Kira

No, he's implying that marriage isn't a relationship based on lust. There's sexual attraction and then there is lust which is obsessing over that. Edit: Again I don't know much about the Anad Karaj and I've never read it, still far to young to consider marriage but it's gender neutral from what I hear, it's the union of 2 souls. Surely since souls don't have genders that shouldn't be an issue? The whole point of Marriage for us as Sikhs is to have a partner to help us attain our final goal. sexual or even sexual practices shouldn't even fall in the same category as this. 2 people can be married and not have a sexual relationship, but still love one another and then use that love to get to the ultimate form of love. Waheguru himself.

This may come as a massive shock to you but homosexuality actually exists in nature, so arguing it's "un-natural" is a pretty weak argument. Good work on exhibiting "unconditional love" by the way. This also may come as a shock to you but Hijra (trans-sexual) culture was alive and around back in our Guru-ji's time. So if being a transexual is worse than being a homosexual then you may have just shot yourself in the foot. That's a pretty nice post but I get it now. Thank you bhaji. Just one final point on where I highlighted. Obviously in the time of our Guru Gobind Singh Ji he created the Khalsa and implemented the keeping of kesh. But you argue that a mona should be considered a Shishya right? but before Guru sahib ji, there was more likely quite a number of mona, followers of Guru Nanak,Guru Angad and so on. Would they be considered "no sikhs then" . Again I just want to re-iterate im not attacking you in any shape and form, I just have quite a bit of questions regarding the rehet maryada and things such as Kesh. For some reason it was an aspect I didn't go into an awful lot. Which has obviously come and bit me back haha. Everything that happens is Waheguru's will. I feel free will is more of an illusion in the sense it's restricted to our choices and nothing more but even those are known to the creator. I could be wrong though but I never understood "free-will" in Sikhism entirely. May Waheguru guide me to the truth.

It shouldn't be like that though. When you said it all depended on the person's karam it made it seem like you were saying the people with better karam are born as men. I'm sorry if that wasn't what you meant but that was the vibe I got from it. Ahh that explains a bit, but I'm sort of referring to Amrit Sanchar. In creating and giving Amrit to a newly baptised Sikh, are woman still forbidden to be a part of that? :huh2: My knowledge on Amrit Sanchar is pretty limited. I'm sure there are some people that would jump at the chance of being part of the Amrit sanchar process. Obviously we have access to phat and such but it's something that's baffling me. Obviously. It's part of our identity. So does that mean someone who's born a sikh and does phat but doesn't keep kesh isn't a sikh? :huh2: For example many non-amritdhari can be pretty spiritual, does that mean they just respect Sikhism and don't actually be sikhs?

It usually isn't just "he said this and she said that" there's quite a lot of analysis done. Rape tests, DNA tests, mark diagnosis extra. The main problem is most of this evidence has been or can be classed as extremely circumstantial. Obviously not DNA (such as residue) but a good amount of other factors can be there. Rape convictions are pretty hard to prove but in most cases it's harder for woman. Especially in Asian cultures. So really saying it's skewed in favor of men or woman is overly simplifying things. in terms of the Justice system it varies from country to country. I live in the UK and I feel in certain areas men are given an advantage and vice versa for woman. Obviously this is a flaw and should be changed. But it's still a tad better than places like say India where woman are treated like stones and kicked from place to place. Or in this case department to department.

I'm not a Brahm Gyanin. Far from it, but it's something I've seen a couple of Kirtani and Jathadhar/Ragi (Punjabi words really confuse me at times) mention so I brought it up here. If we're man or woman based on our Karma then does that mean being a man is more fruitful or better than being a woman? Since no woman stood up does that mean since no certain caste member stood up they should be omitted from the panj pyare? I'm not referring to the Vaisakhi nagar Kirtan where we have the Panj Pyare walk in-front of Guru-ji. I can understand that, I'm talking about amrit sanchar. I'm not trying to pick a fight here apologizes. These are just some questions I dont quite understand. Yes Physical forms do play a somewhat role in our religion, but we're meant to be a spiritual people. We should focus on that and less of the physical aspects right. Obviously there are things that physically need to be done, eating,sleeping,keeping fit etc but our ultimate goal is Spiritual freedom and merging with the light of god.

