Was khanda amrit given to women in during 1699 or recently ?

[CdnSikhGirl]

savinderpalsingh ji, can you please explain to me why women would break rehet by giving birth? And please include references... Why would women giving birth mean they can not follow rehet? As far as I know, giving birth does not require intoxicants, cutting hairs, adultry, or (kutha) meat... and those are the 4 kurehits that would mean needing to retake Amrit. Also, what about women who chose not to have children?

Myself, I chose to never have kids, and pursue a career in the military, and I follow SRM. Am I still less qualified to have kande de pahul than any male in present time, who never actually embodies the 'soldier' aspect? I know plenty of SIkh men who work at cushy desk jobs and would never fight, yet I have made a career of it.

It seems to me, that you guys are actively looking for reasons to put women into lower roles than men. You are approaching everything with the mindset to find something.... anything to use as justfication. Is this not ego (male ego)? Is this not a case of "I am more deserving than any female, just because I happened to be born a male" because this is really what it sounds like. It's gone beyond hanging up the 'boys club no girls allowed' sign, and gone to researching medical books for any hint of a suggestion that girls really have cooties to use as justification to ban them from your blanket fort.

[CdnSikhGirl]

Interestingly, S. Kartar Singh Khalsa, Jatha Bhindran (Mehta) quoted Bhayee Chaupa Singh, “Jo Sikh, Sikhani Noo Khande Dee Pahul Na Deve, So Tankhahiya” (The Sikh, who does not give ‘Khande Dee Pahul’ to Sikhani (Sikh-woman), is a culprit). (See: ‘Khalsa Jeevan and Gurmat Rahat Maryada’ written by Sant Kartar Singh Khalsa, Jatha Bhindran (Mehta), page 180, edition 1977).

[Koi]

I particularly like Sant Jarnail Singh Ji's point where they mention Peevaho Pahul Khande Dhaar, no where does it say Kirpan Dhaar.

Without taking amrit, how does one adopt a Guru?

[Anandpuria]

The oldest manuscripts of Chaupa Singh have the sentence "Jo sikh, sikhni noo khande di pahul deve so tankhahyia". An oldest copy was lying in Sikh Reference Library. Fortunately it was copied before blue star. It has the sentence "Jo sikh, sikhni nu khande di pahul deve so tankhahia". It is available in print to verify.

[savinderpalsingh]

The oldest manuscripts of Chaupa Singh have the sentence "Jo sikh, sikhni noo khande di pahul deve so tankhahyia". An oldest copy was lying in Sikh Reference Library. Fortunately it was copied before blue star. It has the sentence "Jo sikh, sikhni nu khande di pahul deve so tankhahia". It is available in print to verify.

i just found the english copy of the "chaupa singh rehatnama" submitted by W.H. Mcleod

it seems piara singh padams copy of Chaupa Singhs rehatnama was editted while compiling all rehatnama's together

Edited November 21, 2014 by savinderpalsingh

[Matheen]

I'd rather go with Sant Kartar Singh Ji than McLeod.

It's ludicrous to think that Khande Batte da Amrit was not administered to women.

[savinderpalsingh]

There is also oldest copy of hand written manuscript by chaupa singh . in gurmukhi inside the translation which has same thing

[CdnSikhGirl]

So I guess Sikhi was only meant for men then? All the seva, the leadership roles, and even baptism were meant for only men? So what does that say about the position of women? Not even good enough to receive amrit... yet they also say that those who don't receive amrit are lower than low. So read between the lines, its apparent what was being said about women.

I find it very very difficult to believe that Guru Ji would put women so far beneath men, when Gurbani says that everyone are spiritually FEMALE and the only male is Waheguru Ji. And all the Gurus worked so hard to elevate ALL humans to being equal. And that these bodies are illusion and temporary. When Amrit is taken for SPIRITUAL reasons, then according to that rehit above, nobody should receive khandi de pahul then, since we are all female spiritually. Sri Hazoor Sahib has also other practices which go against gurmat...

