Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest ms19

Same surname marriage

Recommended Posts

tell me here pls?

Mukti Nama says: 'Gursikh should marry Gursikh', but the Gott ( surname) of mother and Gott of father has to be avoided.

i.e. Satnam Singh has father's surname 'Jones' and Mother's surname 'Smith'. On that basis, Satnam Singh CANNOT marry anyone with the surnames 'Jones' or 'Smith'.

Does that clarify Guru Ji's Hukum?....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesnt make it any different it one family was from the sun , and the other the moon. It still against the culture of Panjab, and jatts especially. Even Khatris avoid same ghotra marriage.

depends on the region. The further west the Khatris lived, they adopted the customs of the Muslim population such as marrying cousins and doing watta satta. The the ones from central and eastern Punjab did not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mukti Nama says: 'Gursikh should marry Gursikh', but the Gott ( surname) of mother and Gott of father has to be avoided.

i.e. Satnam Singh has father's surname 'Jones' and Mother's surname 'Smith'. On that basis, Satnam Singh CANNOT marry anyone with the surnames 'Jones' or 'Smith'.

Does that clarify Guru Ji's Hukum?....

No... I mean Give me some Genuine links/scriptures/notes of this hukam Where I can Read the same thing.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No... I mean Give me some Genuine links/scriptures/notes of this hukam Where I can Read the same thing.....

I gave you the link for the 'Mukti Nama' . Do you not understand English?....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I gave you the link for the 'Mukti Nama' . Do you not understand English?....

it was yours...I want an another link where you read the same thing and I am getting it but I m not getting you..that's the confusion :PP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mukti Nama says: 'Gursikh should marry Gursikh', but the Gott ( surname) of mother and Gott of father has to be avoided.

i.e. Satnam Singh has father's surname 'Jones' and Mother's surname 'Smith'. On that basis, Satnam Singh CANNOT marry anyone with the surnames 'Jones' or 'Smith'.

Does that clarify Guru Ji's Hukum?....

Please clarify why would Guru Gobind Singh Ji Maharaj give us Singh and Kaur as names and then specify non marriage of same Gotra....I am non punjabi and names in west are based on fathers name (Jones is John;s Son) and others are work based so (smith would be a smithy ie blacksmith) So most Jones wont be related even remotely because they are son of john...there are many Johns - the same with smith. Lets be honest here if you are not marrying anyone thats your sibling, first cousin of parent/uncles/aunties then surely the genetic mutation thing goes out the window? Based on this your great great great grandfather could be the same as your partners great great great grandfather and its still wrong? Really? Surely you should marry the person thats going to have the strongest Sikh jeevan than just ones that appease your family?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please clarify why would Guru Gobind Singh Ji Maharaj give us Singh and Kaur as names and then specify non marriage of same Gotra....I am non punjabi and names in west are based on fathers name (Jones is John;s Son) and others are work based so (smith would be a smithy ie blacksmith) So most Jones wont be related even remotely because they are son of john...there are many Johns - the same with smith. Lets be honest here if you are not marrying anyone thats your sibling, first cousin of parent/uncles/aunties then surely the genetic mutation thing goes out the window? Based on this your great great great grandfather could be the same as your partners great great great grandfather and its still wrong? Really? Surely you should marry the person thats going to have the strongest Sikh jeevan than just ones that appease your family?

maharaj ji did not say anything like that..This guy is just fitting his manmat with Gurmat... I asked him to give me evidence where the Guruji said like that ..but he is just giving his own links and other authors who themselves believe in Caste names..... Btw Indian caste system is based on Profession not on birth or clan. There is hardly any chance if the same genes are found in both parters and the other thing .. Indian castenames do not represent only one Group of people... These represent many communities of people.. Indeed the harsh truth is that We indian sikhs are being brain washed by our parents... The lesson is taught about the importance of jatheras in our life rather than sikhi and you know We sikhs from india have come from Hindus.. so obviously we need more 500 yrs to grow up from such hindu rituals.....because Its an hindu blood at last ...that we have in our souls...

I do wonder its 2014 ..we are not living in B.C...but believing castenames identify our ancestors ? lol One of the best kidding.... We bark on hindus but we cherish their systems lol

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with this post about not being from the same pind. As long as you are not related, it really should not matter.

Infact there are some last names that intermarry. Such as Brars, Sidhus and Gills. I have two massi that are married (my mom's cousins) to men with the same last name. These were arranged marriages.

It is a cultural thing....but some districts like bhatinda...most of those people are Brar's and Sidhus...who marry each other.

So really its about that. Apparently...the Punjab politician "Badal"...is from the pind Badal...but he is a Dhillon...who's daughter is married to a Dhillon as well...

People are really not caring about this anymore, as it is hard to find good people out there.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with this post about not being from the same pind. As long as you are not related, it really should not matter.

Infact there are some last names that intermarry. Such as Brars, Sidhus and Gills. I have two massi that are married (my mom's cousins) to men with the same last name. These were arranged marriages.

It is a cultural thing....but some districts like bhatinda...most of those people are Brar's and Sidhus...who marry each other.

So really its about that. Apparently...the Punjab politician "Badal"...is from the pind Badal...but he is a Dhillon...who's daughter is married to a Dhillon as well...

