Khalistanisinghni

The modern day "Kaurs"

96 posts in this topic

11 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

They are not any less Children of Guru Pita ji and often in our history been the sole carers and makers of mahaan gursikhs  e.g. Bhai Taru Singh ji

This I agree with; however, Punj Pyare should stay male. Guru Sahib doesn't love his sons or daughters any more or less based on their sexuality. That said; they should love Guru Sahib enough to give him the desire of an all male Punj, (he didn't ask for a male head; but Hukam made it 5 male heads.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jacfsing2 said:

This I agree with; however, Punj Pyare should stay male. Guru Sahib doesn't love his sons or daughters any more or less based on their sexuality. That said; they should love Guru Sahib enough to give him the desire of an all male Punj, (he didn't ask for a male head; but Hukam made it 5 male heads.

not arguing for female panj but loss of the harsh accusations which smacks of  prejudice and diminishment of sikh females' value and level of faith :

SIKH: no woman gave her head in 1699 so they have less faith in Guru ji

MUSLIM: women cannot do ibidadat the same as a man per month so is defective in faith

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Khalistanisinghni said:

Harkiran kaur bhenji,

 

SGPC maryada is not the panthic maryada. It has not been accepted. I rather follow the maryada from taksal/dals that can be dated back to the times guru sahib. They don't show women as inferior, they just accept as he plays, they are filled with sant/mahapurkh when SGPC is filled with, nvrm.

so did you have kirpan di amrit then bhen ji because that is dal's purataan maryada?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

so did you have kirpan di amrit then bhen ji because that is dal's purataan maryada?

What about taksal's maryada? 

Puratan maryada of dal is still khande da amrit since scholars from the dals stand by women who take khande da amrit. (The absence of any amrit for women in the beginning and the the development of kirpan da amrit just show that pita ji forgot about for the women and they had to add it when they realised there was "mistake" I.e. Amritdhari singhs couldn't eat the food cooked by their non-amritdhari women)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's good to see that you are posting under your real name Harkiran, and not crying about others using your real name, because it could affect your real life.

 

This harkiran used to post under the name of satkiran and cdnsikhgirl on sikhawareness.com . She posted the same drivel there for over a year that she has posted here. She had all the answers to her questions there but kept repeating the same until she was such a nuisance that no-one regretted her leaving. She has also been upto  the same mischief on facebook, and youtube insulting Sri Dasme Patshahs Granth Sahib as and when she could.

 

This is the same girl that created the topic insulting Sri Charitropakhyan only a while ago, and then had the mods remove her name, which she is using herself now.

 

All of her statements below are stock statements/questions that she just copies and posts. You can answer her questions, she throw up some more, and then when you answer those, she'll repeat the first set.

I want to provide some info for the benefit of other members here who, if confronted by nindaks like harkiran will know how to answer her. Even though she claims to have been studying sikhi for over 20 years, she cant even understand one sentence of Panjabi, so her understanding has all come from english sources.

 

12 hours ago, HarkiranKaur said:

Did you know prior to 1699 masands had Guru given permission to initiate Sikhs by charan Amrit in absence of the Guru? And that there were women masands means women already prior to 1699 initiated others.

Women did initiate Sikhs by charan pahul, but this completely abolished in 1699. A new method of adminstering khande ki pahul was started, and it hasn't changed. This did not include women. So women giving charan pahul is no proof of women being able to give khande ki pahul.

 

 

 

Moving onto the rehat maryada. This rehat maryada was forced on the panth under the guise of being panth parvan. It is true that many people did at some time or the other take part on these meetings, but in some of these meetings by the SGPC's own offical record, there were meetings where out of over a 100 invitees, there were only 4 or 6 or 10 people present. These people made the rehat maryada and it was forced on the panth.

 

How can Sri Akal Takht "accept" anything? It doesn't put it's hands out to accept anything. Its the people in control of Sri Akal Takht who do the accepting. This harkiran character seems to thnk that Sri Akal Takht has accepted it therefore it can be the only true one.

