Use of the term 'Singh' to denote both Singh and SInghni?

[Kuttabanda2]

Singh means a Lion.

I don't think, "Singhni" is a word in Punjabi. Can someone please confirm it?

The word used by Sikh women is "Kaur" which mean prince. The eldest son of a king used to be refereed as Tikaa saab. All other younger sons were referred to as "Kanwar". The "Kaur" word is derived from the word "Kanwar".

Bhul chuk maaf

 

According to Dr. Harbhajan Singh's research in linguistics, 'Kaur' doesn't meant 'prince'. 'Kaur' comes from 'Kuer' or 'Koer' which originally meant 'purified', 'uplifted', 'strengthened', 'pure', 'made Great', etc. 

[Kuttabanda2]

​There is reference to husband being treated like God's form in Gurbani Path Darpan, which was written by Srimaan 108 Sant Gyani Gurbachan Singh jee Khalsa Bhindrawale.

​Not every person's opinion can be taken seriously.

Bhul chuk maaf

 

Make note of the fact there have been changes made in many DDT books, especially from the Mehta Faction. It's best to get hold of an old copy, perhaps one of the first editions. The Bhinder Kalan faction also have the same books which are said to have differences and discrepancies with the Bhindra Mehta faction's version. 

[Koi]

Satkiran, the concept/angle of "punishment" simply does not exist in this context, so I don't think it can apply here.

Now consider the following:

Mata Gujri Ji, Mata Sundri Ji and Mata Jito Ji were all present at the amrit sanchar. Does anyone think why they did not give their heads? If we go by your logic, satkiran, in a previous post, where you mention that women of that time were still (to paraphrase) timid/held back etc., what would be the implication in the context of the 3 Mata Jis? Are you saying that they were timid/held back etc., or that they did not know or had any faith in what Guru Sahib Ji was doing? 

[CdnSikhGirl]

Satkiran, the concept/angle of "punishment" simply does not exist in this context, so I don't think it can apply here.

Now consider the following:

Mata Gujri Ji, Mata Sundri Ji and Mata Jito Ji were all present at the amrit sanchar. Does anyone think why they did not give their heads? If we go by your logic, satkiran, in a previous post, where you mention that women of that time were still (to paraphrase) timid/held back etc., what would be the implication in the context of the 3 Mata Jis? Are you saying that they were timid/held back etc., or that they did not know or had any faith in what Guru Sahib Ji was doing? 

​I agree! However that is the reasoning given in the video speech by *ddt Sant* Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale. That women should not be Panj Pyaras because no woman stood to give her head that day (ie punish all women for all time because the ones present that day did not volunteer their heads). However, to hold all females responsible for all time, does not make sense. However this is the reason quoted by majority of Singhs who don't want women in the Panj Pyaras. 

The only other reasoning given is purely speculation (claiming its because females give physical birth).  That reason also makes no sense since spiritual birth does not require a physical gender. Think of it this way... we never actually left spiritual form. We have only forgotten our true nature! It has never 'not' existed therefore there is nothing to birth into.  We only need to awaken and remember. 

So what's left? Absence of proof? That doesn't equal proof of absence. Just because we cant find written proof that there were women, does not mean the Guru Ji 'disallowed' women.  It only means that we have no written proof.  

If it was because at the time women were seen as wives, stay at home mothers and servant to their husbands who didn't participate in fighting, that no longer holds true. Women are in every element of the armed forces now, and police forces etc. making same sacrifices as their male counterparts. 

 

[Guest guestt]

What do you guys think about man adopting a woman's surname after marriage ?

against, in favor, neutral, doesn't matter ?

[CdnSikhGirl]

Nobody should adopt anybody's surname - at least in Sikhi. 

[paapiman]

According to Dr. Harbhajan Singh's research in linguistics, 'Kaur' doesn't meant 'prince'. 'Kaur' comes from 'Kuer' or 'Koer' which originally meant 'purified', 'uplifted', 'strengthened', 'pure', 'made Great', etc. 

​'Kaur' means Prince, was stated in a katha by a scholar too.

In either case, it does not mean a "Lion".

