Jump to content

Diary Of Sikh Woman: Why I Cannot Get Married


Guest Sikh Woman
 Share

Recommended Posts

I have not read anywhere whereby Guruji Maharaj specifically asked for women to not rid themselves of facial hair. Nowhere is it written.

Where has it been written that men specifically should not rid themselves of facial hair? It hasn’t because rehit is not gender specific.

In my humble opinion, I very much doubt Guruji Maharaj would want Sikh women to look 'butch' and like men. The requirement for keeping a beard is aimed at men and not women.

Butch like men? Do you go out much? We have told you that almost all women have some facial hair; it is not butch like men. You are talking about a condition called PCOS which causes women to grow excessive hair. There are medical treatments for women in those conditions to treat the root cause of hormonal imbalance. But then, that is an individual decision and no one should have to make any change to themselves to make others happy. If you cannot accept the natural facial hair a woman grows, I don’t believe you are actually attracted to women.

Otherwise why didn't Guruji ask for womens head when he created the 1st Panj Pyare? Or at least a mix of men and women? If the requirement for men and women are identical, then surely he would have called for womens head as well. Obviously women back in the day could not wield a sword or fight in battle like men so men were chosen. Since Guruji saw the difference between the 2 genders therefore it is only logical that the requirement for the 5K's for women are not identical to men.

He did not ask for men’s head either. He asked for a head and only men stood up. Guru Sahib had no objection to women wielding a sword. Mai Bhago is a prime example.

As for the argument that hair is natural and should be left uncut, that is pure nonsense. We are not born with a rule book in our hands stating what is natural and what isn't. If it is so unnatural to cut hair, Waheguru Ji would have made cutting hair painful or resulting in death. This argument is pure nonsense.

In that sense, then men should also remove their hair.

As for the OP stating Gillette has brainwashed the masses, she is obviously quite ignorant to history of mankind and has never heard of 'threading'. As soon as humans found a way to cut their hair, they did it. You can see this in all cultures and has existed hundreds of years.

And there is also a time now when men shave their beard. Should singhs also do the same to fit into societies conditioned view of beauty?

Men and women are naturally attracted to beauty and there is nothing wrong in that nor is it 'shallow'. It is only shallow when that is the ONLY basis when looking for a partner. Those who are arguing that it is 'shallow' or 'unnatural' have a twisted view of reality. From a psychological standpoint I believe we humans 'need' beauty. That is why we wax/ polish our cars, paint our houses, cut the lawn, iron our clothes...etc, etc. Without beauty, life becomes depressing.

The reality is that no one actually knows how to find a partner which is why most fail in their marriage. If people understood beauty comes from the qualities of a person, infidelity would not be common. But it is due to people’s weakness to beauty that they lose love for their partner and begin to look at other women.

And why is beauty only important for a woman? Is it so that you can be sexually attracted to women? Perhaps you should take a look at yourself in the mirror. If women are happy with themselves, then you do not need to be concerned for us.

Truth is that you are not a suitable partner for any of Guru Gobind Singh Jee’s daughters; you are far too manipulative, controlling, retarded, narrow-minded and blind. I suggest you look elsewhere; there are plenty of non-sikh women that fit into your conditioned view of beauty and many would be blind enough to fall for a truly ugly person like yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have not read anywhere whereby Guruji Maharaj specifically asked for women to not rid themselves of facial hair.

This is because all Sikhs have been asked to keep kesh. It is not gender specific and that is why you cannot find it in reference to either females or males. Have you even read the rehat maryada - seems like you haven't and are simply going by your own opinion. In the rehat maryada it says all sikhs must not remove any hair on their body as hair is considered 'ang'. I did explain this above but it seems like you have not understood it.

Nowhere is it written. In my humble opinion, I very much doubt Guruji Maharaj would want Sikh women to look 'butch' and like men.

The Guru said women and men should keep their hair. He did not say women must look like men. It is your opinion that women who keep hair are trying to be like men and will be 'butch' but that is YOUR opinion, women who keep hair are actually being women i.e. themselves. In sikhi the natural women saroop is accepted and celebrated just like men with beards are accepted and celebrated as being khalsa roop.

Currently in our society women are expected to look like preadolescent teenagers with no facial hair, no pubic hair etc. Let me ask you this - how is this image accurate or the truth of what women actually look like? Real woman have hair.

When you get married your wife will have hair too but you will ask her to remove it because you cannot love her otherwise. That is because you have been conditioned from birth due to your exposure to never realise the truth. In fact in current society there are some women who don't like men with beards - they have been conditioned from birth to not like it - so why don't you just cut your beard because men are not supposed to look like gorillas. Do you see how what your saying doesn't make sense. Women and men in Sikhi are told to keep all kesh as this is the natural saroop or form of human beings.

The requirement for keeping a beard is aimed at men and not women.

