Jump to content

Singhnis with Dastaar look ugly?


Guest kaurrrrr
 Share

Recommended Posts

20 hours ago, Mahakaal96 said:

You seem to lack understanding of evidence collecting & in general don't seem capable of having an intellectual adult conversation but never the less...

This is coming from a person who used said a reason didn't exist and then turned around and said a doesn't exist because the second reason which I already said didn't happens is the reason why the first claim never happened.  Also it's coming from a person who changed his position after being caught in his illerate assessment of Khande da Amrit, once charan pahul factual point was brought up and was given to both genders without any stipulation.  Here let me show you

Quote

In my first post I wrote 'according' to maryada of Hazur Sahib & Buddha Dal women were not given khanda da amrit (they are given kirpan amrit at Hazur Sahib & Buddha Dal) in 1699.

This is the first time you have mentioned kirpan amrit and never say it in your first post.  You do say the following:

Quote

According to maryada of Hazoor Sahib & Buddha Dal women were never given Khande Di Pahul.

Then later in the post you speak about amrit and say the following:

Quote

Naamdharis were the first to start giving amrit to women around the late 1800's, there's written proof of this.

If you had not changed your position, the above would have said women were first given kirpan amrit by Buddha dal and naamdhari were the first to give khande da amrit.  Let's say you made a mistake and was not clear on your post.  Okay, I'm giving you a chance to clear it up.  So one member quotes your post and poster jkvlondon gives you and example of Mata Bhago Kaur taking amrit.  Now here is a perfect chance for clown college poster mahakaal to clear up according to his beliefs, woman did take amrit but they took kirpan amrit.  But this never happens instead poster mahakaal writes the following:

Quote

Mata Bhago ji's final resting place & tap asthan is just south of Hazur Sahib... no one there refers to Mata Ji using 'Kaur'. 

In the same post poster mahakaal is asking for proof of women taking amrit when he himself want to change his position later to say women were given amrit through kirpan amrit.  Here it is:

Quote

Please provide historical written source that predates 1900 that gives evidence that women were given amrit

Now poster jkvlondon directly challenged you to present evidence to say Mata Bhao Kaur never took amrit.  You did not provide any comment saying women were given kirpan amrit.  Instead you say no women were given amrit.  Clown college has done a number on your ability use logic.  But let's go with your clown college taught rationality and say you made a mistake and forgot to mention women were given kirpan amrit.

In his last post before he is presented with charan pahul being given to all Sikhs regardless of gender he writes the following.  Again, I am giving him a lot to clear up his post and he had three post where he could have cleared up amrit was given to women through kirpan the amrit.  But in his last post he repeats what he said in the first two post.  Here it is:

Quote

If women took amrit & became 'kaurs' then why are all handwritten hukamname of Mata Sahib Deva signed Mata Sahib Devi & not kaur??

Naamdharis have written sources that say they were the first to give women amrit & did so around 1850 onwards.

Nope didn't clear it up here either.  Such a crucial point of how women were given amrit after being challenged by two poster and this clown college member couldn't remember to write women took amrit through kirpan amrit?  Poster mahakaal, I officially give you the title of Mr. Bigly Trump. Then to add damage to insult he makes up the following example of how Punj Pyare would have to take amrit with their wives as a previous poster said a spouse can't take amrit without their spouse.  Here it is:

Quote

I asked for historical sources that predate 1900 that give evidence of women taking amrit... not emotional blackmail pappu parchar. Even if what your saying is right then that would mean that in 1699 the Panj Pyare would only have been allowed to take amrit WITH their wives & when Mahraj themselves took amrit they would only have been allowed to do so WITH Mata Sundri Ji, Mata Jeeto Ji & Mata Sahib Deva Ji! There's eye witness written accounts of what happened that day... of how mahraj asked for 5 heads.. beheaded 5 heads then bought back to life then bowed down & took amrit from panj pyare themselves... no where does it mention women or that the men could only take amrit with their wife. 

Read the first line, again he ask for proof for women receiving amrit.  Amrit and women being or not being given amrit was clearly in his head, but his clown college brain couldn't pull out of his thick head, oooooo by the way women were given kirpan amrit.  This poster mahakaal clearly changed his position after I presented charan pahul was given to all Sikhs regardless of gender and in the same way.  I can't believe I am wasting my time on this thick headed child.  I told him don't play with fire, but Mr. Bigly Trump couldn't resist.  Chalo let's get into rest of his nonsense post. 

