Questioner

WJKK WJKF sangat ji, i'm in desperate need of an amrit sanchar this weekend (may 28/9) but can't find one anywhere in the uk. i would even call up sevadars and beg them to try to arrange one if i had the contacts. please can anyone help?

Email here penji

I've already answered your question! There was no need to be gender specific, since the Rehat of the Khalsa applies equally to men and women. In this context, kesh forms a Kakkar and the keeping of kesh occupies such a place that it is a bujjar kurehat to remove it. It's quite simple really. Why would Guru Sahib specify that women must not "remove facial hair"? I'm not sure you realise how ludicrous that sounds, not only insofar as the latter is the most unnatural and superficial of actions centered around a modern archetype which the brainwashed ceaselessly chase. Sikhi is much higher than the latter - you leave this petty bull at the door to follow Gurmat. Were Sikh women so preoccupied with pulling the hair from their faces that they needed to be told not to do so? Was the injunction of the Khalsa not clear enough for these feeble creatures to understand? So, before you ask me again, Guru Sahib has not told Sikh women to "keep facial hair"; the idea is unnecessary and laughable. The Guru created one Khalsa which adheres to the same injunction. Or are you here with an agenda to imply that Guru Sahib was sexist - that their words, their Khalsa, and their Rehat was only for the likes of males? Will you have difficulty understanding how on God's green earth the Guru could have possibly accepted women in their natural form, hair and all? Arguing for gender equality on this forum is getting tiresome, Maharaj help us. I think this will be my last contribution.

I'm assuming you're asking about where the requirement to keep kesh as part of the Panj Kakkar is written. Various rehatname.

There is no need to make gender specific requests; Guru Sahib has instructed that an Amritdhari Sikh keep his or her hair. Men and women of the Khalsa Panth are expected to adhere to the same Rehat Maryada and keep their Panj Kakkar, one of which is kesh.

I realise divorce is not an easy option. At the least, you should know that I'm here if you want to talk, and I don't live far away from you either if you want a "confidential" friend.

You want me to look through books that I no longer possess and write out the quotes for you, when you could run a simple Google search? I interpret this as your way of avoiding the crux of the discussion. If you do want to look into it, check out: Page 40 of Jhutti, J. (2011) Sikhism Today. London: Continuum Press. Page 137 of Pruthi, R. and Sharm, B. R. (1995) Sikhism and women. Delhi: Amnol Publications. Or go onto Google Books, type in "Sikhism menstruation" and go from there.

Maharaj condemns the belief in ritual purity throughout Asa Ki Vaar. Eg. the belief that a person is impure because of their caste, for example, and a Brahmin who accidentily touches them must therefore wash themselves. Maharaj also talks about ritual purity in regards to food. It is particularly the Vaishnava Hindu branch which condemned the "impurity" of women due to menstruation, and this is the belief that Maharaj is talking about here - it fits right in with that which Guru Sahib is criticising throughout Asa Ki Vaar.Sources? If you want academic sources I can give them to you, since this formed part of an essay I did. I can send you book names tomorrow, when I'm on my laptop. However, you don't need academics to tell you this. Plently of Sikh sources or parcharaks will know the context of the Bani.

jio joroo siranaavanee aavai vaaro vaar || As a woman has her periods, month after month, Guru Sahib is laying out the the prevalent Hindu belief that periods make women impure.... joot(h)ae joot(h)aa mukh vasai nith nith hoe khuaar || so does falsehood dwell in the mouth of the false; they suffer forever, again and again. ...So that they can make a comparison between this belief in "impurity" and what it really means to be impure.Guru Sahib is throwing mud in the face of that belief in external purity by suddenly bringing in the concept of mental impurity. soochae eaehi n aakheeahi behan j pi(n)ddaa dhhoe || They are not called pure, who sit down after merely washing their bodies. soochae saeee naanakaa jin man vasiaa soe ||2|| Only they are pure, O Nanak, within whose minds the Lord abides. ||2|| Now there we have it. Guru Sahib slams the belief in external impurity which they first laid out. They've said, hey, those of you who believe that a woman's period makes her impure - impurity is not a matter of the body. It is not simply by washing the body that one becomes pure or impure. Impurity is a matter of the mind and not the body. You're around here insulting people a lot, "Akalifauj". But you're spreading ignorance because you don't have a clue about the context of this shabad. If you've read Asi Ki Vaar, you'll know much of it is addressing and criticising the Hindu belief in ritual purity, and so the context of this shabad becomes obvious to anyone who reads it.

Telling a woman to try harder to make her abusive husband change is the most idiotic and dangerous advice you could give. It is becuase of the advice of people like yourself that so many women and families have irreversibly ruined their lives.YOU are perpetuating a harmful and deluded belief system. Maharaj can change anything if they so wish, obviously. But they do not wish for us to sit still and take beatings whilst praying that they might one day stop. A Kaur is sovereign, courageous, and loved by her Father - she has every right to stand up and leave any abusive situation. What would Guru Sahib, or the real Singhs, have said and done? I think they would have instantly gone to sort this douche out but, at the very least, they'd have kept their daughter/ sister safe. And here you are today, telling her to put up with <banned word filter activated> in case things change. Think. Your words have consequences, even on a forum. This is coming not from a "15 year old" "paapu poster", but a paapu who's unfortunately had experience in the matter.