This is not the sikh teachings. Your completely lost - the requirement is not about keeping beard and turban. In your life Sikhi is simplified to a set of dogmatic views that Sikhs are men with beard and turbans. That is completely inaccurate and a lay persons approach. Sikhs are a distinct set of humans where neither the male nor female removes kesh. This is because as Sikhs we are taught that our soul is in the body of a man or a woman. We must look after that body as it is a vessel carrying our genderless souls. Looking after our body according to sikh rehat is keeping all our bodily kesh intact.

Otherwise why didn't Guruji ask for womens head when he created the 1st Panj Pyare? Or at least a mix of men and women? If the requirement for men and women are identical, then surely he would have called for womens head as well.

This is another inaccurate statement. The Guru did not ask for a man to come forward - he asked for a Sikh. As sikhs we are genderless souls in the body of a man or woman. At that time the souls that came forward were all in the bodies of men. The Guru cannot decline them and say actually no, you have to be in the body of a woman or man or vice versa. The guru did not discriminate based on gender so he accepted them because of the quality of their soul.

Just because they were souls in men - it doesn't mean that Sikhi is not for females or females cannot be in the panj pyare. The selection of panj pyare is not based on gender - panj pyre selection is based on the quality of your soul. That is the most beautiful thing about our religion - we do not discriminate on gender.

We are the only religion to truly accept females and give them the same rights, responsibilities and opportunities as men. Why should we have a separate set of rules for a soul that is in the body of a woman? What kind of religion would say men must keep hair and women must remove hair. Sikhi is far beyond this and has accepted all men and women in their true hair keeping state.

This reminds me how the Greeks and Arabs decided that they were not going to train their women in warfare or martial arts because they were 'women'. Spartans at that time were the only race that decided it was utter nonsense and gave their girls the opportunities. And actually at that time, the Spartans were made fun of for doing this and if you read history it is clear the amount of mockery the arabs did saying it was ‘harming’ the girls. I am very proud to be a Sikh as our religion is the only religion that has not confined or boxed its daughters to hair removal like the rest of the world. As daughters of the khalsa we are free completely to be at one with who we are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously women back in the day could not wield a sword or fight in battle like men so men were chosen. Since Guruji saw the difference between the 2 genders therefore it is only logical that the requirement for the 5K's for women are not identical to men.

Your statement has so much sexism in it that I don't even know where to start. Women can not wield swords? Women cannot fight in battle? So who was Mai Bhago then??

Also you’re the one who is seeing difference between the two genders. The Guru never said there was ever a difference between the 2 genders. In Sikhi we are described as having a soul in the body of a man or woman and that we must not discriminate or be sexist to that vessel that carries our soul. You are a complete shame of a singh if you think only men carry 5Ks.

With any kind of organization be it religious or social in it's infancy there will be pragmatism. Pragmatism is when one is able to see thing in a balanced manner. In time, dogmatism takes over and rules are applied in a dogmatic way. People who are pragmatic are able to think in multi dimensions whereas dogmatic people think in single dimensions.

Sorry but your the one who is thinking in a single dimension. Also there is no 'grey' area on kesh that we need to sit and work out what was actually meant. The Guru was very clear that all his Sikh (males and females) would keep kesh. In the rehat maryada it is clearly written that all bodilyhair must be kept and at every amrit sanchaar people will say the same. In fact just turn up to your gurdwara and ask them and they will say the same. There is no need to call us dogmatic just because you don't want to accept the sikh teachings. Who in their right mind would say that only men can be Sikhs or only men can be in the panj pyare or that only men can wield swords. only men should keep hair. You are the most sexist, discriminating human being I have ever met.

Lets take the US constitution as an example. The US constitution states the US citizenry has the 'right to bare arms'. This was incorporated into the constitution in order ensure that the citizenry were well armed in case the government became tyrannical. Also back in the day, you were on your own in some distant farmland and times were dangerous. You needed guns to protect yourself
Those who are dogmatic today will say 'I should be able to have any kind of weapon as the constitution said I have the right to bare arms'. 'Thats what the founding fathers said and thats that'. Should the average civilian be allowed to own a bazooka? How about rocket grenade launchers? Drones? Heat seeking missiles? Obviously some sort of pragmatism is needed here.

I am not sure if it registered with you but as Sikhs we don't have a grey area on kesh - we don't need to sit and think about what did the Guru really mean. Our rehat, amrit sanchaar and history has made it very clear and obvious that hair is accepted on both females and males. It would be such a hypocritical religion if it only accepted hair on men and not on women.

You just want to find a way of justifying that only men can keep hair so that you can ask women to remove their hair- however even if I followed your logic and said ok it was only for men - then it begs the question why not women. You say because women are not supposed to have facial hair - well clearly that is not true because all women grow it. Women are supposed to have facial hair. The problem is people like you do not accept that this is the female saroop. In sikhi however we are fully accepting of both the male and female saroop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for the argument that hair is natural and should be left uncut, that is pure nonsense. We are not born with a rule book in our hands stating what is natural and what isn't.

