Anand Karaj Maryada challenged

[CdnSikhGirl]

Paapiman is an idiot...and the one who I'd be leery of making ANY decision especially where Sikhi is concerned.  He has an obvious hate for women, is misinterpreting Gurbani for his own selfish women hating motives and it needs to stop because people do come to these forums to learn about Sikhi.  Can you imagine if a gori like me, came here to actually learn about Sikhi and saw his drivel?  She would think Sikhi sees women as not only inferior to men, but so vastly inferior to men that men are demi-Gods above  women and that women should have no say in Sikhi or in their marriage and have to be blindly obedient mindless reproductive robots that treat their husbands like the Gods they are.  

Admins: Do you REALLY want this WRONG picture of Sikhi presented in this way??? 

Page 599, Line 2
ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਏਕ ਦ੍ਰਿਸਟਿ ਕਰਿ ਦੇਖਹੁ ਘਟਿ ਘਟਿ ਜੋਤਿ ਸਮੋਈ ਜੀਉ ॥੨॥
Gurmukẖ ek ḏarisat kar ḏekẖhu gẖat gẖat joṯ samo▫ī jī▫o. ||2||
As Gurmukh, look upon all with the single eye of equality; in each and every heart, the Divine Light is contained. ||2||

It doesn't say look upon only men with single eye of equality or that the divine light is only in men's hearts.... And it's speaking to ALL Gurmukhs... anyone who doesn't follow it is Manmukh and is going directly against what the Gurus taught about Equality.  Paapiman thinks the above command is only for a Brahamgyani... that's his excuse so he never has to follow things he doesn't like from SGGSJ.  Therefore Paapiman is definitely decidedly MANMUKH!!!!!!!

Sikhi does NOT teach that women have to see husbands as demi-Gods.  That's a self serving lie!!!! Sikhi does not say women can't lead, and it doesn't say women must become doormats of their husbands in marriage.  In fact, marriage is supposed to be "one soul in two bodies" both equal halves of one whole.  If one is playing servant to a demi God, how they can they fulfill that one soul in two bodies analogy when one is busy inflating his Ego and the other is busy inflating it for him! while putting herself as a vastly inferior person???

Admins please do something about this!!! 

Sikh Womens Rights.pdf

Edited September 25, 2015 by Satkirin_Kaur

[chzS1ngh]

Satkirin,

You are very defensive about anything related to women even if it is not worth debating for. And then you have the habit of twisting everything according to your feminist agenda. For example, when someone mentioned how your husband is so tall, you immediately jumped at the moment to defend your height which you considered short by giving examples of how it is better to be short in combat etc etc . You somehow felt the need to defend it.  And then when giving the examples of palla, you somehow mentioned how you were actually in control of the pace of the lavan, your husband was the horse and you were the chariot rider. What was the need to defend it ?

It just shows that you get emotional when it comes to anything related to women issues, and you let it cloud your thinking. And thus, you have taken my words out of context.

You yourself say, that you are a man in womans body, maybe you are not able to understand it from a womans point of view ? if so , then how do you know what a woman wants ? My analysis comes after observing many women.

Here I will say it again, your women will love and respect you if you show masculine traits like responsibility , strength and leading most of the time. If men behave like sissies and bitches they will lose all respect from their women. Who agrees with me ?

And as for hiring a live in maid, I dont need one, if I am man enough in myself my lady will follow, if I slack off i will get constant shittar for sure and lose respect.

And this has nothing to do with Sikhi, its just human psychology.

 

It might be human psychology,

 

but seriously, a true sikh who wants to realize and experience the truth within them (Waheguru), they are seeking to go beyond everything that you write.

 

to recognize and literally see Waheguru in All...because the truth behind all the characters in this play is....that only Waheguru exists. take off the costume and see what underneath!

so, if you are stuck in this..the male needs to be like this, in order that the female to be like this and that, or else this or that might happen.....you have pretty much lost the point of where sikhi is trying to take you...

human life has been given to you to rise above all that and see the truth. Equality, because we are all one and the same in our Core...behind the drama of the world...if everything is Waheguru...who is the leader and who is the follower...He is both...when you realize that, then the leader and follower dissolves and only the One remains.

