Islamic dawa?

[CdnSikhGirl]

Gurparsaad, ​I will try to find the meanings of these verses.

 

 

​In fact, ISIS is using these very verses to justify taking women as sex slaves and have set the age that girls can be married at 9 years old, based on verses from the quran.  

Here: (And there are a bunch od youtube videos linked with Muslim so-called 
'scholars' 
http://freethoughtnation.com/what-does-the-koran-say-about-women/

[paapiman]

​In fact, ISIS is using these very verses to justify taking women as sex slaves and have set the age that girls can be married at 9 years old, based on verses from the quran.  
Here: (And there are a bunch od youtube videos linked with Muslim so-called 
'scholars' 
http://freethoughtnation.com/what-does-the-koran-say-about-women/

​If some people are using religion as a tool for their own purpose, that does not mean that we should start slandering someone's religion.

There have been cases of sexual abuse by so-called priests too. That does not mean, we should start thinking negative about Hazrat Issa jee (aka Jesus Christ).

Bhul chuk maaf

Edited June 10, 2015 by paapiman

[SikhKhoj]

Paapi, brother if you read history. Muhammad did loot & distribute war booty including women amongst his followers. Don't even go far, look up on google: 'Rayhana Bint Zayed'.

She was a Jewish woman, her entire tribe including her father and husband were murdered by Muslims. Think one second from a logical perspective, would she willingly marry the man who ordered all of that? No. She was a war captive, then forced to marry.

Muhammad fell in love with his adopted son Zayeds wife, so he uttered a Quranic verse where it allows men to marry their adopted sons & then married her. Her name was Zaynab. As you can see Muhammad seems to be a prophet who had revelations to give a god-accepted authority of his actions and urges...

Read the Quran 33:37 about the above verse. It is clear, it allows to marry adopted sons wives just because Muhammad did.

 

 

 

[SikhKhoj]

Satkirin, call Paapi out on his hypocrisy where he accepts Baba Gurbachan Singh Bhindranwale as a Mahapurkh who was all knowing yet defies the Baba by saying Muhammad was holy... While Baba said Muhammad was a thief and murderer.

Paapi can accept Taksals defaming position of women but not about Muhammad?

[CdnSikhGirl]

Satkirin, call Paapi out on his hypocrisy where he accepts Baba Gurbachan Singh Bhindranwale as a Mahapurkh who was all knowing yet defies the Baba by saying Muhammad was holy... While Baba said Muhammad was a thief and murderer.

Paapi can accept Taksals defaming position of women but not about Muhammad?

​I have done so many times, but he seems to be a lost cause... 

[Crystal]

​Tongue in cheek.

So, we're playing chess? Good move.

 

Jokes aside - It was merely a honest question. 

 

Crystal

Edited June 11, 2015 by Crystal
Spelling

[paapiman]

Satkirin, call Paapi out on his hypocrisy where he accepts Baba Gurbachan Singh Bhindranwale as a Mahapurkh who was all knowing yet defies the Baba by saying Muhammad was holy... While Baba said Muhammad was a thief and murderer.

Paapi can accept Taksals defaming position of women but not about Muhammad?

​I still have not talked to a scholar in details, about the above mentioned sakhi. I will try.

Taksaal does not defame women. Optimum rights have been given to women in Gurmat.

Bhul chuk maaf.

[SikhKhoj]

Audio is available online. If you understand Punjabi there should be no problem in understanding what Baba Gurbachan Singh said regarding Muhammad.

[paapiman]

 

She was a Jewish woman, her entire tribe including her father and husband were murdered by Muslims. Think one second from a logical perspective, would she willingly marry the man who ordered all of that? No. She was a war captive, then forced to marry.

​Have you talked to a scholar regarding the above incident? An idiot can also make tenth master look, like an enemy of Muslims.

Bhul chuk maaf

[SikhKhoj]

Have read several hadiths. And many Islamic books.

Quran proves Muhammad marrying his adopted sons wife and justifying it with a revelation from Allah. Did you check the Quranic passage?

[CdnSikhGirl]

"​I still have not talked to a scholar in details, about the above mentioned sakhi. I will try.

Taksaal does not defame women. Optimum rights have been given to women in Gurmat.

Bhul chuk maaf" 

 ​

SO this is DDT's idea of what "OPTIMUM RIGHTS" to women are??? 

