Respect for SGPC maryada

[Ragmaala]

Bro, the human body desired by devi/devtay is that of a male human, not a female or a transgender.

Bhul chuk maaf

Obviously everyone wants a male body, its the easiest of all three you  mentioned. Who wants to deal with bloody mess every months, who wants to bleed & pee in the same vicinity, who wants to go through the pain of childbirth, etc.  However, being a mother is the greatest thing ever, it elevates the status of woman to a divine entity. Even God bowed to a woman, in form of Guru Nanak to Mata Tripta jee, and the women who gave birth to Sants Mahapurakhs are DHan!!!

But it does not mean that Manukh only means Man in Gurbani.

It is actually said that Females have a higher chance of union with God due to the hardships that they face during life childbirth, being a mother, devout to her family, and due to her excessive emotions which if turned into Prema Bhagti is a faster track to union with Almightly. However, the same emotions if turned negative can be disastrous like jealousy or excessive attachment . This is just anecdotal evidence , not from Gurbani.

[paapiman]

Let's keep this simple and short.

Can anyone show us (using Hindi/Sanskrit dictionary) that the word "Manush" (Manukh word is derived from it) refers to a female body too?

Thanks

 

Bhul chuk maaf

[Ragmaala]

satkirin

you are funny man, you are kinda like papiman, but the opposite end.

Seriously, two females can create life ? last time, I checked you need a yoni & a lingam to make that happen. lol

 

[kdsingh80]

Obviously everyone wants a male body, its the easiest of all three you  mentioned. Who wants to deal with bloody mess every months, who wants to bleed & pee in the same vicinity, who wants to go through the pain of childbirth, etc.  However, being a mother is the greatest thing ever, it elevates the status of woman to a divine entity. Even God bowed to a woman, in form of Guru Nanak to Mata Tripta jee, and the women who gave birth to Sants Mahapurakhs are DHan!!!

But it does not mean that Manukh only means Man in Gurbani.

It is actually said that Females have a higher chance of union with God due to the hardships that they face during life childbirth, being a mother, devout to her family, and due to her excessive emotions which if turned into Prema Bhagti is a faster track to union with Almightly. However, the same emotions if turned negative can be disastrous like jealousy or excessive attachment . This is just anecdotal evidence , not from Gu

Almost twice the number of men goes for sex change surgery than women. So more men want women body than women 

[sukrit kaur]

Punjabi line:

"Banda hamesha change kamm kre"

In general term,Banda=man

So can you please use punjabi dictionary to show it doesnt support female meaning too.

But that line is directed towards both men and women?

[Ragmaala]

Almost twice the number of men goes for sex change surgery than women. So more men want women body than women 

because they are feminine inside

[CdnSikhGirl]

Obviously everyone wants a male body, its the easiest of all three you  mentioned. Who wants to deal with bloody mess every months, who wants to bleed & pee in the same vicinity, who wants to go through the pain of childbirth, etc.  However, being a mother is the greatest thing ever, it elevates the status of woman to a divine entity. Even God bowed to a woman, in form of Guru Nanak to Mata Tripta jee, and the women who gave birth to Sants Mahapurakhs are DHan!!!

But it does not mean that Manukh only means Man in Gurbani.

It is actually said that Females have a higher chance of union with God due to the hardships that they face during life childbirth, being a mother, devout to her family, and due to her excessive emotions which if turned into Prema Bhagti is a faster track to union with Almightly. However, the same emotions if turned negative can be disastrous like jealousy or excessive attachment . This is just anecdotal evidence , not from Gurbani.

You do know that we arent in the dark ages anymore... there are hygiene products so its not different than any other time now.  
And if you really don't like it and are not planning on having a baby at the time, you can take hormonal BC which will stop menstruation all together and has been shown to have no or negligible effect to fertility later on.  for example... Mirena IUD stops it altogether, as does certain birth control pills, and the depo provera shot. Unless you are in the camp that think menstruation is a punishment from God on women (like Christians do) and that it's part of women's punishment and so she must not do anything to stop the suffering, then there is no reason to oppose using the above methods.  And there's pain killers for childbirth (or C-section which a lot of women are actually electing to PLAN now instead of going through natural).  The only reason human childbirth is so painful compared to animals is because of a genetic compromise between us walking upright, and the ability to produce live offpsring which have gotten smarter = large skull.  The trade off, birth at the last possible moment before the head gets too large, to allow for brain size, but then we also end up now with babies that still need to do a lot of growth after birth and are helpless.  If we walked on all fours like some animals, then birth would be much easier as we wouldnt need to worry about pelvis size as it wouldn't make as much difference with gait.  

