Respect for SGPC maryada

[CdnSikhGirl]

I was refering to your slander of Dasam Granth. Don't keep producing the same oral diarrhea when you have already had answers.

Several present day PSYCHOLOGISTS (Sikhs at that) have read CHaritropakhyan and come to conclusion that reading it, plants subconscious ideas in men's minds to hold contempt against women. If you see group A winning about 75% of the time and group B winning 25% of the time, you will subconsciously (or perhaps even consciously) say that Group A is the better team.  It's unavoidable when the mind is presented over and over certain themes and only few of the opposite, even if it's fictional moral stories, the simple fact that it's believed to be writing direct of Guru Ji, men WILL assimilate it and take it to mean women are more immoral and deceitful than men.  This is from actual psychologists who are both Sikh and male!!!

Certainly our Guru being perfect would foresee this effects on men's minds... that subconsciously men would hold contempt against women and that would translate to men placing restrictions on women, limiting freedom, and seeing them in a bad light or inferior to males.  So I am not insulting Guru Ji's intelligence, I am saying that the real world effect of reading this, is having effects on mens minds to look at women in a bad light....   

Here is my real world example:  A DDT Singh on Facebook actually told me that women should be barred from all seva and just sit and 'listen' because women are the immoral ones and used Charitropakhyan to back it up.  He is staunchly against women performing ANY sort of seva involving SGGSJ.  He said most DDT run Gurdwaras do not allow women to take part in Akhand Paaths, be Granthi, take Hukamnama etc because of this.  And they use DG to back up their reasons... women are less on the spiritual scale than men, and Charitropakhyan is the proof.  

So there ARE SInghs that are thinking this way and they make no secret that it's because of Charitropkhyan.  

So this is why I am leery that it could have been adulterated, or added later etc.  and possibly not the exact words of Guru Ji.  Because I don't think Guru Ji would want this to have happened... to have Singhs treating Singhnis like inferior lustful and deceitful because of what Charitropakhyan stories say.  

And everywhere it is translated as Wiles of Women and not Wiles of Humans.... so if it's wrong, then majority of Sikhs translated it wrong.

[chatanga1]

Several present day PSYCHOLOGISTS

not all the worlds psychologists are equal to my Guru.

It's up to you. Be a Sikh of the Guru or be a follower of your psychologists.

 

If you see group A winning about 75% of the time and group B winning 25% of the time, you will subconsciously (or perhaps even consciously) say that Group A is the better team.  It's unavoidable when the mind is presented over and over certain themes and only few of the opposite, even if it's fictional moral stories, the simple fact that it's believed to be writing direct of Guru Ji, men WILL assimilate it and take it to mean women are more immoral and deceitful than men. 

Being a Sikh is not about winning or losing teams. It's about following your Guru's words as the absolute truth. When you realise this, you might just become a Sikh.

 

This is from actual psychologists who are both Sikh and male!!!

They cannot be Sikhs, because they wouldn't have caste doubts on their Guru's word. Male yes, Sikh, no.

 

So I am not insulting Guru Ji's intelligence, I am saying that the real world effect of reading this, is having effects on mens minds to look at women in a bad light....  

which is tantamount to insulting your Guru. You can paint it in any way you like. Taking amrit is of no consequence if you don't have faith in your Guru. You clearly do not, and not only have you attempted to decieve the Gurus, but also your husband, and to an extent us on this forum as well.

The best alternative is for you to walk away from it all. You cannot allow your superior mind to follow the Guru's words, you are not going to find what you are after in Sikhi. The sooner you realise the better.

Here is my real world example: 

Don't follow the world, follow the Guru, if you believe yourself to be a Sikh. If you cant please go.

So this is why I am leery that it could have been adulterated, or added later etc.  and possibly not the exact words of Guru Ji.  Because I don't think Guru Ji would want this to have happened... to have Singhs treating Singhnis like inferior lustful and deceitful because of what Charitropakhyan stories say.

So now you let your experiences dictate what you believe to be the Guru's word? That's is so pathetic.

And everywhere it is translated as Wiles of Women and not Wiles of Humans....

who cares how it's translated? try reading the original? Oh that's right you can't read it. even after 18 years of "study" you haven't been able to read it. Probably because you weren't really interested in what Gurbani really has to say. Just take one or 2 lines from STTM that fit in with what you think.

Peoplem can become experts in other languages in 3-5 years, yet you still can't read the original in Gurmukhi. Why waste your time (and everyone else's ) on the forum spouting nonsense when you could have learnt Gurmukhi in that time?