Surely the virtues the Panj Pyare represent are more important than their gender. Sant Singh Ji's logic (see my above post) isn't something I can make sense off.

I really disagree with several of his points. All respect to him and everything he accomplished but what he said there was discrimination. He says that no woman stood up so no woman should be allowed in the Panj Pyare. By that logic we might as well whittle it down even more, a certain caste didn't stand up so they must not be allowed in the Panj Pyare. I think people are looking at the Panj Pyare from a historical Perspective more than a Spiritual one. This was an interesting thing this Bhaji brought up in a blog. Each of the Pyare represent a quality we should go towards. We should not be looking at their gender,cast,nationality,place of birth etc. We should be looking at what they represent in the Khalsa. bhool Chuk Maph karna

Can I just ask one thing? Where did sant Jarnail Singh ji object to woman being in the Panj Pyare? this is the first time im hearing about this so im interested in this. I don't even see how this is possible. Guru ji asked for a head in-front of an open crowd. This was both filled with Men and Woman. The Panj Pyare represent the five virtues that we as sikhs should incorporate into our lives. Sikhs, as in both man and woman who follow Sikhism. Their physical forms were not important, it's what they represent, what they did and what they passed onto us that should be important.

Indeed this sort of thing is pretty common. What's worse is the Punjabi community in general (not all people but a good amount) are now turning marriage into a buisness deal. Marry a girl/guy from India to get them here and then divorce them if need be. Sometimes this is done for either cash or some sort of benefit. I've never heard of a "devil" being mentioned. This is if we're speaking about one like the one in Christianity or Islam.

Pretty nice viewpoint there bhaiji. I'd just like to add a couple of things. It's alright to disagree with other faith's rituals of how they do things. Criticizing them is ok. However One thing that is NOT ok is extending that criticism to the person. Bullying people because they believe in that certain faith. Its all fine poking fun at the practice, but its another thing poking fun at the person. I've noticed a-lot of hatred in many sikhs here. I've seen some pretty hostile responses in the sangat here and some can be borderline derogatory, View points should all be respected, however if you disagree there is nothing wrong with bringing up why you disagree and then having a nice discussion about it. Under no circumstance should we, as sikhs, go straight to the swearing or name calling. If someone is wrong you can correct them, explain to them why and if they still don't heed then it's their own problem. As a person I'm prone to the same things, I get angry, I made some jokes that others took to heart and I admit it's my shortcomings. A common thing I see is people aren't willing to accept their wrong, they seem to look down on others and brand them "paapi" or even "bisharam" as soon as they can. We're more quick to slander one another than actually slander ourselves haha. Sorry if my comments hurt someone, bhool chuk maph karni.

I don't think English is as complex as Gurbani. No where near it infact. Feminism did start out as a movement to give woman equal rights to men, however recently it's just been bastardized into getting rights over men. I would personally support the real Feminists like the Suffragettes, but modern time "feminists" that are only interested in making a big deal out of small things? nah.

I wholeheartedly agree with this. Firstly alert your parents, they have a right to know about this and see how they deal with it. If nothing is done to solve this issue then contact the police. You may get awkward glances from the community but they'll leave you alone (depending where you are but i figure you wont disclose. Nothing wrong with that of course). What he is doing is completely anti-gurmat. If anyone has witnessed him abusing you, then take them with you as proof of his misdeeds.

Oh you're not wrong there. I apologize if I made it sound like I was endorsing his behavior. What I meant was that's just one egg, there are thousands of men who support woman's rights or thousands of whites who support black rights. but none of them have the desire or the need to be the ideal they endorse.

I heard about that. But it's sort of a different case as She was a leader of a massive organization consisting of mainly blacks. I don't see why someone would have to say "oh im white" or "oh im a guy" when they try to advocate for the rights of a certain group,gender or nation. It makes illogical sense. Even in our own History our Guru ji advocated woman rights.

I find it shocking you even had to say that. I guess only woman can be supportive of womans rights or blacks for black rights. @Balkaar Bhaji that was an excellent post there.

That sounds like a very nice experience. It's rare you see people of interfaith coming together like to exchange Pleasantries. Usually it's insults haha.

I've read some pretty shocking stuff. But I never expected to read that. You and me both.