 

Also husband and wife do not make the same journey to Waheguru together. They help each other through their sangat to each other, but it's inaccurate to say that they both arrive at the same time. One can arrive earlier. Thye do not make the journey as ONE. Neither do they make the journey after their humans lives are complete as ONE either. Unless they unfortunately both pass away together ie accident. This is just wild speculation on her part.

 

6 hours ago, HarkiranKaur said:

Gender is of no consequence. You say women have other seva? What seva do women have that men don't? None... why is it that men always have to have something to hold over women? Why is it that people like you can't follow Gurbani?

"As Gurmukh look upon ALL with a single eye of equality for in each and every heart the divine light is contained" SGGSJ

If you start saying that male form holds some superior significance then you are unconsciously consigning all souls in female bodies to a lesser existence. Then you have to ask why were we born female in the first place? Male is privileged so we must have messed up somehow to be born female right? Since the male form has privilege over female? 

You do know the soul is genderless right? And hose who merge their light with Waheguru see no difference between them and Waheguru then where does gender matter?

And if the Gurus themselves allowed women masands to initiate Sikhs by charan Amrit then who are you to say it's wrong for a bibi of high avastha to initiate someone now as part of the Panj Pyaras? Let's stop playing man made Maryadas games and go to the source, Gurbani. Show me where in our only Guru, Guru Granth Sahib Ji where it says women should have any less rights than men in ANY sphere be it religious, social, family. 

You can keep looking down in yourself as femalemif you want to but I know my Gurus saw me in no lesser light than a male. Women can be just as brave and courageous and loyal and fight to the death as men can. 

Panthic Maryada took many years with many high level Sikhs present and referred to many rahitnamas and historical works and of course most emphasis was put on Gurbani, did it agree with Gurbani. The consensus was yes women can take part in Amrit sanchars as one of the Panj Pyaras. If you don't like it you can feel free to stick with your dera who sees you as lesser than a man. It's up to you. Ask yourself if you truly feel like you are lesser, are you being punished to be born female? Maybe read in a Gurbani where it says this HUMAN body is precious. Not just male human bodies. Waheguru doesn't give some humans preference over others based on what genitals they have. That's for procreation of species only. Get out of the Hindu mindset where women are seen as lesser spiritually than men. 

 

This paragraph a bove is a stock copy and paste from her. She shows her true feminazi agenda in insisting that if men do something different "they have a hold or priviledge over women", or if women do someting different  "they are subservient to men".

 

Now coming back to her precious rehat maryada, which allows women to participate as panj, i asked her probably about 2 years ago, to provide ONE instance where the SGPC had according to its own rehat maryada conducted a sinchar at Sri Akal Takht Sahib using a woman as part of the sewa. She wouldn't answer.

 

The people who she is holding up as some kind of beacon or scholars won't even implement their own maryada themselves.

 

5 hours ago, HarkiranKaur said:

So tell me why does their gender matter? Does their caste matter? Should we only allow those from the castes who volunteered that day? How about skin colour? Should no white singhs be allowed since no white singh volunteered heir head that day? Why is it only gender matters???? And please use Gurbani to support your answer. 

 

Gurbani says nothing about giving khande ki pahul. So how can anyone explain the who the five should be made of according to Gurbani?

 

5 hours ago, HarkiranKaur said:

If you are reducing the Gurus to a gender you have really missed the mark! They were one with Akal purakh. Gender was meaningless. The reason for male form was that in that time a female form would have been ignored. Even today most men see women as inferior and lower spiritually. This thread is a good example.


Another stock statement. No-one is reducing the Guru's in any place. But they were male, whether they were one with Waheguru or not.

 

And then on to the "guru had to be male because no-one would listen to female" nonsense.

She threw up this response when she ws asked why all the Guru's were male, and if there were no Sikh women of Brahm gyan or turriya avastha in Guru Sahibs times.

Ask yourselves would the Guru's have been afriad of something like this? Guru Harkrishan Sahib was baal guru. Yet people ten times his age obeyed him and saw no difference in the jyot of Guru Nanak Maharaj. No-one would have ignored the Guru's over their gender.

