Jump to content

Patka, Keski Dastar Or None?


Moorakh1
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest A Singh.

Please allow me to clarify a few things.

Bhai Daya Singh Rehat Nama is NOT written by Bhai Daya Singh who was in the original Panj Pyare. This Rehatnama is a late 18th century document. In the same way Bhai Nand Lal Rehatnama is not written by Bhai Nand Lal as the style of poetry does not match up and is of a low standard.

This does not mean that either are to be dismissed as they stand as documents of their time which explain what the Khalsa Rehat was at the time of writing.

With regards to women and Keski, it is clear that this is compulsory. The Puratan style for women's Keski is not a V-Style Dastar. The traditional style of Keski can be seen below in a photo of Bibi Amarjeet Kaur, Shaheed Bhai Fauja Singh's wife. This is the style that Bhai Daya Singh Rehatnama referrs to.

bhai-fauja-singh.jpg

This is more inline with what Bhai Daya Singh was saying. Furthermore when we read Cunningham's description of Sikh women (Cunningham was a westerner who visited Panjab and wrote about what he saw), he states in "History of the Sikhs" in the appendix section:

"The Sikh women are distinguished from Hindus of their sex by some variety of dress, chiefly by a higher topknot of hair."

Lt Alexendar Burnes, writes his account even earlier in the 1800s in "Travels into Bokhara".

"We had now an opportunity of seeing the Seik ladies, who are not less peculiar in their appearance than their husbands. They knot the hair at the crown, and throw a white robe over it, which entirely envelopes the body, and gives a conical shape to the head. They pull up the hair so tight to form this knot, that the skin of the forehead is drawn with it, and the eyebrows are considerably removed from the visual organ. As may be imagined, this fashion does not improve their personal appearance, yet it is general amoung all classes of the females."

Looking at the picture of Bibi Ji it is clear what is being referred to. Puratan Sikh women tied their Jurra tightly (in this account so tightly their eyebrows were lifted!) and added the Kangha at the back. They tied a small Keski on top (most likely white) and then a large white chunni on top. To westerners such as Burnes who saw them, it would appear as if they had a conically shaped head, with a large white robe on top.

This does not mean that women should not wear Dastar. Panth Parkash by Giani Gian Singh also describes Puratan Sikh women in detail:

"Adorning weapons, chakars and knifes they wore many [in their dumallas – high conical turbans]. Forty kilos of weapons and armour they adorned. Dressed alike were young and old women. They were strong, powerful and of great charity. Some wore dress of women. Five dressed like men [i.e. in full warrior dress]. Getting Singh and Singhnias ready thus. Sending one Sirdar with them, the Singhnia set off towards the royal palace. The powerful Singhs stood outside. All the royal women came out to see them. They [singhs] had great moustache and beards. Their eyes were full of rage and eyebrows greater. Wearing many weapons. Seeing their great form and beauty, they were as if incarnations of the warrior spirit. The Begams were astonished. Begams sent them [singhs] gifts. Saluting the Singhs, they sent them away. Then they looked at the Singhnia. They took them into their palace. They [singhnia] said, “Sat Siri Akal”. They replied “Salaam” and sat them down. Seeing their form and strong bodies. Dressed in armour and weapons. Listening to their conversation of plundering and war. And how to kill a hunt. And how to aim with bows and muskets. Hearing them, they were astonished. Under their ‘Salwars’ [trouser like garments], were ‘Kashehras’ [breeches]. Seeing their great clothes. Listening to their manly words. The Begams were astounded. The four Singhnia had a special female dress. They wore silver ornaments twenty pounds in weight. Seeing this they were awe struck. Their Salwars were twenty yard long. They wore heavy lower garments. Their top knots stood span and half high. Their Shmeezes were of special design. Their physiques were large and heavy. Seeing them the Begams were astounded because they stood unarmed and weak of body. Fearing the Singhnia they cowered to half their size. Then began discussion on religion. Singhnia dismissed all other religions. The traditions of Muslims [Turks] they called false. The way of Mohammed they said was full of faults. The Singhnia described all the atrocities of the Turks. Hearing them the Begams shuddered. Shocked they covered their mouths with their hands. Hearing of the chastity, sincerity and morals of the Singhs. The Begams spoke nodding their heads. “Singhnia you are of great fate. You move about with you husbands. We are pathetic and suffer greatly. Our life is like life imprisonment. One king has sixty wives. By marrying we are as if trapped in a trap”