Bhul chuk maaf

Edited June 13, 2015 by paapiman

[paapiman]

The Panj Pyares had to have been Grisht at one time in their life, as it shows that they have and uphold their family responsibilities. 

that's what I have heard of as requirements from some Singhs.

 

 

Most of the Jathedars of that time either had to live in very hard times ( wars, invasions, fighting for Raj, need for rapid Parchar, etc.) that there was little or no time for family lives, or it was out of their choice of living, it's not compulsory. I don't believe it's a requirement to be celibate for Jathedar's position as Sant Baba Ram Singh Khalsa Bhindrawale isn't celibate himself.  

 

​Bro, celibacy is not a requirement to be a DDT's jathedar, but once, a person is jathedar, then he cannot engage sexually with his wife, in any manner.

Correct me if I am wrong, Srimaan 108 Sant Gyani Sundar Singh jee Khalsa Bhindrawale and Srimaan 108 Sant Gyani Bishen Singh jee Murarewale, were both celibates too. They lived during British times, which were not that bad as compared to Mughal times (after Baba Banda Singh's martyrdom).

Additionally, all the original Panj Pyaray were celibates. All the Panj Pyarays associated with Nanaksar order, are also celibates.

Did you hear the above from a scholar?

Bhuk chuk maaf

Edited June 13, 2015 by paapiman

[paapiman]

Make note of the fact there have been changes made in many DDT books, especially from the Mehta Faction. It's best to get hold of an old copy, perhaps one of the first editions. The Bhinder Kalan faction also have the same books which are said to have differences and discrepancies with the Bhindra Mehta faction's version. 

​Bro, do you have the original Gurbani Path Darpan? If so, can you please check the sakhi of Mata Sewan jee (who used to live in Kabul)?

Thanks

[Koi]

​I agree! However that is the reasoning given in the video speech by *ddt Sant* Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale. That women should not be Panj Pyaras because no woman stood to give her head that day (ie punish all women for all time because the ones present that day did not volunteer their heads). However, to hold all females responsible for all time, does not make sense. However this is the reason quoted by majority of Singhs who don't want women in the Panj Pyaras. 

The only other reasoning given is purely speculation (claiming its because females give physical birth).  That reason also makes no sense since spiritual birth does not require a physical gender. Think of it this way... we never actually left spiritual form. We have only forgotten our true nature! It has never 'not' existed therefore there is nothing to birth into.  We only need to awaken and remember. 

So what's left? Absence of proof? That doesn't equal proof of absence. Just because we cant find written proof that there were women, does not mean the Guru Ji 'disallowed' women.  It only means that we have no written proof.  

If it was because at the time women were seen as wives, stay at home mothers and servant to their husbands who didn't participate in fighting, that no longer holds true. Women are in every element of the armed forces now, and police forces etc. making same sacrifices as their male counterparts. 

 

I would go so far as to say that women make even more sacrifices than male counterparts. I'm sure everyone would agree, as we all see it on a daily basis. 

Sant Jarnail Singh Ji said nothing about punishment. Therefore, I would not think it right to twist his words accordingly.

However, what about the point made regarding Guru Sahib Ji's wives and mother? What is your take on that? 

With regard to seeing your husband as a demi god of some kind, I think that is incorrect. Husband and wife are equal in marriage. They may have different roles, but they are equal. 

[paapiman]

I would go so far as to say that women make even more sacrifices than male counterparts. I'm sure everyone would agree, as we all see it on a daily basis.

​Some women do, especially in a country like Canada. Females have to work (on average 40 hours, if full time)  and take care of their children, husband and in-laws. It is a very very tough job. There is no doubt about it.

But, if they stick to Gurmat, they get rewards too.

Srimaan Sant Baba Nand Singh jee Maharaaj kaleranwale had said:

Quote

If a sadhu does meditation for twelve years, a married man one year, a married woman for one month, all meditations are equal.

Unquote [1]

[1] - Sri Nanaksar Stairs to God

Bhuk chuk maaf

[paapiman]

What do you guys think about man adopting a woman's surname after marriage ?

against, in favor, neutral, doesn't matter ?

​Can you please start a new topic on it?