 

Quote

 In support of this stance both Hazur Sahib & Buddha Dal claim that there is no evidence from 1699 that suggests women took Khanda da amrit. To further support this they say that handwritten hukamname of Mata Sahib Deva shows that Mata signed them as Mata Sahib Devi... but why would she do this if she had taken amrit & become a 'Kaur' as is popular practice at other takhts.

Humpty dumpty claims there is no evidence of him sitting on the wall, so how could he fall off the wall?  I will provide evidence humpty dumpty sat on the wall after you provide what evidence Hazur Sahib Sikhs and Buddha dal have to say women never took khande da amrit. 

 

Quote

There's apparently also hukamname by Mata Sundri Ji where Kaur has not been used but I don't know if that is true or not as I haven't seen them myself.

Okay, finally some hint of honesty.  But I won't take the bait.  Provide evidence for Mata Sundri ji and Mata Sahib Kaur ji as well.  You made the claim and now it's time to present it.  And no humpty dumpty business.

 

Quote

Separate to these but of interest is the fact that around 1850s the naamdharis make written claims that they are the first ones to give women Khanda Da amrit... if women were already being given khanda da amrit why would they make such a claim that would be easily blown out the water?

For the same reason naamdhari claim Baba Ram Singh says he was the next Guru of the Sikhs.  baba Ram Singh ji never claimed he was the Guru, but naamdhari continue to do so.  Again stop with the humpty dumpty business or I will be forced to call you Mr. Bigly Trump from this day forward. 

 

Quote

 If men can only take amrit with their wives then what are the names of the wives of the panj pyare who would have also taken amrit? Why do eyewitness accounts from that actual day in 1699 not mention women at all apart from Mata adding patasee into the amrit. Accounts from 1699 unanimously state mahraj asked for 5 heads.... not 5 couples heads.

Okay, I'm drop the clown college business because I can see your problem.  I won't mention it here because it will only embarrass you even more than you have been.  The Punj Pyare took amrit and so did Sri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji from the Punj Pyare and then Sikhs from the sangat took amrit.  Which may or may not have included the Punj Pyare wives and Sri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji's wife.  DamDami Taksal Rehat Maryada was written after Amrit was given to the sangat.  Spouses receiving amrit together is instructions for Sikhs.  Just to stay consistent, provide evidence on 1699 Amrit was given and it was given in the way you want to promote it.   

Quote

also you misunderstood the murti comment. Before formation of SGPC mahants had installed murtis of Devi Devte into the parkarma at Harimandir Sahib... in the Punjab, yet in Hazur Sahib where they are supposedly meant to be Hindu worshippers this never happened.

I clearly said before addressing your murti comment, your sentence is not clear.  The murti got into Sri Harmandir Sahib because the British allowed it as the British had control of Sri Harmandir Sahib at the time.  British didn't really care about Hazur Sahib because the hub, main place where Sikhs got directions from was Sri Akal Takht Sahib.  Yet Hazur Sahib still was corrupted by the very same people who were set to protect it.     

In this whole mess of a post, you never answered my question, why would women not be given khande da amrit when they were equally given charan pahul?  Since you changed your position.  Here is another question, why are women given kirpan amrit and men are given khande da amrit according to your proof.  If you have not caught on yet, I want proof for all your claims.  You asked others for proof and now it's only fair to ask proof from you.  I will be waiting for this proof.  Don't run and hide.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Akalifauj said:

This is coming from a person who used said a reason didn't exist and then turned around and said a doesn't exist because the second reason which I already said didn't happens is the reason why the first claim never happened.  Also it's coming from a person who changed his position after being caught in his illerate assessment of Khande da Amrit, once charan pahul factual point was brought up and was given to both genders without any stipulation.  Here let me show you

This is the first time you have mentioned kirpan amrit and never say it in your first post.  You do say the following:

Then later in the post you speak about amrit and say the following:

If you had not changed your position, the above would have said women were first given kirpan amrit by Buddha dal and naamdhari were the first to give khande da amrit.  Let's say you made a mistake and was not clear on your post.  Okay, I'm giving you a chance to clear it up.  So one member quotes your post and poster jkvlondon gives you and example of Mata Bhago Kaur taking amrit.  Now here is a perfect chance for clown college poster mahakaal to clear up according to his beliefs, woman did take amrit but they took kirpan amrit.  But this never happens instead poster mahakaal writes the following:

In the same post poster mahakaal is asking for proof of women taking amrit when he himself want to change his position later to say women were given amrit through kirpan amrit.  Here it is:

Now poster jkvlondon directly challenged you to present evidence to say Mata Bhao Kaur never took amrit.  You did not provide any comment saying women were given kirpan amrit.  Instead you say no women were given amrit.  Clown college has done a number on your ability use logic.  But let's go with your clown college taught rationality and say you made a mistake and forgot to mention women were given kirpan amrit.

In his last post before he is presented with charan pahul being given to all Sikhs regardless of gender he writes the following.  Again, I am giving him a lot to clear up his post and he had three post where he could have cleared up amrit was given to women through kirpan the amrit.  But in his last post he repeats what he said in the first two post.  Here it is:

Nope didn't clear it up here either.  Such a crucial point of how women were given amrit after being challenged by two poster and this clown college member couldn't remember to write women took amrit through kirpan amrit?  Poster mahakaal, I officially give you the title of Mr. Bigly Trump. Then to add damage to insult he makes up the following example of how Punj Pyare would have to take amrit with their wives as a previous poster said a spouse can't take amrit without their spouse.  Here it is:

Read the first line, again he ask for proof for women receiving amrit.  Amrit and women being or not being given amrit was clearly in his head, but his clown college brain couldn't pull out of his thick head, oooooo by the way women were given kirpan amrit.  This poster mahakaal clearly changed his position after I presented charan pahul was given to all Sikhs regardless of gender and in the same way.  I can't believe I am wasting my time on this thick headed child.  I told him don't play with fire, but Mr. Bigly Trump couldn't resist.  Chalo let's get into rest of his nonsense post. 

 

Humpty dumpty claims there is no evidence of him sitting on the wall, so how could he fall off the wall?  I will provide evidence humpty dumpty sat on the wall after you provide what evidence Hazur Sahib Sikhs and Buddha dal have to say women never took khande da amrit. 

 

Okay, finally some hint of honesty.  But I won't take the bait.  Provide evidence for Mata Sundri ji and Mata Sahib Kaur ji as well.  You made the claim and now it's time to present it.  And no humpty dumpty business.

 

For the same reason naamdhari claim Baba Ram Singh says he was the next Guru of the Sikhs.  baba Ram Singh ji never claimed he was the Guru, but naamdhari continue to do so.  Again stop with the humpty dumpty business or I will be forced to call you Mr. Bigly Trump from this day forward. 

 

Okay, I'm drop the clown college business because I can see your problem.  I won't mention it here because it will only embarrass you even more than you have been.  The Punj Pyare took amrit and so did Sri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji from the Punj Pyare and then Sikhs from the sangat took amrit.  Which may or may not have included the Punj Pyare wives and Sri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji's wife.  DamDami Taksal Rehat Maryada was written after Amrit was given to the sangat.  Spouses receiving amrit together is instructions for Sikhs.  Just to stay consistent, provide evidence on 1699 Amrit was given and it was given in the way you want to promote it.   

I clearly said before addressing your murti comment, your sentence is not clear.  The murti got into Sri Harmandir Sahib because the British allowed it as the British had control of Sri Harmandir Sahib at the time.  British didn't really care about Hazur Sahib because the hub, main place where Sikhs got directions from was Sri Akal Takht Sahib.  Yet Hazur Sahib still was corrupted by the very same people who were set to protect it.     

In this whole mess of a post, you never answered my question, why would women not be given khande da amrit when they were equally given charan pahul?  Since you changed your position.  Here is another question, why are women given kirpan amrit and men are given khande da amrit according to your proof.  If you have not caught on yet, I want proof for all your claims.  You asked others for proof and now it's only fair to ask proof from you.  I will be waiting for this proof.  Don't run and hide.   