When a woman takes Amrit she will have tie tie a normal style of Dastar so the top can be opened (referred to in Daya Singh Rehatnama). In the same way, when a man takes Amrit he cannot tie a conical high damala or his Kesh will be inaccessible. The above accounts make it clear that some of the Singhnia when going into battle wore "female dress" (salwar kameez) whilst others wore Chola. When going into battle women wore damala with many shasters, etc whearas at other times they would wear keski with chunni on top. There was clearly room for acceptable variation. Therefore, for a woman, either a Keski with a Chunni ontop (as can be seen with the older generation and old photos of Bibian of Akhand Keertanee Jatha) or a dastar of any style (damala, v style, gol style) is acceptable. To not wear a dastar is unacceptable for a woman. The Jurra must be on the top of the head as it is the "crown" and a Keski (as per 18th century texts such as Bhatt Vehis, Guru Kian Sakhian) is absolutely compulsory.

There is no real room for trivial argument on this issue, the facts are clear. Dastar is compulsory. Just because you yourself or someone close to you does not keep this Rehat, but keeps all the other Rehats, or does alot of Simran or Paath, does not make this particular loss of Rehat any more acceptable. If only Singhnia today were as proud as the Singhnia in the description by Giani Gian Singh. They had their full Khalsa form with Jurra ontop of their head and pride in their Saroop.

An embarassing fact is that out of all world religions, Sikhs have the worst male to female ratio in terms of population. Sikh women grow up without any proper identity and are confused with Muslim and Hindu women. If they stayed true to the form of Puratan Sikh women then this problem would not be so wide spread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 63
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Please allow me to clarify a few things.

Bhai Daya Singh Rehat Nama is NOT written by Bhai Daya Singh who was in the original Panj Pyare. This Rehatnama is a late 18th century document. In the same way Bhai Nand Lal Rehatnama is not written by Bhai Nand Lal as the style of poetry does not match up and is of a low standard.

This does not mean that either are to be dismissed as they stand as documents of their time which explain what the Khalsa Rehat was at the time of writing.

With regards to women and Keski, it is clear that this is compulsory. The Puratan style for women's Keski is not a V-Style Dastar. The traditional style of Keski can be seen below in a photo of Bibi Amarjeet Kaur, Shaheed Bhai Fauja Singh's wife. This is the style that Bhai Daya Singh Rehatnama referrs to.

bhai-fauja-singh.jpg

This is more inline with what Bhai Daya Singh was saying. Furthermore when we read Cunningham's description of Sikh women (Cunningham was a westerner who visited Panjab and wrote about what he saw), he states in "History of the Sikhs" in the appendix section:

"The Sikh women are distinguished from Hindus of their sex by some variety of dress, chiefly by a higher topknot of hair."

Lt Alexendar Burnes, writes his account even earlier in the 1800s in "Travels into Bokhara".

"We had now an opportunity of seeing the Seik ladies, who are not less peculiar in their appearance than their husbands. They knot the hair at the crown, and throw a white robe over it, which entirely envelopes the body, and gives a conical shape to the head. They pull up the hair so tight to form this knot, that the skin of the forehead is drawn with it, and the eyebrows are considerably removed from the visual organ. As may be imagined, this fashion does not improve their personal appearance, yet it is general amoung all classes of the females."

Looking at the picture of Bibi Ji it is clear what is being referred to. Puratan Sikh women tied their Jurra tightly (in this account so tightly their eyebrows were lifted!)  and added the Kangha at the back. They tied a small Keski on top (most likely white) and then a large white chunni on top. To westerners such as Burnes who saw them, it would appear as if they had a conically shaped head, with a large white robe on top.