[CdnSikhGirl]

 

Sant Jarnail Singh Ji said nothing about punishment. Therefore, I would not think it right to twist his words accordingly.

However, what about the point made regarding Guru Sahib Ji's wives and mother? What is your take on that? 

 

To be fair....​He did not use the word punishment... but saying that "nobody of this gender should be allowed to do this thing because none volunteered to do it on the very first day" whether or not the actual word is used, it's still saying the same thing. That women for all time are being held accountable and losing out on it because of the women who were present that day. 

Maybe since they were so close to Guru Ji himself, they were already in the know of the plans for that day and so it would have made no sense for them to volunteer since they knew what the outcome would be? etc? We dont know... again, we can't use absence of proof as proof of absence... if we did that, science would never have evolved!! Think about it!  Just because they themselves did not volunteer for whatever reason (my thinking is that they already knew what Guru Ji's plans were for that day and so, being part of those plans it made no sense for them to volunteer as there would be no impact. It had to be people who did not know what the outcome personally for themselves was going to be... you cant tell me that a wife and mother would not know the plans ahead of time being so close to him).  Its like if I am part of the planning committee for something, where we call for volunteers and the volunteers dont know what they are volunteering for but I do... would I volunteer?? It makes no sense.   

As for the rest of the women present that day remember culture was still a huge impact and women were likely largely kept submissive, and quiet.  Seen and not heard etc. But... there were thousands upon thousands of men who also did not volunteer that day as well!!!  So to say that all women for all time can not be Panj Pyaras because of the ones present that day, what about all the men who didn't either?

Point is, gender like caste etc were all eliminated with creation of the khalsa.  Its even in DDTs RM itself! Paapiman has yet to comment on this line - in Gurmat - and he's so obsessive on following DDTs RM to the T.  And he has yet to even comment on that command.  He doesnt know how to approach it while still putting women beneath men....because he cant.  It's black and white. That differences in caste, colour, etc and GENDER were ELIMINATED after the khalsa was created. That means that once Khalsa was created, who the first five were (meaning their caste, their ethnicity, their gender etc) all did not matter.  What mattered was the divine light the jot inside of them.  All Khalsa become equal on equal level once someone takes Amrit all these differences are removed.  So to tell an entire gender they can not fully participate as Khalsa goes against this when it says Gender difference was also removed.  (of course actual gender was not removed like caste and skin colour etc what was removed was the social hierarchy used to give some privileges over others because of these attributes)

 

 

[paapiman]

 

Paapiman please respond to this instead of looking for other DDT literature to support your sexist stance. You have been referring to 'Gurmat' and the 'Gurmat Rehet Maryada' as be all and end all in everything... so please respond:

 

​Person of any caste, any gender, any race, any color, any religion, any income category, etc can take khanday da amrit. There cannot be any discrimination in this sense.

How can the physical differences between a man and woman be eliminated by just taking khanday da amrit? Similarly, even caste/race has an effect on a person. One's genes have a definite impact on one's thinking and habits.

Taking Khanday da amrit, is just like getting an admission to a university (degree is not guaranteed). Tons of meditation is required to reach high levels, where gender, caste, race, etc, have no effect on the mind.

Btw, transgenders also cannot be part of Panj Pyaray.

Bhul chuk maaf

Edited June 13, 2015 by paapiman

[CdnSikhGirl]

It doesn't say that these things were eliminated for joining Khalsa... it says these things were eliminated BY the creation of the Khalsa. In other words, it was the effect not a prerequisite.  Meaning that AFTER becoming Khalsa thee things are eliminated.  That means that gender has no bearing on whether someone should be limited anymore.  It has nothing to do with who can or can not take Amrit. It has to do with what happens when one takes amrit.  

I already explained to you of course biology does not change, a persons skin colour does not change, their birth biological family (caste) does not actually change. What was eliminated were the DIFFERENCES created by these things.  DIFFERENCES used to discriminate. You obviously did not actually read my post. These differences used to delineate and put people into neat little hierarchies where some enjoy more benefits than others... THATS what was eliminated. ALL who take amrit drink from the same bata, and are at the same level once they become Khalsa. You cant tell some Khalsa that they can not truly be fully Khalsa while others get to enjoy full benefit of being Khalsa.  That goes agains that statement that these MAN MADE perceptions that some are better than others, some deserve more privilege than others simply by birthright. The Gurus were VERY against this thinking.  