X being a fact and then applying that fact to a set of rational problems that are presented. You're looking to take the literal word of the Guru sahib when there is usually a hidden message behind everything the Guru writes. They weren't dictators, they were guides. You're making the Guru Granth sahib and our guru's seem more akin to the Quran or the Bible which is more a set of rules rather than Spiritual advice. A burning desire to add my own thoughts into the Guru's words? Our founder Guru Nanak started his life asking questions, looking for answers. Our Guru Sahib has always used poetry,metaphors to convey a point. Every Piece of advice our Guru gives us has a meaning, it isnt wrong to explore that. If we take the literal part of everything we would all end up very confused. Sath means together. Increase togetherness with ones wife? sounds like sound advice from Guru-ji. But the word Love is also mentioned there. Have a look at this video. How is it so hard for you to understand. Heterosexuality is sexual inclination towards the opposite sex, Homosexuality is the sexual inclination towards the same sex. How on earth can you say that their not basically the same except for the obvious difference in preference. Marriage is the union of 2 souls, thus I have no objection to either Homo or Hetro relations. Now you're putting words in the Guru sahib's mouth. Many times the word "Spouse" is used instead of wife. Spouse implying you're life partner. So when I say a couple of people living together I must mean they're together physically right :happy2: . Homosexual couple is based on sexual inclination towards the same sex. Just as Heterosexuality is sexual inclination based towards the opposite sex. I don't think you quite understand the definition of Heterosexuality or Homosexuality. In both cases it's more than just "sexual" It's to do with love. The love of a woman or a man. Love is not restricted by sexual desires, there doesn't need to be a physical relationship between individuals for them to be in love. Let us review what I said. I never said they were "forward thinking". Anyone who thinks the 1930's western world was "forward thinking" is deluding themselves, It was still a time plagued with inequalities. Look at America where Blacks were struggling for rights. It took till 1928 in the UK for woman to get the right to vote on the same terms as men. Rather than putting words in my mouth, please counter my points properly. I never said the West was Forward thinking, far from it. I never said the SGPC was forward thinking. They let woman be in the Punj Pyare. So what? Guru Sahib never stopped them. When Guru ji stood out the open and asked for a head there were woman present. It was an open Diwan. Most people struggled to let that tradition go because the Original Punj Pyare were men, in actuality it was the 5 virtues they represented that were the symbolism behind them. By you're logic anyone coming to a different conclusion from Gurbani than your own should be executed for actually thinking. Thinking being something our Guru-Ji encouraged. I'm not misrepresenting anything. So far you've added multiple statements into my mouth and bring up subjects that aren't even related to the debate.

You should read up a bit more about sexuality. It isn't defined by labels, its more like a scale or waveband we all fall under.

Thank you Bhaji, that means alot to me

Yes of course. My apologizes, that is what I meant but my wording was slightly off.

That's an interesting way to look at it. I always defined Kaam as a sort of obsession over anything really. It doesn't have to be sexual in nature, it can be about someone, something but then acting on it with impure intentions.

Hello i was wondering if anyone had any links to online Dasam Granth sahib ji where I can read it in the English translation along side the Gurbani. I'm more keen on the English as my fear is i may disrespect Guru Sahib with my pronunciation of words (their very beautiful and elegant but sometimes a bit tricky for someone like me ). I'm more keen on certain aspects of it such as BACHITTAR NATAK and Guru Sahib's autobiography. Thank you in advance Waheguru Ji ka Khalsa Waheguru Ji ki Fateh

Modern Feminists are more interested in gaining an advantage over men than actually winning right. MisterrSingh and Balkeer is pretty bang on that their mainly white,middle class woman who feel victimized. Though there are aspects where woman do have the disadvantage, modern feminists are more about punishing men for their "misogynistic" ideals and practices. Feminism did start to give woman equal rights, however like most philosophies it was changed and bastardized.

That's pretty true. A hetrosexual is someone who is sexually attracted to woman. By that logic all straight people are just as bad as homosexual people. Narrowing Kaam to only lust is rather narrow minded. Kaam is defined as lust for anything. But lust doesn't necessarily mean abstinence from the vice. I know several people who wish to become successful in life. That doesn't make them attached to it, its a desire of theres. As long as it doesn't manifest in such a way that they'll do anything good or evil to get there, it's harmless.