[Ragmaala]

मानवीय	mAnavIya	adj.	human
	लोक	loka	m.	human race
	मानव	mAnava	m.	human being
	मानुष्यक	mAnuSyaka	adj.	human
	मनुष्य	manuSya	adj.	human
	मानुष	mAnuSa	adj.	human
	मानव	mAnava	adj.	human
	नर्य	narya	adj.	human
	नहुष्य	nahuSya	adj.	human
	नार	nAra	adj.	human
	पौंस्न	pauMsna	adj.	human
	पौरुष	pauruSa	adj.	human
	पौरुषविधिक	pauruSavidhika	adj.	human
	पौरुषेय	pauruSeya	adj.	human
	पुरुष्य	puruSya	adj.	human
	मानुषलौकिक	mAnuSalaukika	adj.	human
	आयु	Ayu	m.	human
	अवतिष्ठति { अव- स्था }	avatiSThati { ava- sthA }	verb	human
	आनव	Anava	adj.	humane
	उन्न	unna	adj.	human

[paapiman]

मानवीय	mAnavIya	adj.	human
	लोक	loka	m.	human race
	मानव	mAnava	m.	human being
	मानुष्यक	mAnuSyaka	adj.	human
	मनुष्य	manuSya	adj.	human
	मानुष	mAnuSa	adj.	human
	मानव	mAnava	adj.	human
	नर्य	narya	adj.	human
	नहुष्य	nahuSya	adj.	human
	नार	nAra	adj.	human
	पौंस्न	pauMsna	adj.	human
	पौरुष	pauruSa	adj.	human
	पौरुषविधिक	pauruSavidhika	adj.	human
	पौरुषेय	pauruSeya	adj.	human
	पुरुष्य	puruSya	adj.	human
	मानुषलौकिक	mAnuSalaukika	adj.	human
	आयु	Ayu	m.	human
	अवतिष्ठति { अव- स्था }	avatiSThati { ava- sthA }	verb	human
	आनव	Anava	adj.	humane
	उन्न	unna	adj.	human

Bro, the above are meanings are for "मानवीय", not मनुष्य?

 

Bhul chuk maaf

 

[CdnSikhGirl]

satkirin

you are funny man, you are kinda like papiman, but the opposite end.

Seriously, two females can create life ? last time, I checked you need a yoni & a lingam to make that happen. lol

 

No it's actually true... I don't know how much medical knowledge or science knowledge you have, but basically the nuclear dna package usually delivered by a sperm, can come from a second egg. They remove the nucleus from one woman's egg and inject it to the other woman's egg. The result is a baby, although they will always be female children.  It wasn't a joke... it is actually possible.  It's been tested on mice and the embryos survived and thrived.  I don't know if they actually have tried on humans yet.  It was in Australia where the breakthrough was made, however the theory that it was possible has existed for awhile...
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2003/aug/28/genetics.genderissues
The above article explains how it's possible.

[Ragmaala]

मनुष्य	manuSya	adj.	manly
	मानुष्य	mAnuSya	adj.	manly
	मनुष्य	manuSya	adj.	useful or
	मनुष्य	manuSya	adj.	friendly to man
	मनुष्य	manuSya	adj.	human
	मानुष्य	mAnuSya	adj.	human
	मनुष्य	manuSya	m.	human being
	मनुष्य	manuSya	m.	man
	मनुष्य	manuSya	m.	class of deceased ancestors
	मनुष्य	manuSya	m.	husband
	मानुष्य	mAnuSya	n.	manliness
	मानुष्य	mAnuSya	n.	human nature or condition
	मानुष्य	mAnuSya	n.	humanity
	मानुष्य	mAnuSya	n.	manhood

[Ragmaala]

So Manushya can mean a Man, a Human Being and other terms like manly, manhood, humane, humanity depending upon context and usage.

[paapiman]

So Manushya can mean a Man, a Human Being and other terms like manly, manhood, humane, humanity depending upon context and usage.

Bro, let's not bring in English. Daas is not sure about the origin of the word "human". 

Is the word Manukh "puling" (male) or istriling (female)? 

