Jump to content

Giving Out Parshaad


Guest -*-
 Share

Recommended Posts

I got a question in my mind but it might be controversial.

When giving out Parshaad to the "punj pyaraay" can you give it to biban? Recently at the gurdwara, a singh was giving Parshaad to a bibi and the sangat were like "ooooooo". I asked my friend if it was wrong but they didnt know. So is it right or wrong to give biban parshaad as being part of the punj pyaraay?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gurufateh!

i dnt know about that - BUT people call me sexist or wuteva - but i dont think Bibi'an just DECIDE to take part as Panj Pyare - i mean Panj Pyare are Singh males - when the time came and the Panj Pyare were being made - women should have thought about it then that maybe they should have got up. Besides IN MY OPINION - Panj Pyare should remain as Singh males.

lol sorry i know u was just askin about the Parshaad but u know - Panj Pyare situation came in my mind

people dont get offended by what i said - its just my opnion chunga? :TH:

Gurufateh1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

vahigurujikakhalsa vahigurujikifateh.

the parshaad should be given to five singhs. In the same way the panj piayre are five rehitvaan gursikhs. However if there are not enough singhs in the sangat for some reason, then its acceptable to give it to a bibi.

sorry for any mistakes.

vahigurujikakhalsa vahigurujikifateh

I got a question in my mind but it might be controversial.

When giving out Parshaad to the "punj pyaraay" can you give it to biban? Recently at the gurdwara, a singh was giving Parshaad to a bibi and the sangat were like "ooooooo". I asked my friend if it was wrong but they didnt know. So is it right or wrong to give biban parshaad as being part of the punj pyaraay?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gurufateh!

i dnt know about that - BUT people call me sexist or wuteva - but i dont think Bibi'an just DECIDE to take part as Panj Pyare - i mean Panj Pyare are Singh males - when the time came and the Panj Pyare were being made - women should have thought about it then that maybe they should have got up. Besides IN MY OPINION - Panj Pyare should remain as Singh males.

lol sorry i know u was just askin about the Parshaad but u know - Panj Pyare situation came in my mind

people dont get offended by what i said - its just my opnion chunga? :TH:

Gurufateh1

i know that the user has just described his/her own opinion.

but i have thought about this a lots many times.

like why izit that the women of today's world should be bound according to what sth. shud/ or shud not have happened 3-4 centuries ago!!!!!?!?!??!?!??

i mean take the circumstances which were in india at those times when women weren't allowed to come alone out of their homes.........they had to cover their faces ----------GHUND KADNA...............and like they had nothing called a social status unless it was a princess or a queen.......i mean even a princess or queen was taken here and there in a covered palanquin...........

but everything's changed

the women of those times CANNOT be compared to the ones that are today.

women today are more open and self-dependent...........

i know of some situations where people say..."esp. 'girls' shud not get baptized b'coz they got to get married and go to an another home and what if the other family are not vegetarians or so......!!!!!"

but ofcourse it not as much anymore..........

so i think rules shud change here too.............

why shud women be bound acc. to what the women in 17th century cudn't do?!?!?!?

oh!!!! and please anyone....do not take it personally ......... i mean it has often been a topic of discussion for me .... so i mean i thought to put it forward. rolleyes.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gurufateh!

i dnt know about that - BUT people call me sexist or wuteva - but i dont think Bibi'an just DECIDE to take part as Panj Pyare - i mean Panj Pyare are Singh males - when the time came and the Panj Pyare were being made - women should have thought about it then that maybe they should have got up. Besides IN MY OPINION - Panj Pyare should remain as Singh males.

lol sorry i know u was just askin about the Parshaad but u know - Panj Pyare situation came in my mind

people dont get offended by what i said - its just my opnion chunga? :TH:

Gurufateh1

i know that the user has just described his/her own opinion.

but i have thought about this a lots many times.

like why izit that the women of today's world should be bound according to what sth. shud/ or shud not have happened 3-4 centuries ago!!!!!?!?!??!?!??

i mean take the circumstances which were in india at those times when women weren't allowed to come alone out of their homes.........they had to cover their faces ----------GHUND KADNA...............and like they had nothing called a social status unless it was a princess or a queen.......i mean even a princess or queen was taken here and there in a covered palanquin...........

but everything's changed

the women of those times CANNOT be compared to the ones that are today.

women today are more open and self-dependent...........

i know of some situations where people say..."esp. 'girls' shud not get baptized b'coz they got to get married and go to an another home and what if the other family are not vegetarians or so......!!!!!"

but ofcourse it not as much anymore..........

so i think rules shud change here too.............

why shud women be bound acc. to what the women in 17th century cudn't do?!?!?!?

oh!!!! and please anyone....do not take it personally ......... i mean it has often been a topic of discussion for me .... so i mean i thought to put it forward. rolleyes.gif

i totally agree with you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest baba amarjeet singh

the reason why singhniaa cannot do 5 pyare seva is simply because it was in the hukam of maharaaj for 5 singhs to do this seva.

this does not change, no matter how the time changes, maharaaj's hukam remains the same.

the physical roop of a gursikh who wishes to take part in panj pyare seva is required to be a gursikh singh, with no angs missing.

to change the roop of panj pyare that guru jee gave is not very wise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Degh distributor!

agree with khalistan zindabadh, this is the correct maryada, wheres that link you gave before about how to make and give out degh?