A lot of effort & hot air but still no ACTUAL evidence or historical evidence. 

you seem to love the exhibition of your so called knowledge... even though it is based on no real evidence.

unlike you I'm not going to talk much, I'm just going to post up some actual evidence for you. I'm not going to do all the work for you... go research it yourself but anyhow 

Mata Sahib Deva hukamname;

 

 

IMG_1958.JPG

IMG_1959.JPG

IMG_1960.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Akalifauj said:

This is coming from a person who used said a reason didn't exist and then turned around and said a doesn't exist because the second reason which I already said didn't happens is the reason why the first claim never happened.  Also it's coming from a person who changed his position after being caught in his illerate assessment of Khande da Amrit, once charan pahul factual point was brought up and was given to both genders without any stipulation.  Here let me show you

This is the first time you have mentioned kirpan amrit and never say it in your first post.  You do say the following:

Then later in the post you speak about amrit and say the following:

If you had not changed your position, the above would have said women were first given kirpan amrit by Buddha dal and naamdhari were the first to give khande da amrit.  Let's say you made a mistake and was not clear on your post.  Okay, I'm giving you a chance to clear it up.  So one member quotes your post and poster jkvlondon gives you and example of Mata Bhago Kaur taking amrit.  Now here is a perfect chance for clown college poster mahakaal to clear up according to his beliefs, woman did take amrit but they took kirpan amrit.  But this never happens instead poster mahakaal writes the following:

In the same post poster mahakaal is asking for proof of women taking amrit when he himself want to change his position later to say women were given amrit through kirpan amrit.  Here it is:

Now poster jkvlondon directly challenged you to present evidence to say Mata Bhao Kaur never took amrit.  You did not provide any comment saying women were given kirpan amrit.  Instead you say no women were given amrit.  Clown college has done a number on your ability use logic.  But let's go with your clown college taught rationality and say you made a mistake and forgot to mention women were given kirpan amrit.

In his last post before he is presented with charan pahul being given to all Sikhs regardless of gender he writes the following.  Again, I am giving him a lot to clear up his post and he had three post where he could have cleared up amrit was given to women through kirpan the amrit.  But in his last post he repeats what he said in the first two post.  Here it is:

Nope didn't clear it up here either.  Such a crucial point of how women were given amrit after being challenged by two poster and this clown college member couldn't remember to write women took amrit through kirpan amrit?  Poster mahakaal, I officially give you the title of Mr. Bigly Trump. Then to add damage to insult he makes up the following example of how Punj Pyare would have to take amrit with their wives as a previous poster said a spouse can't take amrit without their spouse.  Here it is:

Read the first line, again he ask for proof for women receiving amrit.  Amrit and women being or not being given amrit was clearly in his head, but his clown college brain couldn't pull out of his thick head, oooooo by the way women were given kirpan amrit.  This poster mahakaal clearly changed his position after I presented charan pahul was given to all Sikhs regardless of gender and in the same way.  I can't believe I am wasting my time on this thick headed child.  I told him don't play with fire, but Mr. Bigly Trump couldn't resist.  Chalo let's get into rest of his nonsense post. 

 

Humpty dumpty claims there is no evidence of him sitting on the wall, so how could he fall off the wall?  I will provide evidence humpty dumpty sat on the wall after you provide what evidence Hazur Sahib Sikhs and Buddha dal have to say women never took khande da amrit. 

 

Okay, finally some hint of honesty.  But I won't take the bait.  Provide evidence for Mata Sundri ji and Mata Sahib Kaur ji as well.  You made the claim and now it's time to present it.  And no humpty dumpty business.

 

For the same reason naamdhari claim Baba Ram Singh says he was the next Guru of the Sikhs.  baba Ram Singh ji never claimed he was the Guru, but naamdhari continue to do so.  Again stop with the humpty dumpty business or I will be forced to call you Mr. Bigly Trump from this day forward. 

 

Okay, I'm drop the clown college business because I can see your problem.  I won't mention it here because it will only embarrass you even more than you have been.  The Punj Pyare took amrit and so did Sri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji from the Punj Pyare and then Sikhs from the sangat took amrit.  Which may or may not have included the Punj Pyare wives and Sri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji's wife.  DamDami Taksal Rehat Maryada was written after Amrit was given to the sangat.  Spouses receiving amrit together is instructions for Sikhs.  Just to stay consistent, provide evidence on 1699 Amrit was given and it was given in the way you want to promote it.   