[jaikaara]

Satkirin ..rather making it a ego issue i feel we need to introspect ..say if in case women were not given amrit ..what would be the reason..i have lived in india since i was born..its been 37 years ..in 37 years of my life its been a few years i started seeing women wearing a dastaar...i do not know of the rest of you ..it is these days that i find sikh women who do not do shringaar..

i maybe wrong ..but in my personal opinion if there was amrit sanskaar for women ..i do not think the maryada was the same ..Punjabi women were known for their beauty since ancient times ..i belong to a community which had the custom of bride price in the olden days ..i come across mention of high bride prices being paid for women of our clan from Punjab and Himachal because they were known to be extremely beautiful. Rehat maryada prevents making any changes to kes which involves cutting them by any method.

Is there any account by any historian who would remark at the unusual practice of turbaned women...we need to find this ..if anyone has any source then please share.

So I guess Sikhi was only meant for men then? All the seva, the leadership roles, and even baptism were meant for only men? So what does that say about the position of women? Not even good enough to receive amrit... yet they also say that those who don't receive amrit are lower than low. So read between the lines, its apparent what was being said about women.

I find it very very difficult to believe that Guru Ji would put women so far beneath men, when Gurbani says that everyone are spiritually FEMALE and the only male is Waheguru Ji. And all the Gurus worked so hard to elevate ALL humans to being equal. And that these bodies are illusion and temporary. When Amrit is taken for SPIRITUAL reasons, then according to that rehit above, nobody should receive khandi de pahul then, since we are all female spiritually. Sri Hazoor Sahib has also other practices which go against gurmat...

[CdnSikhGirl]

Its in Guru Ji's 52 Hukams that ALL Sikhs are to tie turbans. Also, SGGSJ says " Let the total awareness be the turban on your head" and it does not state that is for men only. I believe there is another spot that says to comb hair and tie turban twice a day.... but I am not sure on that one.

And why would Maryada not be the same? There is no restriction on jewelry etc. Just piercings for ears and nose for 'hanging ornaments' other than that jewelry is allowed.

And.... how would wearing a dastar take away from beauty???? WHat are you trying to say? That we are not as beautiful because we chose to tie a dastar? Good thing I am not wearing it to be 'beautiful' then....

Edited April 3, 2015 by Satkirin_Kaur

[CdnSikhGirl]

Aha the link I was trying to find...

"From the scholar Ghulam Mohyiuddin, an emissary to the mughal emperor, who observed the first amrit sanchar, vaisakhi 1699, "Though orthodox men have opposed him, about twenty thousand men and women have taken baptism of steel at his hand on the first day.The Guru has also told the gathering: I'll call myself Gobind Singh only if I can make the eek sparrows pounce upon the hawks and tear them; only if one combatant of my force equals a lakh and a quarter of the enemy."

20,000 men AND women. no restrictions on who is a combatant.

in my research, persian and mughal sources are more reliable than sikh sources, who often wrote about events 50 years after they happened, and then those documents were clearly edited to favor hindus..."

[jaikaara]

you are thinking emotionally

Its in Guru Ji's 52 Hukams that ALL Sikhs are to tie turbans. Also, SGGSJ says " Let the total awareness be the turban on your head" and it does not state that is for men only. I believe there is another spot that says to comb hair and tie turban twice a day.... but I am not sure on that one.

And why would Maryada not be the same? There is no restriction on jewelry etc. Just piercings for ears and nose for 'hanging ornaments' other than that jewelry is allowed.

And.... how would wearing a dastar take away from beauty???? WHat are you trying to say? That we are not as beautiful because we chose to tie a dastar? Good thing I am not wearing it to be 'beautiful' then....

[jaikaara]

favor hindus !!!! please...its akj internal jargon !!!

Aha the link I was trying to find...

"From the scholar Ghulam Mohyiuddin, an emissary to the mughal emperor, who observed the first amrit sanchar, vaisakhi 1699, "Though orthodox men have opposed him, about twenty thousand men and women have taken baptism of steel at his hand on the first day.The Guru has also told the gathering: I'll call myself Gobind Singh only if I can make the eek sparrows pounce upon the hawks and tear them; only if one combatant of my force equals a lakh and a quarter of the enemy."

20,000 men AND women. no restrictions on who is a combatant.

in my research, persian and mughal sources are more reliable than sikh sources, who often wrote about events 50 years after they happened, and then those documents were clearly edited to favor hindus..."

[CdnSikhGirl]

favor hindus !!!! please...its akj internal jargon !!!

