Jump to content

Is man the head of the house?


puzzled
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest AjeetSinghPunjabi
On 4/4/2019 at 10:52 PM, MisterrSingh said:

Every human act doesn't necessarily need a metaphorical religious or spiritual justification in order for it to make sense. Some things just are. You can search the scriptures for all manner of reasons to justify nearly anything you like, but that doesn't make it any more valid.

answer not related to question at hand

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Christiangirl52 said:

Hi 

I would like to give my perspective on this. 

We are taught that man is the head of his home. A wife must defer to him and obey. Children must come below both parents and obey them. But man is subject to God. Therefore he cannot abuse his family. That is the structure of the Christian family. Surely this is the same for Sikhs? 

Yeah my Christian friend said the same thing, she said when she gets married her man would be the head of the house and family.

In sikh families it's supposed to be the same way. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But,  I think a man only fulfills his role/duty as the head of the house if he is a Sikh, nitnemi, God fearing, high moral standards, has respect etc  then he can guide his family the right way.

If he is a drunk, abuser, materialistic, little faith and not God fearing then what's the point? 

It's important to make yourself a good man and set an example. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Purpose of marriage is to fulfill your duty towards God with your partner. Marriage is a religious duty. So I don't understand why atheists or people of little faith get married tbh     their missing the whole point.  They can do what ever they want  shouldn't abuse marriage with their godless-ness 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest AjeetSinghPunjabi
6 hours ago, MisterrSingh said:

Stop stalking me, faggot. It's embarrassing for you. 

HAHA ! what a pooofter you're ! wide-asssed pooff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Christiangirl52 said:

But there are a lot of church-going respectable ones amongst us.

Where? 

I've been here for decades. Those people don't really exist. You want to see English people being their true selves just go out on the town on a Friday night. I'm not judging this btw. I'm just saying, that God and spiritual matters are not things most English people are concerned with (remotely). I think they are more concerned with enjoying life as much as they can - while they can. 

Link to comment
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...
 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