Take a break from us, let us have a break from you, and go and learn Gurmukhi.

so if it's wrong, then majority of Sikhs translated it wrong.

Majority of Sikhs are very uneducated about what Sikhi actually is. Why look to them for guidance when you can look to the Guru?

Put the same effort into learning Gurbani as you put into spouting this diarrhea that you have inflicted on the forum for the past year, and with the same dedication that you showed towards that Sikh-khoj and his girlfriend mrsingh.

[CdnSikhGirl]

I can actually read Gurmukhi (as in pronounciation) but I am not good at languages. I took French all through school and only know how to ask where the washroom is or howt o order food at a restaurant.  Some people are not wired to process different languages, especially as an adult.  I am more wired for mathematics and physics... where concepts are concrete.  Language requires abstract thought as words can have multiple meanings and contexts. English is also one of the few languages without a male / female concept on inanimate objects... I still cant figure out why a car is feminine and a chair is masculine in French. So yes I have to rely on translations.  

If you think those psychologists are wrong then google them and attack them.  The fact is that this psychological programming DOES happen... whether it was intended or not. 

And I am offended by your remarks about me personally since you dont know me at all.  

[sukrit kaur]

I think we shouldn't personally attack anyone.That's really wrong from your side (chatanga veerji) to ask anyone to leave the forum again and again.That doesnt make sense of a discussion.

 

[paapiman]

A person, who claims to believe in gender equality (seeing divine light in all), why would that person have problem with the Charitars, being skewed towards females? That person must look upon both, males and females as souls. So, why would he/she care, which outer physical shell has played a Charitar? 

Acting like a Saint, when it comes to gender equality and then acting like a normal human, when it comes to Gurbani (Charitars). Is this hypocrisy or not?

Bhul chuk maaf

Edited October 19, 2015 by paapiman

[chatanga1]

Sukrit, I am not talking about her leaving this forum,, I am talking about her leaving (if she ever really was in to begin with) Sikhi. I'm basing it on this:

 

. If wiles of women was used in Amrit Sanchar, let me tell you I would not be following Sikhi right now at all.  I would have walked away as no true religion of God would deliberately want to do so much damage to one half the human race.  

Part of CharitrarPakhyan is used in Amrit Sinchar. There is no separating part of the Granth. It comes as one whole. Imagine if Sikhs started saying I only believe part of Sukhmani Sahib or part of Guru Granth Sahib.

In her own words she says she wouldnt be following it, and IMHO she never has. It's  better she leaves Sikhi.

 

[sukrit kaur]

Sukrit, I am not talking about her leaving this forum,, I am talking about her leaving (if she ever really was in to begin with) Sikhi.

Oh yahh!! Allright then! I misunderstood that! Sorry Takin' my words back!

Gur fateh!!

[CdnSikhGirl]

A person, who claims to believe in gender equality (seeing divine light in all), why would that person have problem with the Charitars, being skewed towards females? That person must look upon both, males and females as souls. So, why would he/she care, which outer physical shell has played a Charitar?

Acting like a Saint, when it comes to gender equality and then acting like a normal human, when it comes to Gurbani (Charitars). Is this hypocrisy or not?

Bhul chuk maaf

Paapiman ou don't even have right to speak of hypocrisy so just be quiet...
You want women to worhip and see men as Gods, but then you state that only a Brahamgyani is capable of seeing God in others... So either you are saying that women are Brahamgyanis (which it's clear you are not) or you somehow think our Gurus would command women to do something which they know is impossible for anyone but a Brahamgyani.  Meaning you are condoning a serious contradiction in Gurbani.  You think women are commanded (and able) to do what you yourself say that you are incapable of doing... Hypocrite!  You also claim meat is forbidden, while drinking your glass of milk and turning a blind eye to the killing of the baby cows so you can have dairy. Hypocrite!!!

You are the last one who has any right to call anyone a hypocrite!

The observation remains valid... because it's still making statement that those souls which are trapped in female form are more likely to do these things, and we KNOW that majority of women do NOT do these things, and that in reality a higher percentage of males actually act immorally seeking out prostitutes, tricking women into sex etc. due to excess testosterone. Yes our souls are genderless, as I have been saying. And it IS the genderless soul commiting the acts, but being in a female form does not make one more probable to commit such acts!  Quite the contrary actually! 