 

 

 

[SAadmin]

Let break this down for both parties actual gurmat way as gurmat is neither crazy oppressive taliban type male mentality nor crazy feminist type mentality:

1. If you are getting married, anand karaj is paramount to follow- No where it mentions woman supposed to see their husband as lord , it has a message of both men and woman as one opened surat consciousness merging with undivided non dual source of surat - which is paratma/supreme spirit- vahiguru. It does not suggest the non sense woman soul has to surrender male soul than they merge, its parallel yet together as sangat merging it in their source

2. It's clearly seen people wrapped their head around (patti varta) but conveniently forget patni varta as they don't mentioned in the same sentence thats taking words out of context and misinterpreting gurmat to boast up your male ego....don't even try to bring holy words like oh purakh is consider male sargun vahiguru in sri guru granth sahib..how about chandi feminine sargun vahiguru mentioned in dasam granth sahib ji?

3. Now to crazy feminism, good lord just because some chores are defined by both sexes it has nothing to do with inequality get a grip, this just shows how feeble your inner understanding with your partner really is. If both partners are connected each other surat to surat looking to abide in their real self these senseless nitty gritty differences will not rise at the first place. 

4. Back to the original topic, on premises on equality this is wrong move these couples obviously failed to see traditions behind it. The fact palla some control is given to female as well shows equal balance.

 

[chzS1ngh]

Right, women in military are tough, assertive, leaders & dominant.  Now in that scenario, the husband would often accomodate and assume a lesser assertive role, more of a follower role, to keep things calm & avoid shit storms from happening.

Now the question is how does the woman feel in that dynamics, in which she is the leader & husband is a follower ?

Are women okay with their husbands being the followers ?

or you both respect the fact that you both have views, ideas and strong opinions, and work together to decide the best way forward...

why have the panj pyare? why put 5 dominant male leaders together to help the panth forward? if 2 women can't function together how can 5 men?

its because they recognized the One within them all...and were immersed in that 'One' ... and if following Sikhi allows you to get passed your barriers, maybe you will see and experience that also...and you will see the God in your partner and vise versa...and there will be no need for nether of you to want to be the leader, or the follower...

 

God Bless

Edited September 25, 2015 by chzS1ngh

[CdnSikhGirl]

 

3. Now to crazy feminism, good lord just because some chores are defined by both sexes it has nothing to do with inequality get a grip, this just shows how feeble your inner understanding with your partner really is. If both partners are connected each other surat to surat looking to abide in their real self these senseless nitty gritty differences will not rise at the first place.

What works for each marriage should be what goes.... There wont be any of these petty differences arise simply because each partner will step up and help each other. There should be no chores specifically for male or female. My husband likes cooking... I hate it... so why force me to cook and him not to??  We'd only end up with burnt tasteless food (and I'd be likely in the ER getting stitches for knife wounds to my fingers) and neither one of us would be happy LOL.  If that works for us, then who should say anything against it!? Other women like cooking... that's fine for them.  I'd rather mow the lawn or do repairs around the house etc. than cook (or do the dishes from the mess from cooking).  Hubby likes cooking, so why not let him?  Male / Female should not be defined by chores dictated to them based on gender.  If you are in a loving marriage, things will automatically work themselves out as both partners compromise.

4. Back to the original topic, on premises on equality this is wrong move these couples obviously failed to see traditions behind it. The fact palla some control is given to female as well shows equal balance.

Exactly... the woman has just as much control( she can pull back on the palla to slow him down just as much as he can pull forward on her). Its NOT a symbol of oppression and dominance by the male.  It's BOTH moving as ONE. I am against side by side simply because one would be further from SGGSJ.  The male is not in front to symbolize the woman becoming his doormat to control and dominate.  And it's not to indicate that the husband gets to be leader while the wife has to always follow... I was explained that it was simply an allegory for soul bride merging to husband lord, and using the physical marriage as a metaphor in the lavans.  It doesn't mean the (physical) wife is inferior, to her physical husband or has to even be blindly obedient and it doesnt mean the physical husband is in charge or in authority over her... they are ONE - and they both have authority over each other - they both lead each other... (if Waheguru is the ONLY actor playing ALL characters, then how can one character be inferior to the other? They are BOTH the same ONE God playing BOTH) they are supposed to function as ONE unit, in the physical this is done through compromise for sake of each other, making decisions together, and being each other's rock when they need it.  It's not even speaking of physical marriage in the lavans... it's between the soul (bride) and Waheguru (husband lord).  And physical wife/husband are merely ONE soul moving towards that union with Waheguru. 