The quote above it though, was from a book... not written by AKJ.... but was written from a DIRECT observer of the first amrit sanchar 1699. And he directly states man AND women both took amrit that day! 20,000 men AND women... Being of Islam background where gender is very much differentiated, I can not see why he would specifically mention "and women"

Edited April 4, 2015 by Satkirin_Kaur

[CdnSikhGirl]

Also:

According to Gurbani and Vaars, every person must take Amrit (Naam) to become a Sikh of the Guru. The method from 1469-1699 was charan Amrit which was changed to Khanda Amrit later on. Many scholars have given different reasons but not a single one asserts that it was a departure from earlier traditions or reserved for men only. Guru Gobind Singh Ji in 1699 implemented the same Gurbani principles according to which Naam is obtained from Satguru. The reason Amrit preparation method is not mentioned in Gurbani is because 1) Vaheguru has given Satguru the prerogative to choose any method to prepare Amrit 2) Guru Sahib did not want Sikhs to assume that there is only one method of preparing the Amrit and 3) Abrogation would have become accepted in Gurmat and Gurbani because abrogating charan Amrit method for Khanda Amrit in Gurbani would have opened the door to other principles. Also, method itself is not a principle. The principle is to obtain Naam according to the method prescribed by Satguru. This is clearly stated in Gurbani in almost every Shabad. There are other reasons but these are sufficient for this discussion. Vaars are no different in this regard according to which charan Amrit was given to Sikhs (which includes women).

Since Guru Sahib eliminated the spiritual distinctions between men and women, they prescribed one rehat for both starting to end. There is not a single spiritual principle in Gurbani that is reserved for a single sex only. Hence, Khanda Amrit being the medium to obtain Naam and enter the path of Sikhi could not have been reserved for men only. It is not rational to assume that with the change of method, women became excluded from obtaining Naam. Otherwise, proponents of such a ridiculous theory must explain the method of initiating women and giving them Naam up to and after 1699. Further, asserting that Khanda Amrit was introduced for men means: All ten Gurus are not one in letter and spirit for the last Guru departed from His predecessors which is contrary to what Gurbani states and that the last Guru introduced new injunctions which were never given any time to develop and be implemented into the lives of the Sikhs. In this view, the tenth Guru did not fulfill the mission of Guru Nanak Dev Ji but pushed it into a different and opposite direction. Such notions go against the fundamentals of Sikhi. Hence, by relying on any document that states that Amrit is for men only, one is going against the teachings of Gurbani. One cannot seriously claim that all the Shabads in which a devotee is begging Satguru for Naam Amrit is written for men only because women are not qualified for this blessing. Gurbani is supreme and all other historical documents must be interpreted and accepted according to Gurmat. History cannot be used to defy Gurbani principles be it Amrit for men, meat eating, opium usage etc.

Now to Mata Sahib Devan Ji. Granted her name is not written as Kaur in her rehatnama but not a single document proves that she was not given Amrit or Naam. Since a Sikh must marry a Sikh, it is ridiculous to assume that Guru Sahib, being a Sikh, married a non-Sikh woman who had not even received Naam. Again, if not Amrit then what was the method of giving Naam to women? What is the historical proof and what Gurbani Shabad proves that there must be two different methods? Dr. Trilochan Singh was at the forefront of using Mata Ji’s correct name as Sahib Devan but even he did not make the claim that she was not given Naam. According to him, she had received Naam through charan pahul and therefore, did not need to receive Naam again through Khanda Amrit. This is why her name did not change. The same goes for Bhai Nand Lal, Bhai Kanhaiya and many others. Those who wished to take Khanda Amrit changed their names but the ones who did not and had already obtained Naam through charan Amrit became members of the Khalsa. Khalsa is a Sikh, Sant, Saadh, Brahmgyani etc. These are not different personalities but different names of the same ideal God-oriented person be it a man or a woman. Khalsa is not a gender but a character and an ideal person in whom Guru Sahib’s power is vested. Nowhere has Guru Sahib ever suggested that His roop lies with men only.

Whether Singh Sabha changed the Sikh teachings or simply brought them to limelight is a separate topic. Dr. Gurdarshan Singh Dhillon has already proven the latter case in his articles. Basically, if a former case, it would have become a cult and a separate faction. Many great Sikhs became its proponents. Sant Attar Singh, Bhai Randhir Singh and Taksal do not believe that Amrit is or ever was for men only. I highly doubt Singh Sabha could influence such Sikhs with their arguments to change their understanding about Sikhi.