- Women being told to bow to husbands to show respect (just because he is a man) while he is not told to do the same to show her equal respect
- Women being told to see their husband as 'God' while he is to see her as only a 'faithful follower'
- Expected to be obedient and subservient to men (because everything is HIS - HIS house etc instead of THEIR home) so he gets final say in all decisions, while she remains a servant in HIS house
- Less rights than men to perform FULL duties as Khalsa, including Panj Pyaras  (why even become Khalsa then if one is never seen as truly Khalsa - ie: unable to perform ALL duties of Khalsa?)
- Also apparently not allowed to do other seva such as paathi seva, ragee for kirtan, granthi etc. by DDT (It's in the Gurmat Rehet Maryada - every seva states 'Singh')
- Being seen as 'dirty' because of biological functions that God gave us, which in turn serve to limit women even more when it comes to seva
-  Women not being given enough say in leadership positions / say in religious affairs (which is ironically why women have such abysmal 'optimal rights' in the first place 
- Women being kept from performing kirtan, washing sanctum sanctorum with milk, chaur sahib seva, granthi, akhand paath seva, palki sahib seva at Harmandir Sahib (main opposition is DDT / Sant Samaj)
- Some Singhs making the statement that Bibis should not even receive amrit (or only kirpan amrit), and suggesting that the only reason they ended up having amrit is so they could still be a servant to their husbands (cook and serve them meals)
- Double standards when it comes to what is considered appropriate clothing (Singhs telling Singhnis to wear only salwar kameez for example, when the Singh himself is wearing jeans)

Is THIS what you consider are "Optimum Rights" to women? Women may as well be a slave... Thank goodness we aren't all forced to follow DDT's idea of 'Gurmat' ​

 

 

Edited June 11, 2015 by Satkirin_Kaur

[paapiman]

Satkirin, call Paapi out on his hypocrisy where he accepts Baba Gurbachan Singh Bhindranwale as a Mahapurkh who was all knowing yet defies the Baba by saying Muhammad was holy... While Baba said Muhammad was a thief and murderer.

Paapi can accept Taksals defaming position of women but not about Muhammad?

​Did you know that a Sikh killed another Sikh, during the times of seventh master and was forgiven by him?

Did you know that a Sikh (Baba Joga Singh jee) was about to go to a prostitute?

 

If yes, then why cannot Prophet Muhammad make a mistake in his life? I never said that he was perfect.
 

How do you know that Srimaan 108 Sant Baba Gurbachan SIngh jee Khalsa Bhindrawale, lied about Prophet Muhammed? It could be a true story.
 

Are you not being a hypocrite too? On one hand, you are saying that Prophet Muhammad looted and murdered and on the other hand, you are unable to digest the sakhi of the Prophet and the sadhu?
 

It is the duty of every Sikh to show respect to all other people, especially the spiritually enlightened ones, irrespective of their faith. A spiritually enlightened person, who has not reached Brahamgyan, can also make mistakes. That does not mean, we must stop respecting them for their good deeds.

Hypocrisy or giving due respect?

Bhul chuk maaf

Edited June 11, 2015 by paapiman

[paapiman]

 ​

SO this is DDT's idea of what "OPTIMUM RIGHTS" to women are??? 

- Women being told to bow to husbands to show respect (just because he is a man) while he is not told to do the same to show her equal respect
- Women being told to see their husband as 'God' while he is to see her as only a 'faithful follower'
- Expected to be obedient and subservient to men (because everything is HIS - HIS house etc instead of THEIR home) so he gets final say in all decisions, while she remains a servant in HIS house
- Less rights than men to perform FULL duties as Khalsa, including Panj Pyaras  (why even become Khalsa then if one is never seen as truly Khalsa - ie: unable to perform ALL duties of Khalsa?)
- Also apparently not allowed to do other seva such as paathi seva, ragee for kirtan, granthi etc. by DDT (It's in the Gurmat Rehet Maryada - every seva states 'Singh')
- Being seen as 'dirty' because of biological functions that God gave us, which in turn serve to limit women even more when it comes to seva
-  Women not being given enough say in leadership positions / say in religious affairs (which is ironically why women have such abysmal 'optimal rights' in the first place 
- Women being kept from performing kirtan, washing sanctum sanctorum with milk, chaur sahib seva, granthi, akhand paath seva, palki sahib seva at Harmandir Sahib (main opposition is DDT / Sant Samaj)
- Some Singhs making the statement that Bibis should not even receive amrit (or only kirpan amrit), and suggesting that the only reason they ended up having amrit is so they could still be a servant to their husbands (cook and serve them meals)
- Double standards when it comes to what is considered appropriate clothing (Singhs telling Singhnis to wear only salwar kameez for example, when the Singh himself is wearing jeans)

