Jump to content

Someone has started a petition for Allowing Sikh Women to Administer Amrit Sanchar


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, JotSinghUK said:

Ahh but bro there is a reason why one needs limbs. You can't physically prepare Amrit without the correct body parts. So that makes sense. But women do have all the correct body parts. And my argument has nothing to do with differences in physical bodies anyway. 

My argument is based on two things:

That Guru Ji has never explicitly disallowed women. Nowhere in any written document does it explicitly say "women are not allowed" it's been taken for granted that the word Singh suggests it, however Gurbani itself uses the word Singh to speak of the lion species male and female both. The word man is used for all of mankind. There is also no historical evidence to show that women were never part of it before. Remember just because there is no written accounts we can find, doesn't mean it didn't happen. And why does a different last name have to mean that Guru Gobind Singh Ji intended to keep women 'in their place' so to speak? I always thought the reason for Kaur was that we have gender neutral first names and also that women instead of having to take husbands identity on marriage would always keep her own identity. It was supposed to be liberation for women not just a different set of chains for them. 

Secondly Guru Ji gave full rights to the panth to make decisions. This is the major important point. He would never have given full rights to the panth to make decisions, and then when a decision is made which was based on Gurbani's message of equality (Gurbani is our living Guru and primary source of morality) agreeing that Kaur's should not be marginalized or treated as lesser in Sikhi, and then be angered that same decision was made. A decision he gave the power to the panth to make. 

Again the correct Rehet Maryada is the one given to you by Panj Pyaras and if they specifically say women can equally do all seva as males (and this has been verbally stated at Amrit sanchars even here in the U.K.) then who can argue with this Guru given authority? Isn't Guru Gobind Singh Ji supposed to himself be there in person when five Sikhs come together?? Who are you to disagree with them? Have you stood in their place as one of the five during an Amrit sanchar and felt his presence yourself? 

Also, you are using what was a very pertinent social reality of that time which meant that women were very much in a degraded position in society as someone aptly put it a few posts back, as "broodmares" which parents desired to marry off as early as possible, to be then controlled by a husband (never having any real authority over their own life and fearing being killed if they disobeyed - yes even by Sikh parents and this is an unfortunate reality and blemish on our culture even today) and you are trying to say that horrible social norm for that time and place is actually his hukam for all time, whilst completely ignoring the message in Gurbani which is beyond time and is for everyone and says all humans should be seen with a single eye of equality. You can't take an injustuce form our past, which happened to exist at the time of the Gurus (and explains why there were no female Gurus or female bhagats or even the first five Panj Pyaras) you can't use that injustice which was forced upon women of that time to justify more injustice for all time stating it is his 'hukam'. 

I am sorry you can't see past your prejudices but you won't change my thoughts bro. Doesn't change that we are all in this path together and we should respect one another. 

 

 

Bro until women and girls get full vidhiya and santhiya as a part of growing up I would hold off on forcing this discussion further. I also would like it to be a universal thing for sikh boys too so that the panth as a whole progresses , There should be remedial classes for parents and older kids righ tht now so that we do not carry on haemmorhaging  youth and women to other faiths or nastikpan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 24/07/2017 at 5:17 AM, JotSinghUK said:

 

Also it should be pointed out that a petition is not necessary as it's already in Rehet Maryada that it can be either. If some of you are so caught up on following exactly the original why stop at gender? What about same eye colour, same height etc? And in that case a woman should always be the only one allowed to add the patashas? But reality is that these same and loudest nay Sayers don't see a problem having a man add them? Anyway either can be done by either as long as they have high avastha and strict Rehet.

 

So many times the same things get discussed. yet the arguments are the same over and over. It would have been god if yhou had done a search on this topic and read a little more. However since the debate is raging here i would like to add a few things directly addressed to you brother.

 

You're right. It is in the SRM, but the question remains why there has not been one amrit sinchar at Sri Akal Takht Sahib since the SRM was forced on the Panth in 1945 which has included women. Ask yourself why.

 

 

On 24/07/2017 at 0:55 PM, JotSinghUK said:

 

On grand scheme of things, everything is one. There is no duality. Akal Purakh IS everything and everyone. Our separate consciousness is an illusion created by this duality. In fact even our bodies are illusion. The Gurus knew this. If we continue to perpetuate the illusion by privileging some and limiting others on things which are out of their control like their gender which is only for procreation, then we only serve to solidify the illusion caused by duality. If we instead realize that every soul literally is Waheguru then it's not so hard to see how can you limit anyone based on caste colour gender or anything else. You are essentially delving further into duality by telling someone no they can't do something no matter how high their spiritual level is. In reality you are hurting yourself more than them.