If the stories were supposed to reflect any sort of reality, there would be equally telling stories of men deceiving women to get them in bed so they can have a quick roll in the hay and then leaving the woman pregnant and denying the child is theirs (not so applicable anymore, as there is now DNA test, but not back then - men could much easier get away with casual sex without looking back).  Or men promising love, and leading a woman on, to get her in bed - tricks like "Oh I promise to marry you and we will be married anyway so what's the harm in making love now? etc... and then never looking back.  Or just outright seeking a prostitute and paying for sex.  Want to know the stats on how many women pay for sex as a comparison???

Instead Charitropakhyan is making statement that women are deceivers and lure men into bed, for sex, with threats etc. Most of the stories are about women begging Kings etc. for sex, and then thtretening them for it.  For what??!! And how in any way is this any sort of picture of reality??? The teachings are supposed to be moral ones right??? So why would our Guru teach moral lessons that would not be applicable to majority of males (since most women are NOT like this, most men would never have been in the situations depicted) and yet not have maoral lessons to warn the females of such behaviour in men (which is FAR more likely what would have happened)???

When birth control did not exist, the fact remained sex had a very high chance of pregnancy, which would mark a woman for life as adulterer. The man could just deny it however.  And that's if the woman even survived the birth... and there was a fairly high chance that giving birth was actually fatal.  Kind of a high price to pay for a quick roll in the hay dont' you think??? The picture it paints is so not reality that it's hard to see how it could be moral lessons based on anything realistic!! If anyone needed warnings against deceitful and lustful people, it was the women!!!

 

 

Edited October 19, 2015 by Satkirin_Kaur

[CdnSikhGirl]

Chatanga1, don't twist my words... I said if any wiles of women stories (or any material which degrades women) were used in Amrit Sanchar I would not have taken Amrit.  But it's not and I don't think it will ever be.

Sukrit Kaur Bhenji, Chatanga1 is asking you 'accept' as part of Sikhi, that because you are in a female body, you are inferior, lower than men, inherently lustful, deceitful, etc. and he is saying this is how Guru Gobind Singh Ji sees his daughters.... because that is what Charitropakhyan is saying and he believes it to be the unadulterated words of Guru Ji. So if this is in fact the writing of Guru Ji, then Guru Ji did not think very highly of females.

So, ask yourself, do you truly think of yourself in this way? Do you believe Guru Gobind Singh Ji sees us in this way???  If you don't then you too are challenging what Charitropakhyan says because its suggesting (by quantity and content) that majority of women are like this while men are not.

 

[sukrit kaur]

 

Sukrit Kaur Bhenji, Chatanga1 is asking you 'accept' as part of Sikhi, that because you are in a female body, you are inferior, lower than men, inherently lustful, deceitful, etc. and he is saying this is how Guru Gobind Singh Ji sees his daughters.... because that is what Charitropakhyan is saying and he believes it to be the unadulterated words of Guru Ji. So if this is in fact the writing of Guru Ji, then Guru Ji did not think very highly of females. 

Actually,I've never read charitro pakhyan.nor do I know about it.May be I had read or listened some part of it in kirtan or gurudwara ,but not sure what it constitutes. So,I'll better like to read it first and then give me inputs.

And secondly,as it's the writing of dasam patsah so there must be a deep meaning/message behind that.I think problem is not there(O god! We cant use such words about any gurbani shabad ) ,problem is with its understanding.I think some people are misunderstanding it!

[Ragmaala]

sukirt bhenji,

you are right, problem happens when people misinterpret or misunderstand based on their inferior intellect, in order to truly understand gurbani one needs to be in sehaj avastha, above from the qualities of rajo tamo sato. No one on this forum is in sehaj avastha except maybe one or two people. This applies to Gurbani and all of Dasam Bani. Some people think they are experts and do slander of Dasam Bani.

So be careful what others say, never accept, just stay in faith & devotion , that is the safest part.  Otherwise if people create unnecessary doubts in your mind, it will hurt your spirituality. I am just writing what I would say to my younger sister.

I hope you understood what I meant to say.

Fateh!

[sukrit kaur]

Gur fateh Raagmaala VeerJi! Yes I understand! Hope Maharaj always save us from getting involved in maya/illusion.All we can do ardaas . Once,we get accepted as a child,then all is his mauj.Hope I/we make all possible ways for this acceptance.

And yes sometime it seems to be very blurry to us ,but supreme's vision is out of our perimeter.

That's why Guru sahib says:

Jan Nanak eh khel kathhan hai kinhoo Gurmukh jaana||

Dhan Guru Maharaj hi baksh lain!

"Daas tere ki benti Riddh kar pargaas||"

[CdnSikhGirl]

 

Actually,I've never read charitro pakhyan.nor do I know about it.May be I had read or listened some part of it in kirtan or gurudwara ,but not sure what it constitutes. So,I'll better like to read it first and then give me inputs.