Is THIS what you consider are "Optimum Rights" to women? Women may as well be a slave... Thank goodness we aren't all forced to follow DDT's idea of 'Gurmat' ​

 

 

​In Sikhism, there are only a few restrictions on women.

- They cannot be part of Panj pyaray.

- They should avoid seva, especially Satguru jee's saroop's seva, during periods.

Considering a husband as a demi-God, is out of respect. It is similar to an adult son respecting his mother, as a guru. This does not mean that the son is a servant/slave to her mother or that the mother cannot make a mistake. A Sikh husband is also suppose to respect his wife.

Bhul chuk maaf

 

Edited June 11, 2015 by paapiman

[paapiman]

Unfortunately those verses are well known and not misinterpreted Paapiman.  Those interpretations ARE from Muslim scholars.  

​Women are given, plenty of respect in Islam. Please read below.

Quote

According to the Quran, men and women have the same spirit, there is no superiority in the spiritual sense between men and women. [Noble Quran 4:1, 7:189, 42:11]

The Quran makes it clear that all human beings (and the phraseology doesn't apply to men or women alone, but to both) have what you might call a human;

Nowhere in the Quran do we find any trace of any notion of blaming Eve for the first mistake or for eating from the forbidden tree. Nowhere, even though the Quran speaks about Adam, Eve, and the forbidden tree, but in a totally different spirit. The story is narrated in 7:19-27, and it speaks about both of them doing this, both of them are told that both of them disobeyed, both of them discovered the consequences of their disobedience, both of them seek repentance and both of them are forgiven. Nowhere in the Quran does it say woman is to be blamed for the fall of man. Furthermore, when the Quran speaks about the suffering of women during the period of pregnancy and childbirth, nowhere does it connect it with the concept of original sin, because there is no concept of original sin in Islam. The suffering is presented not as a reason to remind woman of the fall of man, but as a reason to adore and love woman or the mother. In the Quran, especially 31:14, 46:15, it makes it quite clear God has commanded upon mankind to be kind to parents and mentions,

"His mother bore him in difficulty or suffering upon suffering." [Noble Quran 31:14, 46:15]

The Quran makes it clear again to remove any notion of superiority and I refer you again to 49:13. I must caution you that there are some mistaken translations, but if you go to the original Arabic, there is no question of gender being involved.

In terms of moral, spiritual duties, acts of worship, the requirements of men and women are the same, except in some cases when women have certain concessions because of their feminine nature, or their health or the health of their babies.

The Quran explicitly, in more than one verse, 3:195, 4:124, specified that whoever does good deeds, and is a believer and then specifies "male or female" God will give them an abundant reward.

In the area of economic rights, we have to remember that in Europe until the 19th century, women did not have the right to own their own property. When they were married, either it would transfer to the husband or she would not be able to dispense of it without permission of her husband. In Britain, perhaps the first country to give women some property rights, laws were passed in the 1860's known as "Married Women Property Act." More than 1300 years earlier, that right was clearly established in Islamic law.

"Whatever men earn, they have a share of that and whatever women earn, they have a share in that." [Noble Quran 4:32]

Secondly, there is no restriction in Islamic law that says a woman cannot work or have a profession, that her only place is in the home. In fact, by definition, in a truly Islamic society, there must be women physicians, women nurses, women teachers, because it's preferable also to separate teenagers in the volatile years in high school education. And if she chooses to work, or if she's married with the consent of her husband, she's entitled to equal pay, not for equal work, but for work of equal worth.

Thirdly, when it comes to financial security, Islamic law is more tilted in many respects towards women. These are seven examples:

During the period of engagement, a woman is to be on the receiving side of gifts.

