity of 10% of your income to needy; Isnan (Bath).
3. If you cannot do Naam, Dan, and Isnan, then do NOT overburden yourself with sins. In other words, avoid doing sins.
4. If you cannot refain from sins, then it is better to die because without doing steps 1, 2, 3 you are bound to fall to lower planes in this Matrix system.

das

[Guest]

Look at the flow of supreme consciousness of satguru gobind singh ji in jaap sahib, akaal ustat its literally going (bowing, paying respect) as unconfined, limitless, boundless, spaceless, unconditioned , pure cognitive flow without any fixation on specific form.

Maharaj is bowing, respecting (jale hari thale hari- god god everywhere and in everything) to god's creation where there is no distinction left between creator and creation. Wive, husband, kids, animal kingdom entire human race, inanimate objects everything comes under.

This is unified non dual -advait bowing/respect which spontenously naturally arises in one awakened consciousness which is shown by maharaj in jaap sahib, akaal ustat is ultimately acceptable in Gurmat which is unconfined, limitless, boundless, spaceless, unfixated on specific form. This is ultimately acceptable in Gurmat which is arisen very naturally spontaneously arisen from awakened consciousness.

Any conditioned confined/ritualistic bowing without pure cognitive perception can easily become empty ritual or dogmatic type bowing falls right in pakhand/karam kaand bowing which is rejected in Gurmat.

We bow to sri guru granth sahib ji because sri guru granth sahib ji is eternal limitless live gyan guru personified (Eternal gyan expressed in ink, pen, paper, binding) not because of its only outside structure/external qualities.

[harsharan000]

Bhai Manoman Singh Translation:

ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਜਿਨਿ ਪ੍ਰਿਉ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਕਰਿ ਜਾਨਿਆ ॥

Kaho Nānak jin pari▫o parmesar kar jāni▫ā.

Say Nanak, She who looks upon the Supreme Lord as her Spouse,

ਧੰਨੁ ਸਤੀ ਦਰਗਹ ਪਰਵਾਨਿਆ ॥੪॥੩੦॥੯੯॥

Ḏẖan saṯī ḏargėh parvāni▫ā. ||4||30||99||

is the blessed chaste wife, and she becomes acceptable in God's court.

Dr Sant Singh Khalsa Translation:

ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਜਿਨਿ ਪ੍ਰਿਉ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਕਰਿ ਜਾਨਿਆ ॥

Kaho Nānak jin pari▫o parmesar kar jāni▫ā.

Says Nanak, she who looks upon the Transcendent Lord as her Husband,

ਧੰਨੁ ਸਤੀ ਦਰਗਹ ਪਰਵਾਨਿਆ ॥੪॥੩੦॥੯੯॥

Ḏẖan saṯī ḏargėh parvāni▫ā. ||4||30||99||

is the blessed 'satee'; she is received with honor in the Court of the Lord. ||4||30||99||

I strongly agree with the translations forwarded by Satkirin jee.

Saints at different times have tried to explain the relation between a soul and the Lord with different relationships. Christ , described that relation, just as a one between a son and his father; Sree Ramakrishna as the one of a son and mother, and among others including our Guru Sahibans, is the one of a wife and her husband.

The strings which pull the both ends in all these relations, are absolute love and faith. That´s it. So let us not misunderstand the Bani. If a woman is attached to her husband physically, or the husband is attached to wife or any other worldy relations, it means, we are still in agyanta, because these relations create karmas, for which we shall have to come back one day to settle them, as a giver or a taker...

It is only, when we love Wahiguru, just as woman may love her husband, without looking here or there and due to the pull of His Love, we are constantly absorbed in Him.

So then naturally, what will happen?

Our true unconditional love for Him, will take us to His Darbar. This is what the two gyanis above are trying to tell us in their interpretations.

Worldly love, is an hindrance in our spiritual goal, divine love for Wahiguru, is the cause of our true freedom from the mayavee creation, and at same time, of our union or merging in Him.

We sholud love and interact with the world, only to the extent of adjusting and paying off our past karmas. Just as a maid, goes to work, but she in her innermost knows, that she has her own true home, where she has her children, husband or parents, and there she has to go at end of the day.

In a similar way, we are here because, from some we have to take, to others we have to give; all this, we must gladly perform our duties, as sons, daughters, spouses, etc....but knowing that, all this will be left behind one day, and the only Truth remaining in the end is Wahiguru Akal Purukh.

So it is unto Him, whom we should give all our hearts, minds and souls, and in return we shall get unbound grace, mercy and love ....

The Bani beauifully says:

"Bhaee parapt manukh deh hureeya, Gobind milan kee yeh taeree bareeya"

or

"bahut janam vichuretey Madao, ehe janam tumareh lekhey"

Bani hae Guru, Guru hae Bani.