This does not mean that women should not wear Dastar. Panth Parkash by Giani Gian Singh also describes Puratan Sikh women in detail:

"Adorning weapons, chakars and knifes they wore many [in their dumallas – high conical turbans]. Forty kilos of weapons and armour they adorned. Dressed alike were young and old women. They were strong, powerful and of great charity. Some wore dress of women. Five dressed like men [i.e. in full warrior dress]. Getting Singh and Singhnias ready thus. Sending one Sirdar with them, the Singhnia set off towards the royal palace. The powerful Singhs stood outside. All the royal women came out to see them. They [singhs] had great moustache and beards. Their eyes were full of rage and eyebrows greater. Wearing many weapons. Seeing their great form and beauty, they were as if incarnations of the warrior spirit. The Begams were astonished. Begams sent them [singhs] gifts. Saluting the Singhs, they sent them away. Then they looked at the Singhnia. They took them into their palace. They [singhnia] said, “Sat Siri Akal”. They replied “Salaam” and sat them down. Seeing their form and strong bodies. Dressed in armour and weapons. Listening to their conversation of plundering and war. And how to kill a hunt. And how to aim with bows and muskets. Hearing them, they were astonished. Under their ‘Salwars’ [trouser like garments], were ‘Kashehras’ [breeches]. Seeing their great clothes. Listening to their manly words. The Begams were astounded. The four Singhnia had a special female dress. They wore silver ornaments twenty pounds in weight. Seeing this they were awe struck. Their Salwars were twenty yard long. They wore heavy lower garments. Their top knots stood span and half high. Their Shmeezes were of special design. Their physiques were large and heavy. Seeing them the Begams were astounded because they stood unarmed and weak of body. Fearing the Singhnia they cowered to half their size. Then began discussion on religion. Singhnia dismissed all other religions. The traditions of Muslims [Turks] they called false. The way of Mohammed they said was full of faults. The Singhnia described all the atrocities of the Turks. Hearing them the Begams shuddered. Shocked they covered their mouths with their hands. Hearing of the chastity, sincerity and morals of the Singhs. The Begams spoke nodding their heads. “Singhnia you are of great fate. You move about with you husbands. We are pathetic and suffer greatly. Our life is like life imprisonment. One king has sixty wives. By marrying we are as if trapped in a trap”

When a woman takes Amrit she will have tie tie a normal style of Dastar so the top can be opened (referred to in Daya Singh Rehatnama). In the same way, when a man takes Amrit he cannot tie a conical high damala or his Kesh will be inaccessible. The above accounts make it clear that some of the Singhnia when going into battle wore "female dress" (salwar kameez) whilst others wore Chola. When going into battle women wore damala with many shasters, etc whearas at other times they would wear keski with chunni on top. There was clearly room for acceptable variation. Therefore, for a woman, either a Keski with a Chunni ontop (as can be seen with the older generation and old photos of Bibian of Akhand Keertanee Jatha) or a dastar of any style (damala, v style, gol style) is acceptable. To not wear a dastar is unacceptable for a woman. The Jurra must be on the top of the head as it is the "crown" and a Keski (as per 18th century texts such as Bhatt Vehis, Guru Kian Sakhian) is absolutely compulsory.

There is no real room for trivial argument on this issue, the facts are clear. Dastar is compulsory. Just because you yourself or someone close to you does not keep this Rehat, but keeps all the other Rehats, or does alot of Simran or Paath, does not make this particular loss of Rehat any more acceptable. If only Singhnia today were as proud as the Singhnia in the description by Giani Gian Singh. They had their full Khalsa form with Jurra ontop of their head and pride in their Saroop.

An embarassing fact is that out of all world religions, Sikhs have the worst male to female ratio in terms of population. Sikh women grow up without any proper identity and are confused with Muslim and Hindu women. If they stayed true to the form of Puratan Sikh women then this problem would not be so wide spread.

145848[/snapback]

very interesting.....thanx for sharing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

gurmukh pyare veer jasdeep singh jee,

it is not arrogance to say that dastaar is a requirement for all gursikhs.

bhai daya singh jee has said in the rehitnama above, the all those wishing to take amrit should wear dastaar.

women and men both take amrit.

therefore women and men both should sajja dastaar.

vaaheguroojeekaakhaalsaa

vaaheguroojeekeefatheh !!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

doesn't 'joora' mean 'top-knot'?...

IF that IS the full translation.. then that would mean women would also have to tie their hair at the top of their head anywayz... which kinda points towards tying a keski/dastaar anywayz .. (unless they tie a patka)...

regardless, if that IS the translation.. then both men AND women would have to tie their hair at the top of their head...

bhul chuk maaf

Vaheguru Jee Ka Khalsa, Vaheguru Jee Kee Fateh!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We are soo used to see sikh women and even sikh men being in warrior type portray that we forgot that some can dress up like raja -ie Raja Janak and someone can dress up like - (Raja Hari Chand wife's) Rani Tara and still be "Bhramgyani". Bhai Gurdas Ji talks about them.. look it up.