PS: I hope to someday BE in Panj Pyaras ;) Being of military background this is the ultimate seva I aspire to.  Good thing I am not following DDT hunh? 

btw you still have not shown me the actual line in writing that outright says "women can not be panj pyaras" :) Hint: There is none... 

Edited June 13, 2015 by Satkirin_Kaur

[CdnSikhGirl]

:) Notice while some of these are 3HO, not all are. 

 

[paapiman]

btw you still have not shown me the actual line in writing that outright says "women can not be panj pyaras" :) Hint: There is none... 

​I will try to find it.

[CdnSikhGirl]

And it cant be in some jatha specific document that does not affect the rest of the panth.  The DDT own RM does not say it, Gurbani does not say it, the PANTHIC RM does not say it and actually specifies that women CAN be Panj Pyaras.  

Do you believe on a personal level, that women are spiritually inferior to men? 

Because that what is being suggested by saying that women entirely must rely on males to progress spiritually while males do not require females at all.  And since we never really left spiritual form at all - even while in this physical form our spiritual self still exists, which is why we can access it.  Are you saying that those born as females are somehow spiritually deficient and so they are punished and born as a woman to need males (those born into male form because they are spiritually superior to them) to help them progress spiritually?? 

Nobody is addressing this issue... that to restrict women (even though Guru Ji never came out and said women were not allowed) but to suggest that Guru Ji did (putting words into his mouth assumptions) its making the suggestion that women by nature are spiritually deficient compared to men.  

Do you really believe that??? Because ALL of us are told to take Amrit right?  So its telling women they MUST pass through this stage relying entirely on men because their gender is 'not good enough'.  

Why even have women take Amrit at all if they can not fulfill ALL of the duties of Khalsa? Women in that sense are never truly even seen then as fully Khalsa / Amritdhair anyway, so why even bother?  Why not take it like other religions do, and just make the statement that women should wait to be reborn as male then... 

Edited June 13, 2015 by Satkirin_Kaur

[CdnSikhGirl]

Look at it another way: 

You are guy.  You spend thousands and thousands of dollars on an education and study and study to attain your degree in your chosen field, but are told that even though you attend the graduation ceremony, no matter what you do, because you were born into the body you are born in, you can never fully practice your field. There will be this one job that you can never do, only females can do it, simply because the first time that job opportunity became available only females volunteered for it.  And now only females are qualified to even present you with your degree.  

How would you feel?  You'd certainly feel like you were being looked at as inadequate in your chosen field, that your gender was being looked as being inferior and that the females were always going to be seen as superior to you job wise, qualification wise, and that even though you are now told you are qualified, you can never qualify others into your field, even though you hold the same degree and the same knowledge, and the same ability.  It certainly makes the statement that females are seen as "more" qualified in the field, and "more" knowledgable and capable.  That even though you paid the same amount for your education as them, and studied just as hard, and you may have even beat some of them marks wise, but your degree will always be seen as less than theirs simply because you are a male. 

Why would you even bother studying for the degree at all then? 

In this case the 'education' is becoming Amritdhari. And the 'graduation ceremony' is Amrit Sanchar.  The degree is being 'qualified' as a member of the Khalsa. But restricting women from fully performing duties of Khalsa is saying they are never truly 100% Khalsa, they are only 90% Khalsa compared to males. That they are deficient somehow compared to the males.  That the males are more qualified, more capable. It's saying that both take the same Amrit, they both give their heads, they both make same commitments, but females still end up 'less Khalsa' than males and only males can confer the degree on other females, even though both took the exact same amrit.    

Is this what Guru Ji wanted?  To make some fully khalsa and others only 'nearly' Khalsa... even though they take the same amrit, they make the same commitments and both give their heads equally.  