Bhai Chaupa Singh rehatnama is altered just like all other rehatnamas. No rehatnama exists in its original form. All other historical texts have different versions. Also, a rehatnama is something that explains rehat as defined by Gurbani. If Gurbani does not support it, then its rehat cannot be accepted. Prem Sumarag granth supports giving pahul to women. I remember reading in Gur Pad Prem Parkash that women took Amrit in 1699 including wives of Guru Sahib. Mata Sahib Kaur Ji came in 1701 according to historical sources. Giani Gian Singh writes that her Anand Karaj was performed after she was given Amrit. Guru Sahib’s hukamnama written to sangat of Kabul clearly commands them to take Amrit from Panj Pyare. Was it addressed to men only? Are men the only sangat?

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence meaning that just because it is hard to find women with ‘Kaur’ names in history does not mean there were none nor does it lead to the conclusion that Amrit was for men only. Such a premise does not support this conclusion and it is a logical fallacy. Women being part of Panj Pyare is a separate topic but no true Sikh of the Guru can claim that Amrit is or ever was for men only. It is a method of initiation and imparting Naam to the devotee. Since women have equal rights in religion and can equally tread the spiritual path, they are equal receivers of Amrit. Guru Rakha

[CdnSikhGirl]

Also:

Was Chaupa Singh the "culprit" as stated in this book? Did he revert back to the Hindu way of thinking regarding women? His rehetnama also apparently states that women should view their husbands as "God" - I seem to remember this statement somewhere in the smritis as well??? In any case, Gurbani actually says there is only ONE we are to see as God... and that's Waheguru... so doesn't that statement of telling women to view their husbands as God, actually go against what's in SGGSJ? Who is higher authority? SGGSJ or Chaupa Singh's Rhetnama?

Edited April 4, 2015 by Satkirin_Kaur

[jaikaara]

Satkirin ..i understand history can never be unbiased..and please be clear on my stand ..I am not against women taking amrit and tying dastaars...this is their choice..i am not in favor of curbing one's choice..my only question is there was something different way back which i had seen and now something different emerging ..my feeling is something is being infused by certain groups with a weird idea to cut off from the roots..as we clearly see anti Dasam lobby ..so please do not take me as one of the male chauvinists who thinks of women as a weaker gender .. ..i cannot comment on Bhai Chaupa singh ji since i have no knowledge

Also:

Was Chaupa Singh the "culprit" as stated in this book? Did he revert back to the Hindu way of thinking regarding women? His rehetnama also apparently states that women should view their husbands as "God" - I seem to remember this statement somewhere in the smritis as well??? In any case, Gurbani actually says there is only ONE we are to see as God... and that's Waheguru... so doesn't that statement of telling women to view their husbands as God, actually go against what's in SGGSJ? Who is higher authority? SGGSJ or Chaupa Singh's Rhetnama?

[jaikaara]

Was Chaupa Singh the "culprit" as stated in this book? Did he revert back to the Hindu way of thinking regarding women? His rehetnama also apparently states that women should view their husbands as "God" - I seem to remember this statement somewhere in the smritis as well??? In any case, Gurbani actually says there is only ONE we are to see as God... and that's Waheguru... so doesn't that statement of telling women to view their husbands as God, actually go against what's in SGGSJ? Who is higher authority? SGGSJ or Chaupa Singh's Rhetnama?

I do not agree to playing blame game on the hindus ..if that was that true then there would be no women scholars nor would there be women priests conducting religious rituals ..and i know a woman who voluntarily conducts pooja...so please its better we keep our hatred in our pockets.

[CdnSikhGirl]

Except that Chaupa Singh was of Brahmin background...

In his rhetnama as I have showed also says for women to view their husbands as God and also fast for them. That is the top of her religious duty according to him.

Not only is this anti gurmat when we look to SGGSJ for support, but both those statements are almost word for word from Hindu scriptures. That can't be mere coincidence. There are other clues in his rhetnama as well... For example he instructs to awaken and salute the sun with Namaste, and then Fateh to the singhs. First of all, Sikhs awaken before dawn, and second Sikhs do not 'salute' the sun with Namaste. This is not hatred... I do not hate Hindus. I was merely stating the obvious, that Chaupa Singhs rhetnama contains very Hindu ideology especially his views of women.