Sorry to say Paapiman, but yes the woman holds back the palla, as much as the man pulls on it. They both have the same control. The only way they can move together as ONE is if they cooperate.  This is not to be done by the woman surrendering her own will and becoming a doormat, subservient slave to her husband.  It's done by mutual respect, mutual control, mustal love, and both helping each other.  Men tend to act on impulse (testosterone driven)... its up to their wives to hold them back from making rash decisions, acting on anger etc and to ground them.  (Who is the better decision maker now Raagmala??)  Women in contrast tend to think over consequences before acting, but Women also tend to have low self esteem (and its no wonder reading comments on here!) and its up to their husbands to pull them forward, to make them see their value and have full confidence to participate as an equal.  Both elevate each other. Neither dominate one another. Both serve each other and both make sacrifices for each other.  Both take the lead when need arises, and neither one is to dominate or lord it over the other.  And NOBODY likes to be controlled... sorry Raagmala you can remove your rose colored glasses now.

Marriage was never ever ever supposed to be about men dominating and controlling women, and pushing them into subservient 'homely' simpleminded roles where they could never express their own personality and talents, and expecting women to serve them as a God.... wow... I just hope those two P and R never get married! 

 

 

 

Edited September 25, 2015 by Satkirin_Kaur

[Ragmaala]

It might be human psychology,but seriously, a true sikh who wants to realize and experience the truth within them (Waheguru), they are seeking to go beyond everything that you write. to recognize and literally see Waheguru in All...because the truth behind all the characters in this play is....that only Waheguru exists. take off the costume and see what underneath! so, if you are stuck in this..the male needs to be like this, in order that the female to be like this and that, or else this or that might happen.....you have pretty much lost the point of where sikhi is trying to take you...human life has been given to you to rise above all that and see the truth. Equality, because we are all one and the same in our Core...behind the drama of the world...if everything is Waheguru...who is the leader and who is the follower...He is both...when you realize that, then the leader and follower dissolves and only the One remains.

Veer,

I agree with you totally. The real purpose of Sikhi is about transcending above the physical limitations, boundaries, identification with gender, rising above the attachment to family, kids, parents, relatives, husband and wife and developing a true bond with feet of Guru Nanak. I myself understand this as a goal of Sikhi too.

But becoming a Sikh is work in progress. It takes a while before one can reach the stage where one sees the same light in all. Not everyone can do that just yet.

So when I see feminist views being posted, viewing Sikhi from a feminist lens, evaluating every tradition in Sikhi based on bs female male equality, whether it is the tradition of lavas, who is controlling whom in palla, whether the tradition of preparing Amrit...I get annoyed.

And then I have to present the anti-feminist views.

 

 

 

[CdnSikhGirl]

Veer,

I agree with you totally. The real purpose of Sikhi is about transcending above the physical limitations, boundaries, identification with gender, rising above the attachment to family, kids, parents, relatives, husband and wife and developing a true bond with feet of Guru Nanak. I myself understand this as a goal of Sikhi too.

But becoming a Sikh is work in progress. It takes a while before one can reach the stage where one sees the same light in all. Not everyone can do that just yet.

So when I see feminist views being posted, viewing Sikhi from a feminist lens, evaluating every tradition in Sikhi based on bs female male equality, whether it is the tradition of lavas, who is controlling whom in palla, whether the tradition of preparing Amrit...I get annoyed.

And then I have to present the anti-feminist views.

 

 

 

Actually wht you presented was anti-female views... not anti-feminist views. 

Male Chauvenism - male in control dominating everything and dictating what if any privileges women should have (most often less than males) Women are seen as breeding machines, simple minded, incapable, indecisive, and unskilled

Feminism - women who blame men for everything and want female dominant and to suppress male ego entirely.

Humanism - equality REGARDLESS of our differences. Where everyone has same opportunities, same privileges, in spite of our differences.  Where people can embrace what traits they have instead of being forced into roles that are dictated by gender. If a woman is a leader let her, if a Man is a leader let him, of both are leaders all the better! A good leader knows how to lead alongside others. Women / Men work together both having equal say and input. Nobody is forced into the crappy role of being subservient, *homely*, unremarkable, unskilled, having to be obedient and just blindly follow... nobody wants that role! It's a shame so many have been forced into it!

I am a HUMANIST. Not a feminist.  Guru Nanak Dev Ji was a humanist!

Are you tryin to say Sikhi supports male chauvenism??? Because I am sure our Gurus would be very disappointed at that thought!

 

 

 

Edited September 25, 2015 by Satkirin_Kaur

[Ragmaala]

wow... I just hope those two P and R never get married! 

 

...definitely to not a feminist ...

[CdnSikhGirl]

 

...definitely to not a feminist ...

Ahhso you want a doormat to stroke your male chauvenistic ego eh??

[Ragmaala]

or you both respect the fact that you both have views, ideas and strong opinions, and work together to decide the best way forward...

why have the panj pyare? why put 5 dominant male leaders together to help the panth forward? if 2 women can't function together how can 5 men?

its because they recognized the One within them all...and were immersed in that 'One' ... and if following Sikhi allows you to get passed your barriers, maybe you will see and experience that also...and you will see the God in your partner and vise versa...and there will be no need for nether of you to want to be the leader, or the follower...