 

5 hours ago, HarkiranKaur said:

Your post reeks of hatred towards women.  That and a bit of superiority complex since you are male. 

 

Stock answer to anything she can't answer properly.

 

4 hours ago, HarkiranKaur said:

If you have such Love for the Guru then respect your only and eternal Guru, Guru Granth Sahib ji. Gurbani says as Gurmukh to see ALL with a single eye of equality (which means treat equally) for in each and every heart the divine light is contained. That divine light is the ONE and only light of Akal Purakh. By dismissing bibis with a statement like that to say an outsider Singh is still better than such a lowly Kaur, you are actually refusing Akal Purakh in female form to do this seva! Gurbani says he IS the male AND the female. The chess player and the board, it's the same ONE actor who is playing ALL the characters. This world is an illusion. A dream. Gender is transient and inconsequential. A <banned word filter activated> won't get you anywhere when this life is done. 

For your information yes I have taken Amrit at a historical Gurdwara in Kashmir. And the Panj Pyaras that day specifically told us Kaur's present that day they WANT to see some of us in their place some day and that there is NOTHING in Gurbani that prohibits it. Gurbani sees all humans as equal. It's male ego who can't let go of privilege. 

There is a saying that for those who have been always given privilege, equality seems like oppression to them. That's why men who have had it so good for so long feel so threatened to give Kaurs their due right to equality. 

Preparing amrit does not require male anatomy. It requires high avastha which both males and females can attain and it requires strict Rehet and physical ability to carry out the ceremony. The light of the Guru is genderless. Guru Ji will come if any five Sikhs with high avastha are preparing Amrit. Learn to see past the physical shell and see the divine light instead. 

 

This single light is restricted by hrakiran to men and women only. But it is more than that. This single light is the same light in every single living thing (and non-living thing) in the creation. So she was asked if this light means that we have to see every one with the same eye of equality, why can't gay marriages take place in Sikhi?

Akal purakh is the chess board and the players. Akal Purakh is the male and the female. Akal Purakh is also in the third gender. Akal Purakh is also the animal and the vegetation. Akal Purakh is also the stones. So what? did harkiran give any of these other species any consideration for marriage? Or did she discriminate and select a man?

 

She has taken amrit, but failed to see an act of discrimination at that very sinchar. At the beginning men are not allowed to wear pyjama but women are not allowed to remove pyjama. At the end, all the  men have the name Singh, yet females have the name Kaur. Why can't women be called Singh?

 

Moving onto anatomy for preparing amrit. After the passing of Guru Gobind Singh Ji Maharaj, Matas Sahib Deva and Mata Sundri give leadership and direction to the Panth, yet there is no record of either Mata taking part, or any other female taking part as panj sewa in any sinchar whatsoever. Both Matas were of the highest avastha. yet there is no mention of any such sinchar.

 

You can argue with her all you like. She can't change. This is her first job, creating trouble for herself on social platforms.

 

Admins keep an eye on her, sooner or later she will start on Sri Dasme Patshah's Granth. It wold have been better if she had been banned when she started that topic about Sri Charitropakhyan Granth a few weeks ago. Challo later is better than never.

 

 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 gurus all men
15 bhagats with bani in SGGS all men 
5 pyare all men 
 

Femenist & their supporters get over it & accept it instead of trying to alter sikhi to suit your own manmat ideas. 

Those asking for 'proof' from Guru Granth Sahib Ji that women can't be in punj pyare, can you give me proof from Guru Granth Sahib Ji that supports Kirpan, kanga, kara, kachera & kes maryada?? 

Khalsa maryada comes from Dasam Granth, Sarbloh Granth & rehitname

Idiots ain't got a clue what the Khalsa is... the Khalsa is an ARMY.. not a social club.

 

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, californiasardar1 said:

This is a great point.

Why do people insist on replicating the gender of the panj pyare, but not their other attributes?

