Dilpreet Posted December 29, 2003 Report Share Posted December 29, 2003 Why are the majority of Sikhs against love marriages???? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hatinder Posted December 29, 2003 Report Share Posted December 29, 2003 Well, Sikhs in general don't really have a good reason for hating the idea if one finds their own partner. They just want to carry on the past traditions but they need to get over it, we're in the 21st century. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hari Posted December 29, 2003 Report Share Posted December 29, 2003 Why are the majority of Sikhs against love marriages???? Why?Have you surveyed the majority of Sikh as to wether they are for or against love marriage? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SAadmin Posted December 29, 2003 Report Share Posted December 29, 2003 Its unfair to say that sikhs are against love marriages... Its the culture that is against love marriages not the relegion.. As far as sikhi goes...as long as the person is sikh and as long as couples have love towards god in primary and everything else is secondary.. its all good... Gurbani says- "Sach kahun suan leh ho sabi, jab prem kio ten hi prab payeo" (Guroo gobind singh ji) English translation, I speak the truth, person who has love others can only acheive god In other words, If you cant see god in all, you cant see god at all Hope that helps akaaaaaaaal hiii akaaal anand hii anand 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr §ingh Posted December 29, 2003 Report Share Posted December 29, 2003 N3O I heard in a Katha that ....that statement means those who have love TOWARDS GOD will achieve God please englighten me:? -- ------------------------------------- After checking my translation... it says something like: All should listen, only those who love God will achieve him :? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
commander Posted December 29, 2003 Report Share Posted December 29, 2003 Why are the majority of Sikhs against love marriages? Just what exactly is this "love" marriage? It wouldn't be another name for "lust" marriage, would it? Well, Sikhs in general don't really have a good reason for hating the idea if one finds their own partner. They just want to carry on the past traditions but they need to get over it, we're in the 21st century. Ah, the 21st century with its 50% divorce rate. Is that the tradition you want us Sikhs to adopt now? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khalsacrazed Posted December 29, 2003 Report Share Posted December 29, 2003 I don't know. I think love marriages are a bad idea because you can't commit adultery before marriage. It is a bujjar kurehit. Not that those people might.. but also a love marriage just brings more kaam into you, which we are trying to get rid of.. Heres an example: 1. Love marriages are due to kaam, because when people tell each other they like each other, its because they are in love with their image, beauty, not their soul.. 2. Why do love relationships start? because of kaam ***Look at our gurus, they did not get married with love marriages, they adopted the style of arranged marriage, did they not??? What is greater? following our gurus, or following our mind... These days people adopt something we know as manmat, because most of us are manmukhs. I, for one, am a manmukh. We listen to our mind, not our guru entirely. If we were real sikhs of the guru, some of us would not be on the computer, instead we would be doing naam jap. The whole idea of love marriage is considered okay by the followers of www.sikhnet.com or i don't know just plain old regular people. I don't really have anything against a love marriage, if people are concerned that they'll get married to someone that they might hate, they should do ardaas to guru ji, heck start doing paath now, and we might get to leave the world and unite with god. (of course i do not practice this line)) The real reason of a marriage of gursikhs is for them to remember god, so it can become an easier task, then they are one soul in 2 bodies 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heyyo Posted December 29, 2003 Report Share Posted December 29, 2003 Just what exactly is this "love" marriage? It wouldn't be another name for "lust" marriage, would it? Ah, the 21st century with its 50% divorce rate. Is that the tradition you want us Sikhs to adopt now? Firstly, who's to say that love just means lust. So you're telling me that a person wouldn't feel that same way after seeing their arranged bride for the first time? Not exactly a good example, but you know what I mean....you can't simply correlate only a love marriage with lust Secondly, please