Bhul chuk maaf 

[kdsingh80]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH This has to be most FUNNY thing I have ever heard! Women are only half men now huh????  So no wonder you think women can't do seva as Panj Pyaras since you think we are only half-people you don't even see us as being fully human LOL.  You actually think male is the epitome of human evolution...

Here is why this is so funny:

ALL FOETUSES START OUT AS FEMALE. YOU were once female Paapiman. One teeny gene attached to the now dying Y chromosome (of over 600 genes now only carries a mere 27) that one tiny gene gives instructions to the Mother's body to bathe the foetus in testosterone, causing the female foetus to develop male attributes.  Then the babie's body is built ENTIRELY FROM THE MOTHER'S OWN BODY.  This means EVERY human comes from female.  A female can LITERALLY BUILD a male body from her own body!!!! Guru Nanak Dev Ji KNEW this truth and why he wrote that we ALL come from a woman. The father only donates one single sperm and out of that sperm only one tiny chromosome, and only one tiny gene from that chromosome. This means the base gender is female! Two females can actually create life.  Two males NEVER COULD - they LACK THE LIFE GIVING ABILITY. The key to life is in the EGG not the sperm! How can a female be HALF a male... it's the other way around!  The key to life is in the X chromosome and not the Y!!!  The Y chromosome is dying, and along with it that gene which changes a female to a male.  This will mean the extinction of the male gender in about 100,000 - 125,000 years.  It's already happened in some species on Earth!! The mole vole adapted, and the gene became spliced to the X chromosome in time, so now the entire mole vole species is XX.  No males!  Though some display male traits and ability to produce sperm, but biologically they are all female XX.  The human race may not adapt in this way naturally but it's been proven that two female eggs can create life.  Two sperms can not.  The nucleus from one egg is transplanted into the other egg and deposits that same nuclear dna coding as a sperm would.  The baby still has two parents, only they are both women. And all babies would be female. 

The natural progression of the human race towards all female, means that eventually we will ALL be female.  And since our evolution as a species is toward and not away from Waheguru... what does this say??  That the vehicle most favoured to reach God is the female vehicle, not male!  :P So how in the world could you think that women are half human... LOL it's the other way around!!! X is the key to life! Not Y.  And men only have one X. Therefore men are actually HALF WOMEN. Not the other way around LOL. 

This is the danger of Babas preaching their Brahaminical mindset about women. They misinterpret Gurbani and twist it to favour males and put women in bad light.  The truth is, all through history, men have feared women.  Put a man in front of an audience to give an important speech, and no matter how hard he tries, his mind will go to the woman in the front row showing a bit of cleavage.  The 'little warrior' will stand to attention regardless of what the man wants. The man still knows it's inappropriate though because he knows right from wrong. So he blames the woman... instead of his own kaam.  This is the power women have over men and it scares the crap out of men.  So they feel like they need to dominate, conquer what they fear is controlling them.  Put women into subordinate roles, hide them in the house, cover them head to toe (Muslims) but women STILL have this power and always will have this power over men.  And men know it.  This is the KEY reason all major religions subordinate women, why most cultures have done so.  Because men fear women, the power we have over their self control, and our power to create life, which they don't have.  Add to this the aggression and rage that testosterone cause and you have the reason for most of the problems in the world.  Women (sans the levels of testosterone in male bodies) do not tend to cause wars, enact violent crimes, etc all these are majority caused by men.  

Look at it another way... several of the five evils can even be traced back to excess amounts of a certain hormone... can you guess which one??
High levels of Testosterone causes high sex drive (kaam) and anger/rage (krodh) among other things, I would say ego too judging by the posts on here. 

Hey Paapiman when the human race are all females then who will hold the palla?  Then who will act as Panj Pyaras?? huh??? 

I'm actually laughing so hard at the comment about women being half of something... so not even fully human... that I am actually trying to write this through tears in my eyes!!! 

Great so by your logic women should also be prime care takers of children? Why is it then we see women demanding 50: 50 contribution?

 

As far extinction is concerned it is just another theory , nobody knows what is going after  1 million years 

 

and yes testosterone make more men anti social but there are many benefit of testosterone like it makes men more risk taking.

Men are hardly afraid of women they are always afraid of their own sexuality as alpha males always use to take many women  ,.