And secondly,as it's the writing of dasam patsah so there must be a deep meaning/message behind that.I think problem is not there(O god! We cant use such words about any gurbani shabad ) ,problem is with its understanding.I think some people are misunderstanding it!

 

And this is the question then... IF there is deep message behind it that only a vey few can understand, should most Sikhs even read it at all then??? Since if this IS the actual wiritng of Guru Gobind Singh Ji, then using it to denigrate women can NOT possibly be the deep meaning of it can it??... But that is how it's being used, so was it even meant for majority of Sikhs to see at all?? 

Since you have never read it, let me quote you just one of the MANY stories... It describes a woman hell bent on sleeping with the Raja so she dresses up as a man to teach him *magic tricks* and then tries to lure him into bed by threatening to yell and call him a theif.  The Raja by the way is commonly assumed to be the Guru. - So first of all, it paints woman as temptress, lustful and only after sex to the point that she cooks up this elaborate scheme just to get a short ride in the hay and actually threatens to accuse him of being a theif.  It also supposes that somehow our Guru was not only interested in *magic charms* but was tricked into believing the cooked up story to get him there. In the end it paints the woman as deceiver, and the Raja as the morally righteous one (whether or not it was meant to depict the Guru). Now on its own the story wouldnt be so bad if there were equally disturbing depictions of men.  But nearly all of the Charitropakhyan paints women as immoral lustful deceivers this light and men as the righteous and moral ones. So what moral lessons can be learned from this?? Is it helpful to only give men moral lessons which seem to be telling them to distrust women?
What about the deep lessons for women to avoid the trickery and lustfulness of men, which is far more likely of happening than the other way around??
BhenJi  please read below... its just one of the MANY stories in there that paint women in this light:

Dohira There lived a Raja at the banks of river Satluj. Enticed by the lure of his wealth, a prostitute came over.(1)
Arril She was called Chhajia and, to her rich patrons, she was known by the name of Ladhia. Any body who saw her felt a seductive sensation through her beauty.(2)
Dohira She fell in love with that Raja but the Raja did not get into her trap. She commenced on her designs how to meet him.(3)
‘He is not falling in love with me, what should I do. ‘Neither he comes to my house, nor calls me over.(4)
‘I must contrive quickly,’ thinking thus she indulged in the magical charms to allure him.(5)
She was exhausted performing the charms but the Raja never turned up. Then, to tempt the Raja she devised a scheme.(6)
She put on the saffron coloured attire, disguising herself as a Jogan, the ascetic, entered the Royal Court and paid the obeisance.(7)
Arril The Raja was contented to see an ascetic and thought he could learn a few charms from her. The Raja sent one of his attendants to learn some magical faculties.(8)
Chaupaee The attendant walked over to her house and conveyed her the Raja’s intention. ‘Please do me a favour and enable me learn some charms.’(9)
Dohira The Jogan opened her eyes after a period of three hours and said, ‘If you want to learn the charms then bring the Raja here.(10)
‘Past mid-night he should come to us and, with the blessings of Gorakh Nath, he will not go back disappointed.’(11)
Chaupaee The attendant conveyed to the Raja by waking him up at Past-midnight and brought him to the Jogan. At the sight of the Raja she sighed with relief.(12)
Dohira She told the Raja to send all the courtesans away and fetch the festival lights, flowers and vintage wines.(14)
The Raja ordered all his people to leave, and stayed alone to seek magical charms.(15)
Chaupaee The Raja remained alone with her and she said, ‘To begin with I will show you a miracle and, thereafter, the magical charms will be taught to you.(16)
Dohira ‘I will convert a man into a woman and a woman into a man. ‘Becoming a man I will teach you charms and, then turning into a woman I will indulge in sexual play with you.’(17)
Said the Raja ‘The man who confers the charms is the father and a woman the mother.' ‘One should provide them service instead of involving in sexual plays.'(18)
Arril ‘By rendering service and bowing head in obeisance to the Guru for a long time, with great efforts, the charms are learnt. ‘You bow your head before him and to learn you perform playful actions.’(l9)
Chaupaee Thereafter ascetic added, ‘To meet you I have disguised myself like this. ‘Now you bedeck my bed and enjoy sex with me.(20)
Dohira ‘My mind has been craving to meet you and every limb of my body is getting impassioned. ‘O my love! Come to my ravishing bed and enthral me with your company.(21)
‘But if you attempt to run away, I will get you caught by shouting “thief” and abuse you as well. ‘Therefore, my love! Forget all the apprehensions and indulge with me in fornication.(22) ‘If a woman comes to her husband tormented with the sexual desire, ‘And, if she faces disappointment, then, her husband is fit to be thrown into hell.(23)
‘If a person does not grant the benevolence of carnal fulfilment to a sex desirous woman, then, (that person), deserves to be cast off into hell.(24)
Arril ‘God gave me birth into the house of a prostitute and I disguised myself into an ascetic to meet you. ‘Now you be quick and adorn my bed. I am your maid, please don’t torment me.(25)
Dohira ‘What if you are astute? You must not be proud of your youth. ‘I am afflicted with the arrow of separation, don’t let it dissipate.(26)
Arril ‘Don’t lose this opportunity; I am in the grip (of Cupid) and drowning in the sea of passion up to the brim. ‘Don’t let me drown into the dense and dark cloudy night without sexual fulfilment.(27)
‘People come from all directions and get their mind pleasing aspirations fulfilled, then what wrong have I done? ‘You cannot narrate any as (I have done nothing wrong). ‘I am your slave, please come to my bed’.(28)
(The Raja said), ‘I had come to you to learn the charms but you are playing such a drama. ‘Why should I indulge in sex with you? ‘By doing this, I am afraid, I will go astray of my righteous path.’ (29)
Chaupaee The concubine implied numerous ploys, performed various blandishments, and executed several magical charms, But she could not win the favour of the Raja.(30)
Arril Then she jumped out to the courtyard and shouted, ‘thief, thief,’ To frighten the Raja. As he refused to have sex with her, she wanted to entrap him.(31)
People, hearing the call of ‘thief’, came running. But she told them that she was shouting in her dream. When they had gone away, holding Raja’s arm she said, ‘Either you have sex with me or I will get you trammelled.’(32)
Dohira Then the Raja contemplated, ‘It will be wise for me to play some trick to get out of this place.(33)
If I run out, my honour is ruined, and if I indulge in sex, my Dharma (the righteousness path) is lost. (34)
‘Both the paths are arduous, O God, please help me.’(35)
Chaupaee ‘O my love! Listen to me. One’s birth is worthless if, after coming across a pretty woman like you, (36)
one abandons her. ‘Dishonourable would be the descent of such a person.’(37)
‘You, immediately, make the marijuana, cannabis, opium available, and joyfully serve them with your own hands.(38)
‘Yourself, you drink wine, and let me quaff cannabis to enable me to enjoy sex with you during all the four watches.’(39)
Chaupaee Hearing this, that mindless was overwhelmed, and did not comprehend the real motive. Being too happy, she arranged all the intoxicants which were asked for.(40)
Dohira The woman brought the marijuana, cannabis and opium, and Presented to him the thoroughly grounded cannabis along with seven times decanted wine.(41)
Arril The Raja had determined the substance of her charm, (and planned,) ‘After enchanting her and making her to lie down in the bed. ‘Then leaving sixty gold coins, I will run away, and, thus, save my Dharma.(42)
Dohira ‘She does not understand the essence of love - as money is her only passion. ‘How can a reptile and a prostitute think in good terms of their friends?’(43)
Satisfied and pondering this way, the Raja served her wine in abundance. To run away he put her, when intoxicated with wine, in the bed.(44)
The Raja had served her the cups full of wine with his own hands and cunningly made her go to sleep.(45)
Arril He had made her to drink cups after cups of the wine and showed extraordinary affection. When she went into deep slumber, he put sixty gold coins and took to his way.(46) If a (strange lady) wants to make love with you, do not show her affection. One who wants to relish your (sensual) companionship, don’t relate with her. One whose mind is not intelligible enough, don’t divulge your inner thought.(47)
Dohira Intoxicating the woman and leaving sixty gold coins, the Raja ran away. Without being noticed by anybody he returned and settled down in his own house.(48)
Arriving home, he thanked his luck for saving his Dharma this time and determined, ‘Now I will roam around different countries to spread God’s exaltations, and swore never to heed to a strange (woman).(49)
Dohira ‘The same determination is abiding in my mind and I will never attend to another’s woman.(50)(1)

Sixteenth Parable of Auspicious Chritars
Conversation of the Raja and the Minister,
Completed with Benediction. (16)(315)

[chatanga1]

And yes sometime it seems to be very blurry to us ,but supreme's vision is out of our perimeter.

There is a lot of material to take in, in Gurbani. Reading and understanding Gurbani is a lifelong process, and can be even longer. But never make the mistake of insulting your Guru, if there is something you don't understand.