don't use that 50% statistic. It's so flawed beyond comprehension. You know why most love marriages end in divorce according to your statistic? That stat is taken mostly from a caucasion population where it is seen as a mostly acceptable action (except catholics blah blah, you get the point though). But in general, the argument is flawed because do you think that a culture which forces it's people into ARRANGED marriages would be accepting of DIVORCE? NO!!!!!!!! Exactly the point. Tell me how many Indian women who have had arranged marriages to supposed Prince CHarmings, only to have them turn out to be drunk and abusive. Oh but WAIT, Indian culture doesn't look too happily upon this women divorcing her husband, no matter the circumstances...so she's inevitably STUCK........THAT IS WHY WE GET THE STAT THAT 50% OF LOVE MARRIAGES END IN DIVORCE! IT'S BECAUSE THE MAJORITY IF PEOPLE WHO GET ARRANGED MARRIAGES COME FROM CULTURES THAT FORBID DIVORCE, NO MATTER HOW DIRE THE CIRCUMSTANCES. Thanks 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SAadmin Posted December 29, 2003 Report Share Posted December 29, 2003 Also check this topic relevant to this post: http://www.sikhawareness.com/sikhawareness...opic.php?t=1515 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest harkirat singh Posted December 29, 2003 Report Share Posted December 29, 2003 i dont think love marriages is the style of khalsa 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heyyo Posted December 29, 2003 Report Share Posted December 29, 2003 I don't know. I think love marriages are a bad idea because you can't commit adultery before marriage. It is a bujjar kurehit. Not that those people might.. but also a love marriage just brings more kaam into you, which we are trying to get rid of.. Heres an example: 1. Love marriages are due to kaam, because when people tell each other they like each other, its because they are in love with their image, beauty, not their soul.. 2. Why do love relationships start? because of kaam ***Look at our gurus, they did not get married with love marriages, they adopted the style of arranged marriage, did they not??? What is greater? following our gurus, or following our mind... These days people adopt something we know as manmat, because most of us are manmukhs. I, for one, am a manmukh. We listen to our mind, not our guru entirely. If we were real sikhs of the guru, some of us would not be on the computer, instead we would be doing naam jap. The whole idea of love marriage is considered okay by the followers of www.sikhnet.com or i don't know just plain old regular people. I don't really have anything against a love marriage, if people are concerned that they'll get married to someone that they might hate, they should do ardaas to guru ji, heck start doing paath now, and we might get to leave the world and unite with god. (of course i do not practice this line)) The real reason of a marriage of gursikhs is for them to remember god, so it can become an easier task, then they are one soul in 2 bodies Once again, who are you to say that two individuals are together only on the basis of eachother's looks? Kind of a shallow argument, isn't it? :roll: Cmon, I expect better than that. Moreover, I can kinda see your argument that some people engage in lust blah blah, but think about: Whenever you see some young Sikh jack walking around with a girl on this hand, do you REALLY THINK THAT HE'LL END UP MARRYING HER? NO!!!!! That's just a stupid guy who's just looking for a good time....please don't automatically lump a person who sees or dates a girl with the concept of a love marriages!! As shocked as you may be to here this, it's actually possible to have a LOVE MARRIAGE/RELATIONSHIP without indulging in any premarital sex. Yes, I know, I'll face a fury of backlash sayin "yes, but you can be tempted"...but once again, that depends on the individual.....Sorry to tell all you hardcore religious types on this board, but you can see increasingly that even amritdhari sikhs have girlfriends prior to marriage!! So, like I said, it all depends on the person.....I think that most people are against love marriage only because they associate it with NON-SIKHI types who are already thought to be corrupt only for not being amritdhari. (Sorry, but I gotta say, I've met a few religious SIkhs who really look down on me cuz I'm not baptized, but when I turn around, it's their baptized kids who are out doing drugs and gettin drunk :roll: ) What I'm trying to say is that, please don't automatically dump on love marriages without fully exploring them, because in the end, even arranged marriages can be complete failures!!!! The mistake people make is to