Why does Gurbani not support this? (see ALL with single eye of equality, for in each and every heart *not just male hearts* the divine light is contained) Why does even DDTs RM say that differences used to delineate people were ELIMINATED once Khalsa was created. (not to become Khalsa, but once one actually becomes Khalsa these things are eliminated)?? Its viewed as a huge sin to discriminate based on caste, colour etc because of this very line... but this very line also specifies gender.  
 

 

Edited June 13, 2015 by Satkirin_Kaur

[Koi]

To be fair....​He did not use the word punishment... but saying that "nobody of this gender should be allowed to do this thing because none volunteered to do it on the very first day" whether or not the actual word is used, it's still saying the same thing. That women for all time are being held accountable and losing out on it because of the women who were present that day. 
Maybe since they were so close to Guru Ji himself, they were already in the know of the plans for that day and so it would have made no sense for them to volunteer since they knew what the outcome would be? etc? We dont know... again, we can't use absence of proof as proof of absence... if we did that, science would never have evolved!! Think about it!  Just because they themselves did not volunteer for whatever reason (my thinking is that they already knew what Guru Ji's plans were for that day and so, being part of those plans it made no sense for them to volunteer as there would be no impact. It had to be people who did not know what the outcome personally for themselves was going to be... you cant tell me that a wife and mother would not know the plans ahead of time being so close to him).  Its like if I am part of the planning committee for something, where we call for volunteers and the volunteers dont know what they are volunteering for but I do... would I volunteer?? It makes no sense.   

As for the rest of the women present that day remember culture was still a huge impact and women were likely largely kept submissive, and quiet.  Seen and not heard etc. But... there were thousands upon thousands of men who also did not volunteer that day as well!!!  So to say that all women for all time can not be Panj Pyaras because of the ones present that day, what about all the men who didn't either?

Point is, gender like caste etc were all eliminated with creation of the khalsa.  Its even in DDTs RM itself! Paapiman has yet to comment on this line - in Gurmat - and he's so obsessive on following DDTs RM to the T.  And he has yet to even comment on that command.  He doesnt know how to approach it while still putting women beneath men....because he cant.  It's black and white. That differences in caste, colour, etc and GENDER were ELIMINATED after the khalsa was created. That means that once Khalsa was created, who the first five were (meaning their caste, their ethnicity, their gender etc) all did not matter.  What mattered was the divine light the jot inside of them.  All Khalsa become equal on equal level once someone takes Amrit all these differences are removed.  So to tell an entire gender they can not fully participate as Khalsa goes against this when it says Gender difference was also removed.  (of course actual gender was not removed like caste and skin colour etc what was removed was the social hierarchy used to give some privileges over others because of these attributes)

 

 

To rationalise the actions of the Mata Ji's by inferring that they "knew of the plan beforehand" is a gigantic assumption, which is, to be fair, clutching at straws. Especially when you research the history of the 1699 Amrit Sanchar. 

To say that the women were submissive then would imply that the first 9 Gurus just wasted their time. Again, another massively dangerous assumption. 

Personally, I believe that this was all divinely preordained. Because they could not have become the original 5 Piyare with an infinite amount of bhagti. 

Satkiran, a from a woman's point of view, how would you say the path resolve this issue? Call a sarbat khalsa? Get all the jathedar together?

[CdnSikhGirl]

To rationalise the actions of the Mata Ji's by inferring that they "knew of the plan beforehand" is a gigantic assumption, which is, to be fair, clutching at straws. Especially when you research the history of the 1699 Amrit Sanchar. 

To say that the women were submissive then would imply that the first 9 Gurus just wasted their time. Again, another massively dangerous assumption. 

Personally, I believe that this was all divinely preordained. Because they could not have become the original 5 Piyare with an infinite amount of bhagti. 

Satkiran, a from a woman's point of view, how would you say the path resolve this issue? Call a sarbat khalsa? Get all the jathedar together?

​I thought it was already solved? SRM explicitely states that both genders can be Panj Pyaras.  SRM was created after literally years of deliberation by hundreds of sikhs representing ALL jathas.  The majority decision was that there is no evidence that precludes women from this seva and it was only circumstantial evidence that prevented women from being 'allowed' prior.  Also note, it was always MALES who decided what females should and should not be allowed to do.  That in and of itself is wrong. There should have been 50/50 participation of gender in decision making when it involves gender issues.  Similarly a panel of 100% women should never be deciding factor on issues that only affect men. I think you will agree on this... so a panel of all males should never have full deciding power on decisions that affect only females.     