We do have a rule book - the rehat maryada. It says hair is 'ang. It is not nonsense - what you are saying is nonsense that females should not keep their kesh. Why would the Sikh religion only ask its men to keep their hair. What kind of hypocritical religion would do that. You are clearly brainwashed and conditioned by society because you want women to remove hair. However your opinion does not count - Sikhi has made it clear that all sikhs - males and females must keep all kesh as this is the true human form i.e. saroop of all men and women.

If it is so unnatural to cut hair, Waheguru Ji would have made cutting hair painful or resulting in death. This argument is pure nonsense.

This is the most absurd statement I am yet to read. Firstly hair is natural. The definition of natural is existing in or derived from nature; not made or caused by humankind. Our body with our hair is what is the human saroop. Secondly waheguru doesn't cause instant death or punishment if you loose a part of yourself. I am a surgeon and I can cut off your leg and you won't die. Are you trying to say if you loose a part of your body and you do not die that that part of your body was not natural? What about people in car crashes who lose limbs, fingers etc and carrying on living?

Also it is so silly to say - well waheguru should have made it so that when our hair is removed that we die - only then would I accept hair is natural. You don't need to have death or pain to see what is natural. Please speak to the hippy movement as they accepted hair as natural - in fact all of society would say our natural human state is with our hair. Your argument is pure nonsense and it would be so impractical for the human species to die every time their hair fell off accidentally e.g. friction from a fall. Please speak some logic because this is such a tangent point. By the way if you want to experience pain on hair removal – please go and get a bikini wax.

As for the OP stating Gillette has brainwashed the masses, she is obviously quite ignorant to history of mankind and has never heard of 'threading'. As soon as humans found a way to cut their hair, they did it. You can see this in all cultures and has existed hundreds of years.

In the Sikh culture hair is not removed. You are ignorant of the Sikh teachings. Hair was also not widely removed in all cultures until companies like Gillette came around for men facial beard removal. The OP is correct and has mentioned waxing, threading etc. All these practices however are forbidden in Sikhi. Quite frankly we as Sikhs don't care if other cultures remove it - we as Sikhs are taught not to remove it. If you want to copy other cultures then why are you calling yourself a Sikh? By definition a Sikh is someone who follows the teachings of the Sikh faith and quite clearly you don’t or you are a 50/50 person who picks and chooses what they want.

Men and women are naturally attracted to beauty and there is nothing wrong in that nor is it 'shallow'. It is only shallow when that is the ONLY basis when looking for a partner. Those who are arguing that it is 'shallow' or 'unnatural' have a twisted view of reality.

You are conditioned and brainwashed and therefore will never be able to see the truth - just like how the chinese society forced their girls to have small deformed feet for the sake of beauty. Let me help you and give you an example. In the future men will be expected to remove their chest, arm and leg hair and if I came around and said that it was ok to have chest, arm and leg hair and that this was the natural state of a man - Then people like you in the future would say no - that you cannot accept a man with chest, arm and leg hair as it is not beauty. The current issue with female body hair is the same.

I can tell you as much as I want that you are conditioned and that society has made you think something that is not true, however your not going to listen to me. This is because the nonsense that you have been exposed to since birth has become your truth - just like those chinese people who believe that small feet were beautiful. If I had a time machine and went back in time to tell them to stop – then they would not believe me. I believe there is no way that we can get you back - you are now trapped into false conditioning and it is only with Guru's kirpa that one day you might be able to uncondition yourself.

From a psychological standpoint I believe we humans 'need' beauty. That is why we wax/ polish our cars, paint our houses, cut the lawn, iron our clothes...etc, etc. Without beauty, life becomes depressing.

I have written a lengthy piece on conditioning and how we have true conditioning and false conditioning. I also made comments on how conditioning can be unconscious and conscious. There are some things that are true conditioning and then there are others that are false conditioning.

In relation to female hair phobia - this is false conditioning where you have been taught to believe something as being true when it is false. Your current belief is that females do not have facial hair and those that keep facial hair are looking like men. This is false conditioning because all females have hair and those keeping hair are actually looking like what all women should look like. I don’t expect you to understand because you are now trapped like the chinese people wanting small feet.

However Sikhi is very clear - Sikhi accepts the human saroop with hair of both a female and male and states that this is the best and most beautiful saroop. When you get married your life partner will have hair and will also have a ‘bad day’ where she does not remove her hair. When that day comes please tell me whether she suddenly became ugly to you. If she did, then what does that say about your character?

These are just my humble thoughts. Thanks.