analyze the sort of marriage, and NOT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE IN IT!!!!!!! PS: I know how you used the Gurus as examples for love marriage, but cmon, that was a totally different time. I don't even think Guru Nanak could have brough up as big a change as introducing love marriages j/k........but newayz, I don't think it's a good example to use, also because you can't really compare the actions of the divine Gurus with ours..I know people will say it's up to us to achieve such a spiritual status, but lets face it, if ANY OF US were able to be 1/10th of what the Gurus were, don't ya think this world would be a damn better place to live And so ends my tiring monologue......... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest -akalsharan- Posted December 29, 2003 Report Share Posted December 29, 2003 Encore (at heyyo) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
commander Posted December 29, 2003 Report Share Posted December 29, 2003 Firstly, who's to say that love just means lust. So you're telling me that a person wouldn't feel that same way after seeing their arranged bride for the first time? Not exactly a good example, but you know what I mean....you can't simply correlate only a love marriage with lust. I don't know which "arranged" marriages you've been witness to. Every single (Punjabi) "arranged" marriage that I have been familiar with involved letting the would-be couple see and talk to each other before deciding if they wanted to go through with it. The 20th century did not invent the concept of "love". If anything, it perverted it. In my opinion, the overwhelming majority of time "love" today is nothing more than lust in disguise. I don't claim to fully know what Love is or how many shapes and forms it takes, but I do wonder if this earthly love is in fact just a form of maya. Secondly, please don't use that 50% statistic. It's so flawed beyond comprehension. Ok. You know why most love marriages end in divorce according to your statistic? That stat is taken mostly from a caucasion population where it is seen as a mostly acceptable action (except catholics blah blah, you get the point though). So you're saying that a "love" marriage is different for caucasians versus the rest of humanity? But in general, the argument is flawed because do you think that a culture which forces it's people into ARRANGED marriages would be accepting of DIVORCE? NO!!!!!!!! Exactly the point. We are discussing Sikh marriages here and not Indian or caucasion or anything specific to one culture. Tell me how many Indian women who have had arranged marriages to supposed Prince CHarmings, only to have them turn out to be drunk and abusive. Again, let me remind you to stay on topic here - we are discussing Sikh marriages. Besides, doesn't the above happen just as much, if not more, in the so-called "love" marriages? Oh but WAIT, Indian culture doesn't look too happily upon this women divorcing her husband, no matter the circumstances...so she's inevitably STUCK Again, you're confusing the issue of Sikh marriages with Indian marriages. I am only concerned with the former. THAT IS WHY WE GET THE STAT THAT 50% OF LOVE MARRIAGES END IN DIVORCE! IT'S BECAUSE THE MAJORITY IF PEOPLE WHO GET ARRANGED MARRIAGES COME FROM CULTURES THAT FORBID DIVORCE, NO MATTER HOW DIRE THE CIRCUMSTANCES. Stop shouting, please. To make it clear where I stand, I'll say this: I have no problems with Sikhs getting married however they please (arranged or otherwise). I just want to explore whether a Sikh may be better off with an arranged marriage (with a modern touch) than a "love" marriage. Further, I want to know whether there is such a thing as a "love" marriage as far as a Sikh is concerned. Of course, I realize that it is probably better for partners to get to know one another before deciding whether they wish to be married. I merely question the extents to which this interaction may go and whether it is appropritate for something to be called "love" when in fact it may just be the short-lived lust. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 29, 2003 Report Share Posted December 29, 2003 We had 8 pages long discussion whether sikhs are allowed to have girlfriend/boyfriend or not and it has few nice points in it. I will request members to have a look on that discussion as well which you can find on http://www.sikhawareness.com/sikhawareness...topic.php?t=326 and it has really good points from both sides. Warning: Clashes of opinions are welcome but clashes of personalities are not. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khandaydhaar Posted December 29, 2003 Report Share Posted December 29, 2003 to me a love marriage means, dat u know da person pretty well b4 marraige and dat u are sure dat dis is da person fo u. love is a special thing and subtle too. we love God, our parents, our friends and even our dog (wen i had one, i did)...see love comes in all shapes and colours, but bottom line, its LOVE. so YES, u CAN love som1 without TOUCHING dem... i dnt see nething wrong in dat..and if ne1 does, den deyr VERY closed minded, and dey r only tryin to bring religion down to dere level of thinkin...guys think abt it. thats all i gota say, dnt make dis topic of love marriage anotha mess and somin to argue abt fo no reason. chill aite. and oh yes, if som1s amritdari, and dey have a gf/bf, den man dats screwed up! da sound of it jst sounds so bad. but yeh, if ur tryna know som1 beta and ur very good friends wid em, den its totally fine. deres nuttin wrong in havin a good friendship wid som1 and in da end if u get married datz even beta..it wud be great to marry som1 who will b ur friend and spouse who can understand and whom u can understand, wat more can u ask fo in a partner? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
princess_sonia Posted December 30, 2003 Report Share Posted December 30, 2003 Khandaydhaar to me a love marriage means, dat u know da person pretty well b4 marraige and dat u are sure dat dis is da person fo u. How do u determine what is the LIMITS of KNOWING someone? Well according to me, due to the nature of us, HUMANS, it is never sufficient. We need to know more and more and more, and what is the end? Kaam. I THINK, only A VERY FEW couples have OVERCOME the kaam to move on with spiritual completion. There is a VERY thin line where Love becomes Lust. Just have to be carefull and strong. We can be close and dear FRIENDS with the opposite gender, but people have to be VERY strong to keep that FRIENDSHIP intact, cause kaam is something that BOILS, and when it boils a tiny little bit more over the thin line, it infects the mind and body. So, gotta be carefull, and ANALYSE ur friendship with care and an open mind to make sure now and then that one is not trying to cross that thin line. Well thats what i think. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shasterkovich Posted December 30, 2003 Report Share Posted December 30, 2003 How do u determine what is the LIMITS of KNOWING someone? Well according to me, due to the nature of us, HUMANS, it is never sufficient. We need to know more and more and more, and what is the end? Kaam. I THINK, only A VERY FEW couples have OVERCOME the kaam to move on with spiritual completion. There is a VERY thin line where Love becomes Lust. Just have to be carefull and strong. We can be close and dear FRIENDS with the opposite gender, but people have to be VERY strong to keep that FRIENDSHIP intact, cause kaam is something that BOILS, and when it boils a tiny little bit more over the thin line, it infects the mind and body. So, gotta be carefull, and ANALYSE ur friendship with care and an open mind to make sure now and then that one is not trying to cross that thin line. Well thats what i think. The love between a man and a woman is not, and has nothing in common with, friendship. This is a very complex area. Generally speaking (and this is a gross simplification), the human brain is hardwired into monogamous habits. This is to protect the massive investment in energy, time and effort that goes into having kids and bringing them up to be adults. When choosing a mate, apart from the obvious attraction points (money, power, good looks, etc) the man looks for a surrogate mother and the woman a surrogate father. Hence, the sexual partners meeting voluntarily have similar qualities and even appearances to each other's parent, of the opposite sex. The mental bond between the 2 is called agape, and is a sort of selfish obsession, misleadingly called (in this rather limited language) "love". It has a lot to do with conceptions of terrritory and ownership. Glad to clear that up for you. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dilpreet Posted December 30, 2003 Author Report Share Posted December 30, 2003 HARI WROTE: Why?Have you surveyed the majority of Sikh as to wether they are for or against love marriage? Well.....i just meant that a lot of the Sikhs I know are against love maraiges....so from all the Sikhs i know the MAJORITY of them ARE against love marriages. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