Similarly to your argument to assume that because we have no written proof of women participating as Panj Pyaras that must mean there were none at all, is also clutching at straws.  If Guru Ji had meant outright to not allow women, then the perfect opportunity was when his 52 Hukams were written.  But there is nothing written in there. In fact there is nothing written anywhere specifically stating women are not allowed.  And using what tiny little shreds of evidence we have on the original or the amrit sanchars that happened immediately after the first as some sort of absolute proof, is wrong. Truth is, historically we can barely piece together the actual events of the first amrit sanchar in 1699, let alone those which occurred after. This is well admitted to! Even Bhai Chaupa Singh's Rhetnamma was written some 50 years after 1699, and since he was known to be of Brahmin background, the Brahmin mindset can easily be seen dripping from his writing, particularly as it pertains to women.
Also, to suggest that 'well if there were women, it surely would have been written down' but in reality, you are using the same argument as a counter that you are refusing to allow in favour of.  There were also no written accounts of who actually WERE the panj pyaras in these original amrit sanchars (let alone who wasn't) which occured immediately afterward, so we really can't say either way. And to make claims as such would ALL be purely speculation. To suggest either women were allowed or disallowed is speculation only.  
All we have to go by is what we were left which is Gurbani.  And Gurbani does not preclude either gender from any seva but instructs us as a Gurmukh to "See ALL with a single eye of equality, for in each and every heart the divine light is contained".  So what if the so called orthodox Sects who have been limiting Sikh women, have been wrong all this time? Would it be better (in Guru Ji's eyes) to be all inclusive, and follow Gurbani on equality and be wrong, or would it be better to be exclusive, limit half the Sikh population because they happened to be born female, purely based on speculation and cultural thoughts of women, even though Gurbani does not support it, and be wrong?  Which would be the better situation to be in? I really don't think that Guru Ji would fault anyone for allowing women to be in Panj Pyaras (even if his original plan was not to have them) since this decision would be based on love, equality, treating all humans as ONE, removing differences that pit humans against each other. Whereas if Guru Ji had intended to actually allow both genders from the beginning, by limiting women and declaring them unworthy, inferior and basing the decision on exclusivity, ego, heirarchy etc. would be doing a huge disservice. 
I think the better position to be in, will be the one that follows Gurbani teaching on inclusiveness and equality rather than decision based on ego and superiority etc. - no matter whether the original plan was to have females or not. The statement that keeps being thrown around that "No woman gave her head that day" reeks of arrogance / ego on the part of the males claiming this.  Forgetting that the entire human race are actually ONE and are actually genderless souls, experiencing this illusion together, they are instead operating through ego, by wanting to hold something over the heads of others... to be 'better' than someone else, to put others at a weaker and lower position than they are, to make them feel inferior and like they don't deserve to do this seva simply because they were born female and telling them that they are carrying the burden of the mistake / inaction of women who existed hundreds of years ago.   
I don't think our Gurus were so rigid that they would fault anyone for basing a decision (when there is no evidence either for or against) on love and equality rather than ego and superiority. Don't you think? 

If SRM is to be contested on this specific issue (which has already been decided when SRM was created) then the panel of Sikhs making the decision should include 50% males and 50% females, all of them Amritdhari and with an equal spread of different jathas and groups, along with 50% of the congregation being associated to no jatha at all since majority of Sikhs are not part of specific jathas anyway.  I fear that any panel loosely put together, would be made up of majority males, from DDT / Sant Samaj and Nihang etc background, with maybe 1 or 2 'token' women who are also from those backgrounds and being coached on what they are to say and decide.  So once again, females fates would be decided entirely or nearly entirely by men. A situation that men in the same position would never want to see... their fates decided entirely by women. So it has to be a panel of 50/50 women and men who decide gender related issues.  Same as with the menstruation issue etc.  Or old men who nearly ALL have incontinance issues where they dribble etc. Or maybe we should just put our focus away from these biological issues all together and trust that people know how to wash their genitals and use hygiene products.  (Is Sikhi really that invasive that it should be peering into people's underpants anyway?)     