Why not insist on panj pyare who come from the same geographic areas, same castes, have the same height/weights, same ages, etc. as the original panj pyare?

It just shows how ridiculous it is to insist that the panj pyare be male.

 

It's not a great point at all. After taking pahul you lose your caste, previous dharam affiliations etc. You do not lose your gender. You stop being whatever you were and become a Khalsa, but you dont stop being male or female.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Mahakaal96 said:

Femenist & their supporters get over it & accept it instead of trying to alter sikhi to suit your own manmat ideas. 

Those asking for 'proof' from Guru Granth Sahib Ji that women can't be in punj pyare, can you give me proof from Guru Granth Sahib Ji that supports Kirpan, kanga, kara, kachera & kes maryada??

Exactly.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, HarkiranKaur said:

As for marriage as long as we remember why we are circling Guru Granth Sahib Ji and never look at it as one leading and one following the.

 

But it is though. A woman takes her husband's palla to follow him around Guru Granth Sahib. She is following in the footsteps he has already trodden.

But your husband is all about equality. tell him when there is a next family wedding, to get the male to hold the females palla and follow her around the lavan, because it's not about leading is it? Wonder why you were silent about it on your own wedding day?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Mahakaal96 said:

10 gurus all men
15 bhagats with bani in SGGS all men 
5 pyare all men 
 

Femenist & their supporters get over it & accept it instead of trying to alter sikhi to suit your own manmat ideas. 

Those asking for 'proof' from Guru Granth Sahib Ji that women can't be in punj pyare, can you give me proof from Guru Granth Sahib Ji that supports Kirpan, kanga, kara, kachera & kes maryada?? 

Khalsa maryada comes from Dasam Granth, Sarbloh Granth & rehitname

Idiots ain't got a clue what the Khalsa is... the Khalsa is an ARMY.. not a social club.

 

WAHEGURU. ♥️

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, chatanga said:

 

But it is though. A woman takes her husband's palla to follow him around Guru Granth Sahib. She is following in the footsteps he has already trodden.

But your husband is all about equality. tell him when there is a next family wedding, to get the male to hold the females palla and follow her around the lavan, because it's not about leading is it? Wonder why you were silent about it on your own wedding day?

That was a whole lot to digest. But glad to see someone who actually has some real knowledge 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chatanga said:

 

It's not a great point at all. After taking pahul you lose your caste, previous dharam affiliations etc. You do not lose your gender. You stop being whatever you were and become a Khalsa, but you dont stop being male or female.

 

Do you lose your age, height and various other personal characteristics?

 

I'm a really stupid person, so please explain to me what you lose and what you retain once you become a khalsa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Khalistanisinghni said:

What about taksal's maryada? 

Puratan maryada of dal is still khande da amrit since scholars from the dals stand by women who take khande da amrit. (The absence of any amrit for women in the beginning and the the development of kirpan da amrit just show that pita ji forgot about for the women and they had to add it when they realised there was "mistake" I.e. Amritdhari singhs couldn't eat the food cooked by their non-amritdhari women)

err Guru ji forgot or perhaps others didn't choose to give weight to the command that all sikhs who wanted charan di pahul would now have to take Khande di pahul? Guru Pita is abhul so it must be the latter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, HarkiranKaur said:

Why are you guys entertaining this lost cause.  She was causing a mess at Sikh awareness with her illogical posts.  She has a problem.  She has no true knowledge of Gurbani, Sikh history, or writings.  She flaps her arms around hoping someone will pay attention to her.  She has anger issues and self hate.  Remember the cartoons where the cat holds the ticking bomb hoping it won't explode but it does all the time.  She is the cat.  The bomb will go off and she will self destruct. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, HarkiranKaur said:

And what if the woman is the one who has 'already trodden' these footsteps by taking Amrit while the husband has yet to? You assume that the husband is the one who already is on spiritual path and that the woman requires to be led on to the spiritual path. 

