Jump to content

Hindu Marry Sikh But Not Sikh Marry Muslim


Recommended Posts

Some1 asked y iz "ok" hindu marry sikh . But not so ok sikh marry muslim? Wo cn i say bak? :)

You simply need to ask 'someone', who told them it it was 'ok' to marry hindus ?

I know its fairly common among the urban sikh groups from Delhi, but amongst the much larger sikh community it hardly ever happens. In fact, I honestly can't think of a single relative - close or distant - that has ever married a hindu. It just doesn't happen.

At the end of the day.....in theory....the sikh would find more in common with a muslim spouse. The hindu spouse idea is just full of contradictions. Belief systems which are totally at odds with each other. But....thats the theory. You need to go back to 'someone' and ask if the muslim's family will allow her to marry a sikh without resorting to fisticuffs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest KopSingh

SORRY SON but we are not allowed to marry non-belivers, SIMPLE! if sikhs want to marry muslims and hindu, then thats fine, AS LONG as their partner converts to sikhi, end of! getting married (anand karaj) infront of guru granth sahib ji with a non sikh partner is like slapping guru gobind singh in the face, especialy as guru is bani, bani is guru.

any gurdwara committe/gianis that allows a sikh boy/girl to marry a non-beliver in the presence of guru granth sahib ji, should be slapped into some ukal (sense), then threatened. this crap has been going on for too long now! WE HAVE NEVER been allowed to marry out of the religion, amritdhari or not, so y now?

also ive heard of hindus marrying hindus in the gurdwara in the early days during the 1900's, is this allowed by the way guys? a bollywood actress (karishma kapoor) got married in a sikh ceremony (anand karaj), yet she and her husband r hindus, how come dis is happening? also the giani for this ceremony is a famous giani, bhai harbans singh

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there anything in bani that opposes inter religion marriage by Sikhs?

I know it is the maryada, but does anyone know of a sakhi where guru ji forbade it?

Ive asked this before and got referred to guru gobind singh jis 52 hukams, after doing much homework I couldn't find a sakhi of where guru declared this hukams.

My questions may make me sound like a doubter of maryada - I'm not, but it would good to know why I believe in what I do if anyone gets me. Unfortunately only an explanation from guru ji will do.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sister.. I think it's common knowledge that inter religious marriage cause hurdles in our own religious journey.

Example, if wife is from Hindu dharma and husband is from Sikh dharm then we know that their ideologies will clash sooner or later. They will not have two bodies one soul concept. During Amrit saanchar it is important that both husband and wife take it together, which means that wife need to leave Hindu ideologies in order to take Amrit saanchar. So inter-religion marriages doesn't work out if they religiously want to continue their birth adopted dharm.

Sikh definitation in our guru jees eyes : Amritdhari Khalsa

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

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...


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I never said anything about life for Sikhs in the UK in the 70s, I was talking about the present day. I understand and respect the struggles that you all went through to get to the position where you are today. But I hope you all don't lose sight of the fact that the freedom and status that Sikhs enjoy in the UK today is very far from the norm. Sikhs in the US today are fighting battles that were settled in the UK decades ago (and without the benefit of a population density that gives Sikhs in the UK at least some visibility and political sway). But forget about the US. You don't have to go that far, you can just cross the English channel and see how precarious the position of Sikhs is in continental Europe. Thanks for giving details about the grooming issue. Do you think this had to do with Labour being more concerned about the Muslim vote (as Muslims former a larger voting block than Sikhs) or political correctness? Or both? I concede that leftists sometimes go to far with political correctness and "canceling" in order to try to show how "fair" and "unbigoted" they are. I am not going to question your take on the whole grooming issue. You know more about that than I do. But that seems to be a very specific situation in the UK. I stand by my general point that left-leaning people are by far the most likely to support the rights of vulnerable minorities (which is the category that Sikhs fall under almost everywhere).   I don't buy your point about a backlash to "wokeness" at all. I don't think that that is what is causing the growing popularity of far-right movements. The way information is shared and distorted today is radically different from what was the norm not very long ago, and that has been the game-changer that has led to today's division and polarization. You seem to think that if the "woke" people would just be quiet, the racists would not have a "rallying cry". That is simply not true. First of all, those people will ALWAYS find something to complain about. (That has certainly been true throughout American history. If it has been less true in UK history, that is probably because the white British majority did not feel threatened by a sizable minority until relatively recently. See my second point.) Second of all, the complaints of the more hardcore right-wing racists increasingly resonate with the more "passive" racists as the majority community diminishes in size and feels more threatened. And third of all, as I alluded to before, today's media/information landscape will allow for any complaints to blow up and go viral.   Any time anyone from the non-majority community asks for anything, no matter how reasonable, there is going to be a backlash from the majority community. And in many instances, the non-majority community doesn't even have ask for anything or complain about anything to provoke a backlash. Their mere existence is enough. This is what history has shown us.
    • Guest free
    • And people want to talk about poverty, look at how India was stripped of wealth. Here 2800 silver bars were taken for ww2 but didn't make it back here. Now that they've found it, look at what they are doing with it. The pillaging is still going on.      Treasure from the deep: Thousands of silver bars that were meant to fund Britain's WWII effort but were sunk by German U-boat FINALLY reach their destination - and will be sold as coins Merchant ship carrying silver from India for the war effort was sunk in 1941 Its cargo of 2,800 bars of silver has sat on the bed of the Atlantic ever since Record-breaking bid to salvage the silver from three miles down a success The Royal Mint is now making the metal into coins to remember the tragedy https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2596785/Thousands-silver-bars-sunken-WWII-ship-sold-coins.html
    • I was reading something on the internet and came across this article and thought it may be of some interest to everyone here regarding their perspective on the impact of brutalities of colonisation upon India and its people.  Here is the link:-   https://www.myindiamyglory.com/2019/03/10/atrocities-on-indian-women-and-india-by-british-during-their-rule/     Atrocities on Indian Women and India by British During ... - myIndiamyGlory 10 Mar 2019 — Raped Indian women were forcefully made prostitutes by British Christians. Prostitution houses were set up by the Britishers in 350   
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use