Sant Samaj and DDT right now have a stronghold in Amritsar. Just look what happened when Akal Takht a few years back openly declared that women are allowed to perform kirtan there, it was DDT and Sant Samaj who kicked up such a stink about it, that even though this edict still stands (women are actually allowed by Akal Takht to do kirtan there) but to date it has never been enforced because of DDT and Sant Samaj putting forth such a huge stink about it. 
http://www.sikhtimes.com/news_081805a.html
http://www.hindustantimes.com/chandigarh/women-seek-right-to-do-kirtan-in-golden-temple/article1-745231.aspx

BTW Here is an article that mentions two elderly female in Panj Pyaras:
"Shortly afterwards we did appear in front of Panj Peeyarey and detailed our transgressions. We were terrified as so many who interviewed to serve as one of the Panj came out weeping and wailing. About 65 people were rejected for one reason or another. Two elderly ladies found suitable were in the Panj peeare and one was Peredhaar. "
Link: http://khalsapanth.blogspot.ca/2007/01/bhai-jagdesh-singh-and-bibi-jagjit-kaur.html?m=1

Edited June 14, 2015 by Satkirin_Kaur

[paapiman]

Scientifically speaking, it makes sense, to allow only men in Panj Pyaray.

More details later on.

Bhul chuk maaf

[paapiman]

SRM was created after literally years of deliberation by hundreds of sikhs representing ALL jathas. 

​I think, the above statement is false. Correct me if I am wrong, I don't think DDT and Nanaksar (two big sects of Sikhism) representatives, agreed with the so-called SRM.

I will try to find more details.

Bhul chuk maaf

Edited June 14, 2015 by paapiman

[CdnSikhGirl]

​I think, the above statement is false. Correct me if I am wrong, I don't think DDT and Nanaksar (two big sects of Sikhism) representatives, agreed with the so-called SRM.

I will try to find more details.

Bhul chuk maaf

​Whether they agreed or not is not the issue.  In any sort of panel, not everyone is going to agree completely.  If you put 100 people together you will never get a unanimous decision. However in this case majority wins out. So maybe they did not agree totally with it, but they were present and did vote.  Its not fair after the fact to contest the majority decision because your particular group couldn't sway the minds of everyone on every issue.  Correct me if I am wrong, but DDT would never be happy unless SRM was a carbon copy of their own so-called GRM anyway.  

And scientifically... haah this should be funny.  Since we are dealing with spiritual ceremony that has nothing to do with physical.  Physical is all an illusion anyway.  Your being a male is false. Just like my being female. In the grand scheme of things, in reality, we are identical. 

Answer my point on the fact that women and men take the SAME amrit, make the SAME commitments, and both give their heads equally. But to say that women can not fully perform duties of a Khalsa means that Amritdhari women would always be 'not quite' Khalsa compared to men.  Its like the university analogy I used.  Why even bother studying and getting the degree if you will never be able to fulfill ALL the tasks that your degree entails.  Why pay the same, study the same, get the same piece of paper as someone else but be told that while they can do everything, your degree will always be seen as 'not quite' what theirs is.  Why even pursue the degree to begin with? Why doesn't Sikhi just come put and say like other religions then, that since women are lacking spiritually to be able to perform all religious duties, that they have to wait and be reborn as a male so they can then become '100%' Khalsa instead of this 'almost' Khalsa that DDT allows women to be now?



 

[paapiman]

​Whether they agreed or not is not the issue.  In any sort of panel, not everyone is going to agree completely.  If you put 100 people together you will never get a unanimous decision. However in this case majority wins out. So maybe they did not agree totally with it, but they were present and did vote.  Its not fair after the fact to contest the majority decision because your particular group couldn't sway the minds of everyone on every issue.  Correct me if I am wrong, but DDT would never be happy unless SRM was a carbon copy of their own so-called GRM anyway. 

​Correct me if I am wrong, I don't think, Nanaksar and DDT members, were even present in that panel.

Bhul chuk maaf