Sat Sree Akal.

[hsingh8963]

JFIEBDUEVDOWBDIEBAPEOT8DVD THE 4U4BTBXOE FUEBDOENFY3VFH4 FIE DLSNSKAPQPWORUUTBTBXKDBFU3OSNZPFMVNFBK2OEIRBRJRBFIENFU3KSOSOCBXNXBSOWORHFBXKSKDBDNXOSNDJDB

JUST STOP!!!!! THIS IS GOING NOWHERE

[paapiman]

Yes you're right satkirin penji. Wrong interpretation of Gurbani has been pointed out! That's really good!!

So you think, you are above Gurmukh Brahamgyanis of the panth, who changed the lives of hundreds of thousands of humans like us???

Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa

Waheguru jee kee Fateh

[paapiman]

You are REALLY trying to drag that one misinterpreted tuk as justification to subordinate women and put them beneath men arent you?? Why are you so concerned about "putting women in their place" anyway??

Here are two translations... I will edit and add the rest later. I have about 10 different translations and ALL say see God as Husband... not see husband as God. Because I already showed you wehre it says God is equally in ALL of us. So having this one tul by istefl trying to subordinate women beneath men or to sugegst that only women should see men as God and not the other way around goes against rest of Gurbani! We are to ALL see God in EVERYONE!

Bhai Manoman Singh Translation:

ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਜਿਨਿ ਪ੍ਰਿਉ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਕਰਿ ਜਾਨਿਆ ॥

Kaho Nānak jin pari▫o parmesar kar jāni▫ā.

Say Nanak, She who looks upon the Supreme Lord as her Spouse,

ਧੰਨੁ ਸਤੀ ਦਰਗਹ ਪਰਵਾਨਿਆ ॥੪॥੩੦॥੯੯॥

Ḏẖan saṯī ḏargėh parvāni▫ā. ||4||30||99||

is the blessed chaste wife, and she becomes acceptable in God's court.

Dr Sant Singh Khalsa Translation:

ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਜਿਨਿ ਪ੍ਰਿਉ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਕਰਿ ਜਾਨਿਆ ॥

Kaho Nānak jin pari▫o parmesar kar jāni▫ā.

Says Nanak, she who looks upon the Transcendent Lord as her Husband,

ਧੰਨੁ ਸਤੀ ਦਰਗਹ ਪਰਵਾਨਿਆ ॥੪॥੩੦॥੯੯॥

Ḏẖan saṯī ḏargėh parvāni▫ā. ||4||30||99||

is the blessed 'satee'; she is received with honor in the Court of the Lord. ||4||30||99||

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

The above arth is valid according to the following (written by members of sects, who trace back their origins to the tenth master):

- DDT Rehat Maryada

- Amir Bhandaar teeka

- Faridkot wala teeka

Having said that, the above arths done by Dr.Sant Singh jee and Bhai Manmohan Singh jee are also right.

One cannot accept the arths which one likes and reject the others, according to one's personal opinion.

Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa

Waheguru jee kee Fateh

[CdnSikhGirl]

Paapiman, we have also shown you that taking is this way:

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

Even if you agree with the above, it still is NOT talking about a physical wife and her physical husband. It's NOT NOT NOT telling physical wife to see her physical husband as God.

'She' in this tuk is not speaking about a human female. It's speaking of the feminine concept of our souls. Gurbani describe ALL of our souls as feminine and Waheguru as the only masculine principle.

The husband being spoke of - even when written as in DDT version, is not a physical husband (ie a human male). It's still speaking of Waheguru.

It's STILL saying that ALL of us (YOU INCLUDED) must see the God as our true husband... we must look upon our TRUE husband as being God (and not a human) and that sacrifice to Waheguru, our TRUE husband, makes us a true sati.

Its not telling a physical female to view a physical male individual as God. It's telling ALL OF US as soul brides to take consider Creator, Waheguru, Akal Purakh as our TRUE husband.

It's using metaphor from physical things to explain it... but it's not instruction for a human physical female to view her physical human male husband as God. It's telling both of them (her and her husband) to view God as their true husband.