 

Please forgive me sangat Ji if I have said anything wrong. 

 

 

Forgiveness is not necessary brother as we are all learners. But I want to ask you why you have limited the "soul" only to humans and not applied it to each and every living thing from plant life to animal life to human life. These are the churasi lakh joon that all souls pass through to obtain the "rattan" of human chola. What if someone said tomorrow we should give amrit to horses because they have served Sikhs very well?

 

And then I want to ask you why eunuchs or bi-gender or people of no gender should be excluded? They have the same soul that you and I have.

 

Further to this I want to ask you if the soul literally is Waheguru then why are marriages between man and woman the only ones allowed in Gurmat? Why cant two men marry each other? They both have the same soul don't they? Are you married? If  not will you be looking for a soul or a woman?

 

 

On 24/07/2017 at 3:51 PM, JotSinghUK said:

 

 In that cultural time in India you hardly saw women even in public gathering at all (even today you hardly see women at public gatherings). In that time, a female form as Guru would not have been listened to (and possibly not even now as some of you still harbour this same resentment deep inside). It's same question as why the Gurus were all high caste. The message of equality can not come from those in the lower position (at least not without a lot of blood). Slave masters claiming that slavery was wrong meant so much more than slaves claiming the same. It was same for women. In that time women were little more than property, the Gurus in male form claiming all humans were equal meant way more than if a female was Guru claiming the same.

 

 

IN those times, high and low castes never sat or ate together yet Guru Baba Nanak spent many years with Bhai Mardana and ate at the house of Bhai Lalo. Why would a revolutionary Like Guru Sahib be afraid of nominating at least one woman as Guru?

 

The message of equality cannot come from those in lower position but the people of higher position still move beyond words to prove a point.

eg a slave master claiming slavery is wrong but yet holding those slaves as slaves means what exactly? A slave master would free his slaves as an example.

 

 

6 hours ago, JotSinghUK said:

Ahh but bro there is a reason why one needs limbs. You can't physically prepare Amrit without the correct body parts. So that makes sense. But women do have all the correct body parts. And my argument has nothing to do with differences in physical bodies anyway. 

 

 

And that is precisley what this is all about. The physical bodies. Homosexuals, have the same body parts as other humans but they are not allowed to be part of panj pyare.

 

 

6 hours ago, JotSinghUK said:

 

That Guru Ji has never explicitly disallowed women.

 

 

Brother, there are many things in Sikhi that are not written by the Guru's explicitly. But the tradition should go a long way, an extremely long in telling us what the Guru's instructions were.

 

6 hours ago, JotSinghUK said:

 

Secondly Guru Ji gave full rights to the panth to make decisions. This is the major important point. He would never have given full rights to the panth to make decisions, and then when a decision is made which was based on Gurbani's message of equality (Gurbani is our living Guru and primary source of morality) agreeing that Kaur's should not be marginalized or treated as lesser in Sikhi, and then be angered that same decision was made. A decision he gave the power to the panth to make.

 

 

Guru Sahib gave the Panth to make political and social (miri) based decisions. Not religious ones, where the Panth can decide to change the protocols of Sikhi.

Imagine 20 or 30 years down the line, the majority of the Sikh Panth decided that the 5 ks are not necessary, could they decide to discard them? In the same way the Sikhs cannot change one word of gurbani or the protocols of Sikhi that started from our Gurus.

 

6 hours ago, JotSinghUK said:

 

Again the correct Rehet Maryada is the one given to you by Panj Pyaras and if they specifically say women can equally do all seva as males (and this has been verbally stated at Amrit sanchars even here in the U.K.) then who can argue with this Guru given authority? Isn't Guru Gobind Singh Ji supposed to himself be there in person when five Sikhs come together?? 

 

So which spirit is in Guru Granth Sahib then, if it isn't Guru Gobind Singh Ji?

 

Some jathas in order to subvert the status of Sikhi may make these kinds of changes but they wil never earn the blessings of Guru Sahib.