In Sukhmani Sahib there is a tuk- Raj Mein Raja, Jog Mein Jogi.....

If you are thinking that only sikh women with keski with no make up can get passport to sachkhand darbar then you are mistaken.

We got figures both male and female who were king/queen and dressed up like king/queen but still leen in Vahiguroo (merge with God).

And if gurbani has accepted them not because how they dress up like but because of karni/bandagi towards Vahiguroo then

"Who are we to say otherwise"?

Bhai Gurdas Ji says referring to raja janak-

"Gurmukh Maya vich udasi"

Fact that you have figures who were king and queen but still were fakirs in Siri Guru Granth Sahib Ji and the fact you got figures who were in full bana in Siri Guru Granth Sahib Ji and in Sikh History shows "diversity in the panth" ..

Lets drop this fanatical bhusaria talibanistic sikhi by putting end to this brainwashing against women- oh guru ji only loves you, if you wear dastar dumalla 9 inch and if you wear 9inch kirpan blah blah....if sikhi was upto bhasuria singh sabhas along with his chamchaie sikhi right now would be taliban faith with over-zealous insecure so called "panthic" sevadars would have gave tankhaiya to women who don't wear keski but cover their hair. !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Namstang, how do you know those dressed up as "kings and queens" were able to merge with Waheguru? And who said they were Brahmgianis? Yes, Bhai Gurdas Jee's vaars mentions Rani Tara but where does it mention how she dressed (beyond the fact she wore sandals) and where does it say she was a Brahmgiani? Seems to me like you've simply spewed forth all kinds of irrelevant details, but none prove anything.

We got figures both male and female who were king/queen and dressed up like king/queen but still leen in Vahiguroo (merge with God).

Like who?

Gurmukh Maya vich udasi

Living admist maya and yet remaining INDIFFERENT to it would actually mean NOT dressing up as "kings and queens", and it would go against what you've said about wearing make-up too.

Lets drop this fanatical bhusaria talibanistic sikhi by putting end to this brainwashing against women
if sikhi was upto bhasuria singh sabhas along with his chamchaie sikhi right now would be taliban faith with over-zealous insecure so called "panthic" sevadars would have gave tankhaiya to women who don't wear keski but cover their hair.

Namstang, until you entered the scene here, this discussion was entirely civilized and sensible. Your post alone comes across as a feeble attempt at brainwashing, given the fact that it's full of irrelevant nonsense thrown together to form some sort of argument against women in Dastaars. If anyone seems insecure, it's you and you alone. If Singhnees wear 9" damaallay and 9" kirpans and look like more of a Sikh than you, don't be so threatened by us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GOOOOOOOO PENJIIIII GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO :)

JIKAAAAAAAAAARAAAAA BAAAAALLLLAAAOOOOOO KHAAALSSSAAAAA JEEEE!

VAHEGUROOOOOOOOOOOOO JI KA KHAAAAAAAAAAAAALSAAAAA

VAHEGUROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO JI KIIIIIIIIIIII FAATTTEEEEEEEHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!

THAN THAN SIKHI THAN THAN GUR PYAREIII d_oh.gifd_oh.gifd_oh.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Namstang, how do you know those dressed up as "kings and queens" were able to merge with Waheguru?  And who said they were Brahmgianis?  Yes, Bhai Gurdas Jee's vaars mentions Rani Tara but where does it mention how she dressed (beyond the fact she wore sandals) and where does it say she was a Brahmgiani?  Seems to me like you've simply spewed forth all kinds of irrelevant details, but none prove anything.
We got figures both male and female who were king/queen and dressed up like king/queen but still leen in Vahiguroo (merge with God).

Like who?

Gurmukh Maya vich udasi

Living admist maya and yet remaining INDIFFERENT to it would actually mean NOT dressing up as "kings and queens", and it would go against what you've said about wearing make-up too.

Lets drop this fanatical bhusaria talibanistic sikhi by putting end to this brainwashing against women
if sikhi was upto bhasuria singh sabhas along with his chamchaie sikhi right now would be taliban faith with over-zealous insecure so called "panthic" sevadars would have gave tankhaiya to women who don't wear keski but cover their hair.