I clearly said before addressing your murti comment, your sentence is not clear.  The murti got into Sri Harmandir Sahib because the British allowed it as the British had control of Sri Harmandir Sahib at the time.  British didn't really care about Hazur Sahib because the hub, main place where Sikhs got directions from was Sri Akal Takht Sahib.  Yet Hazur Sahib still was corrupted by the very same people who were set to protect it.     

In this whole mess of a post, you never answered my question, why would women not be given khande da amrit when they were equally given charan pahul?  Since you changed your position.  Here is another question, why are women given kirpan amrit and men are given khande da amrit according to your proof.  If you have not caught on yet, I want proof for all your claims.  You asked others for proof and now it's only fair to ask proof from you.  I will be waiting for this proof.  Don't run and hide.   

Rehitnama written by Bhai Chaupa Singh (if you don't know who Bhai Chaupa Singh is then research it)

This rehitnama was written in 1700 which means Guru Gobind Singh Ji were still on this mortal world (maharaj returned to sach kand in 1708)

heres translation for you, it is written that khanda da amrit should not be given to women;

I've asked several times but will ask once more, please provide written historical source which predates 1900 that proves women did take Khanda da amrit. Bhai Chaupa Singhs rehitnama from 1700 says women should not be given khanda da amrit & hukamname from Mata Sahib Deva from early 1700's show Mata never used Kaur in her name (which she would have had she taken khanda da amrit)

Hazur Sahib have written historical sources from the time of mahraj to back up their maryada, unless you provide some ACTUAL evidence then this conversation is at a standstill & pointless.

 

IMG_1947.PNG

IMG_1951.PNG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Mahakaal96 said:

Rehitnama written by Bhai Chaupa Singh (if you don't know who Bhai Chaupa Singh is then research it)

This rehitnama was written in 1700 which means Guru Gobind Singh Ji were still on this mortal world (maharaj returned to sach kand in 1708)

heres translation for you, it is written that khanda da amrit should not be given to women;

I've asked several times but will ask once more, please provide written historical source which predates 1900 that proves women did take Khanda da amrit. Bhai Chaupa Singhs rehitnama from 1700 says women should not be given khanda da amrit & hukamname from Mata Sahib Deva from early 1700's show Mata never used Kaur in her name (which she would have had she taken khanda da amrit)

 

IMG_1947.PNG

IMG_1951.PNG

I could find  not the bit proscribing Khande di amrit but I certainly saw something else , a Gursikh bibi cannot recite gurshabad by taking vaak in satsang.... I know that Chaupa SIngh was a Brahmin and somewhere else in the same rehitnama he tells gursikhs that they should respect Brahmin singhs more than others and that women should consider their worldly husband as pati parmeswar (not a sikh belief) . They are some questionable ideas especially even if we compare against rehit of Guru Nanak Dev ji and subsequent Guru Sahiban . Sword is written in english but where is the original ? because a Khanda is a sword as well as a kirpan. Explain to me how kirpan di amrit is not sufficient in itself for male children (at least ) and yet is for women  who have to cook for their men who are not supposed to eat from non-amritdhari , does this mean they only ever ate langar prepared by men?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

I could find  not the bit proscribing Khande di amrit but I certainly saw something else , a Gursikh bibi cannot recite gurshabad by taking vaak in satsang.... I know that Chaupa SIngh was a Brahmin and somewhere else in the same rehitnama he tells gursikhs that they should respect Brahmin singhs more than others and that women should consider their worldly husband as pati parmeswar (not a sikh belief) . They are some questionable ideas especially even if we compare against rehit of Guru Nanak Dev ji and subsequent Guru Sahiban . Sword is written in english but where is the original ? because a Khanda is a sword as well as a kirpan. Explain to me how kirpan di amrit is not sufficient in itself for male children (at least ) and yet is for women  who have to cook for their men who are not supposed to eat from non-amritdhari , does this mean they only ever ate langar prepared by men?

Bhai Chaupa singh was the nephew of Shaheed Bhai Mati Dass Ji & a Shaheed himself.