There was a lot of sexism in your thoughts especially about women not being able to carry a sword or how you want women to look. Sikhi doesn't say women should look like this or men should look like this. Instead it accepts both female and male saroop with its hair. Currently you have an issue recognising that females have hair on their body including their faces. If you are a singh with a beard then you should stand in front of the mirror and reflect on what a hypocrite you are – why should you want women to accept you in your male human bodily form with all your hair when you cannot accept a woman with all her hair. Singhs like you are hypocrites.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frankly bheinji if he wants you to wax or cut your hair to look beautiful he is not ur Perfect partner. Beauty is in the eyes of beholder. And if you do it once you will do it everytime. Marry someone with ur originality and if you change urself he will keep on changing u forever

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frankly bheinji if he wants you to wax or cut your hair to look beautiful he is not ur Perfect partner. Beauty is in the eyes of beholder. And if you do it once you will do it everytime. Marry someone with ur originality and if you change urself he will keep on changing u forever

Weird, u sound like me. ? ??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So how do you, uh ,uncondition yourself

The first step is enlightening yourself with knowledge on how humans condition themselves and to understand false and true conditioning.

The second step is to be conscious of both conscious and unconscious conditioning. We all have developed false conditioning behaviours in our lives without realising - start thinking about your thoughts and actions and why you have those ideas.

The third is to move from 'thinking' to 'practicing' true conditioning, to live it, to form good habits and to be an example i.e. 'be the change, you wish to see in the world'.

The final step is to teach and educate others. All true conditioning is for sarbat da bhalla i.e. for the goodness of the whole of the human race. So you must make others aware too, engage in conversation, dialogue.

Most people haven't entered the first step of enlightening themselves with the knowledge or accepting or understanding that knowledge so that is your start.

I would like to add that it is a long journey spanning all of life. It is a life time commitment where that knowledge is practised, refined and further deeper knowledge and understanding is developed through life experiences. But it is worth it for personal development and for creating a system that benefits all.

If you seriously want to 'uncondition' or what I would rather call it is - living a life of true conditioning then start off by understanding yourself as a human, how you fit in the system, how the system fits in you. Then take small steps to change old habits and slowly do that to every aspect of your life and you will see the change. You cannot pick and choose when you want to condition yourself to false and when you want to condition yourself to true. You have to work at conditioning everything to the truth to benefit both yourself and others. Its like in japji sahib when it says we use soap to wash the dirt off our bodies - similarly we use naam or true conditioning to clean our thoughts i.e. we automatically get 'polluted' by the world and sometimes we don't realise or see the truth due to unconscious effects but by being aware and alert to these we can change ourselves for the better. Good luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. 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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • yeh it's true, we shouldn't be lazy and need to learn jhatka shikaar. It doesn't help some of grew up in surrounding areas like Slough and Southall where everyone thought it was super bad for amrit dharis to eat meat, and they were following Sant babas and jathas, and instead the Singhs should have been normalising jhatka just like the recent world war soldiers did. We are trying to rectifiy this and khalsa should learn jhatka.  But I am just writing about bhog for those that are still learning rehit. As I explained, there are all these negative influences in the panth that talk against rehit, but this shouldn't deter us from taking khanda pahul, no matter what level of rehit we are!
    • How is it going to help? The link is of a Sikh hunter. Fine, but what good does that do the lazy Sikh who ate khulla maas in a restaurant? By the way, for the OP, yes, it's against rehit to eat khulla maas.
    • Yeah, Sikhs should do bhog of food they eat. But the point of bhog is to only do bhog of food which is fit to be presented to Maharaj. It's not maryada to do bhog of khulla maas and pretend it's OK to eat. It's not. Come on, bro, you should know better than to bring this Sakhi into it. Is this Sikh in the restaurant accompanied by Guru Gobind Singh ji? Is he fighting a dharam yudh? Or is he merely filling his belly with the nearest restaurant?  Please don't make a mockery of our puratan Singhs' sacrifices by comparing them to lazy Sikhs who eat khulla maas.
    • Seriously?? The Dhadi is trying to be cute. For those who didn't get it, he said: "Some say Maharaj killed bakras (goats). Some say he cut the heads of the Panj Piyaras. The truth is that they weren't goats. It was she-goats (ਬਕਰੀਆਂ). He jhatka'd she-goats. Not he-goats." Wow. This is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard in relation to Sikhi.
    • Instead of a 9 inch or larger kirpan, take a smaller kirpan and put it (without gatra) inside your smaller turban and tie the turban tightly. This keeps a kirpan on your person without interfering with the massage or alarming the masseuse. I'm not talking about a trinket but rather an actual small kirpan that fits in a sheath (you'll have to search to find one). As for ahem, "problems", you could get a male masseuse. I don't know where you are, but in most places there are professional masseuses who actually know what they are doing and can really relieve your muscle pains.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use