 

6 hours ago, JotSinghUK said:

 

 You can't take an injustuce form our past, which happened to exist at the time of the Gurus (and explains why there were no female Gurus or female bhagats or even the first five Panj Pyaras) you can't use that injustice which was forced upon women of that time to justify more injustice for all time stating it is his 'hukam'.

 

 

Be careful of what you say bro. Or should I say harkiran? You are bringing up the same arguments she did, and indeed I wonder if it's you again? How does someone repeat EXACTLY the same arguments over and over?

 

If you say that this is an injustice as I have bolded, then you are calling the Guru unjust. If Guru Sahib wanted he had the power to have any number of women attend and stand up when calling for a head. Guru Sahib is sarav-shakti-maan. Guru Sahib is aseem-shakti. Guru Sahib had the power to do anything, and even could have made a woman Guru, or included women in the Panj Pyare. Guru Sahib gave his life for another religion yet was still unjust?

 

Are you saying that Guru Sahib was too scared to conform social conventions of their times?

 

 

6 hours ago, JotSinghUK said:

 

I am sorry you can't see past your prejudices but you won't change my thoughts bro. Doesn't change that we are all in this path together and we should respect one another. 

 

 

 

I am sorry that you think so low of your Guru.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WJKK WJKF 

chatanga ji

Your arguments are the same old arguments and make no sense to me. Let me put it to you a different way. Why have not many women till now stepped up for any leadership roles let alone as panj pyaras? 

Honestly I believe the fault lies on us historically for conditioning women to believe they can't. We ingrained centuries of lack of self confidence into them making them believe they were entirely dependent on us and incapable for themselves. Now put this into perspective in medieval Punjab where even Sikh women were expected to marry early, have babies, serve their husbands and be obedient to male leadership. Even if the Gurus had said women are free to exercise authority over their own lives and make decisions for themselves, how many women do you think first of all had both the freedom to do so without repercussion from their family, had the self confidence to do so? And if even if they had the self confidence to do so, how many felt that they would be abandoning their 'duty' to obey and serve their parents and or husbands in the process? At least that's the position (or even worse) where we started from at the time of the Gurus. Women were basically incubators and servants. We can't escape that truth. That should exaplin to you why there could be no woman taking up religious life (it's even frowned upon by Sikh parents today for a daughter). You can't use that reality to say that's what our Gurus wanted just because it was the reality of the time. 

Move a bit forward and we have the message from the Gurus through Gurbani. But that message which was ingrained persists even today so imagine how many women actually felt they could step up. I realize we have a few examples like Mata Sahib Kaur Ji and female masands prior, and of course Mata Bhag Kaur Ji but most women would have thought they were special cases and that life was out of their reach. So through rest of 1700s onward women were still chained. Not by anything our Gurus wanted. They were chained by us. By male ego. This was not the doing of Guru Gobind Singh Ji. He did not intend to further chain women to a lower existence. And I am sorry you think that way and also that you think being born female is a lesser step on the ladder below us on the path to liberation, in my mind makes you no better than casteist Hindus (who consequently saw women as beneath even the lowest caste males such that they had to serve males for several lifetimes before hoping to be born male). 

So to answer why no female has as of yet participated in Amrit sanchars at Darbar Sahib? it has nothing to do the message from our Gurus or Gurbani. It's our male egos. In short males are feeling threatened to imagine women having equal status and so simply, they refuse to let women have the chance. Second it's partly women's fault as how many have actually overcome this centuries of ingrained lack of confidence, cultural influence and had the courage to actually step up and demand their equal place? However there seems to be a revolution starting. Lucknow Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee (Lucknow is my birthplace) has passed resolution to put it into practice across entire city and now two Gurdwaras have had a female as one of the Panj. Sadar and Naka Gurdwaras have both done so in recent months. Change takes time and maybe this is Guru Gobind Singh Ji's example now taking form. 

Now let me ask you if the Gurus had originally arrived in a different culture (let's use Amazonian) where women were encouraged to be warriors and not subservient by their culture, do you think it would have been an entirely different outcome? Since women were encouraged in that culture to lead in battles (I realize Mai Bhago did but that was not the norm where it was the norm in Amazon culture) and that included women leading men and this was the norm, do you think those circumstances would have still produced all male Gurus, and five males when five heads were called for? It's not likely. 

