Jump to content
singhbj singh

Women in Weddings

Recommended Posts

singhbj singh    1,136

Many times at anand karaj ceremonies we see men, primarily granthis, officiating the union. Women’s involvement is rare and many people have never personally witnessed it. At Kaur Life, we wanted to showcase the families and couples who have asked the women in their lives to be a part of their anand karaj ceremony. It is a unique way of honoring the women in a couple’s life and celebrating close relationships. Furthermore, involving women in the anand karaj ceremony publicly showcases the equality between men and women inherent within Sikhi. To those who shared the following photos, thank you for giving us a peak into your anand karaj. We recognize that weddings are intimate, sacred moments and we all feel blessed to be able to see a step on your Sikhi journey.

https://kaurlife.org/2017/09/05/womenweddings/?platform=hootsuite

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
S1ngh    1,343

Too much feminism. There is no rule that bars the women to be a granthi. Just because it's not happening does not mean that someone is enforcing any rule. All are created equal and anyone can do anything they want but sometime folks takes stuff too seriously and get stuck egoism.

C96056C9-78E7-461B-8A7C-12B6C14AA092-2209-0000021563B3FBC7.jpeg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jkvlondon    3,419

Found it ridiculous that one of the weddings had Both sets of parents giving palla ...by what right and what logic does the incumbent girl's in-laws have to do with it , they are receiving a daughter :waheguru:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jacfsing2    1,834

We shouldn't be making this a political statement, those who become Granthis should know Gurmukhi well, whether through years of education and hard work, or through Gur-prasad to know it. Some random person saying they want to be a Granthi shouldn't just get that position. If a Singh or Kaur has such qualifications, and can explain what is being said, then they should be a Granthi.

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


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Heretic or a Turk. Both are repulsive. The heretic is an internal threat where as the Turk is external. Whether or not he's insulted the Gurus (as of yet), is not the issue. It's the fact that he's Turk-Beeraj.
    • I do not believe in an absolute morality, dharam is not the same for each and every individual. This is not to say that dharam does not exist, only that it doesn't exist in a monolithic form.  This concept is reflected very well in the life of the Mahapurakh Sant Baba Thakur Singh, 14th jathedar of Damdami Taksaal. Babaji was a strict vegetarian like all members of Taksaal, so for him eating meat was a great sin. However when he visited the chaunis (encampments) of Nihang Singhs around Chowk Mehta he would often bring offerings of goats to be jhatkaa'd by the nihangs and later consumed. Because eating meat was not a great paap for them as it was for babaji, rather it was their tradition and he respected that the role they were given by the Almighty was different from his own.  Satguru's Hukam affects each person differently.  Eastern dharams tend not to impose moral codes on the whole of humankind, as though such codes apply to everybody. Yes there are certain basic guiding principles of human morality - don't murder, don't rape, but most sane people don't really need to be told not to do these things by a religion because they feel an inherent revulsion towards them. However beyond this things can get quite flexible. Some people are meant to be householders and provide for a family, whilst others are meant to be celibates and devote their lives and all their energy to Akaal Purakh and Seva of the Panth. If God creates someone with the intention that they will become a warrior, battle becomes dharam for this person, a righteous deed. If however God creates a man and by his hukam determines that this man is to be peaceful saint, battle is adharam for him, not righteous. This is why different sampardas/jathebandiaan exist in Sikhi. Guru Ji is not/was not anti-samparda or anti-jathebandi, if they were, they wouldn't have created or blessed so many of them themselves. I don't know if what I'm saying is right, but this is the conclusion I have arrived at from my study of Sikhi. Others will have arrived at different conclusions, and good thing too -  Sikhi is a garden full of many diverse flowers.  I do not believe Guru Ji aspired to make all Sikhs, or all people,  identical in their religious outlook and practice. 
    • So you think that Sikhs and Muslims need to remain bitter enemies for as long as this world exists?   And because of 84 do we also need to become eternal enemies of the Hindus forever and ever?   Yesterday Hindus were our friends but they ended up knifing us in the back. And Yesterday's enemies can become strategic allies of today. Try to see the bigger picture.
    • This one statement just proves you should know before commenting on such complex topics.
×