kdsingh80 Posted April 9, 2015 Report Share Posted April 9, 2015 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... You are looking it from the feminist point of view, a movement of of developed countries of 20th century and greatly helped by science. 1699 was different time . Khalsa was supposed to be martial and at that times you need to be quite strong to be martial . Women at that time used to get married at 14-15 and produced 5-6 kids . infant mortality death from epidemics diseases were quite high.moreover martial communnities loose population at fast pace..Please tell how it was possible for women to have pregnancies in their prime youth and fighting war at the same time. It was simply not possible .That is why women who fought in war like Mai bhago were always few. For majority to fight in war , they have to renounce their duty of producing 4-5 kids and this mean death of that society at that time. If you want to blame anybody for sexism then blame god because it is the one who created this world in this way 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singh123456777 Posted April 9, 2015 Report Share Posted April 9, 2015 Baba hari Singh randhawa is doing katha at malton gurduwara in ontario canada and a few day ago he started this topic about women taking Amrit.. How can mata sahib Kaur be Khalsa do mata when she herself did not take Amrit? In suraj pratap/Prakash Granth there is no mention that Bibis took Amrit but in the same Granth there is no mention of guru gobind Singh Ji giving gurgaddi to Guru Granth Sahib Ji.. Does that mean we should stop believing ing Guru Granth Sahib Ji? Baba hari Singh also said that the daily dairy writer of guru gobind Singh Ji ( i think his name is heera Singh or hari Singh but I'm not sure) wrote every thing that happened each day up until 1708 when guru Ji joti jot smagey and his Granth is called Jodh Pothi... In that Granth the daily diary writer wrote that mata Gujjar Kaur and immediate family members INCLUDING women took Amrit in 1699.. Mata sahib kaur did not take Amrit on 1699 because she came 1 year and 18 days after 1699 and when she came she took Amrit... So I think there is no more debate.. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singh123456777 Posted April 9, 2015 Report Share Posted April 9, 2015 Dhan guru amar das Ji made women sikh missionary's... The first sikh ever was bibi nanaki.... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 9, 2015 Report Share Posted April 9, 2015 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 . As i mentioned earlier, Sikhi neither supports raw patriarchy model nor raw western feminism model. Sikhi is neutral and above both, as gurmat functions/ operates flows from unconditioned knowledge-awareness/gyan which exist in both male and female but beyond both perception of body/sexes differences, soul is universal is above from both sexes. Speaking from sikh theological point of view, Vahiguru(god) is above both male and female but also have full of attributes immanent form-Visible Sargun form is both described as male- purakh, and female as in sri dasam granth sahib which is interpreted both as shakti(life/creative/ destructive force)- feminine and weapon-shakti. Coming back to post Guru's history though, in all fairness, women in our community went through a lot. Sikh women went from centers (maniya system- preaching centers by sikh woman) established* for them by our Guru's in guru's time to house wives. Thanks to tribal pendus in the panth. *There were manji system (centers establishment where gursikhs were chosen to do parchar) was started by Guru Amar das ji, they were 22 manjiya initially strategically placed everywhere in india to do parchar. Here is the list of manjiya http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Manji_System and there were manjiya given to sikh woman as well to do parchar to other woman and give them empowerment. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnSikhGirl Posted May 5, 2015 Report Share Posted May 5, 2015 (edited) Found this recently when pasousing the Gurmat Rehet Maryada (DDT). It's wrtitten right in the Gurmat Rehet Maryada.... Since we have long established that 'spouse' means husband / wife then obviously its meaning that women are also supposed to take Amrit and this was from Bhai Chaupa Singh.... and this interpretation was written in the Gurmat Rehet Maryada (for all of you who consider DDT's Rehet Maryada as the only authentic one). Hoping this puts this auggestion of women not deserving Amrit to rest... Edited May 5, 2015 by Satkirin_Kaur 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koi Posted May 5, 2015 Report Share Posted May 5, 2015 Found this recently when pasousing the Gurmat Rehet Maryada (DDT). It's wrtitten right in the Gurmat Rehet Maryada.... Since we have long established that 'spouse' means husband / wife then obviously its meaning that women are also supposed to take Amrit and this was from Bhai Chaupa Singh.... and this interpretation was written in the Gurmat Rehet Maryada (for all of you who consider DDT's Rehet Maryada as the only authentic one). Hoping this puts this auggestion of women not deserving Amrit to rest... My question is simple and rhetorical. Other than talking Khande Di Pahul, how else would one become a Sikh? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnSikhGirl Posted May 5, 2015 Report Share Posted May 5, 2015 Apparently some think that women were never supposed to become Sikhs then?? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singh123456777 Posted May 6, 2015 Report Share Posted May 6, 2015 To make this matter clear guru Ji gave Amrit to woman... In the gojh pothi written by har Singh who is the daily diary writer of guru Ji he wrote the whole family of guru Ji took Amrit including women... This pothi can be found in hazur sahib... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhKhoj Posted May 6, 2015 Report Share Posted May 6, 2015 Prem Sumarg which is one of the most extensive (but therefore not unflawed) Rehatnama also talks about giving Pahul to women. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhKhoj Posted May 6, 2015 Report Share Posted May 6, 2015 There are some old books also claiming that Guru Gobind Singh used a karad and not khanda for the whole pahul ceremony, shall we also believe that? (Bansawlinama mentions use of Karad for complete Amrit Sanchar) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdsingh80 Posted May 7, 2015 Report Share Posted May 7, 2015 My question is simple and rhetorical. Other than talking Khande Di Pahul, how else would one become a Sikh? There was good discussion sikhnet regarding tradionalist vs reformists Now this is where it gets interesting, religious beliefs and traditions for Traditionalists and Reformists. Traditionalists have three Amrit ceremonies. The first, for Sahajdhari Sikhs, Charan Da Amrit, is where the Guru's feet is dipped in the Amrit, or now the Guru Granth Sahib is dipped in Amrit, and this Amrit is usually done for Udasis, or Sahajdhari Sikhs who want to go down the "easy path". The second type is Kirpan Da Amrit, which is done for Keshdhari Children at Birth, and for Keshdhari women, where certain banis are read, and the Amrit is stirred with the curved blade, Reformists have only one version of the Amrit ceremony for Men, Women and Children, which is a modified version of Khande Amrit, where only the straight blade is used to stir the Amrit, and the Panj Pyare are ELECTEDhttp://www.sikhnet.com/discussion/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=10524 So I guess there were other methods too for becoming sikhs apart from Khande daa amrit 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnSikhGirl Posted May 7, 2015 Report Share Posted May 7, 2015 But if women were given amrit on that first day (which was witnessed by the Moghul Spy who later wrote about it as an eye witness account, then shouldn't "traditionalist" be the ones having one Amrit for everyone? If it was done the first day, I don't see how that can be considered 'reformist'?? To call the ones who want to have separate Amrits for women, as 'traditional', is suggesting they are the ones who are correct as per the original way it was practiced. The word Reformist sounds like someone who is advocating change. Women did receive the same amrit as men in 1699 on that first day as written in eye witness account from an outsider who was spying on the event. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdsingh80 Posted May 7, 2015 Report Share Posted May 7, 2015 (edited) But if women were given amrit on that first day (which was witnessed by the Moghul Spy who later wrote about it as an eye witness account, then shouldn't "traditionalist" be the ones having one Amrit for everyone? If it was done the first day, I don't see how that can be considered 'reformist'?? To call the ones who want to have separate Amrits for women, as 'traditional', is suggesting they are the ones who are correct as per the original way it was practiced. The word Reformist sounds like someone who is advocating change. Women did receive the same amrit as men in 1699 on that first day as written in eye witness account from an outsider who was spying on the event. Don't trust everything you read , I read somewhere that there was no mughal spy, and the story was later cooked up. Baisakhi report of Abu Turani by Serjinder Singh » Wed Feb 25, 2009 10:28 am Waheguru ji ka khalsa Waheguru ji ki fateh World famous historian of Medieveal India Prof Irfan Habib at Aligarh Muslim University has spent his life time researching historical documents related to Mughal and earlier periords. As a tribute to the Sikhs he jointly with Prof J S Grewal collected