Sikh Women And SGGS ji Is This True?

[doctor_mani]

dr_mani

if u dnt have anything decent to say plz keep ur stupid thoughts to urself...ur still annoyed at me from other topics which shows ur only on here to wind ppl up..i try 2 ignore u yet u push me more into krodh...most ppl on this forum think ur a fool n ur proving that right now

plz do reply bak trying to sound mature n well educated its not gonna impress anyone...

(~*SiNghNi*~ Im not commenting on any other topic other than this very one. You call yourself a 'moorakh' in the opening paragraph remember? When I disagree with you, you have a problem, and when I agree with you, you still have a problem! Thought I'd be nice to you this time but you really dont know how to appreciate gifts do you? What kind of person are you? Are you ever satisfied. I think krodh suits you and your charecter full of ego. You have gained something invaluable by being angry, you just added to your basket of evils. You should be thankfull to the things I do to you- you wont find krodh cheaper than this anywhear.

Who are you to say most people on this forum think Im a fool? I say what I believe in my innermost self. How many people do you know share their thoughts 100%. If you dont like what I say its your problem. Besides, I only agreed with what you said, but instead of appreciating that you got angree.

I dont understa

nd your charecter (~*SiNghNi*~! Your a weird one. And something says inside me I'll never understand you. Im not tring to impress anyone out there but even if I was, what would you loose from this?

I replied to keep you happy- you wanted me to didnt you. Well you got it. Tell me what dont I do for you? I do all this for you because I like you- youre an interesting charecter with a good sense of humour. Pray to Waheguru that you dont loose your touch.

Waheguroo Jee Ka Khalsa!

Waheguroo Jee Kee Fateh!!

Doctor_Mani

[GABROO KHALISTAN DAH]

dr. mani are u self perscribing perscriptions?

i would'nt put much faith into ne rahit nama

[Gupt_Singh]

ive mentioned this somewhere else, that bhai chaupa singh isnt exactly the most reliable man when it comes to the rehat or history......he mentions himself as one of the original panj pyare and he says bahmans are better than all others.....his rehatnamas in particular are notoriously anti woman......

rehatnamas are importnat but it is important to remember also that other historical sources, or cross referencing multiple rehatnamas, are the only way to prove your point on one part of the rehat.

[bijli kaur]

vaheguru vaheguru vaheguru

[~*SiNghNi*~]

dr_mani ji

u keep commenting on my personality calling me all sorts from insane to wierd..may i ask why? (edited)

its sometimes gud to show anger, we all need some sort of fire in us how else would we defend ourselves... what else u expect me to be a pacifist ghandi?

why dnt u get married so u can take ur insults out on her, u wnt have 2 be a net hero anymore...

i think from now on we should ignore each other unless u have something decent to ( which i doubt u ever will)

(edited)

PAGE 98 GURU GRANTH SAHIB Ji

No one is foolish, and no one is clever.

naa ko moorakh naa ko si-aanaa.

ADMIN NOTE : NO PERSONAL ATTACK ALLOWED ! Post Edited

[japmans]

Holy God..... Doctor Mani and Singhni, pm your arguments to each other.....

[Akaali]

Please don't argue on such useless topics. And there's no point in arguing, just brings anger, and ego. Come on guys!! Bhul chuk maaf karnee..

[Gupt daasan daas]

Waheguroo Jee Ka Khalsa!

Waheguroo Jee Kee Fateh!!

dr mani, are u amridhari, in other words, are u a sikh?

BHULL CHUKK MAFF

Waheguroo Jee Ka Khalsa!

Waheguroo Jee Kee Fateh!!

[JSingh]

There are many rahetnamas by many people and there is no doubt that there had been mixing in Sikh History by clever and panth dokhis. No doubt about it. In your post, Singhni Ji, the quotes that you mentioned, they are indeed true that they appear in Rahetnamas, and as one can see, these are muslim concepts that women are unclean and they should not read scriptures, so and so on. As I can think of, the original Rahetnamas of Bhai Chaupa Singh, Desa Singh, Bhai Prahlad Singh, and many others, were obtained by panth dokhis, changed and mixed with anti-sikh stuff, and exposed to the public, as true sikh rahetnamas. We are lucky that we have Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji and we can see what is right and what is wrong in these Rahetnamas.

Concerning mixing in our scriptures and history, there is a book written by Karam Singh Historian,"kattak Ke Visakh". In this book, he analyzes Guru Nanak Dev Ji's sakhi written by Bhai Bala, in which Bhai Bala claims that Sri Guru Angad Dev Ji asked him to write about Guru Nanak Dev Ji's Sakhi. The version that we can buy from bookstores is not the original version. It is addited version.