Edited May 13, 2015 by Satkirin_Kaur

[sukrit kaur]

So you think, you are above Gurmukh Brahamgyanis of the panth, who changed the lives of hundreds of thousands of humans like us??? Waheguru jee kaa KhalsaWaheguru jee kee Fateh

Where did I say so? Show me! I just said the gurbani's tukh was really interpreted and that somehow was showing a wrong message.Targetting my ownself,I said so.Just think,If I were not little aware of it,then following the message as your post gave(to LOVE the husband as sati did),would lead me to a wrong path,definitely to the world of MOH MAYA.I'm not talking about Bowing/respect here.To show respect is a different matter,but to love someone as much as Sati did,is totally a form of Moh Maya.In my view,Yes It's obligation of both partners to respect each other and to show solidarity in each situation,but to love Husband/Wife as SATEE did,is not right.Just imagine,If she would have loved God instead of her husband,then She would be much and much fortunate and that would be the real source of satisfaction. Satisfaction of love!

That was just my view.I wrote I'm not sure,cause I was not a Brahmgyani.Even ,I dont want to think/talk about it.It's like a flea of gutter talking about Nectar of richest orchids. So,I just wanted to discuss the tuk .That was a kind of question to the sangat.And I'm not interested in doing bias over it.here,fiction is really not my idea!

[CdnSikhGirl]

@sukrit kaur bhenji... Paapiman's thinking is entirely seemingly stuck in the physical only. He only sees in that tuk an instruction for a female human to see a male human as God, and keeps bringing it up as justification that women are seen as beneath men / should be subordinate to men etc. (In fact he throws out this tuk at every instance where equality of male and female are brought up to somehow prove his point that men are to be seen as God and women are beneath them). And then he goes on with the usual bits about these 'Brahamgyanis' know better than us, so we *directed at us women* should just *unwritten but highly suggested by Paapiman* that we should as women just shut up and accept our lower status because that's GRM is Guru Ji's own word etc.

He can't seem to see the spiritual meaning through the metaphor. No matter how many people try to show it to him. And I think he *personally* harbours some serious negative opinions on women and our place in his thoughts and uses any opportunity to try to justify putting us down using that one tuk. Its evident in his posts on how we should prostrate / bow to men, evident how he thinks anand karaj lavans are indicative of womens lower place, its evident in his posts suggesting women have more lust than men, its evident in his views of sexuality / love / marriage relationships, and well ALL of his posts its evident! I get a serious sense of arrogance from him, and male Ego that he truly believes that because he was born with a penis he is better than us! Too bad he doesn't realize he is just bringing himself far far away from Waheguru Ji.

Your meaning of that tuk is correct. No matter whether its written "husband lord" or "lord husband" in the tuk the meaning is the same. Its speaking against worldly attachment, and telling us all of us male and female both we should put our love / trust in Waheguru. Paapiman is just stuck in the physical, with his male Ego and wanting to be bowed to by women.

[das]

doesn't this Bulleh Shah's poem seems to fit us for this debate:

Beautifully sung:

Not a believer inside the mosque, am I
Nor a pagan disciple of false rites
Not the pure amongst the impure
Neither Moses, nor the Pharaoh

Bulleh! to me, I am not known

Not in the holy Vedas, am I
Nor in opium, neither in wine
Not in the drunkard`s intoxicated craze
Niether awake, nor in a sleeping daze

Bulleh! to me, I am not known

In happiness nor in sorrow, am I
Neither clean, nor a filthy mire
Not from water, nor from earth
Neither fire, nor from air, is my birth

Bulleh! to me, I am not known

Not an Arab, nor Lahori
Neither Hindi, nor Nagauri
Hindu, Turk, nor Peshawari
Nor do I live in Nadaun

Bulleh! to me, I am not known

Secrets of religion, I have not known
From Adam and Eve, I am not born
I am not the name I assume
Not in stillness, nor on the move

Bulleh! to me, I am not known

I am the first, I am the last
None other, have I ever known
I am the wisest of them all
Bulleh! do I stand alone?

Bulleh! to me, I am not known

Edited May 13, 2015 by das

[sukrit kaur]

@satkirin bhen ji, I think it's all his grace to differentiate right or wrong.I think Paapiman is trying to express his views in a different manner.Biasing is not the solution.we can't change anyone's views.

Acc to Gurbani ,Akal Purkh is the only Nar-Male and everybody else is called a NARI-female. Now,this Doesnt mean any gender difference or so as pointed out by us nor does it mean any superiority of one gender over the other.

Our beliefs are based on worldly definitions ,not based on divinity.Sikhi doesn't mean to follow a set of rules laid down by some man made committees or organisations.(Here I'm not attacking any particular one). When we start doing Naam Kamai,then we start understanding Gurbani in the true perspective.

As talking about equality of men and women,Women have given many Human Rights.But As a true Sikh,we Beliebve GURBANI.It's our duty to abide the teachings of Gurbani.