5 singhs, or into the bata 5 times. nice and simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest confused
the reason why singhniaa cannot do 5 pyare seva is simply because it was in the hukam of maharaaj for 5 singhs to do this seva.

this does not change, no matter how the time changes, maharaaj's hukam remains the same.

the physical roop of a gursikh who wishes to take part in panj pyare seva is required to be a gursikh singh, with no angs missing.

to change the roop of panj pyare that guru jee gave is not very wise.

where in bani does it say that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GurFateh

1. I'd like to see this 'hukam' that everyone's talking about that states that panj piare have to be malke.

2. I think that through this whole discussion, no one has mentioned what the 5 piare represent.

THE GURU. And the Guru is neither male, nor female; the Guru is the Guru.

If you use this logic that only men stood up in 1699 then you can go a lot further and say that only middle-aged males can be panj piare, or that only men by the name Himmat Singh, Mohkm Singh, etc, can be panj piare. Why are you trying so hard to replicate that day exactly? Guru's traditions are timeless.

Forget the fact that 5 MEN stood up in 1699. Remember that only 5 PEOPLE stood up in 1699, in a crowd of thousands.

It's things like this, barring sexes from truly participating in the legacy of Guru Gobind Singh, that show that we are failing as Sikhs today.

We are all children of Dasam Patshah. To allow one group of children to do seva rather than another group is an insult to our Father, because it shows that we REALLY don't understand what he has taught us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

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

    • Part of the problem is the hostilities between India and Pakistan. If the border were open, Amritsar would easily become a huge trading city. Secondly, the National Highways Authority of India is constructing a new 6-lane expressway from Kashmir, through Amritsar/Jalandhar/Ludhiana to Dehli which will be part of the Ludhiana-Delhi-Kolkatta Industrial Corridor.  Maps of the New Silk Road show Kolkata as a key part of the "road". The Punjab to Kolkata expressway and rail connections will fulfill the ability to hook up to the New Silk Road.  In addition, while crossing to Pakistan via AH1 (Asian Highway 1) is difficult, India does connect to AH1 on the other side, towards the East. Finally, Punjab can trade with the world via Mundra port in Gujurat. Rail to Mundra, then sea onwards. Dubai is very close with a free port. If you send products to Iran, there are ground links onward to Europe.
    • Yeah, that's one possibility. Another I initially thought is that it's a Muslim trying to gather info. But then, you might ask, how does he know about Sikh textual sources. Well, you'd be surprised at their resourcefulness. A final possibility is he's a weak Sikh who was asked a question by a non-Sikh and now he's suddenly feverishly wondering where it's "written" that you can't marry a young child. To the latter, I would say, you're looking in the wrong spot. Gurbani isn't a 1428 page rulebook, like Leviticus or the Vedas: ਸਿਮ੍ਰਿਤਿ ਸਾਸਤ੍ਰ ਪੁੰਨ ਪਾਪ ਬੀਚਾਰਦੇ ਤਤੈ ਸਾਰ ਨ ਜਾਣੀ ॥ ਤਤੈ ਸਾਰ ਨ ਜਾਣੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਬਾਝਹੁ ਤਤੈ ਸਾਰ ਨ ਜਾਣੀ ॥ The Simritis and Shastras discriminate between charity and sin, but know not the essence of the Real Thing. Without the Guru, they know not the essence of the Reality, know not the essence of the Reality. Anand Sahib.
    • You're confusing two different things: One is merely adding starch to a turban to get a certain feel to the fabric. The other is tying your turban once and taking it off like a hat. It is this that people have a problem with. What's wrong with it is that Rehit says to tie your turban afresh every time. If you ask, "Where is that written?", it's written in Bhai Nand Lal ji's Rehitnama. @ipledgeblue didn't just make it up. Umm, no, bro. We're not evangelical Christians like President George W Bush of the US claiming to "talk to God" who told him to invade Iraq. "Speaking to him directly" basically ends up being doing whatever you feel like with the excuse that Guru ji told you to do it. If you still want to take your turban off like a hat, feel free to do so, but don't claim that it's Rehit.
    • You don't need to wear either a pag or dumalla in the gym. You can simply wear a meter or 1.5m small turban (gol pagg or round turban). It doesn't come off.
    • The reason you don't see anything wrong with it is because like a fish in water, you grew up in Western culture and imbibed it fully. It's very difficult to for parents to inculcate traditional culture while in the West. The reason there is a problem is because a kiss between a man and wife is a sexual act (I didn't say it's coitus, but it's still sexual.) By contrast a kiss between a mother and a child, for example, is not sexual. And in our culture, sexual acts are not allowed in public. Goras do allow it. And that's also the reason they have gay pride parades now with people walking around naked with children in attendance and so forth.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use