People are really not caring about this anymore, as it is hard to find good people out there.

when will you people get rid of your backward, tribal tail names and adapt only SINGH and Kaur as your last names??????????????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was replying to a post. I see no reason to quote & make personal attacks on my posts with very negative words. You are so far from Sikhi, if you have become so inflexible with your orthodox views, mostly like you a teen to 20's turban wearing guy with no life. Sikhi is a religion of love. I am not amritdhari so don't use the lastname Khalsa...I use Kaur before my surname as common practice. Yes we are tribal, and the names may be tribal to you...but that is an familial identity. Kaur & Singh are religious identities that show affiliation to religion. I use both so scream you head off, and show some respect to other people's views.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was replying to a post. I see no reason to quote & make personal attacks on my posts with very negative words. You are so far from Sikhi, if you have become so inflexible with your orthodox views, mostly like you a teen to 20's turban wearing guy with no life. Sikhi is a religion of love. I am not amritdhari so don't use the lastname Khalsa...I use Kaur before my surname as common practice. Yes we are tribal, and the names may be tribal to you...but that is an familial identity. Kaur & Singh are religious identities that show affiliation to religion. I use both so scream you head off, and show some respect to other people's views.

Your immaturity screams through with your immature comments and mindset.

keep using your sur name, fur name or any other name too. LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure dads pass x and Y chromosome so not sure that's a good post... You get an x from mum and an x or y from dad so xx =girl and xy = dad. Maternal and grandparents links are checked if you do it do it properly. The only issue is lineage so if this Is shared then in our culture it is considered incestuous.... But take advice as u never know what your parents view is until you ask - u don't have to tell them why u r asking just ask.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest

Mr Johal saab , Mian v pind to belong karda , main aksar dekhya pind de munde , pind dia kurian naal dating karde ne , Even our elder they have setting neighbors bhabi something like that , honestly ek bar soch ke dekh ke tuhade pind vich aida nai hunda, Pind vich marriage karn lai kuri munda behan bhai , Dating jida marzi karo je dating kar sakde aa te marriage v kar sakde aa , Eh sab bakwas ke sade guru granth sahib vich likhya aa aida , kithe likhya please link send karna , Nale surname kehne banaya sanu ki pata assi koun aa te kitho aaye aa, According to science everyone have connection in the world it means we all brother and sister . Ek passe assi kehnde haan ke dunia ek insaan te aurat bani aa , je ek insaan te aurat to bai aa te assi sab behan bhai hee lagde fer te sanu kise nu v kise naal marriage karn da haq nai aa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Main v ek pind to belong karda aa , Aksar dekhya pind vich munde kurian nu dating karde fer marriage karan to ki probelm aa ? jo jo message kar riha ek bar soch ke dekhe ke pinda vich ki hunda , Even sade elders v ghat nai c , main sunda hunda c ke ohna dada ohna dee bibi naal dekhya , aaj kal v munde kurian pinda vich aam dekhe jande aa, according to sceince we all connected it means we all brother and sister , Even we heard dunia te pehla ek admi aaya fir aurat , je dunia ek aurat te aadmi to bani aa fer te assi sab behan bai , fer te koi v nai marriage kar sakda .

Share this post


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...
Sign in to follow this  



  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I don't agree. Sure, we might not have the ease and comfort of categorisation along the western introduced binary/dual model. But I'm pretty sure that Sikhi can be demarcated along lines that aren't dumbed down and simplistic like that.   I've often said that the main difference between Hindu matt and Sikhi matt is Sikhi's militaristic egalitarian social vision. Abrahamising or westernising (which are both frameworks built upon binary/duality) Sikhi isn't any sort of solution. Pandering to the lowest intellectual denominator of the panth is stunting our development. As well as reaching down to such people, we have to drag them upwards too (no easy task given certain elements of the panth).    And look at how the example of Dusserha in Sikhi works. It's brought into a SIkh framework for the Sikhi agenda. It's clearly repurposed and adapted to needs. It's not some sort of blurring  or compromise. 
    • The so called good cops are standing quietly behind the blue line backing their comrades who commit racially motivated murder etc. When their voice is the loudest about abhorrent police practices, then they'll be good cops. Until then they're complicit.   
    • Kinda kills the Teesra / Niara Panth narrative, though, doesn't it?  Something has to come from something else, but those lines of demarcation are becoming blurred with each day.
    • I don't think it is just that. A lot of academics have a sort of secular western mindset too. A lot of them have taken the Singh Sabha ideas and have gone to extremes with them. When I was younger, there seemed to be little understanding of puratan Sikh ithihaasic texts (like those we are looking at in this thread), which were all pretty much branded as 'Hindu accretions' because the writers referenced commonly accepted Indic concepts and such in their narratives. I think colonialism sort of created a dual-abrahamic mindset amongst many educated apnay, and they went to extreme lengths to separate Sikhi from Hindu matt, even going to the extreme of vilifying their own historical texts because they couldn't grasp the contexts with the duality mindsets.  It's really good to see a generation who can study and analyse their own historical texts without the paranoia the olders did. 
    • I shouldn't have been so harsh for your honest opinion. Sorry about that. Guess I can be an ar5e as well.  I thought the book was really good in how it explained those moments of stillness that you can sometimes get if you're lucky when meditating (simran). Those moments (what he calls the power of now i.e. being in the moment unencumbered by the baggage of the past, as well as concerns about the future) are psychologically and spiritually rejuvenating.  And I didn't agree with all he said, I just thought he helped elucidate a purpose of meditation very well.     You should maybe try reading it again, because you might be in a different mindplace now, and be able to take more out of it. I should read it again too sometime.   
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use