The lavaans have nothing to do with delegating someone in charge over the other. If you think that then you are mistaken. The husband and wife as ONE are embarking on a NEW journey as ONE together. You can't assume that the husband was already pious while she needs to be led to spiritual path. She could be the more spiritually advanced of the two and in that case she would be the leader in their spiritual journey regardless of who's home they live or who walks in front. 

In our marriage I had just as much control of him as he had of me. If I wanted him to slow down all I had to do was pull back on the Palla. Remember in who's hand the palla is and around who's neck it is!!! My favourite analogy for those who want to make it into some statement of who gets to be in charge... think of the palls like reins and a chariot. The wife is the rider in control holding the reins. (Since you want to make it into something it's not). It actually has nothing to do with who gets to be 'in charge' and it has nothing to do with human marriage even. It's symbolic for soul journey back to Waheguru and the couple as ONE making that journey. It's all about who is in the centre. Guru Ji is at front not us. If you are after some hierarchy let marriage where you get to order your wife around (not sure if you are married because you never said so) but if that's what you want then there are plenty of other paths. 

For our marriage, my husband and I put Guru Granth Sahib Ji as the one 'in charge' and leading and neither one of us. We treat each other equally. He may have been 'in front' at the marriage but you'll find most times in our day to day life I am or we switch and that's where it matters more because that's our life. I know that bothers you that I have authority in my marriage as an equal. But our life is beautiful and we work together as a team with SGGSJ at centre stage. Even for paath we take turns reciting together meaning no one person leads. It's beautiful. 

By the way there are people who say 100 years ago their great grandparents never even circled SGGSJ they just stayed in front for all 4 lavaans. 

Tell me why all 10 Gurus were men? tell me why all 15 Bhagats with gurbani in SGGS are all men? Tell me why all panj pyare were men?

Most of the Gurus had more then 1 wife & in some cases had several wives... tell me how many wives had more then 1 husband? 

Tell me why all the the founders of all the major religions of the world were men? 

The truth is, men & women are equal in that they were both created by God but that's where the equality stops. They were created by God but created to fulfil different roles & duties....

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Faithless cynics have this idea the social structure of society did not allow women to play a leader role in society at the time of the Gurus, hence their was no women Guru's in Sikhi.   Throughout Sikh history there have been women who took the lead in Sikh processions.  Sikh women have been given leader roles by the Gurus.  Sikh women took the leader role for Manji Sahib's.  The faithless cynics argument is baseless.  So why were their only Guru's who took the male form?  Because Akal Purakh made it that way.  As he commands things come into play.  Akal Purakh also asked for heads on 1699.  The people who stood up to this call were all men.  Men only stood up because that's what Akal Purakh hukam (command) was.  No one, but those 5 men would have stood up and given their head that day.  Did not matter if their was a Sant sitting in the sangat on that day.  Only those 5 men were commanded by Akal Purakh to stand up and present themselves to Sri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji.  Bhai Jaita ji (after taking amrit became Bhai Jeevan Singh ji) was sitting in the sangat when the call was made by Sri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji.  If you know the history of Bhai Jaita ji, you would understand the deep meaning of mentioning his name.  Bhai Jaita ji was the one who risked his life and household to bring back Sri Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib ji head to Sri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji.  This Gurmukh was sitting in the sangat, do you not think he would have given his head for the next Guru, when he risked his life for the last Guru?  We can play the "what if" game all day and nothing of value would become of it because we are not following Akal Purakh hukam to accept his decision.    Do you think it was just by chance the five men who stood up, just happened to be from different caste?  What do you take Akal Purakh to be some poker player?....I need 5 heads....Brahma bets 2 men and 3 women, Krishna bets 16000 women, shiva bets on one man?  It was going to be 5 men in the position of Punj Pyare and that was his command.  Jap ji Sahib says look at how many are singing Vaheguru's praises in so many different ways, but only those who follow his command are approved.  The faithless cynics believe they are in control, I want to go left, I go left.  It's all arrogant beliefs. Vaheguru's hukam can't be changed or altered.  Vaheguru hukam is perfect.   