Since the message in Gurbani is universal and for all, and even Khalsa is universal and for all and not just medieval Punjab, then how can we use the example of medieval Punjab which included a suppressed and subservient existence for women which we still perpetuate today, and claim that's what our Gurus wanted for all time and all cultures? Unless you are trying to claim that Sikhi and the Khalsa were also only meant for medieval Punjab and if you think that then you have a very narrow minded view and are one of the reasons why Sikhi has not spread like other religions. 

Lastly, now that we are no longer in that cultural time and place do you want to see women leave Sikhi for better pastures (mostly atheism) because they are now globally surpassing this idea that their existence is here to serve us and produce babies? Because continuing to push them to a lower subservient role will donone of two things, drive them away from Sikhi completely because they feel there is nothing in it for them, or they will start to rebel and demand their equal rights. And we are seeing both now. There is not only one petition which was submitted to Akal Takht in recent times by the way. This was only the most recent. We are also seeing women leave Sikhi in droves mostly to abandon religion altogether which is tragic. In the end women can actually cause the death of Sikhi if enough leave. We will get smaller and smaller in numbers. So we have a choice. And including them as equals actually fulfills Gurbani's message of equality and does not actually explicitly go against any recorded message from our Gurus. Please stop using tradition as a reason as that is a very weak reason. When a tradition involves marginalizing a group, that tradition needs to stop.

as for marriage, for obvious reasons you need a male and female. Married life the aim is to produce offspring and live life of householder. Obviously two males or two females or a eunuch can't do that. Thats why anand Karaj is between a male and female. And that has nothing to do with argument of who can administer amrit. The rule for disabilities has been explained by Akal Takht themselves that one needs to be physically fit to sit in bir posture which can be physically demanding obviously requiring limbs. They require to be able to speak to recite and have their arms and hands to physically prepare the Amrit. They require their vision to see the initiate and the eyes are the window to the soul and the eyes are actually acting as vision for Guru Ji through the Panj, so that's why they need to conform to those standards, and none of this requires specific gender.

Though we disagree on this doesn't mean I aim to disrespect in anyway so Inappologize if any of this came across that way brother. 

WJKK WJKF 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, jkvlondon said:

Bro until women and girls get full vidhiya and santhiya as a part of growing up I would hold off on forcing this discussion further. I also would like it to be a universal thing for sikh boys too so that the panth as a whole progresses , There should be remedial classes for parents and older kids righ tht now so that we do not carry on haemmorhaging  youth and women to other faiths or nastikpan

Of course! I am not advocating that the lipstick wearing tight jeans clad tarts be selected to do this seva!  Or the likes of Harnaam Kaur. They have to be brought up with proper teaching and religious life. And I am a strong advocate for turban on Kaurs too. But I think part of attracting girls to religious life is full inclusion instead of a secondary position in Sikhi or else many will unfortunately go elsewhere, and that elsewhere is usually abandoning religion all together. What girls will be attracted to a religiously dedicated life if that life means always taking second place to men? Instead they will find other things to be interested in if you know what I mean. Other religions or more often no religion at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, JotSinghUK said:

Your arguments are the same old arguments and make no sense to me.

 

So are yours. They make no sense to me either. They smack of feminism and nothing else. A very dangerous trait.

 

 

4 hours ago, JotSinghUK said:

Why have not many women till now stepped up for any leadership roles let alone as panj pyaras? 

 

Leadership roles? God you sound so much like satkiran/harkiran. Leadersship roles, seeing everyone with one eye, long repetitive posts...

 

4 hours ago, JotSinghUK said:

Honestly I believe the fault lies on us historically for conditioning women to believe they can't. We ingrained centuries of lack of self confidence into them making them believe they were entirely dependent on us and incapable for themselves.

 

Humans are made to err, but are the Gurus? Couldn't the Gurus be capable of raising women from their status' in their religions to something more in Sikhi? Bibi BHani did so much sewa of Guru Amar Das ji, but Guru Sahib gave gurgaddi to her husband. Was that unfair? Was Guru Sahib damaging her or other Sikh womens confidence by not considering Bibi Bhani ?

 

4 hours ago, JotSinghUK said:

You can't use that reality to say that's what our Gurus wanted just because it was the reality of the time. 

 

But the reality changed with the Gurus an Sikhi did it not? Did Guru Sahib raise women from their status' in their previous religions?

 

4 hours ago, JotSinghUK said:

We are also seeing women leave Sikhi in droves mostly to abandon religion altogether which is tragic.