Remember Guru Nanak Dev Ji testing the Sikhs. Guru Ji asked the Sikhs to climb the tree and pluck sweetmeats. How can mithayi grow on trees asked the other Sikhs using their intellect. But Bhai Lehna is already climbing the tree.

Decide who you want to be.

You can be like this asatkiran, and apply your own logic to the Guru's words, or you can accept your Guru and everything he says as the truth.

[chatanga1]

So be careful what others say, never accept, just stay in faith & devotion , that is the safest part.  Otherwise if people create unnecessary doubts in your mind, it will hurt your spirituality. I am just writing what I would say to my younger sister.

Remember that those doubting Sri Dasam Granth have moved onto Guru Granth Sahib and Bhai Gurdas Vaaran as well.

[chatanga1]

And this is the question then... IF there is deep message behind it that only a vey few can understand, should most Sikhs even read it at all then??? Since if this IS the actual wiritng of Guru Gobind Singh Ji, then using it to denigrate women can NOT possibly be the deep meaning of it can it??... But that is how it's being used, so was it even meant for majority of Sikhs to see at all??

There is no message so deep in Gurbani that it could not be fathomed by Sikhs.  And it is not being used to denigrate women. It's just your ego of your false intellect and shallow observation speaking.

Since you have never read it,

You haven't read it either, you are copying and pasting someone's arguments here. remember how dangerous it is to be a parasite on someone's false intellect.

 let me quote you just one of the MANY stories... It describes a woman hell bent on sleeping with the Raja

what does the woman and the Raja in this story represent? You don't even know.

 

[sukrit kaur]

*sigh*

What I understand of it is:

Here we can take the scenario in two contexts.First,the woman/feminine character representing Maya/Ilusion and man/Raja/Masculine character representing human jeev/human as person.

So that defines how Maya/illusion tries to distract a person from his path.As our ultimate goal is to merge with that supreme.And before doing that we need to cross many sub stages.And to achieve a awastha where one is free from these 5s is one of those sub stages and yes  higher awastha though.But that man (with god's /gurus grace) doesnt indulge in all this.He just sits still in name of his Guru.

Maya again and again tries to allure him so that he gets trapped in his jaal/scheme .She(maya) offers him many tastes like taste of wealth,health,beauty etc etc etc but that man(person/jeev) never wants to be the part of it.Then she simply says if you will not enjoy my offerings(worldly pleasures) then people will call you thief(a weird/pschyo/mad/inhuman//impersonator/titles like that) then man gets suspicious at this moment.he says O guru If I deny worldly pleasures/attachments then It seems difficult to live here among people in human body and if I accept all this,then I get away from you.So then Maharaj(guru) himself helps him by teaching him to play tricks with maya(as raja does with that woman) with help of Naam ,and still he is living in world(as he was in Ward of woman),but he doesnt get caught under her influence(did not do anything wrong).

So I took that in this way.I may be wrong but thats what clicked me at the instant.

Other context is as it's mentioned.Then it goes for both men and women.For Men,to never get allured by women and vice versa.

Edited October 19, 2015 by sukrit kaur

[Ragmaala]

sukirt bhenji, your interpretation is correct. stick with it, dont let anyone else brainwash you.

[sukrit kaur]

Actually I liked reading that! Hope we all turn out as that Raja throughout our lives and achieve that sehaj awastha to merge with akal purkh!

Dhan Guru Maharaj!

Yes this Maya is of verryy bad character,always tries to allure us,what a devil character!

Always wants to eat us for her own satisfaction by offering us sweet poison.

And devils are those who are loving this sweet poison and crying day and night in call of more poison.

What a big trap!

 

 

[Ragmaala]

yes guru amardas ji maharaj says ... maya mamta mohni vin danta jag khaye...  maya is such a treacherous entity it eats the whole world without even teeth.

Baba Nand Singh Ji would say in ardaas to Guru Nanak   Aap di maya nu mod lo,  maya de shal shidar to hath deke bacha lo

Translation:  Guru Nanak sahib ji take your maya illusion away from our minds, save us from the shal shidar = charitar of maya.

So I understand that  a charitar can happen to either male or female. The responsibility is upon a individual gursikh to understand the real meaning behind the story, and use it in their own lives instead of deliberating giving it a negative color .