At the time of marriage, it is the duty of the husband, not the bride's family. He is supposed to pay for a marital gift. The Quran called it a gift, and it is exclusively the right of the woman. She doesn't have to spend it on the household, she doesn't have to give it to her father or anyone else.

If the woman happened to own any property prior to marriage, she retains that property after marriage. It remains under her control. Also, in most Muslim countries, the woman keeps her own last name, and her own identity.

If the woman has any earnings during her marital life, by way of investments of her property or as a result of work, she doesn't have to spend one penny of that income on the household, it is entirely hers.

The full maintenance and support of a married woman is the entire responsibility of her husband, even though she might be richer than he is. She doesn't have to spend a penny.

At the time of divorce, there are certain guarantees during the waiting period and even beyond for a woman's support.

If the widow or divorcee has children, she's entitled to child support.

In return for these listed securities, it is clear why the Islamic laws pertaining to inheritance give men a higher share. From the social standpoint, as a daughter we find that credit goes to Islam for stopping the barbaric practice of pre-Islamic Arabs of female infanticide. These ignorant people used to bury female daughters alive. The Quran forbade the practice, making it a crime. Surah 81 Additionally, the Quran condemned the chauvinistic attitudes of some people who used to greet the birth of a boy with gladness, but sadness in the case of a girl.

The duty, not the right, the duty of education, as the Prophet said, is a duty on every Muslim, male and female.

"Among His Signs is this, that he created for you mates from among yourselves, that they may dwell in tranquility with them, and He has put love and mercy between your (hearts): Verily in that are signs for those who reflect." [Noble Quran 30:21]

There are numerous verses in the Quran to the same effect.

Secondly, the approval and consent of the girl to marriage is a prerequisite for the validity of marriage in Islam. She has the right to say yes or no.

Husbands' and wives' duties are mutual responsibilities. They might not be identical duties, but the totality of rights and responsibilities are balanced.

"Dwell with your wives in kindness for even if you hate them, you might be hating someone in whom God has placed so much good." [Noble Quran 4:19]

Unquote [1]

[1] - http://www.islamswomen.com/articles/do_muslim_women_have_rights.php

Bhul chuk maaf

 

 

Edited June 11, 2015 by paapiman

[CdnSikhGirl]

​In Sikhism, there are only a few restrictions on women.

- They cannot be part of Panj pyaray.

- They should avoid seva, especially Satguru jee's saroop's seva, during periods.

Considering a husband as a demi-God, is out of respect. It is similar to an adult son respecting his mother, as a guru. This does not mean that the son is a servant/slave to her mother or that the mother cannot make a mistake. A Sikh husband is also suppose to respect his wife.

Bhul chuk maaf​

Again show me where exactly it says that women can not be Panj Pyaras.. please!  I am dying to see!  And I don't mean a book with some baba's opinion or subjective thoughts on it. I mean actual rules... and if you point out that it's because GRM says 'Five Singhs' then you also have to explain why GRM says 'Singh' for EVERY seva! Including Granthi Singh, Ragee Singhs, Paathi Singhs, etc.  You just said the only seva women cant do is Panj Pyaras, but your precious GRM says SIngh for EVERY seva.  So then, Singh must mean both Singh and SInghni as I suggested?  But you still want to use the fact that it says five singhs as Panj Pyaras.  You can't do that and pick and choose especially when your very precious GRM also says outright that GENDER difference was ELIMNATED by creation of Khalsa. So there can be no more man made restrictions placed on women after Khalsa was created!  That is very much in black and white in GRM.  Saying women can not be in Panj Pyaras however is NOT in black and white in the GRM.  And you DID say that this was THE RM of Guru Ji... Guru Ji's words right from his mouth! So please enlighten me... how can you limit women from being Panj Pyaras when Guru Ji himself said that gender difference was ELIMINATED with creation of the Khalsa??

Who is the one who is going against Gurmat now????

 

Oh and a child respects their Mother (AND Father) because they spent years raising them, and made huge sacrifices for them.  What has a husband done in that light for his wife?  Especially when they are first married? They come to the marriage on EQUAL terms!  The Husband has not sacrificed anything like a parent does for their child.  At least no more than the wife has made sacrifices for him.  So the respect SHOULD be equally BOTH ways.  One should NOT see the other as God and bow them.  THAT'S the difference!  You keep saying its the same as a son bowing to his Mother... no its not!  Get that through your thick skull!  What has a husband done for his wife (that she has not done for him) that entitles him to more respect from her, than he gives to her?