Karam Singh took the original version of this Sakhi and wrote a book this book proving that there was no such person called 'Bhai Bala'. Bhai Bala is a made up character to do mixing in Sikh scriptures. Karam Singh also writes that the Parkash Utsav of Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji has a different date in Bhai Bala's Sakhi, whereas Bhai Mani Singh's version and other Sakhis have a common date. Unfortunately, we are celecrating Guru Sahib's birthday according to Bhai Bala. Another thing, the language of Bhai Bala's Sakhi is very modern. I have

not read the whole book yet, but few pages. I also have Bhai version of Guru Sahib's Sakhi, but as I said before, it is not the original version.

In the orininal version, many disgraceful things are written about Guru Nanak Dev Ji.

Karam Singh also says, as we all know, Bhai Gurdas Ji's bani tells a lot about Guru Nanak Dev Ji's visits, but no were in his Bani, Bhai Sahib mentions the name 'Bala'. The only person he mentions is 'Mardana'.

One day, I was reading a book about Sant Attar Singh Ji and Sant Ji mentioned Bhai Bala. I was confused because Karam Singh proved that a person called 'Bala' never existed in sikh history. But at the same time a thought came in my mind: There was Bhai Bala and Sri Guru Angad Dev Ji did ask him to write Guru Nanak Dev Ji's Sakhi and he did. Then later on this sakhi went in path dokhis' hands after many years and they did mixing in it and destroyed the original. The reason I am saying it happened after many years after it was written is due to the fact that the language of this sakhi is very modern.

Gurusikho, people had been trying to destroy and mixing in our histrory from the beginning. As we can see, Sikhs actually never had time during the time of Gurus and many years after, to pay attention to their scriptures and literature. We were busy fighting with moghuls and struggling to survive and save the world, and the clever people were busy destroying our history. A lot of the evidence of wars and other historican incidences and struggles that we have written records of are by non-sikhs historians. And at that time in Moghul raaj, no one had the courage to write the truth about Sikh History. There is truth, but in a mixed form.

If someone wants to read some pages of Karam Singh Historian's book, I will sacn them in December and upload them here.

To my Sikh Sisters: Please do not feel bad or get offended by these rahetnamas. They are not original. Feel proud to be Singhneea and daughters o

f Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji, because Guru does not view us as males or females, but as SIKHS.

bhul chuk di khima

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa

Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

Jaswant Singh

[Singh 5]

taken from www.tapoban.org:

Author: Balpreet Singh

Date: 11-10-03 13:49

The Chaupa Singh rehitnama is interesting on different levels. Chaupa Singh was a Chhiber Brahmin and sometimes he seems to let a bit of a Brahmin bias enter into his work. At other times he is completely egalitarian and condemns caste in all forms. "Naa daekhai Khatree, naa daekhai Shood ki Vaish hai. Sikh Guru kaa daekhai, jaat barn naa daekhai" meaning "One should not look at whether someone is Khatri or Shudra or Vaish. One should look whether someone is a Sikh, one should not look at caste or clan." (77) All my references on this rehitnama come from the Padam book.

The Chaupa Singh rehitnama also contains a number of internal contradictions which indicate that it has been tampered with. One very clear case is the situaton of "saluting the sun". "Guru kaa Sikh praatay outh kay sooraj noo(n) namastay aakh kay, Sikhaa(n) noo Vahiguru Jee kee Fateh bulai" (91) meaning, when a Sikh rises in the morning, he should say "namastay" to the Sun and then Fateh to the Singhs. That's problematic on a number of fronts, seeing as how Sikhs don't revere the sun and the sun hasn't risen when a Sikh gets up (last part of night ie. amrit vela). But the rehitnama later contradicts itself: "Jo sooraj dayvtay noo namaskaar karay, so Tankhaiyaa" (105), meaning, "One who salutes/does namaskaar to the sun is a Tankhaiyaa".

And so I come to the issue of women in the Chaupa Singh rehitnama. This again is a very confused issue. I havn't seen the manuscript you quote which says not to give Paahul to women, but the common Chaupa Singh rehitnama says the following: "Jo Sikh, SikhNee noo(n) khand

ay dee paahul naa dayvay, so Tankhaiyaa" (105) meaning, "that Sikh who does not give khanday kee paahul to a female-Sikh, is a Tankhaiyaa".

Even in regards to reading Sree Guru Granth Sahib, your references are correct, but the same rehitnama then goes on to say, "Guru kee SikhNee Granth Sahib pothee paRn sikhay..." (107) meaning a female-Sikh should learn how to read Sree Guru Granth Sahib.

Overall, we can learn interesting things from rehitnamas, but we can't consider them to be the authority on rehit. Rehit has been passed down amongst Gursikhs and it's hard to find but it still exists. Only that rehit is authentic which can pass the test of GurbaaNee.

http://www.tapoban.org/phorum/read.ppa?f=1...1&i=6411&t=6411