Singhnis with Dastaar look ugly?

[jkvlondon]

29 minutes ago, Mahakaal96 said:

"(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'

then why is it not said the same for the mona woman in the previous section ? stop making up stuff and recognise that there are some things here that against Guru Gobind SIngh's rehit  especially numerous Hindu specific rituals like yearly shrad and putting phul of antim sanskar in GANGA ... also no mention of anand Karaj anywhere.  

It is literally contradicting itself , then comparing againt Bhai Nand Lal SIngh's rehitnama  again the difference are apparent.

No daughter of a sikh is supposed to given in the house of a mona  from Guru ji's own hukam  - roti beti di sanjh.. so how does one equate this rehit nama to Guru ji's orders ?

 

[Mahakaal96]

46 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

then why is it not said the same for the mona woman in the previous section ? stop making up stuff and recognise that there are some things here that against Guru Gobind SIngh's rehit  especially numerous Hindu specific rituals like yearly shrad and putting phul of antim sanskar in GANGA ... also no mention of anand Karaj anywhere.  

It is literally contradicting itself , then comparing againt Bhai Nand Lal SIngh's rehitnama  again the difference are apparent.

No daughter of a sikh is supposed to given in the house of a mona  from Guru ji's own hukam  - roti beti di sanjh.. so how does one equate this rehit nama to Guru ji's orders ?

 

I'm not making anything up, it's there in black & white to read & it's from Bhai Chaupa Singh not me.

People need to realise that the initiation rites of a SIKH & the initiation rights of a SINGH/KHALSA are not the same. The KHALSA rehitnama is for those initiated into the Khalsa FAUJ by way of taking 'Khanda Di Pahul'. The Khalsa is a fauj... not a social club where you bring your wives, sisters kids etc along. Firstly understand what a fauj is, then understand what the Khalsa is.

Like I said in previous post, please take your questions & grievances directly to Hazur Sahib to get clear answers 

[jkvlondon]

35 minutes ago, Mahakaal96 said:

I'm not making anything up, it's there in black & white to read & it's from Bhai Chaupa Singh not me.

People need to realise that the initiation rites of a SIKH & the initiation rights of a SINGH/KHALSA are not the same. The KHALSA rehitnama is for those initiated into the Khalsa FAUJ by way of taking 'Khanda Di Pahul'. The Khalsa is a fauj... not a social club where you bring your wives, sisters kids etc along. Firstly understand what a fauj is, then understand what the Khalsa is.

Like I said in previous post, please take your questions & grievances directly to Hazur Sahib to get clear answers 

ok also tell why a sehajdhari is allowed to trim his/her body hair with a scissor , does this mean there four classifications of sikh or three because you have khalsa (khande di pahul), Sikh man (charan pahaul) , Sikh child (kirpan di pahul/chaula), sikh bibian ,keep kesh ,cover heads, not allowed to recite bani to satsang (doesn't specify whether this only relates to male satsang or female satsang (so could be only a male reads to females) and yet is supposed to as part of her duties teach her husband sikhi and gurbani ??? (only kirpan di pahaul)

I'm sorry but too many contradictions  somebody who is called deceitful and untrustworthy , unworthy of sitting in mixed sangat, unworthy of taking gurvaak much less singing kirtan in darbar,  has to have lesser form of amrit, lesser rehit and yet instruct and remind  her husband of his rehit ?

what happened to "so kion manda aakiya jitt jamai rajan ?" of Guru Nanak Dev ji , the Manjis and parchaariks of whole areas by Bibian? How can one instruct other newcomers  of mixed genders if there is such a paabandi on gurvaak, gursewa in sangat? 

Problem is we don't know how much is truly authentic as it even contradicts contemporary Nand Lal rehitnama in places. Guru ji wasn't known to constantly change rehit  just build on previous Guru Sahiban's rehit.

 

[Akalifauj]

9 hours 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)

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.

 

This is not proof.  Provide Bhai chaupa Singh's rehat in its original writing.  A guy puffing his chest for hazuri singhs and Buddha dal is providing McLeod translations.  Lmao.... What's next Dr. Pashura singh writings.  What happened to your predated stipulation of 1900 evidence only.  Clown college presents translation dating from 1990 or so.  Hi Mr. Bigly Trump.....lol

[Koi]

I'm more interested in the why. Why can women not take Khande Di Pahul? 

[Mahakaal96]

1 hour ago, Akalifauj said:

This is not proof.  Provide Bhai chaupa Singh's rehat in its original writing.  A guy puffing his chest for hazuri singhs and Buddha dal is providing McLeod translations.  Lmao.... What's next Dr. Pashura singh writings.  What happened to your predated stipulation of 1900 evidence only.  Clown college presents translation dating from 1990 or so.  Hi Mr. Bigly Trump.....lol

What do you think this is... babysitting spoon feeding time?? The original is widely available... here's an idea... do some research yourself. The translation is of a text written in 1700. 

The handwritten hukamname of Mata Sahib Deva are originals from early 1700's, if Mata had taken Khanda da amrit she must have become a Kaur as is popular practice today... so why has Mata signed those rehitnama as Sahib Devi & not used the word Kaur anywhere?? 

Do your research and you will realise the word 'Kaur' actually means 'Prince'... not princess

You have been given a translation of a text  from 1700 (original widely available) & actual originals of hukamname written by Mata Sahib Deva herself from early 1700's..... where's your evidence that backs up your argument???

[jkvlondon]

11 minutes ago, Mahakaal96 said:

What do you think this is... babysitting spoon feeding time?? The original is widely available... here's an idea... do some research yourself. The translation is of a text written in 1700. 