The reason I get wound up is because it seems like everyone on here actively look for reasons to support restricting Bibian instead of looking for evidence to support equal inclusion. For example, absence of proof is NOT proof of absence but everyone jumps automatically to that conclusion which shows where their thinking is, even if it's subconscious. If they were truly supportive of Sikh women then they would instead go looking for proof that they WERE treated equally and given the same opportunities, rather than ACTIVELY looking for any shred of proof to exclude them.

Proof of this was in your statement of 'we should ask why women would have been excluded' instead of suggesting that we should dig deeper to find proof that they WERE included (in Gurbani, in history sources outside of Sikh like the Mughal spy I posted above who was present on that first day and gave an eye witness account) instead you chose to think it more likely that women were excluded and that we should just accept it and ask why. This is because everyone on here so far chose to dig for proof that women were excluded (all of which has been circumstantial) rather than actually looking for any proof (which does exist) that they were treated equally.

Edited April 4, 2015 by Satkirin_Kaur

[harsharan000]

Sister,

whether khanda amrit was given to women during 1699 or recently ..... is something which creates confusion to some, or irritation to others.

The thing is, society in general has done a lot of unjustices to women ...... when the Truth is women are bodily genders fashioned so by Nature, but there is another truth also, the jeevas, the atmas, in them are of the same Divine nature just as in men. And this is the last reality.

Whether in men or women, the souls in them are trapped as prisoners, and the fact is there is another Amrit placed by Akal Purukh within us, and given to each one of us in equal measure.

The thing is, each one of us has to drink of that Amrit, in order to free ourselves from Maya and merge in Him.

For that purpose, following are some words of Dhan Guru Ram Das Maharaj in Raag Kalyan, which if followed we can fulfil the purpose of our lives:

Har Har naam amrit ras meethaa gurmat sehjay peejai.
The Name of the Lord, Har, Har, is Ambrosial Nectar, the most Sweet and Sublime Essence; through the Guru's Teachings, drink it in with intuitive ease.

na-o darvaaj navay dar feekay ras amrit dasvay chu-eejai.
There are nine doors, but the taste of these nine doors is bland and insipid. The Essence of Ambrosial Nectar trickles down through the Tenth Door.

He says, the Ambrosial nectar is already within you, just get above the nine portals through His Simran, where one is connected and surrounded by Maya, and enter the tenth door, there where that Nectar is available at all times.

Whosoever wadbaghee jeeva reaches there, be it man or woman, can surely savour it and become pure paviter, free from all ego/mind/maya ....which are the cause of our bondages in the mayavee creation.

Sat Sree Akal.

Edited April 4, 2015 by harsharan000

[Singh123456777]

Bhudda dal has a dera of nihang singhni's who are just like mata sahib kaur(devan) and mata bhag Kaur.. They have taken full Amrit just as men and they wear dumalas and carry shastars. This dera is in Haryana..

Jathedar Akali Baba Prem Singh stays at that dera time to time...

[Guest]

Bhudda dal has a dera of nihang singhni's who are just like mata sahib kaur(devan) and mata bhag Kaur.. They have taken full Amrit just as men and they wear dumalas and carry shastars. This dera is in Haryana..

Jathedar Akali Baba Prem Singh stays at that dera time to time...

Great notion of sikh women equality. Hopefully some tribal pendu taksalis can take note of this and get off their male patriarchy ground.

[savinderpalsingh]

Great notion of sikh women equality. Hopefully some tribal pendu taksalis can take note of this and get off their male patriarchy ground.

you seriously dont miss a chance to disrespect other gursikhs do you?

and you are after spirituality , there are so many holes which until you cover them will keep leaking out .

[CdnSikhGirl]

you seriously dont miss a chance to disrespect other gursikhs do you?

and you are after spirituality , there are so many holes which until you cover them will keep leaking out .

Be careful of teapot calling kettle black, as Singnis are your sisters, mother, aunts, etc. And you haven't missed a beat in disrespecting them with the male patriarchy model of Sikhi. Spirituality is BEYOND physical gender.

[jaikaara]

The problem is ..there is one camp who simply doesnt want to accept women. another camp which accepts women with conditions applied , if we had valiant women like Mai Bhago and Mata Sahib Devi/Devaa ..we do not know how they were part of the Khalsa and how were they initiated.

Best is ..follow what you feel ..Andar Hukame Sabko ..Baahar Hukam Na Koe...