Guru Nanak Patsah has said There are no differences between men and women.The following phrases are well explaining the fact:

Purk mih Nwir Nwir MIH Purk bujhu brahm IgawnI(woman is in man,and man is in woman,only great intellectuals can understand this phenomenon)

Acc to science,presence of X chromosome in woman from father,explains man in woman.and presence of X chromosome in man from mother explains woman in man.and combination of both X puts responsibility on woman,since she is the mother of humanity of future.

Guru Nanak Patsah has highest praise for women and also has indicated her importance in raising the humanity:

Bhand Jamiye BHand nimiye Bhand Mangan viahh,

Bhandau hove Dosti BHandau chaley Rah

Bhand MuA bhand bhaleeye Bhand hovey Bandaan

So kyo manda akhiiye jit jammey Rajan

Bhandai Hi Bhand UPJay Bhandau Bhaaj na koye

Nanak Bhandey Bahara eko sacha soye

(From woman,man is born;within woman man is conceived, to woman he is engaged and married.Through woman,generations come.when his woman dies,he seeks other woman,to woman he is bound.So why call her bad?from her,Kings are born.from woman ,woman is born,without woman no one at all.O Nanak,only a true lord is without a woman)

One of the strongest argument of opposing force is Menstrual cycle.Guru Nanak patsah says menstruation doesnt make a woman polluted,since it's a natural and necessary process of woman's physiology:

Jive Joru sirNAavnaey aavey vaaro Vaar(as a woman has her periods month after month)

Juthey jutha Mann vasey,nit nit hoye khuaar(so does the falsehood dwell in the mouth of false, they suffer forever again and again.)

Suchey Aihey Na Aakhiye behan je pinda dhoye(They are not called pure,who merely sit after washing their bodies)

Suchey seyI Nanaka ,jin mann vaseya soye(only they are pure,within whose minds the lord abides)

Sutak kyo kar rakhiye sutak pavey Rasoye(How can it be protected from impurity,it touches our own kitchen)

Nanak Sutak aaev Na uttrey,gyan uttarey dhoye(o Nanak,impurity can only be washed with spiritual wisdom)

So there is no difference between Men and women.Both are ought to respect each other .Husband-Wife relationship is a spiritual relation.Both need to respect each other.Guru sahib respected their wives a lot and same did the wives.

We can't question anyone's particular views on this relationship.No doubt ,Wives MUST respect their husbands and Husbands should do so.I think to just bias over the topic is not worthwhile.One who will disrespect the guru's order,will be punished for his mistake.

If a wife is respecting her husband with all efforts,then she is well doing her karam. And yes it's duty of a wife.On contrary,if husband is not doing so,then he is too conducting his karam.

I think we should stop the discussion Now!

[CdnSikhGirl]

^^ exactly! Respect and love goes both ways. Husband and wife respect and love and guide each other. Their union is spiritual in nature so they are working towards same goal spiritually together as one unit (Ik Jot Due Muerti). All humans are supposed to see God in each other. There is no heirarchy, nobody is above anyone else. Wives are not beneath their husbands on some respect scale.

In conclusion, I don't care what Paapiman personally thinks. It's when he tries to dictate his personal views as to what we women must do (prostrate to physical men because they are God over us) because we are beneath men somehow, and then goes further to say that's words from 'Tenth Master' himself as if to try and guilt us into complying. If he personally doesn't get the spiritual meaning through the metaphor, that's his issue to sort out (and he will later in life as he actually lives), but to try and force his personal view of women's place on others as if it's the direct word of Guru Ji is wrong.

[paapiman]

Where did I say so? Show me! I just said the gurbani's tukh was really interpreted and that somehow was showing a wrong message.

What did you mean by this?

Quote

Yes you're right satkirin penji. Wrong interpretation of Gurbani has been pointed out! That's really good!!

Unquote

Who did the wrong interpretation of bani?

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

The above arth is/will be accepted by DDT, Nanaksar, Nirmalay, Nihangs, etc.

If you say, they have interpreted Gurbani wrong, then you are implying that you have more knowledge than them.

Waheguru jee kaa Khalsa

Waheguru jee kee Fateh

Edited May 13, 2015 by paapiman

[paapiman]

Edited May 13, 2015 by paapiman

[sukrit kaur]

[What did you mean by this?]

I mean I'm not trying to act as a brahmgyani here.As you stated ,"

["So you think, you are above Gurmukh Brahamgyanis of the panth, who changed the lives of hundreds of thousands of humans like us??? " ]

Quote

Yes you're right satkirin penji. Wrong interpretation of Gurbani has been pointed out! That's really good!!

Unquote

Who did the wrong interpretation of bani?

I think You're trying (Maybe By mistake) to change the true meaning.Don't GO to the straight translation.This is not the whole description.

Edited May 13, 2015 by sukrit kaur

[shastarsewak]

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?