princess_sonia Posted December 30, 2003 Report Share Posted December 30, 2003 I was just talking about the point that "there is nothing wrong about being a FRIEND with the opposite gender" not about LOVE between man and woman. I meant that that kind of "friendship can go out of "control" easily. well i think. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khandaydhaar Posted December 30, 2003 Report Share Posted December 30, 2003 so really i dnt get it? r u guys sayin dat its wrong to get to know som1 b4 u jump in to marry dem????? well if u do, den koo, i myself dont agree wid dat. so r u sayin dat one SHUDNT get to know da person b4 dey marry jst cuz u think dat da friendship cud make da ppl involeved develop feels fo each otha? man dis is getin confusing? so if uzz know beta den tell us kindly whether or not love marriage is WRONG OR NOT??????????????? and pls dnt start telln abt wat kinda bond a man and woman share and wateva dats all abt...cuz its getinn pretty confusing and goin off topic now. newayz its 'ones' own choice of how dey decide to choose dere spouse, whether through gettin to know dem or goin wid arranged marriage....and besides, how u say humans wanna know more and more, well i dnt think we CAN get to know som1 inside out so letz not get into dat, and besides deres nuttin wrong in gettin to know som1 wel enuf overall to decide whether uzz will have a good match and have a good chance of a healthy marriage. aite. nuttin else. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shasterkovich Posted December 30, 2003 Report Share Posted December 30, 2003 Hmm... Friendship is about getting to base 1. Marriage is way beyond the last base. All your base are belong to ... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JOYce Posted December 30, 2003 Report Share Posted December 30, 2003 I was just talking about the point that "there is nothing wrong about being a FRIEND with the opposite gender" not about LOVE between man and woman. I meant that that kind of "friendship can go out of "control" easily. well i think. Sorry Friend, But i hav totally a different approach towards UR views as for Friend 'n' Friendship - Love 'n' Lover. One more thing friendship dosnt define limits between friends. Its our blunder sociaty 'n' own narrow think horizons. And upto the talk of question I dont think there is anything which cant be controled if U determine 2 do so. As per me LOVE is like .... My love for you is deep, Because it's there even in my sleep. I enjoy the love that you give me, And I want you to know we will always be. My love for you is true, Because I didn't feel love till I found you. I will never love another so deep, I will always cherish you and I never wanna see you weep. Because we lasted so long, You and me will always belong Or so my heart said to me And so I responded it was meant to be Till the day of my death, My love for you will never skip a breath. You make me so happy, love has stricken me Sending me a beautiful angel so tender and sweet. My love for you grows stronger as time goes by, And by the hands of time, I swear never to say good bye. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lali Posted December 31, 2003 Report Share Posted December 31, 2003 i say .. Stay within ur own culture and ur own religion.. its for the best. and u will eventually see it in da long run.. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr §ingh Posted December 31, 2003 Report Share Posted December 31, 2003 I personally ..PERSONALLY think LOVE towards another person is nothing but lust..thus a "Love marriage" would just lead towards MORE lust-.. thus I think arrange marriages are better than "love marriages" thats my 2 cents bhull chukk maaf 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vaapaaraa Posted December 31, 2003 Report Share Posted December 31, 2003 Sorry Friend, But i hav totally a different approach towards UR views as for Friend 'n' Friendship - Love 'n' Lover. One more thing friendship dosnt define limits between friends. Its our blunder sociaty 'n' own narrow think horizons. And upto the talk of question I dont think there is anything which cant be controled if U determine 2 do so. As per me LOVE is like .... My love for you is deep, Because it's there even in my sleep. I enjoy the love that you give me, And I want you to know we will always be. My love for you is true, Because I didn't feel love till I found you. I will never love another so deep, I will always cherish you and I never wanna see you weep. Because we lasted so long, You and me will always belong Or so my heart said to me And so I responded it was meant to be Till the day of my death, My love for you will never skip a breath. You make me so happy, love has stricken me Sending me a beautiful angel so tender and sweet. My love for you grows stronger as time goes by, And by the hands of time, I swear never to say good bye. wow .. gr8 poem veer! 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.