[sukrit kaur]

 

 Arril ‘God gave me birth into the house of a prostitute and I disguised myself into an ascetic to meet you. ‘Now you be quick and adorn my bed. I am your maid, please don’t torment me.(25)

 

here it's very much evident about origin of maya.As how it (as an constituent of Kaal) was originated from God/supreme itself.As Kaal was a ansh(ray) of supreme divine then he created this maya to cheat the seeking souls.how she is disguising and trying her best to make everyone slave of herself.

 

[CdnSikhGirl]

 

here it's very much evident about origin of maya.As how it (as an constituent of Kaal) was originated from God/supreme itself.As Kaal was a ansh(ray) of supreme divine then he created this maya to cheat the seeking souls.how she is disguising and trying her best to make everyone slave of herself.

If the *she* really is only Maya and not human females, then why Sikhs like Paapiman use it to justify women as being more lustful, deceitful etc? And why not just call her Maya in the story, it would remove any doubt that it was speaking in symbolism to Maya and all of us as the Raja.  But Paapiman is not the only one who is trying to say that woman should be limited or restricted and are immoral compared to men because of these stories.  So if the women in these stories are not human females at all then why do so many Singhs say these stories are depicting the character of "women"? Why not say that its symbolic for Maya illusion and the *male* is really all humans regardless of the gender of their body? 
In fact, I actually suggested this before, that it was symbolic and not speaking about human females - but I was shot down by several members on here saying and I quote:
"Whats wrong with Guru Ji wanting to warn his Singhs about immoral women??" 
And even Chatanga1 himself pointed out not too long ago, that the number of stories depicting women in a bad light compared to men, doesnt mean its saying women are that immoral compared to men, ...showing he believes they are indeed stories against human females. ANd he was also one of the first to shoot down when I said it was purely symbolic, as if to make statement that I just won't accept that females are like this.  Otherwise he would have said it was only symbolism for Maya and not speaking of human females at all. 

Also, every website devoted to the subject outright claims that its highlighting the negative aspects of human females psychology... so majority think this is what it means. Not a single one mentions symbolism for Maya.

Chatanga1: if the female in the stories is not actually human females and is only symbolism for Maya and the male in the stories is all of us, then fine you win... but you could have stated this a long time ago instead of making remarks that make it sound like you believe it to be about human females. Not being Punjabi, and not understanding the language well, I have to rely on translations. I have no choice. That wont change... I have been trying to learn Punjabi for 5 years and I know basically how to ask for a glass of water and ask someone how they are (or answer tikka if they ask me) Its not easy!

So instead of saying things that make it seem like you hate women (like women must OBEY men just because they are men etc. - which is degrading and hateful against women - or suggesting that the Gurus were male because women are inferior) ....if you REALLY care then just point out the right translations.  And if its not speaking against women at all but only Maya ... why not just call the female character Maya to begin with???  Instead of attacking me for not knowing Punjabi and having to rely on english translations, why not attack those translated it wrong to begin with&? Wouldn't it be more constructive to contact the sites that translate it to mean negative characters of *human* women, and tell them to change it to Maya??? To explain that its Maya and not human women... it would be more constructive than using abusive language to someone who has to rely on those translations just to make them feel like a piece of worthless sh*t.  At least I dont try to degrade men... If men feel like being on equal level to women is degrading, then think how it feels to have men think women are inferior! 

So is it only symbolic and not about male or female humans at all?? If so, then it makes much more sense. But since I was torn a new one, for suggesting the female in these stories was only symbolic before on this very site (even by YOU Chatanga1) its evident that many of the SInghs on here do not think its only symbolic of Maya, and take it to be a "warning for human males against immoral human females". 
And then the question still remains... why is anything immoral or low behaviour always related to feminine / female energy or symbolism, while righteous, moral etc are always attributed as male quality?? 

And please think about what you are saying to people before you do it Chatanga1.  If I was not as strong willed as I am, someone on the receiving end of your abuse, could be seriously hurt and and up doing something stupid to themselves.  

Edited October 19, 2015 by Satkirin_Kaur

[chatanga1]

If the *she* really is only Maya and not human females, then why Sikhs like Paapiman use it to justify women as being more lustful, deceitful etc?

 

Because they, like you, are missing the essence of the text, by having one dimension thinking.

 

 And why not just call her Maya in the story, it would remove any doubt that it was speaking in symbolism to Maya and all of us as the Raja. 

Because not every lesson can be spoon-fed to you. Some important lessons require more time and effort.

 

IAnd even Chatanga1 himself pointed out not too long ago, that the number of stories depicting women in a bad light compared to men, doesnt mean its saying women are that immoral compared to men, ...showing he believes they are indeed stories against human females. ANd he was also one of the first to shoot down when I said it was purely symbolic, as if to make statement that I just won't accept that females are like this.  Otherwise he would have said it was only symbolism for Maya and not speaking of human females at all. 