Hazur Sahib would be more then happy to answer your questions or anyone else's. Baba Kulvant Singh jathedar of Hazur Sahib is easily approachable as is Baba Prem Singh Ji from Gurdwara Mata Sahib Deva. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest London jwaan
On 12/03/2017 at 8:02 PM, Guest Gupt said:

Jasbir Kaur Villaschi,

Give it a rest.

Are you sure you are an Amritdhari Sikh? You certainly do not act nor speak like one. If you are, please consider visiting the Panj Pyare and asking for Pesh. Making violent threats and using potty-mouth language is not Gurmat. Samjh?

Also, I doubt your husband would do that as violence seeing as he is a Brazilian who knows very, very little about Sikhi itihaas.

You are not fooling anyone here.

I couldn't agree more. Jkvlondon, over and over again you adopt an aggressive tone to your discussion, accusing others of beadbi if they disagree with your militant views - which on many an occasion are a misrepresentation of facts, retrospective rewriting of history or declaring that others are not Sikhs.

However the elephant in the room is that despite your attempts to show that you are pious, the inconvenient truth is that metaphorically you choose to do the Brazilian lambada in front of SGGS as your choice in life. 

So keep spouting nonsense, the forum sangat are well aware of your hypocrisy. And no amount of militant nonsense will undo that.

Is your husband a teetotal amridhari convert? If not, then clearly you have chosen kaum as your path. So live with it. Did you have an Anand karaj? How long were you dating before you were married? Is that pious?

Like the guest said, you're not fooling anyone here.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mahakaal96 said:

Bhai Chaupa singh was the nephew of Shaheed Bhai Mati Dass Ji & a Shaheed himself

I know the family tree , but the problem is there are some thing there in the written rehitnama which we know that go against Khalsa Rehit (if we are just talking men) when you have amrit you break the bonds to previous belief systems such as caste system and recognise all as one jaat , humanity so why does he do this in the rehitnama:

"7.. Doctrine. A second reason for rejecting the extant text as the unadulterated work of
Chaupa Singh is presumably the presence of attitudes and injunctions which conflict with
twentieth-century orthodoxy. A prominent example is provided by the following item.

Any Gursikh who is a Brahman should receive twice the service and consideration that other
Sikhs receive. He who renders such service shall earn a double reward. 38

The rahit-nama's attitude towards Muslims is similarly unacceptable to orthodox ideals.

A Gursikh should never touch a Muslim woman. He should never become friendly with a
Muslim, nor should he trust his word. Never drink water from the hands of a Muslim and do
not sleep in the company of Muslims. Never trust the oalh of a Muslim ... 39

The notion that Guru Gobind Singh could have sanctioned privilege for Brahmans or the
contemptuous ostracising of all Muslims is unthinkable. No work inspired by the Guru could
possibly include such instructions. If the rahit-nama is truly the work of the Guru's servant
Chaupa Singh then these injunctions and others like them must surely be later interpolations.
conflict with later orthodoxy is also implied in some notable omissions. These include the
text's failure to mention the panj kakke (the five K's)40 and the absence of a distinctive
marriage ritual."
l

 

actually he was great grand nephew as they were grand uncles to Kesar Singh his father

under treatment of women he has put 

" (li) A Gursikh should never trust a woman, neither his own nor another's. Never entrust
a secret to them. Regard them as the embodiment of deceit. [100]"

This is a very Brahmin attitude to women not the Guru's  so you have to be intelligent and weigh it up against Gurbani and Gur Karni ..

under the section on caste :

" 3. Caste133
(i) Personal relationships amongst Sikhs should be based on the belief that there is only
one caste (gotra) and only one lineage for those who are followers of the one true
Guru. [79]"

then immediately contradicts:

" (ii) Sikhs should, however, observe the distinctive customs of their various castes, and
they should marry according to the traditional prescriptions of caste and lineage. This
they should do in order that no stigma may attach to their narne. 134 [II, 121]
(iii) Sikh marriages should be performed by Brahmans. [120]
(iv) Brahman Sikhs should receive double the deference and attention normally bestowed
on a Sikh. Any Sikh who imparts the teachings of the Guru should be similarly
honoured. [24]
At meals, however, Brahmans should not be seated in front of others. All should be
required to sit in the same line and Brahmans should not necessanly be served flrst.[499]"

then you have seperate satsangs for men and women mentioned later  etc too many to-ings and fro-ings , We know that women were admitted into Guru ji's darbar e.g. Rani visiting Guru Amar Das ji  so what's going on ? Has these Rehitnama been messed with at a later time ? Chaupa SIngh was Shaheed in 1723.