 

God Bless

veer ji , when one doesn't have a choice they have to adjust lol

i do not talk about complete dominance over one another, just adjustments of masculine & feminine traits in both parties.

It definitely gets easier, when one is walking the path of Sikhi, i agree sikhi def helps...

but kadi kadi bibian naal panga lain nu jee karda because they dont stop sometimes. no hard feelings tho...

[Sat1176]

This thread is becoming bit of a soap opera.

[Ragmaala]

Ahhso you want a doormat to stroke your male chauvenistic ego eh??

...projecting your own insecurities through a feminist lens onto me eh ??

[Ragmaala]

This thread is becoming bit of a soap opera.

get some chaa and pakodas ready.. :)  haha

[Sat1176]

get some chaa and pakodas ready.. :)  haha

Pakoras are off limits for a bit. Cholesterol came back bit high. But if you insist I will have 2 instead of 10. :-) Think this topic still has some hot steam still left in it.

[CdnSikhGirl]

get some chaa and pakodas ready.. :)  haha

Make your own damn Pakodas... LOL

[paapiman]

Mate stop being a freak. So are you saying that men being hunters is wrong in kalyug as hunting should be done by women?

Bro, we have to look at the context of the shabad. It is talking about negative signs of Kaljug. ਸਈਆਦ  also means a fool.

Another translation - "Men have become fools".

Bhul chuk maaf

[paapiman]

No where it mentions woman supposed to see their husband as lord

Bro, it might not say in Sri Lavan Sahib jee to view husbands as demi-Gods, but there is another tuk which clearly states the women are suppose to look at her husband, as a Demi-God. This does not mean that the woman is a servant.

For example - Suppose there are two brothers. The younger brother respects his elder brother as a demi-God. Does that mean that the younger brother is his servant? 

In Sikhism, mother is considered to the first guru of the child. Does that mean, she is equal to SSGGSJ?

Bhul chuk maaf

[CdnSikhGirl]

Bro, it might not say in Sri Lavan Sahib jee to view husbands as demi-Gods, but there is another tuk which clearly states the women are suppose to look at her husband, as a Demi-God. This does not mean that the woman is a servant.

For example - Suppose there are two brothers. The younger brother respects his elder brother as a demi-God. Does that mean that the younger brother is his servant? 

In Sikhism, mother is considered to the first guru of the child. Does that mean, she is equal to SSGGSJ?

Bhul chuk maaf

Paapiman, everyone is supposed to see God in EVERYONE ELSE.  Nobody is to be seen or worshipped as higher than anyone else.  A younger brother does not see his brother as a Demi God.  He might seek advise from an elder brother who has experience. But that doesn't mean the elder brother is a demi God over the younger one!  They are both equal.  It doesn't matter who was born first!  

A man is also supposed to see God in his wife just as much as she is supposed to see God in him. But neither are a demi god above the other... 

There is no heirarchy there.  Both are equal and deserve equal respect.

And there is no tuk which says women are to see their husband as a demi God.  You are misusing Gurbani for your own selfish purposes by taking it out of context. I can equally twist Gurbani to make bold claims about men too. This is why Gurbani MUST BE TAKEN IN CONTEXT OF THE SHABAD!!! That's how you get the actual true meaning of it!  Otherwise, there are no checks and balances and anyone can pull a single tuk and make it mean whatever they want!

Edited September 25, 2015 by Satkirin_Kaur

[paapiman]

 

to recognize and literally see Waheguru in All...because the truth behind all the characters in this play is....that only Waheguru exists. take off the costume and see what underneath!

 

 

Bro, the keyword above is "All", which includes animals, insects, plants, etc.

If God exists in all, why don't we allow animals to come into Gurudwaras? 

If God exists in all, then why don't we give Amrit (Khanday wala) to animals?

It is easy for a person like me to say that God exists in all, but to actually start seeing God as omnipresent, takes tremendous amounts of hard work.

 

so, if you are stuck in this..the male needs to be like this, in order that the female to be like this and that, or else this or that might happen.....you have pretty much lost the point of where sikhi is trying to take you...

So why did God make males and females different? Do you know that there are major differences between male and female brains? 

Bro, we cannot ignore modern Science, Human Psychology, Sociology, etc. Sikhism is not against science.

Once a person reaches Brahamgyan, then the situation is different. A person like me cannot talk like a Brahamgyani, when my spiritual state is very very low.