all the available Persian documents that had even slightest mention of Guruji or sikhs and at the time of tercentenary of Khalsa, translated these into English and published as a book entitled "Sikh History from Persian Sources, Tulika, Indian History Congress 2001,2001". It is amazing to read from some mysterious person who appears to be more knowledgable about archives at Aligarh University that Irfan Habib or for that matter any other Sikh or non-sikk historian. We do not find any mention of such a document by Irfan Habib or Prof J S Grewal in their above mentioned publication that may be lying hidden at Aligarh to which only this mysterious person had access. Why doesn't this so resourceful person reveal him/herself with the story of his discovery? I feel this is the mischief of some over-zealous sikh to justify the oft-propagated standard narrative of Baisakhi of 1699 for which no contemporary or near contemporary account exists. A range of different brief versions of course we do find but not the one so close as by this "Abu Turani" to the current version in great detail as narrated these days by Sikh Parcharaks. Humbly Serjinder Singh http://www.sikhnet.com/discussion/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1641 Edited May 7, 2015 by kdsingh80 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnSikhGirl Posted May 7, 2015 Report Share Posted May 7, 2015 Okay so I also should not believe what I have read about suggesting that women should not have kandi di pahul?? Maybe we will never know then the actual truth. So why can't we go by what we have in the HERE and NOW. Which is Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji and examples of majority of sects all give both males and females kandi di pahul amrit. Even some Singhs at Hazoor Sahib when questioned, have no idea why they were giving women only kirpan amrit. If they don't know 'why' they are doing some practice, maybe it's time to question that practice. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdsingh80 Posted May 7, 2015 Report Share Posted May 7, 2015 Okay so I also should not believe what I have read about suggesting that women should not have kandi di pahul?? Maybe we will never know then the actual truth. So why can't we go by what we have in the HERE and NOW. Which is Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji and examples of majority of sects all give both males and females kandi di pahul amrit. Even some Singhs at Hazoor Sahib when questioned, have no idea why they were giving women only kirpan amrit. If they don't know 'why' they are doing some practice, maybe it's time to question that practice. At present there is no restriction on women to take Khanda amrit and may be at that time few women took that . but there is hardly evidence that majority of women took khanda amrit and fought side by side with men. Even Mata Sundri the wife of Guru Gobind singh lived for many years after the death of Guru Gobind singh and guided khalsa did not fight in wars. What people should not do is to rewrite the sikh history according to their beleif 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singh123456777 Posted May 7, 2015 Report Share Posted May 7, 2015 It is a known fact that women did take Amrit... There were some Bibis who did partake in battles but the percentage is really low. Most women were just housewives cause the Singhs usually went to battle. The exceptions are the likes of mata bhag Kaur and few others... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnSikhGirl Posted May 7, 2015 Report Share Posted May 7, 2015 At present there is no restriction on women to take Khanda amrit and may be at that time few women took that . but there is hardly evidence that majority of women took khanda amrit and fought side by side with men. Even Mata Sundri the wife of Guru Gobind singh lived for many years after the death of Guru Gobind singh and guided khalsa did not fight in wars. What people should not do is to rewrite the sikh history according to their beleif But does that mean that today's women should be prevented from fighting alongside men if they wish? Overall society mind has changed... women have stepped up to take on more prominent roles. Due to technological advances in society etc, women are no longer shackled to a kitchen and changing nappies all the time. Fighting wars now is more technology than brute physical strength. Just because at that time not many women fought (still we know SOME did as Singh123456777 mentioned !!!) but just because majority chose to stay home to have babies and mind house, doesn't mean that is how we should do things now. The world is not the same as it was then. More women are now finding courage to step up and fight... and WANT to do this so that they feel like they are also *directly* contributing to fighting injustice and tyranny...