The handwritten hukamname of Mata Sahib Deva are originals from early 1700's, if Mata had taken Khanda da amrit she must have become a Kaur as is popular practice today... so why has Mata signed those rehitnama as Sahib Devi & not used the word Kaur anywhere?? 

Do your research and you will realise the word 'Kaur' actually means 'Prince'... not princess

You have been given a translation of a text  from 1700 (original widely available) & actual originals of hukamname written by Mata Sahib Deva herself from early 1700's..... where's your evidence that backs up your argument???

wasn't it tradition for mahals to be surnamed deva/ devi ? and if issuing hukams for the panth signing with that name would be more well known than her new moniker.

[Mahakaal96]

10 hours ago, jkvlondon said:

wasn't it tradition for mahals to be surnamed deva/ devi ? and if issuing hukams for the panth signing with that name would be more well known than her new moniker.

That would be very very unlikely as amrit sanchar was in 1699, mahraj returned to Sachkand in 1708, Mata jis hukamname are from several years after that. So your looking at a minimum of around 10-15 years after amrit sanchar so unlikely Mata would continue to use a previous name. And also if we look at other females in the panth right from the time of Guru Nanak Dev Ji I can't recall any of them having Deva or Devi added to their name. If Mata had taken amrit & therefore become a Kaur as is common practice today then she would not have continued to use a previous name... just like mahraj themselves never used sodhi or rai once they became a Singh.

[Akalifauj]

10 hours ago, Mahakaal96 said:

What do you think this is... babysitting spoon feeding time?? The original is widely available... here's an idea... do some research yourself. The translation is of a text written in 1700. 

You are the one who made the claim of women not being given amrit at all first then changed your position to women were given kirpan amrit.  So it is on you to provide sufficient evidence for your claims.  Clearly you didn't understand the humpty dumpty example provided for your simplistic arrogant mind.  If I was to provide your evidence, I would be spoon feeding the clown college illiterate child by providing his own "evidence".  Man O man you are Donald Trumps replica.  And to further show how illiterate you are, you claimed kirpan amrit is given to women, the translated document you provide says nothing about women being given kirpan amrit.  If the translated document is gospel this would make Buddha Dal and Hazur Sahib wrong on women getting kirpan amrit.  As a result your original claim of Hazur Sahib and Buddha dal having the Guru given maryada is wrong.  Also do you see how the author of your translated document doesn't even write down the 5 Bani were recited to make the amrit.  Again Hazur Sahib and Buddha dal maryada will be wrong because they recite the 5 Banis to prepare amrit.   My initial assessment was correct, you are a child. 

Quote

People need to realise that the initiation rites of a SIKH & the initiation rights of a SINGH/KHALSA are not the same. The KHALSA rehitnama is for those initiated into the Khalsa FAUJ by way of taking 'Khanda Di Pahul'. The Khalsa is a fauj... not a social club where you bring your wives, sisters kids etc along. Firstly understand what a fauj is, then understand what the Khalsa is.

If Khande da Amrit was for only the fauj, then the Guru's have been fighting wars since Sri Guru Hargobind Sahib ji.  Khande Da Amrit would have been initially given by the Sixth Guru, you illiterate arrogant little boy. 

Quote

The handwritten hukamname of Mata Sahib Deva are originals from early 1700's, if Mata had taken Khanda da amrit she must have become a Kaur as is popular practice today... so why has Mata signed those rehitnama as Sahib Devi & not used the word Kaur anywhere?? 

Well do your homework little boy and find sources to make sense of it all.  I know what is going on here, but I won't spoon feed the illiterate arrogant little child, so he can go and troll other forums and Sikhs with his illiterate beliefs.  Time to put on big boy pants today.  You can't push me around little boy. 

If you had done your research, you would know other Gursikhs who gave their life to the Guru wrote an account of what happened on 1699.  This account is different than the English translated document you provided.  Again no spoon feeding for you little boy.

[Mahakaal96]

13 minutes ago, Akalifauj said:

You are the one who made the claim of women not being given amrit at all first then changed your position to women were given kirpan amrit.  So it is on you to provide sufficient evidence for your claims.  Clearly you didn't understand the humpty dumpty example provided for your simplistic arrogant mind.  If I was to provide your evidence, I would be spoon feeding the clown college illiterate child by providing his own "evidence".  Man O man you are Donald Trumps replica.  And to further show how illiterate you are, you claimed kirpan amrit is given to women, the translated document you provide says nothing about women being given kirpan amrit.  If the translated document is gospel this would make Buddha Dal and Hazur Sahib wrong on women getting kirpan amrit.  As a result your original claim of Hazur Sahib and Buddha dal having the Guru given maryada is wrong.  Also do you see how the author of your translated document doesn't even write down the 5 Bani were recited to make the amrit.  Again Hazur Sahib and Buddha dal maryada will be wrong because they recite the 5 Banis to prepare amrit.   My initial assessment was correct, you are a child. 

If Khande da Amrit was for only the fauj, then the Guru's have been fighting wars since Sri Guru Hargobind Sahib ji.  Khande Da Amrit would have been initially given by the Sixth Guru, you illiterate arrogant little boy. 

Well do your homework little boy and find sources to make sense of it all.  I know what is going on here, but I won't spoon feed the illiterate arrogant little child, so he can go and troll other forums and Sikhs with his illiterate beliefs.  Time to put on big boy pants today.  You can't push me around little boy. 

If you had done your research, you would know other Gursikhs who gave their life to the Guru wrote an account of what happened on 1699.  This account is different than the English translated document you provided.  Again no spoon feeding for you little boy.

Yawn..... still just hot air & childish remarks but still no ACTUAL facts or evidence....