it is strange to see under marriage that a Singh can only marry the daughter of a mona if she has CHARAN DA PAHUL  and yet we are told by Guru Sahib himself from 1699 charan di pahul will be replaced by Khande da pahul .  A daughter of a sikh can be married to a Mona if he promises to take intiation :

"(v) A. Gursikh should not marry his daughter to a mona unless he agrees to accept
initiation. ThlS lS performed with sweetened water which has been used to wash a
Granth Sahib lectern (manji). Five stanzas of Japji and five of Anand Sahib should be
recited. The couple should then drink the water. If the bridegroom has previously
worn a sacred thread he may .continue to do so during the wedding ceremony, but he
should subsequently remove 11. [16, 21)"

so confusing ...as this initiation is not even equal to sikh initiation , charan pahul

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

So much hate for one-eyed Singhs. Harsh.

it is because all pairs of eyes imbibe the amrit with energy , even abilakhees are told to do naam jap whilst listening and look at the surface of the amrit .(at least I was told to by my elders) plus the panj are supposed to embody Guru Sahib , who was untainted by disfigurement or handicap

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"(v) A. Gursikh should not marry his daughter to a mona unless he agrees to accept
initiation. ThlS lS performed with sweetened water which has been used to wash a
Granth Sahib lectern (manji). Five stanzas of Japji and five of Anand Sahib should be
recited. The couple should then drink the water. If the bridegroom has previously
worn a sacred thread he may .continue to do so during the wedding ceremony, but he
should subsequently remove 11. [16, 21)"

I assume this became the process by which charan pahul was prepared once SGGS were given gurgaddi;

' ThlS lS performed with sweetened water which has been used to wash a
Granth Sahib lectern (manji). Five stanzas of Japji and five of Anand Sahib should be recited'

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

    • yeh it's true, we shouldn't be lazy and need to learn jhatka shikaar. It doesn't help some of grew up in surrounding areas like Slough and Southall where everyone thought it was super bad for amrit dharis to eat meat, and they were following Sant babas and jathas, and instead the Singhs should have been normalising jhatka just like the recent world war soldiers did. We are trying to rectifiy this and khalsa should learn jhatka.  But I am just writing about bhog for those that are still learning rehit. As I explained, there are all these negative influences in the panth that talk against rehit, but this shouldn't deter us from taking khanda pahul, no matter what level of rehit we are!
    • How is it going to help? The link is of a Sikh hunter. Fine, but what good does that do the lazy Sikh who ate khulla maas in a restaurant? By the way, for the OP, yes, it's against rehit to eat khulla maas.
    • Yeah, Sikhs should do bhog of food they eat. But the point of bhog is to only do bhog of food which is fit to be presented to Maharaj. It's not maryada to do bhog of khulla maas and pretend it's OK to eat. It's not. Come on, bro, you should know better than to bring this Sakhi into it. Is this Sikh in the restaurant accompanied by Guru Gobind Singh ji? Is he fighting a dharam yudh? Or is he merely filling his belly with the nearest restaurant?  Please don't make a mockery of our puratan Singhs' sacrifices by comparing them to lazy Sikhs who eat khulla maas.
    • Seriously?? The Dhadi is trying to be cute. For those who didn't get it, he said: "Some say Maharaj killed bakras (goats). Some say he cut the heads of the Panj Piyaras. The truth is that they weren't goats. It was she-goats (ਬਕਰੀਆਂ). He jhatka'd she-goats. Not he-goats." Wow. This is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard in relation to Sikhi.
    • Instead of a 9 inch or larger kirpan, take a smaller kirpan and put it (without gatra) inside your smaller turban and tie the turban tightly. This keeps a kirpan on your person without interfering with the massage or alarming the masseuse. I'm not talking about a trinket but rather an actual small kirpan that fits in a sheath (you'll have to search to find one). As for ahem, "problems", you could get a male masseuse. I don't know where you are, but in most places there are professional masseuses who actually know what they are doing and can really relieve your muscle pains.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use