Back to Islam, just go to ANY Islamic run country and see the position of women... You are posting from Islamic apologetics who try in media to smooth over the Image of Islam.  But in actual Islamic countries, see how it's actually PRACTICED! Thats what matters. 

 

Edited June 11, 2015 by Satkirin_Kaur

[paapiman]

Mother's (female) level of respect stays higher than that of a father's (male); in the same way, a husband's level of respect stays higher than that of a wife.

Bhul chuk maaf

Edited June 11, 2015 by paapiman

[paapiman]

Back to Islam, just go to ANY Islamic run country and see the position of women... You are posting from Islamic apologetics who try in media to smooth over the Image of Islam.  But in actual Islamic countries, see how it's actually PRACTICED! Thats what matters. 

 

​Do you know, the state of Sikhism in Punjab (birthland of Sikhism)? Do you know, how well Sikhism is being practiced in Punjab? Let's look into our own backyard, rather than commenting on another religion.

Bhul chuk maaf

Edited June 11, 2015 by paapiman

[CdnSikhGirl]

Mother's (female) level of respect stays higher than that of a father's (male); in the same way, a husband's level of respect stays higher than that of a wife.

Bhul chuk maaf

​Why?  What has the husband done to receiver higher respect than the wife?  Why would they not be expected to respect each other equally?  Thank goodness I am not marrying a Taksali who expects me to respect him more than he gives me respect.  That would be a horrible marriage!  

Why should a woman ever want to be married then if she will always be seen as lower and not respected as much??  

 

 

Edited June 11, 2015 by Satkirin_Kaur

[paapiman]

​Why?  What has the husband done to receiver higher respect than the wife?  

Why should a woman ever want to be married then if she will always be seen as lower and not respected as much?? 

​What has the mother done to receive higher respect than the father?

Why should a male ever want to be a parent then, if he will always be seen as lower and not respected, as much by the children?

Bhul chuk maaf

Edited June 11, 2015 by paapiman

[CdnSikhGirl]

​What has the mother done to receive higher respect than the father?

Why should a male ever want to be a parent then, if he will always be seen as lower and not respected as much by the children?

Bhul chuk maaf

​A Mother should NOT be seen as higher than the Father that's what I am saying... they are BOTH parents and should BOTH be respected equally by their kids.  Same as husband and wife should respect each other equally.

You DO know that respect is EARNED right?  Its not just given just because someone says.  

A Father will gain equal respect from his children if he actually PARTICIPATES in their upbringing.  A Father who plays with his infant, toddler, and is there for his kids, takes them on outings, etc.  He will be respected just as much as they respect their Mother.  

Similarly, husbands who would be the most respected by their wives would the husbands who give uttmost respect to their wives as well.  Those husbands who treat their wives as their equal would gain the most respect because the wives would feel that their husband actually cares about them as their equal and not as a servant.  

Fearing someone is not the same as respect, which is all you would get if you try to demand respect from someone for not other reason than you feel entitled.

Edited June 11, 2015 by Satkirin_Kaur

[paapiman]

​A Mother should NOT be seen as higher than the Father that's what I am saying... they are BOTH parents and should BOTH be respected equally by their kids.  Same as husband and wife should respect each other equally.

​Why is there more reference to mothers than fathers in Gurbani? Don't you think that is sexist?

Bhul chuk maaf

[chatanga1]

 I was also asked (more like told) in private message to leave the forum by another member (chatanga) because he doesn't wish to see female opinions on here.

​what a horrible person you are. c and p that message i sent you on this page (or i will do it ) and highlight where i have wished for female opinions to end on this forum. that is really disgusting behaviour from you to add those words in.

 

moreso, i have asked you at least twice openly to leave this forum, as per your "last post" fiasco.

[chatanga1]

So, we're playing chess? Good move.

Jokes aside - It was merely a honest question.

​yes it's just a "wise crack". looking back on it I should have put it in italics. that would have made it clearer.

[Paappi]

Plz any body can tell that is it written in shri dasam granth sahib ji that muhhamed sahib stolen the pavitar quraan fro hindu saadhu

[amardeep]

Paapi: No it is not mentioned in the Sri Dasam Granth.