 

Here is another point where you sound like satkiran/harkiran. She tried to claim this and it is a most untrue statement. Sikh girls are ot leaving Sikhi because of any perceived thought of discrimination over not being allowed to serve in Panj Pyare. No Sikh girl has ever left Sikhi because of this.

 

5 hours ago, JotSinghUK said:

Married life the aim is to produce offspring and live life of householder. Obviously two males or two females or a eunuch can't do that. Thats why anand Karaj is between a male and female. And that has nothing to do with argument of who can administer amrit.

 

Thankyou! First you were saying we need to look on all with one eye of equality and discard the human gender. Now you are saying the human gender is imnportant. You need male and female physical bodies to produce offspring. That is the law of nature. In Sikhi the pyares have to be male, with no missing limbs or digits. Even if the tip of one finger is missing that disallows a male.

 

5 hours ago, JotSinghUK said:

The rule for disabilities has been explained by Akal Takht themselves that one needs to be physically fit to sit in bir posture which can be physically demanding obviously requiring limbs. They require to be able to speak to recite and have their arms and hands to physically prepare the Amrit.

 

You do not need to be physically fit to sit in bir asan. It is very posible to hold that position for the duration of amrit sinchar (about 45 mins). Anybody with a missing finger or toe or ear can hold bir asan. But are they allowed to participate in Panj Sewa? No, they are not.

 

5 hours ago, JotSinghUK said:

They require their vision to see the initiate and the eyes are the window to the soul and the eyes are actually acting as vision for Guru Ji through the Panj, so that's why they need to conform to those standards, and none of this requires specific gender.

 

Eyes? Vision? People can see without  eyes. People with eyes are blind. That is quite  a ridiculous assertion.

Eyes are windows to the soul? Not in Gurmat.

5 hours ago, JotSinghUK said:

And including them as equals actually fulfills Gurbani's message of equality and does not actually explicitly go against any recorded message from our Gurus.

 

Then also eunuchs can participate because there is no "explicit" recorded message from the Gurus.

 

To add to this then Sikhs can say "we don't need to take amrit/wear the 5 K's because there is no explicit recorded message from the Gurus either."

What about if someone says to you "there is no recorded message from our Guru's to have Singh/Kaur in your names?"

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, parmjit10 said:

Next they will say let's have enuchs, homosexxuals, lesbians, drag queens, cross dressers as panj piaareys romping and prancing about in guru's bana.  What f uck ed  mad lot.  Men doing all these f uck ed mad things and hiding behind women.

WJKK WJKF

Well I can see the resentment you harbour toward females (and the sense of entitlement you feel for having the luck to be born male). You and previous poster chatanga have in the last few posts managed to compare women to animals, disabled, and homosexuals or eunichs. Let me ask you brother why do you feel that male gender is so above women? And why do you think some souls are born male and some female? It is some big prize to be born male and we are above females on spiritual ladder? Because I thought gurbani says human body is precious not just males ones.

The way you are both talking makes it sounds like no different than our Hindu casteist neighbours who think a woman was born only to serve and has to wait future lifetimes to have any chance to know liberation. 

But aside from that your tone made it sound like women are supposed to be the ones hiding behind us? Is this what you want? You think Is it what Sri Guru Gobind singh Ji Maharaj wanted?? Because bro I want nobody hiding and want us all standing together and think that's what Guru Ji wanted. I won't change my mind and I've spoken or rather typed my thoughts why. I don't see any other explanation than haume to explain you and his thoughts. 

Abnway my only purpose posting in this thread was not to engage in nonsense arguments. But to just point out about Lucknow Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee and the decision to uphold this principle and they have had several females do this in last few months as an example so it's not mere talk. Other cities will follow and have started to implement as well in india. 

Please forgive any mistakes. 

With Waheguru Jis kirpa we will all come to understanding. 

WJKK WJKF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What happened to "Trishna Bujji?" (fulfillment)? The 11 Guru Sahibs went the extra mile for male/ female. Kandhi batt da Amrit, seva in Gurudwara, saccha kirth, house roles, family roles, Tabbya di seva, sit in sangat, eat in sangat... SAME prayers, SAME method told for men/ women...

YET WE WANT MORE! We're not satisfied... It all starts from one place. Give both gender roles of this seva then tomorrow we'll turn to NON - SIKH organisation AGAIN stating "Gay/ lesbians must be allowed to do Amrit sanchaar seva..."

Watch this space.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

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