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, HarkiranKaur said:

So using your logic then no white singh can be one of Panj Pyaras, nor someone not of the same castes or from same area or same heights/ weight etc. Because the physical saroop has to be replicated 100% right? 

But guaranteed you will jump just to gender. Please explain to us why none of the other things matter but gender does? Please also tell us what is meant by sargun saroop. Are the five males we choose looking exactly like the original 5? Should we try to clone in science? If you think having a male genetalia is what sargun saroop means then you don't know anything at all. 

To be in his roop means to don the uniform he gave us including turban. It means to wear our good deeds and practice our Rehet with strict accordance. It means to be a living image of our Guru and set aside ego haume identity and find the light of Akal Purakh in all. It has nothing to do with having a male anatomy dangling down there. 

Try reading Gurbani sometime. GGSJ tells us that Akal Purakh IS the male and the female. It tells us INSTRUCTS us to see ALL equally. It says to base on our deeds and not our physical body. It says every human has the SAME capacity for spiritual advancement without hinderance.

Without realizing maybe, you have turned women into only being valued as a breeding machine and not valued in our own right. Are we only valued for being able to produce male children who can become the leaders in sikhi? Women were never supposed to be leaders or prominent? Just breeding machines here to serve men??? That's how other religions see us. Not how our Guru sees us!!!! 

TBH, your language just proves the brothers correct. What about go ask guru ji? I dare not say what Sant giani jarnail singh ji said was untrue and you are "smarter". So good day.

WJKK WJKF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, jkvlondon said:

bro ,itihassic records say that the crowds at Anandpur were over 35,000 and Dal historians say there were not many women present , would it not be harsh to condemn women on the basis that they were not 5 out 35,000 ? They are not any less Children of Guru Pita ji and often in our history been the sole carers and makers of mahaan gursikhs  e.g. Bhai Taru Singh ji 

bros may consider being less condemning and more encouraging of your lost sisters ...return the favour 

There were over 80,000 Sikhs. Not sure where did you get the 35K.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, californiasardar1 said:

 

Do you lose your age, height and various other personal characteristics?

 

I'm a really stupid person, so please explain to me what you lose and what you retain once you become a khalsa.

Yes you lose all those. Because you are a stupid person you will beleive it.

 

6 hours ago, HarkiranKaur said:

So using your logic then no white singh can be one of Panj Pyaras, nor someone not of the same castes or from same area or same heights/ weight etc. Because the physical saroop has to be replicated 100% right?

 

And on it goes. We are no talking about physical sarop. You have dragged that into it. We are talking about gender.

You won't get away with your nonsense here.

 

 

6 hours ago, HarkiranKaur said:

Without realizing maybe, you have turned women into only being valued as a breeding machine and not valued in our own right. Are we only valued for being able to produce male children who can become the leaders in sikhi? Women were never supposed to be leaders or prominent? Just breeding machines here to serve men??? That's how other religions see us. Not how our Guru sees us!!!! 

 

 

Other religions do not see us that way. It's really deceitful of you to try and play that card. You talk about Sri Guru Granth Sahib a lot, but yet haven't accepted the core principle of honesty.

 

As I told yo on Sikhawareness, once you do, your life will become a lot better.

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, chatanga said:

Yes you lose all those. Because you are a stupid person you will beleive it.

 

 

And on it goes. We are no talking about physical sarop. You have dragged that into it. We are talking about gender.

You won't get away with your nonsense here.

 

 

 

Other religions do not see us that way. It's really deceitful of you to try and play that card. You talk about Sri Guru Granth Sahib a lot, but yet haven't accepted the core principle of honesty.

 

As I told yo on Sikhawareness, once you do, your life will become a lot better.

 

 

She is the same person commenting on this video as well ...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Khalistanisinghni said:

There were over 80,000 Sikhs. Not sure where did you get the 35K.

it was the number that were initiated  on that day according to more than one retelling I read including mughal spy account who became Ajmer Singh , I'm sure the ikatt was bigger but I didn't want to put down something I couldn't be sure of .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, HarkiranKaur said:

And what if the woman is the one who has 'already trodden' these footsteps by taking Amrit while the husband has yet to?

