Sikh_Soulja Posted October 17, 2003 Report Share Posted October 17, 2003 WJKK WJKF I was told that the kachhera was made to cover the men in their pubic region. How does the kachhera work if it is made so loose and big that it doesnt keep the pubic region contained? If it were tight then it would make obvious things less obvious. I hope you all understand what i am trying to say please can someone explain this to me WJKK WJKF 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CK Posted October 19, 2003 Report Share Posted October 19, 2003 I don't quite understand it either, nor do I understand why the identical design should be worn by women. This to me does not have anything to do with equality of men and women...I just think that since a woman's body is different than a man, then shouldn't she at least have an option as to what undergarment she wears to cover and protect herself? While I mean no disrespect to one of our sacred gifts, in a similar vein I wonder about women dressing in Kachheras. Something so bulky will be quite obvious under many styles of dress, including many types of conservative Western clothing. Wearing a bulky undergarment risks drawing unnecessary attention to a woman's private areas...which I don't think was part of the original intent. I personally choose to wear something akin to bike shorts instead of the traditional Kachhera. To me, they are more comfortable, much much more available, and can be virtually seamless under Western clothing. But...it is not the same... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ms514 Posted October 21, 2003 Report Share Posted October 21, 2003 Sat Sri Akal: So both of you are smarter than Guru Sahib eh? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sikh_Soulja Posted October 21, 2003 Author Report Share Posted October 21, 2003 Fateh We are not cleverer than guru sahib ji. I just dont understand how it makes the obvious thing on males,less obvious. I thought a tighter piece of clothing would keep males privates more closer to the skin so it wouldnt be obvious can someone please help me in understanding this bhul chuk maaf fateh 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gupt Singh Posted October 21, 2003 Report Share Posted October 21, 2003 what exactly do u wear bhai? skintight jeans lol i dont see any probs with kachere, baggy boxers etc. if u want to go back to old skool kiddies pants then u can, i think they are nasty....still remember the day i gave them up a fair few yrs back neither do i see what hte problem with women wearing kachere are. kachere arent made of 10 inch thick material, its just thin cotton. how is it going to bulge out at the sides? unless your wearing a miniskirt, obviously, and in that case the kachere legs would prolly pop our under the miniskirt ive gt a feeling my interpritation of kachere is different to you guys.........long, knee length undergarment made of thin cotton and enough material at the front to cover your "modesty" when they r wet. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Javanmard Posted October 21, 2003 Report Share Posted October 21, 2003 khalsa soulja neither do i see what hte problem with women wearing kachere are. obviously Khalsa Soulja seems to ignore an important fact about female anatomy: menstruation. When women have their period and they have to use hygienic wipes wearing a kachera only is quite unpractical if not ridiculous. Not all women use tampax so if they are to use kachera only are they just supposed to get their kachere dirty with period blood. The old Nihang habit of wearing soemthing between your kachera and your private parts is far more reasonable. I just find it disgusting how some people go around saying that you should only wear kachere and nothing else underneath. I mean urine and period blood will in any case make your kachere dirty and I don't think it's a nice way of honouring the kavhere given to us by Maharaj. but hey ladies, if you take kirpan da amrit no worries: kachere are not compulsory :wink: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khandaydhaar Posted October 22, 2003 Report Share Posted October 22, 2003 derz only ONE Amrit dat iz Amrit by Panj Paayaras..so wats dis kirpan da amrit comn from??????? dude Amrit is One and if it aint Amrit by Panj Paayarayz den its a None :!: Peace 8) as wid kacheraas well we ladies know abt dose timez so ahem plz... :!: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lil_princess Posted October 22, 2003 Report Share Posted October 22, 2003 lol niceeeeee one lalleshvari!!!!!! i also don't really quite understand the concept of the kachere, yes i know that its part of the ks, and i am not against it im just in the same boat as the people above, i dont' understand why, its mainly directed to males.... isn't that not sexist?? anyways i don't think discussing undergarments is nessisary but it is sort of mind boggling after a while, but then again so is everything else in the world, and i guess there are more questions than answers... but wouldn't it be great of there were more answers to questions.. anywayz Sikh_Soulja brought up a good point.... respect keep on smiling 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsb Posted October 22, 2003 Report Share Posted October 22, 2003 i agree with you, lalleshvari..... kacchhera is a must...but it's not the only thing... for example.....if you wish to believe keski is kakaar....it's a must, but it doesn't hafta be the only thing... you can always put something else on top... or for kara....kara isn't the end.you can always put a maala on or whatever you feel is practical....remember... sikhi is meant to be practical..not fanatical..... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gupt Singh Posted October 22, 2003 Report Share Posted October 22, 2003 um i didnt say u cant wear pants underneath if ur a lady bt i did say u cant replace kachere with pants.......... im sure theres a sakhi wear guru gobind singh told a lady to wear keski and kachere and never remove them.......... im nt understanding kirpan de amrit......are you saying that kirpan de amrit has a different set of kakkars to normal amrit? isnt that even more heretic than the evil modern ram rae akhand keertan jatha? what historical evidence is there for kirpan de amrit? ive never seen any puratan accounts of it....maybe you can enlighten me....... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Narsingha Posted October 22, 2003 Report Share Posted October 22, 2003 Has anyone read Baba Gurbachan Singh Khalsa ji's works on the origins of the Kachera? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khandaydhaar Posted October 22, 2003 Report Share Posted October 22, 2003 im nt understanding kirpan de amrit......are you saying that kirpan de amrit has a different set of kakkars to normal amrit? ..... man wats dis all abt there is only ONE kinda Amrit and thats the one Guru Roop Panj Payaray give so y r u getn misled bro? wat up it aint dat hard to differentiate wat is real Amrit and wat isnt, or is it? not to me it aint & shouldnt be for u either. fateh 8) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BikramjitSingh Posted October 22, 2003 Report Share Posted October 22, 2003 um i didnt say u cant wear pants underneath if ur a lady bt i did say u cant replace kachere with pants.......... im sure theres a sakhi wear guru gobind singh told a lady to wear keski and kachere and never remove them.......... im nt understanding kirpan de amrit......are you saying that kirpan de amrit has a different set of kakkars to normal amrit? isnt that even more heretic than the evil modern ram rae akhand keertan jatha? what historical evidence is there for kirpan de amrit? ive never seen any puratan accounts of it....maybe you can enlighten me....... Khalsa Soulja I think Lallesvari came across this term in one of the Rehatnamas and now keeps on bringing it up like it's some sort of proven fact. He was challenged to give a reference on the Kirpan Da Amrit thread but he did his usual 'Gappan Mar Key Bhajj Jana' strategy. GurFateh Bikramjit 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sikh_Soulja Posted October 22, 2003 Author Report Share Posted October 22, 2003 why is the tension building up between everyone? this page is about the 'kachhera'. Why is everyone changing the talks to the types of amrit? as far as i no there are many types of amrit but the main official one is Bata De Amrit. Also i didn mean tight underwear as in skin tight. I ment js something not too loose and something not to tight. The kachhere is supose to be slightly below the knee and loose. Dont get me wrong, i will wear it when i take amrit but i was just askin for your explanations because i did not understand how it works. We need to know so when our children ask us we'll know what to say. Thank you though neway 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ms514 Posted October 23, 2003 Report Share Posted October 23, 2003 Sat Sri Akal: Sikh_Soulja Sahib, tight underwear also has a problem...like making men sterile. It moves the testes closer to the body, raising the temprature in the testes - a situation that decreases sperm count. Also, free clothing lets air circulate, keeping the area free of excess moisture, which can cause a large amount of diseases. If women wear tight underwear, this excessive moisture can cause bacterial growth and lead to urinary tract/vaginal infections (men can also get urinary tract infections...but a little bit more difficult) or other unpleasant conditions. So that is why looser underwear is better off. And about making "obvious things less obvious" - yeah, that could also lead to anatomic discomfort and abnormalities (one word - bending). Get me? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randip singh Posted November 5, 2003 Report Share Posted November 5, 2003 The Kachera is made so for chastity. Hindu's wore Dhoti's which could easily be unwrapped and was quick for promiscous acts to take place. The Kachera is tied at the top and is one ready madde garment and does not readily come off............wheras the dhoti is easily wrapped and unwrapped............it is to remind us of Chastity.........and not go round putting it about ...... Personally I see no problem with wearing something else under the Kachera.........but it is true........tight underpants will make a man sterile.........wearing of trousers and underpants may have a lot to do with falling sperm counts in men...... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Javanmard Posted November 5, 2003 Report Share Posted November 5, 2003 randip singh wrote: The Kachera is made so for chastity what if I told you that Brahmins and sannyasins used to wear langota to repress their sexuality and that Sikhi in its insistence on grahisti accepts sexuality in its life-affirming attitude to life whereas the sannyasins see everything to be just an illusion. Discover God in all the joys of life :wink: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mugermach Singh Posted November 5, 2003 Report Share Posted November 5, 2003 the long kechera have long nala's, (sorry if im repeating, just skim read most of the posts, also, i dont care if men and women wear then or not, etc, although it is 'harder' for women cos of their periods etc.), but anyways a long nala, tied around your waist, etc takes time to open, not good if you need a dump quickly :shock: but if you bout to be Raped, then it is very usuful. For practical reasons, the kechera is very well designed. It can be adapted, i.e put som pockets on then, and a zip, etc, streamline kechares for the cyclists and swimming people among you. lol 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 5, 2003 Report Share Posted November 5, 2003 next thing mugz is gonna say u can get some with the armani eagle on the backside :| 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randip singh Posted November 7, 2003 Report Share Posted November 7, 2003 randip singh wrote: what if I told you that Brahmins and sannyasins used to wear langota to repress their sexuality and that Sikhi in its insistence on grahisti accepts sexuality in its life-affirming attitude to life whereas the sannyasins see everything to be just an illusion. Discover God in all the joys of life :wink: Hi lallesvari............I am not saying be a prude..........but also don't go around putting about all over the place.............then the act of making Love becomes very cheap.............and I think making love should be a very special thing...................so I'm not talking about repressing it..........but about not dropping your dhoti at the first sign of a carnal urge......... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Javanmard Posted November 7, 2003 Report Share Posted November 7, 2003 same thing for me randip ji. Don't be a khanjar but don't be a monk either! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.