I did say exactly in another topic about how in the western world we have Aesop's fables. But you missed it because in that same topic you were fighting in sikhkhoj/mrsinghs' corner. These stories are just that, stories. If you had bothered to learn Panjabi up to any standard you could have listened to katha where this is all explained, but instead you attach yourself to so-called scholars.

 

Also, every website devoted to the subject outright claims that its highlighting the negative aspects of human females psychology... so majority think this is what it means. Not a single one mentions symbolism for Maya.

That just tells me that you are looking at the wrong websites, or purposely looking for those websites that will fit in with your thinking. Most likely the latter as we have seen from your activity on this forum, siding with those who know nothing.

 

Chatanga1: if the female in the stories is not actually human females and is only symbolism for Maya and the male in the stories is all of us, then fine you win...

I don't win anything. Nor do I need to win anything. The only losers will be those who try to undermine the Guru Khalsa Panth, no matter what garb they present themselves in.

I have been trying to learn Punjabi for 5 years and I know basically how to ask for a glass of water and ask someone how they are (or answer tikka if they ask me) Its not easy!

Maybe it's tme for you to take a break from this forum then. It's certainly taking up a lot of your time, posting the same drivel over and over. Take that time to learn to understand Panjabi.

 

So instead of saying things that make it seem like you hate women (like women must OBEY men just because they are men etc. - which is degrading and hateful against women - or suggesting that the Gurus were male because women are inferior) ....if you REALLY care then just point out the right translations. 

How many times have you posted this drivel? That I suggested the Gurus were male because women are inferior? I have never said that, but you have made numerous posts twisting  my words, and then tell us you don't have enough time to learn Panjabi. How ridiculous is that?

 

And if its not speaking against women at all but only Maya ... why not just call the female character Maya to begin with???

2nd time you have asked same question in same post.

 

Instead of attacking me for not knowing Punjabi and having to rely on english translations, why not attack those translated it wrong to begin with&?

 

Correcting you is not attacking you. Maybe it is to you because I'm a man.

 

So is it only symbolic and not about male or female humans at all??

Again another repeated question in the same post. You could have learnt another Panjabi word in this time.

 

Wouldn't it be more constructive to contact the sites that translate it to mean negative characters of *human* women, and tell them to change it to Maya???

Like I said everything cannot be spoon fed to you.

 

And then the question still remains... why is anything immoral or low behaviour always related to feminine / female energy or symbolism, while righteous, moral etc are always attributed as male quality?? 

 

 

It isn't. It's just in your head. Telling me what little understanding you have of Gurbani.

 

But since I was torn a new one, for suggesting the female in these stories was only symbolic before on this very site (even by YOU Chatanga1) its evident that many of the SInghs on here do not think its only symbolic of Maya, and take it to be a "warning for human males against immoral human females". 

Another repeated line in the same post.

 

And please think about what you are saying to people before you do it Chatanga1.  If I was not as strong willed as I am, someone on the receiving end of your abuse, could be seriously hurt and and up doing something stupid to themselves.  

You had enough warnings on this forum about your posts. You never saw to question yourself. If someone else was not as pig-headedly ignorant as you, they would have looked to research more about Gurbani rather than do the things you did here.

 

 

[CdnSikhGirl]

Even though you are mean condescending overbearing rude and have a superiority complex I still wish you well as I also see the same light in you equally.  

I am focusing all my efforts on my own journey now and to hell to anyone who tries to stop or limit me because I am female.  I have actually had some spiritual experiences even before I heard he word Sikh....

I will always believe in equal opportunity for all humans because I see that light in everyone including you.  I just hope you can see it someday as well.  But you won't get there by regarding people calling them names and thinking of yourself with such superiority complex.  Learn to see Hingis from others perspectives too.  And PLEASE learn to feel some compassion...

[chatanga1]

Even though you are mean condescending overbearing rude and have a superiority complex I still wish you well as I also see the same light in you equally. 

 

No i am not, but you seem to be able to bring out the worst in people. Just because I won't allow you to post your bs here.Maybe it's time to introspect.

 

I am focusing all my efforts on my own journey now

Start with learning to tell the truth.

 

I just hope you can see it someday as well. 

Don't worry about me.

 

And PLEASE learn to feel some compassion...

Please learn not to labour on the same points over and over again. Please learn to understand Panjabi and try to learn what being a Sikh means.