Namstang, until you entered the scene here, this discussion was entirely civilized and sensible. Your post alone comes across as a feeble attempt at brainwashing, given the fact that it's full of irrelevant nonsense thrown together to form some sort of argument against women in Dastaars. If anyone seems insecure, it's you and you alone. If Singhnees wear 9" damaallay and 9" kirpans and look like more of a Sikh than you, don't be so threatened by us.

146021[/snapback]

- Rani tara dressed up as "queen", and existed long time before than sri guru nanak dev ji came. If gurbani accepts her, does upma of her karni of her naam jap, bairaag despite of her outer kriya, who are we to say women need to look certain way in order to get to sachkhand?

- Gurmukh Maya Vich udasi gurbani quote. if you learn the whole context of that shabad by bhai gurdas ji, you will come to know this label- gurmukh maya vich udasi is reffered to Raja Janak... yes same the king raja janak, who was surronded by maya, he took part in worldly duties, dressed up like a king, had multiple wives(raniya) but still he was bairaagi. He was udasi(nirlaip from the maya). He didn't do any karam khandi acts like - do certain things certain way, adapted certain dress in his bhagti marg.

- I don't feel threatned by bibya who wear dumalas or huge kirpan... if they wear it, that's good for them but in the course of wearing dastar or kirpan when these bibaya's or fanatical parchariks who are soo hell bend on keski start doing parchar on wearing keski bibi - gurmat, chardi-kalah singhni, non keski women- anti gurmat, prostitue(check tapoban), low life worm then i must step up to let them have taste of their own medicine.

by the way, i just don't get how jatha who themselves commit such a manmat of distorting vahiguroo mantar in their samagam have any authority to tell others what is gurmat and what is not Gurmat?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Namstang, first of all, stick to the topic of this discussion and save your hate-filled nonsense for someone who cares.

You've mentioned Rani Tara again but you've neglected to address my previous inquiries into how you know she was a brahmgiani and merged with Waheguru. How do you know she got to Sachkhand? If she existed before Guru Nanak, that's fine, but from after Guru Nanak onwards, Gurbani tells us that the only way to merge with Waheguru is through Naam given by the Satguru. Naam is given by Guru Sahib in the form of Punj Pyaaray during an Amrit Sinchaar. From Guru Gobind Singh Jee's time until the 1930's, every Sikh was required to wear a Dastaar before getting Amrit dee daat. This includes Singhs and Singhnees.

"Gurmukh Maya Vich udasi"...He didn't do any karam khandi acts like - do certain things certain way, adapted certain dress in his bhagti marg.

There's a word for "doing certain things in a certain way". It's called Rehit. You might have heard of it, you know, like when Guru Sahib says "Rehit pyaaree mujh ko, Sikh pyaara naae". Ring a bell?

- I don't feel threatned by bibya who wear dumalas or huge kirpan... if they wear it, that's good for them but in the course of wearing dastar or kirpan when these bibaya's or fanatical parchariks who are soo hell bend on keski start doing parchar on wearing keski bibi - gurmat, chardi-kalah singhni, non keski women- anti gurmat, prostitue(check tapoban), low life worm then i must step up to let them have taste of their own medicine.

So much hatred! What does Tapoban have to do with this? It's been proven to you time and time again that you've taken the so-called "quote" about prostitutes out of context, yet you try to slip the same point past us repeatedly, despite being put in your place just as repeatedly. When will you learn? And have you EVER participated in a discussion without being told to tone down the hate and being told you're going off-topic and bringing up totally irrelevant matieral?? Forget about "stepping up" and "giving a taste of their own medicine"....just sit down and take a chill-pill for God's sake! Once you cool down, maybe you could tell me where a fanatical parcharik has called non-keski women "low life worms".

If you REALLY felt it was "good for them" that Singhnees wear big dastaars and kirpans, your words wouldn't reek so strongly of insecurity and hate.

by the way, i just don't get how jatha who themselves commit such a manmat of distorting vahiguroo mantar in their samagam have any authority to tell others what is gurmat and what is not Gurmat?

By the way, I just don't get why it's so difficult for you to stay on one topic? I don't get why you would bring this up and think people here would actually think you're a sensible person with any skills in discussion at all. People here have already argued (successfully) against your nonsensical attempts at spreading hate against Tapoban/Jatha in other threads. When, oh when will you learn??

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