 

 

 

 

 

[chatanga1]

So what you are saying is the reason for male being in front?? 

 the wedding resembles a battle taking place. Traditionally, the groom would arrive on a horse with sword with his army (baraat) and win the girl from her parents. The father would signify his giving/surrendering  his daughter by tying her palla to the groom. The groom would lead her around the parikarma of fire to show his commitment to her,  will only be broken by fire. ie when he dies. This is how weddings have been conducted in India for yugs. the first wedding being that of Bhagwaan Shiv Ji, and Mata Sati. Since then weddings have been carried out according to this ancient sanskriti. Only for Sikhs the wedding involves Guru Granth Sahib rather than fire.

I hope that you will not insult our sanskriti as you have on other occasions on this forum, even if you do not understand or agree with this.

 

 

[kdsingh80]

because they are feminine inside

So  inside feminity or masculinity decide which body we want,If we take away social aspects then eunuchs body is the easiest. he/she don't even have to deal with kaam

[CdnSikhGirl]

Great so by your logic women should also be prime care takers of children? Why is it then we see women demanding 50: 50 contribution?

 

As far extinction is concerned it is just another theory , nobody knows what is going after  1 million years 

 

and yes testosterone make more men anti social but there are many benefit of testosterone like it makes men more risk taking.

Men are hardly afraid of women they are always afraid of their own sexuality as alpha males always use to take many women  ,.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Caretakers can be anyone. I was speaking of creation of life.  They have already proven two eggs can create life, where two sperms can't.  Caretaking only takes someone who is a genuine and caring person.  As far as testosterone, all I said was that it creates obstacles to men that women do not have... extra anger, rage, sex drive etc.  

And yes, women often choose the most successful males.  Especially if they are in a society where females are kept from working / participating in society themselves directly.  It's actually that set up which causes it. So men created their own bed as far as that goes.  If women are kept from being able to compete amongst themselves and even men, then the only way they can gain any status is by living on the laurels of their husband... so of course they will choose the most successful males.  If women are allowed in the workforce, and compete directly, using their OWN merits, they are less likely to only go for the most successful guys... maybe instead she has the good career, high status etc.  But anyway, it's only ever been a means to achieve a status using someone else's status to live off of...  hey look I married a millionaire,  and now I am a millionaire and I didn't have to do anything work myself type of thing... and yes I hate those women.

[chatanga1]

I think it might depend on context that the word is used in. Just like how when we refer to ‘mankind’ we are actually referring to all humanity and not only men. 

 

Mankind is Manush-jati. that is human kind. Manush means human. These are all different jaatis. Guru Gobind Singh in Sri Dasam Granth talks of manhy differnt jaatis including the ones I wrote about earlier but also Joginia - witches, naags - serpents,

[paapiman]

So Manushya can mean a Man, a Human Being and other terms like manly, manhood, humane, humanity depending upon context and usage.

Bro, the word "ਸੰਗ੍ਯਾ" relates to the gender. It is very clear from the below that the word Manukh is male (Puling).

 

Quote  

ਮਾਨੁਖ੍ਯ - mānukhya - मानुख्य

ਸੰ. ਮਨੁਸ- ਮਨੁਸ਼੍ਯ- ਮਾਨੁਸ- ਮਾਨੁਸ਼੍ਯ. ਸੰਗ੍ਯਾ- ਆਦਮੀ. ਮਨੁੱਖ. "ਮਾਨੁਖ ਕੀ ਟੇਕ ਬ੍ਰਿਥੀ ਸਭ ਜਾਨੁ." (ਸੁਖਮਨੀ) "ਪਰਸ ਮਾਨੁਖ੍ਯ ਦੇਹੰ ਮਲੀਣੰ." (ਗਾਥਾ) ੨. ਚਾਰਹੱਥਭਰ. ਦੇਖੋ, ਮਨਖੋਸਟ.

सं. मनुस- मनुश्य- मानुस- मानुश्य. संग्या- आदमी. मनुॱख. "मानुख की टेक ब्रिथी सभ जानु." (सुखमनी) "परस मानुख्य देहं मलीणं." (गाथा) २. चारहॱथभर. देखो, मनखोसट.

