Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Moorakh1

Patka, Keski Dastar Or None?

64 posts in this topic

here's a rehitnama from Bhai Daya Singh Jee (one of the original panj pyaray) ... very interesting... looks like dastaar was apart of maryada...

post-539-1136737672_thumb.jpg

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
here's a rehitnama from Bhai Daya Singh Jee (one of the original panj pyaray) ... very interesting... looks like dastaar was apart of maryada...

post-539-1136737672_thumb.jpg

145637[/snapback]

What does it say?? (Sorry can't read punjabi :)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What does it say?? (Sorry can't read punjabi :@

Rough translation (my Punjabi sucks too) :

Those who are going to get Amrit have to first wear a Kacheraa

They must gather their hair into a joora and sajjaa a dastaar

Wear a kirpan in a gatra, remain standing with hands together

Keep your joora in the middle of your head, and wear a big turban

Keep your hair covered, do kanga two times, and tie your turban chuN-key (gathered)

I don't understand the last line. Something about women and jooras :)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hellow found this for your refrence:

http://panthkhalsa.org/rahit/rahit_kakkar.php

The following points are clear from the above references :

Not only Kes (unshorn hair) are part of the external Khalsa Rahit, but also Keski (the Turban to cover the hair)

Keski is required by ALL SIKHS, regardless of sex. (See Rahit-Namah, Bhai Daya Singh Ji, above. Note: Bhai Daya Singh was one of the initial 5 Piyarays on Vaisakhi 1699.)

There is no separate Rahit for women, they are required to follow the Guru's Hukam in the same manner men are required to, and wear a Keski (Dastaar.) Sadly, for the last 60 odd years, "modern Sikh" females have rejected this very symbol of GurSikhi, and have thus gone against the Hukams of our Gurus. With the upsurge of Gurmat Parchaar, especially in the western countries, it is inspiring to see many daughters of Guru Gobind Singh wearing Dastaars as required by the Khalsa Rahit.

www.panthkhalsa.org

www.panthkhalsa.org

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if the rehit of keski/dastar was the same for men and women..

i wonder why the rehitnama would have an extra line for Women...and i nthat extra line for women doesn't say anything about dastaar...instead just says they should have joora and the kes not left open...

kind of throws out the argument for dastaar if being based on that rehitnama...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe it's for extra emphasis, to really drill the point home for women too. From the first two lines though, it's clear that it's directed at anyone wishing to take Amrit, not just Singhs.

And you can't overlook the other evidence presented by Tarunjeet Singh's earlier post. It makes no sense whatsoever to argue that women don't require a dastaar.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

amrithdahri bibian who want to follow full rehit must not just cover their heads but wear a Keski. done.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
amrithdahri bibian who want to follow full rehit must not just cover their heads but wear a Keski. done.

145742[/snapback]

singh making a statement like that is all good...but u gotta back it up.... can't just say that an expect people to listen...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

vaaheguroojeekaakhaalsaa

vaaheguroojeekeefatheh !!!!!

in the rehatnama above by pyare bhai daya singh jee, bhai sahib jee says that anybody who wants to take amrit, at the amrit sanchaar they should first be wearing a kachhera, put their kes in a joora and wear a dastaar, and wearing a sri sahib with gatra should stand with hands folded. they should tie their joora in the middle of their head and tie a large pug (dastaar).

in addition (i think it is implied that the following is rehit for when they become amritdhari) they should keep their kes covered, do kanga twice a day, and tie their pug (dastaar) chuN kay.

all of the above particularly applies to BOTH MEN AND WOMEN,

then bhai sahib jee says, women should tie joora and not keep their hair open.

even though this is TO WOMEN, it also applies to men, because also men should tie joora and not keep their hair open - as per the directions above.

however it is a necessary double instruction because it was (and still is) prevalent for women to keep their hair down (open) instead of tying a dastaar.

the entire rehitnaamaa is from pyare bhai daya singh jee to all khalsas, and therefore if you have shardaa and prem for bhai sahib jee's bachans you can trust that dastaar is equally important and necessary for both singhs and kaurs.

bhai sahib jee has not stated the word keski, but pug and dastaar. for me these are three words with similar meanings, the bottom line is that all gursikhs should wear dastaar according to this rehatnama.

please forgive my mistakes

vaaheguroojeekaakhaalsaa

vaaheguroojeekeefatheh !!!!!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think it is highly irresponsible and arrogant to try to put words into the mouths of great gurmukhs like bhai daya singh...i'm seeing people saying...oh he meant that women have to wear dastarrs...but it really isn't said explicitly...the only instruction that is specifically aimed at women doesn't even mention the dastaar...people are saying oh well..he was trying to clarify for them...but if he WAS trying to clarify...why wouldn't he clarify it in totality and say the word dastaar in addition to the joora?..hence the debate...

and whoever said all gursikh amritdhari bibian are required to wear dastaars...that's just laughable...i'll show you some amritdhari gursikh bibian without dastaars who follow such rehit that will make us all cry...

plus...whoever said that...shows how arrogant they are...especially when in the panthic maryadas keski isn't required...how are we above the panth all of a sudden...and then claim to be panthic....seems pretty counterintuitive...

i'm not saying women shouldn't wear keski....i love seeing my bhens in keskis..i think it is something that takes a lot of courage to do...however...i am not convinced at all that it is a requirement...and most panthic sikh organizations have taken the stance that it isn't required...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

jhakh bolan kiaa jag sio vaadh ||

Why do you speak such nonsense, and argue with the world?

jhoor marai dhaekhai paramaadh ||

You shall die repenting, when you see your own insanity.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jhakh bolan kiaa jag sio vaadh ||

Why do you speak such nonsense, and argue with the world?

jhoor marai dhaekhai paramaadh ||

You shall die repenting, when you see your own insanity.

145826[/snapback]

as long as your nice to everyone all the time, nothing else matters.

just remeber BE NICE.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thus far this has been by far the most CIVILIZED ... discussion on rehat... please lets keep it that way... :)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a singhnee who wears a distaar..you guys know that by now.

BUT I Agree.....ultimately if we look at all the facts and evidence the distaar is Not necessary..the evidence is there, what further proof is required....choosing to ignore won't change facts...we can all argue as much as we want.

My sisters that don the distaar are beautiful and so are the ones that don't...but I agree chunni...Just chunni alone is Not suffient coz it keeps slipping off....Joora is needed so that means covering it will also be required with chunni on top. However (playing devils advocate here..muhahha)....the bibi will not necessary be tyar-bar-tyar for battle coz will she look after the chunni or fighting the opponents.

It may come down to sharda..bibian wanting to and having the prem pyar to look like maharaj ji...'khalsa mero roop hai khaas' and wear the crown...I know I sure do. And its such a blessing to be able to wear the distaar.

But lets not knock those that don't. My mum doesn't wear a dostaar...she does waer patka and chunni. She's taght me a lot and I still learn from her.

vaheguroo. Ive been arguing both sides here....take your pick. Neither seems wrong...no use arguing.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as you cover your head it's all good. However, it's kind of sad to see a full grown man wearing a patka sometimes :) @

It's not good to get to much into small details, this is where wrong traditions and myths are born.

0

Share this post


Link to post
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 !!!!!

0

Share this post


Link to post
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!!

0

Share this post


Link to post
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. !

0

Share this post


Link to post
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.

0

Share this post


Link to post
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

0

Share this post


Link to post
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?

0

Share this post


Link to post
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??

0

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
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0