Bhul chuk maaf

Edited September 25, 2015 by paapiman

[CdnSikhGirl]

 

Once a person reaches Brahamgyan, then the situation is different. A person like me cannot talk like a Brahamgyani, when my spiritual state is very very low.

Bhul chuk maaf

Well this is obvious, in how you view women so much lower than yourself.  You are actually the poster child for the definition of "male chauvenist".

Even if you can't yet SEE that God resides in women the same as you... it's still YOUR CHOICE to at least TREAT women equally.  

Nobody is asking you think women and men are identical.  Even two men are never identical... What Sikhi is asking you to do though is to TREAT EVERYONE EQUALLY.  Give EVERYONE the same respect and give EVERYONE the same opportunities.  Don't limit some while giving privilege to others based on stupid things like physical strength.  Those who have less physical strength are likely stronger mentally, or scientifically, or mathematically, or artistically, or musically etc.  No two people will ever be identical.  Get past gender as the only difference.  Learn to appreciate others based on their merits and what they personally bring to the table instead of judging them based on what's between their legs.  Having a penis or extra testosterone doesn't make you better, or worthy to be seen as a demi God.  You need to get over it... even if you can't yet SEE that God is in everyone equally, you can start by at least TREATING everyone equally!!!!  At least you would be espousing the qualities of God.  How you treat people is purely your own choice.  And you don't have to be a Brahamgyani to treat people equally! 

God exists in ALL.  This even includes minerals (rocks). There are different levels of unfolding consciousness ---- mineral > plant > animal > human. You are right in that the same divine light is in everything.  The difference is, and it is explained in Gurbani as such:  This HUMAN body is our CHANCE to meet and merge to Waheguru Ji.  Gurbani does NOT say this MALE body... it merely says this HUMAN body.  That pretty much says that male / female does not matter.  The human form is the highest spiritual state we can achieve to merge back with the Creator... know why???? Because as human we can finally contemplate God and ask the very questions "Who am I?" and "Why am I here?"  As animal, individual consciousness is less developed though telepathic species consciousness exists stronger.  But animals lack the developed individuality to ask those questions... in short... they can't contemplate God.  A plant even less so...   To compare the difference between male and female with the difference between human and animal is hugely wrong!!!!  Both female and male human can equally contemplate Waheguru.  And Gurbani says this HUMAN body is our chance to meet God and is RARE.  It doesn't say that only males can merge back with God... it says HUMAN.  In order for plants / animals / minerals to get to this point they too must go through spiritual unfolding consciousness and descend into individuality... because only in this SEPARATE form, with fully individual consciousness, can we actually contemplate God.  Throughout this process, gender means very little outside of propagation of the species.  

 

Edited September 25, 2015 by Satkirin_Kaur

[paapiman]

But becoming a Sikh is work in progress. It takes a while before one can reach the stage where one sees the same light in all. Not everyone can do that just yet.

Excellent point brother.

When a doctor informs someone that he/she needs a urgent surgery done for an illness. How many people on this forum will get a Sri Akhand paath done to cure it, rather than going for the surgery? After all, God can do the surgery for you or cure you, without the help of any medium. If this happens to me (Maharaaj save me), Daas is definitely going for the surgery, as I don't have 100% faith in God.

Daas went to university for a degree. Why? -- did not have complete faith in God.

Daas applied for jobs. Why? - did not have complete faith in God.

Daas has money in his account. Why? - don't have complete faith in God.

Daas went to a doctor for blood/urine test. Why? - did not have complete faith in God.

Daas wants his name on his parent's will. Why? - don't have complete faith in God.

Daas went for a surgery in the past. Why? - did not have complete faith in God.

 

It is very very very easy to talk like a Brahamgyani, but very hard to walk the talk.

Bhul chuk maaf

[SAadmin]

Pappiman,

Our sidhant of gurmat is advait, all in one, one in all. From that gurmat sidhant, we don't beleive in seeing other spouse as demi god or demi goddess personality worship rubbish. Please don't confuse gurmat with hindu mat. We don't believe in this cop out method as well its very easy to talk like one bhramgyan or very hard to walk the talk.

Who's really talking like bhramgyani? No one as this is about uphold the gurmat sidhant. Every sikh is encouraged to do that.

We have very right to uphold deep layer of gurmat sidhant so gurmat sidhant presented all time remains unaltered/unclouded allways remains pure-shud gurmat gyan/tat gyan. This has nothing to do with talking like bhramgyani if that case i can equally accuse of other argument- coping out to small self improvement with same crap self loathing non sense.

We are closing this topic now. Enough said.!!