(its difficult to feel like you are directly contributing something important to the cause, if all you are doing is changing nappies and cooking dinner). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdsingh80 Posted May 7, 2015 Report Share Posted May 7, 2015 But does that mean that today's women should be prevented from fighting alongside men if they wish? Overall society mind has changed... women have stepped up to take on more prominent roles. Due to technological advances in society etc, women are no longer shackled to a kitchen and changing nappies all the time. Fighting wars now is more technology than brute physical strength. Just because at that time not many women fought (still we know SOME did as Singh123456777 mentioned !!!) but just because majority chose to stay home to have babies and mind house, doesn't mean that is how we should do things now. The world is not the same as it was then. More women are now finding courage to step up and fight... and WANT to do this so that they feel like they are also *directly* contributing to fighting injustice and tyranny...(its difficult to feel like you are directly contributing something important to the cause, if all you are doing is changing nappies and cooking dinner). Women at that were not prevented from fighting so there is no reason that today women should be prevented from fighting 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chatanga1 Posted May 10, 2015 Report Share Posted May 10, 2015 Found this recently when pasousing the Gurmat Rehet Maryada (DDT). It's wrtitten right in the Gurmat Rehet Maryada.... Since we have long established that 'spouse' means husband / wife then obviously its meaning that women are also supposed to take Amrit and this was from Bhai Chaupa Singh.... and this interpretation was written in the Gurmat Rehet Maryada (for all of you who consider DDT's Rehet Maryada as the only authentic one). Hoping this puts this auggestion of women not deserving Amrit to rest... Nice try but maybe a little less effort into deception may help her a lot. this has nothing to do with women being allowed to tyake amrit but the fact that DDT does not endorse only one married person being amritdhari and the other non-amritdhari. They along with others will not give amrit to people who are married but have come alone to receive amrit. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnSikhGirl Posted May 10, 2015 Report Share Posted May 10, 2015 Nice try but maybe a little less effort into deception may help her a lot. this has nothing to do with women being allowed to tyake amrit but the fact that DDT does not endorse only one married person being amritdhari and the other non-amritdhari. They along with others will not give amrit to people who are married but have come alone to receive amrit. Actually this is in the GRM, and it's quoting Bhai Chaupa Singh as saying that both spouses need to take Amrit. Since two spouses can not be male... then how do you interpret that?? Since spouses are male/female in Sikhi, that means that both spouses including the WOMAN had to have taken amrit! duh! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drawrof Posted May 17, 2015 Report Share Posted May 17, 2015 Prem Sumarag Granth/param sumarag granth which is believed have been written in 1701 talks of amrit sanchaar for women. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guransh SIngh Posted November 3, 2021 Report Share Posted November 3, 2021 I guess that we all agree that Baba Nand Singh ji is the shiromani of all sant mahapursh and himself got his divine knowledge by Guru sahib. Well, he never said that women should be given Kirpan di pahul, khande di pahul is for each and every Sikh or Sikhni. Guru Gobind Singh jee loved women as his daughters and Mai Bhago jee and Mata jee and many other women were shastardhari and part of the Khalsa fauj. In Nanaksar under Baba Gurdev Singh jee, khande di pahul is administered to everyone irrespective of gender. So kyon manda akkhiye jit jamai raajaan Bhul Chuk Maaf Sat Kartar 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paapiman Posted November 3, 2021 Report Share Posted November 3, 2021 9 hours ago, Guransh SIngh said: Baba Nand Singh ji is the shiromani of all sant mahapursh IMHO, we must not call any one Sant as the "Shromani" Sant. There were other Gurmukh Brahamgyanis, who were of the same avastha as Sant Baba Nand Singh jee. Â Bhul chuk maaf 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guransh SIngh Posted November 3, 2021 Report Share Posted November 3, 2021 2 minutes ago, paapiman said: IMHO, we must not call any one Sant as the "Shromani" Sant. There were other Gurmukh Brahamgyanis, who were of the same avastha as Sant Baba Nand Singh jee. Â Bhul chuk maaf Maafi jee, i meant according to the sau sakhi bachan of Guru jee. 2 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.