 

 

Unquote

 

1 - http://searchgurbani.com/mahan_kosh/view

 

 

 

Bhuk chuk maaf

Edited October 10, 2015 by paapiman

[CdnSikhGirl]

 

 the wedding resembles a battle taking place. Traditionally, the groom would arrive on a horse with sword with his army (baraat) and win the girl from her parents. The father would signify his giving/surrendering  his daughter by tying her palla to the groom. The groom would lead her around the parikarma of fire to show his commitment to her,  will only be broken by fire. ie when he dies. This is how weddings have been conducted in India for yugs. the first wedding being that of Bhagwaan Shiv Ji, and Mata Sati. Since then weddings have been carried out according to this ancient sanskriti. Only for Sikhs the wedding involves Guru Granth Sahib rather than fire.

I hope that you will not insult our sanskriti as you have on other occasions on this forum, even if you do not understand or agree with this.

 

 

I can understand it... it's allegory even in that sense.  

But I always thought in the case of Sikhi, it wasn't to live out a battle in human sense... it was taking perhaps something familiar (ie it may have been originated from that) but the symbolism was changed (as even seen in the meaning and wording of the lavaans themselves as they do not speak of human marriage) is actually that of soul (of both male/female) reaching to Waheguru.  So the true marriage is the husband and wife as ONE unit (one soul in two bodies), taking the palla of Guru and going towards union with Husband-Lord.  So although the method used was similar, it was given a new meaning in Sikhi... a spiritual meaning instead of being one where the woman was seen as war-booty won from the father.  

But in our case, none of my family were even there... so no war was waged LOL.  We both entered this marriage willingly and together as one and as much as you think I hate men I don't.  I highly respect Balbir Ji and he does me (yes on an equal level).  Where in some marriages husband would die protecting his wife, both of us would rather die together / protecting each other.  

Edited October 10, 2015 by Satkirin_Kaur

[paapiman]

Mankind is Manush-jati. that is human kind. Manush means human. These are all different jaatis. Guru Gobind Singh in Sri Dasam Granth talks of manhy differnt jaatis including the ones I wrote about earlier but also Joginia - witches, naags - serpents,

Bro, you are right about Manush-jati. Manush-jati will include women, children and possibly transgenders, but the word "Manukh" 's ling is Puling (masculine).

Gurparsaad, will try to confirm it with a scholar.

Bhul chuk maaf

Edited October 10, 2015 by paapiman

[Ragmaala]

So  inside feminity or masculinity decide which body we want,If we take away social aspects then eunuchs body is the easiest. he/she don't even have to deal with kaam

eunuchs/ transgenders have kaam too. 

[chatanga1]

ਆਦਮੀ.

This means man, but from a semetic view. Adam father of mankind - Aadmi his children - mankind.

[Ragmaala]

Bro, the word "ਸੰਗ੍ਯਾ" relates to the gender. It is very clear from the below that the word Manukh is male (Puling).

 

Quote  

ਮਾਨੁਖ੍ਯ - mānukhya - मानुख्य

ਸੰ. ਮਨੁਸ- ਮਨੁਸ਼੍ਯ- ਮਾਨੁਸ- ਮਾਨੁਸ਼੍ਯ. ਸੰਗ੍ਯਾ- ਆਦਮੀ. ਮਨੁੱਖ. "ਮਾਨੁਖ ਕੀ ਟੇਕ ਬ੍ਰਿਥੀ ਸਭ ਜਾਨੁ." (ਸੁਖਮਨੀ) "ਪਰਸ ਮਾਨੁਖ੍ਯ ਦੇਹੰ ਮਲੀਣੰ." (ਗਾਥਾ) ੨. ਚਾਰਹੱਥਭਰ. ਦੇਖੋ, ਮਨਖੋਸਟ.

सं. मनुस- मनुश्य- मानुस- मानुश्य. संग्या- आदमी. मनुॱख. "मानुख की टेक ब्रिथी सभ जानु." (सुखमनी) "परस मानुख्य देहं मलीणं." (गाथा) २. चारहॱथभर. देखो, मनखोसट.

 

 

Unquote

 

1 - http://searchgurbani.com/mahan_kosh/view

 

 

 

Bhuk chuk maaf

So what do you mean bro ?  that Manukh only means Man ? and wherever Manukh is mentioned in Gurban it only means Man ?

And Gurbani is only for man ?

These are rhetoric questions btw

Edited October 10, 2015 by Ragmaala

[chatanga1]

Bro, you are right about Manush-jati. Manush-jati will include women, children and possibly transgenders, but the word "Manukh" 's ling is Puling (masculine).

Manukh is just a simpler word or variation of Manush.