This is really awful. I wish I could start a campaign against this douche-bag - our community really are a bunch of idiots when it comes to things like this, yet they boast about stupid crap like stopping interfaith marriages. Pathetic. I know it's really difficult. But would returning to live with your family not be an option? Failing that, a friend's house? A women's shelter? Obviously it would be a big decision for you to make, but I want you to know that the option is always there. As your younger sister, I'd also be happy for you to stay at mine for as long as you need (assuming you're in the UK).

You are absolutely right.

There are many things wrong with this comment, but I just have to point out that the OP has clearly stated that she likes her hair and wanted to keep it. She said she accepts herself and feels free. Your comments about what is "unnatural" or whether she (or, actuallyy, all women - thanks for that) should keep her hair are totally irrelevant... did you even read her post?

Any updates sister? We hope you're well!

What? I'm not confusing gender with sexuality, nor talking about bisexuality or sexual inclinations. The point I'm making is that there are plenty of people who fall biologically outside of the male/ female category. By the logic that an Anand Karaj should only and in every case be between a man and a woman, those people are also restricted through no fault of their own. Accordingly, I would be unable to have an Anand Karaj with a Gursikh hemraphrodite because they would not wholly fit the "male" category, but nor do they fit the "female" category. Do you see what I'm saying? Vaheguru has made something more than male and female, the picture is not black and white and there's more to life than one's genitals.

Where do hermaphrodites fit in, then? If they don't fit neatly into a gender category, who are they "allowed" to have an Anand Karaj with - or are they restricted too, on account of the way they were born? In all seriousness, they serve as an example of the irrelevance of gender in Vaheguru's plan. Things are not as black and white as they tend to appear to the privileged heterosexual Sikh man or woman.

Eduardo, your concern is valid in that no woman should be made to keep her body hair by the insistence of men. (Although ironically in this society they are encouraged to remove it by the insistence of men - that is what you should be protesting). But you seem to be implying that the only reason a Kaur would do so is due to the latter and not because she's exercising her own free choice. No, that's demeaning and paints us (women) in a bad light. A Sikh woman will be as hairy or hairless as she wishes on account of her own choice.Women will do or not do as they wish with their bodies. The poster asked whether laser before Amrit was permissible on Sikhi grounds, and it's not. It can never suddenly be. I think people know that even whilst they decide to do it. But nonetheless, people will do as they wish with their bodies - and nobody is stopping them, but Sikhi does not change because of it.

Do any of those people even read Gurbani? They clearly don't believe or accept what the Guru says, only keeping kes after Amrit to tick an imaginary box. That is not love, that is not the way of the slave. It's the way of a person who wants to follow their mind. What's more is that they think they are above the Guru, that they can somehow get around Maharaj's will. In reality theyre mere pawns in the Guru's hands. bahuth siaanap aagal bhaaraa || Through clever tricks, the weight is only piled on more and more.

It may seem worth it, but it won't be. If you stop walking in the will of Guru Sahib for something else, that thing can never be fruitful. The call is to give up your clever ways and completely leave your life at the feet of the Guru - whatever will be will be, pehila maran kabool jeevan kee shad aas. I know this is a hard pill to swallow for those of us who have are own desires like marriage, but in the end what we want is subordinated to what Maharaj wants for us... I'm saying this a sister who expects the same thing that you're going through. And you have every right to be angry at the "Sikh" men about their hypocrisy, but the way I see it is I wouldn't want to be with anything less than a Gursikh anyway (eg. one who lives and breathes Gurmat - not just one who looks the part - andarau choote paij baahur duniya andhar fail).

Cor blimey, why do you need to ask? Why do you need permission? Go fourth and use your judgement and be your own person. I would like to add that most people know nothing about feminism. But I can't be bothered with this.

Why do we stand during Ardaas? (Particularly personal Ardaas).

Bhenji, I'm really sorry to hear this. This is so wrong. I can't tell you to leave, but I can tell you that you deserve more - there's no doubt about it. You are a Kaur and you had an Anand Karaj to an Amritdhari man who's failed to be a decent husband or Gursikh. You are still a Kaur, and with Guru Sahib by your side you still have the capacity and self respect to cut your way out and come out fighting. I know that you want to make things work. But know that no matter how much you want to work on the marriage, if he remains uncooperative then your efforts are futile. A marriage and your efforts to move forward have to be two-sided - how can he change if he is unwilling to? Don't go silent, don't stop seeing things clearly, don't fall for his manipulation. Threatening suicide is one classic example abusers use to keep the partner trapped in the relationship. I hope you have a family and friends who care for you with whom you talk to this about. Don't become isolated. I'm here too, please feel free to message anytime. And calling the Sikh Helpline is a good idea, whether you want advice or someone to listen.

He says that to him it's "just sex". He says that he couldn't be with you because of your son. If I heard this about any man, I could say unequivocally that he does NOT sound worth it.

Ya'll complicate things considerably - which is fine, I suppose, it's quite wonderful that Guru Sahib has given each Sikh the ability to view the same path in a multitude of different ways. But the way I see it, the first principle of Sikhi is daya and Sikhi itself is the path of love. Only through indiscriminate love can Vaheguru be realised within oneself and within all others - jin prem kio tin hee prabh paaeeio - anything contrary to love, any abonxious theorising or hurtful condemnation can at once be seen to be a deviation from the path of love. Guru Nanak Sahib's arms were open to all. There is no way we can block someone from the path when Guru Sahib themselves didn't do so. If you won't forget your chaturai and simply love and accept all, then I implore you at least to consider how the things you say affect those closeted souls who read these posts in hope and sadness.

I feel exactly exactly the same. And I've been called a hippy Sikh too. I don't understand why these hot headed young Sikhs are left to their own devices, left to bully others and create conflict.