 

O twisted one, we are talking lavan and now you want to bring in amrit sinchar to it?

 

6 hours ago, HarkiranKaur said:

The lavaans have nothing to do with delegating someone in charge over the other.

 

Who said they did? It's you who is throwing this muck around that if the man steps one foot in front of his wife then he is the leader and she is subservient. No-one else here is saying that women are subservient, in Gurmat or otherwise.

 

6 hours ago, HarkiranKaur said:

In our marriage I had just as much control of him as he had of me. If I wanted him to slow down all I had to do was pull back on the Palla.

 

And if he wanted to drag you round all he had to do was put his back into it!

 

6 hours ago, HarkiranKaur said:

 

 Remember in who's hand the palla is and around who's neck it is!!!

 

To add to all the stupid things you have repeated on  forums to the point pof making people vomit, this is one of the few that are equally hilarious. You are describing yourself as a noose around your husbands neck. How stupid is that? What do nooses do? They restrict breath until the victim dies. Is that what you really are? You can choose when to end your husbandds life?

You have said some realy stupid things on this forum. I would give up whilst you are  still a joke, rather than give up when you are a mental case.

 

For the benefit of other readers, I would like to point out that the palla is not worn around the neck but over the shoulder. Neither does the female pulling on the palla achieve anything The man still still have total control of the palla. Even if the woman stands stil, all that will happen is the pala will fall from her hands.

 

Something this harkiran creature did a long time ago, when she tried to place her own mat over the Guru's mat.

 

6 hours ago, HarkiranKaur said:

 My favourite analogy for those who want to make it into some statement of who gets to be in charge... think of the palls like reins and a chariot. The wife is the rider in control holding the reins.

 

And now your husbands a horse. Still his manure will go to mask the stench of manmat coming from you.

 

6 hours ago, HarkiranKaur said:

 He may have been 'in front' at the marriage but you'll find most times in our day to day life I am or we switch and that's where it matters more because that's our life. I know that bothers you that I have authority in my marriage as an equal.

 

There is no "may" about it. he was at tyhe front, you were behind hijm following in his EVERY footstep. And I couldn't care less about your married life. I feel sorry for your husband though, having to use his tail constantly to swat away all those flies and now there is one massive fly who won't stop buzzing.

 

6 hours ago, HarkiranKaur said:

 Even for paath we take turns reciting together meaning no one person leads.

 

You haven't even progressed beyond the Panjabi alphabet in the last 20 years, how can you be reading any paath?

 

6 hours ago, HarkiranKaur said:

By the way there are people who say 100 years ago their great grandparents never even circled SGGSJ they just stayed in front for all 4 lavaans. 

 

By the way, there are people who say that women never took Khande ki pahul 100 years ago. So what?

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, HarkiranKaur said:

When I said 'us' I meant women not Sikhs. Other religions see women as subordinate and here to just serve men and bear children but never be leaders over men.

 

I meant women when I posted it.  No other religions say that Gurmat sees women as subordinate. Stop your lying...

 

7 minutes ago, HarkiranKaur said:

Our Gurus never saw us (as in women) in that way and women masands is proof...

 

of what? The greatest proof would have been if a woman was made Guru.

And there it ends heopfully. You haven't got anything to add to this topic so just give this forum and all other forums a break. Work on yourself first. Good luck.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

it was the number that were initiated  on that day according to more than one retelling I read including mughal spy account who became Ajmer Singh , I'm sure the ikatt was bigger but I didn't want to put down something I couldn't be sure of .

Guess i have to work on readings and katha :grin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Khalistanisinghni said:

She is the same person commenting on this video as well ...

 

Have just  had a look at those comments. the usual rubbish. She has said much worse about Sri Dasme Patshah's Granth Sahib. Each and every opportunity she gets, she is in there doing nindya. And for someone who can't even read basic gurmukhi, she tries to set herself up as some bastion of knowledge on Gurmat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now