Jump to content
Guest Akaal

Throwing flowers on wedding

Recommended Posts

i absolutely hate that     how can they throw flowers over irrelevant mortals in the presence of Guru sahib      this really drives me up the wall     this is why i dnt go to weddings anymore   because i know i will get frustrated because of these fckrs     bet you its the females that came up with this idea    

Edited by puzzled

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This tradition was fairly common back in the day but more or less fizzled out at some point. I believe it carried over from when people used to get married with Bedi, which is actually how many Sikhs conducted marriages until the modern day Anand Kaaraj was formalised.

Marriages were not actually performed on a large scale in front of SGGSJ, if at all - there was no mass printing of Saroops and obviously wasn't a large number of handwritten Saroops either.

I'm pretty sure they were still performed with a fire even after Guru Ram Dass Ji composed Laavan. Prior to that people still went to Pandits.

I read a Sakhi attached to Laavan Bani in which a poor Sikh wanted to arrange a wedding but he didn't have enough money to pay for the services of the Pandit. So he went to Guru Sahib and related his issue after which the Laavan were composed, and Guru Sahib said to the Sikh you will no longer have to rely on Pandits and pay any fees.

Which is ironic because Anand Kaaraj today costs like £5-600 lmao. But also this Sakhi sheds some light on how people used to get married and one can also deduce they still continued to use fire.

Of course people find this all very hard to accept, like they do with much of our history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest akaal
2 hours ago, puzzled said:

i absolutely hate that     how can they throw flowers over irrelevant mortals in the presence of Guru sahib      this really drives me up the wall     this is why i dnt go to weddings anymore   because i know i will get frustrated because of these fckrs     bet you its the females that came up with this idea    

why do you have to always blame the girls? the men are equally as stupid for allowing this to happen, regardless of who's idea it is. on top of this, it's on a beach and they has a kund/ghoonghat infront of maharaj. blood joke. should have just had a hindu wedding. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, MrDoaba said:

This tradition was fairly common back in the day but more or less fizzled out at some point. I believe it carried over from when people used to get married with Bedi, which is actually how many Sikhs conducted marriages until the modern day Anand Kaaraj was formalised.

Marriages were not actually performed on a large scale in front of SGGSJ, if at all - there was no mass printing of Saroops and obviously wasn't a large number of handwritten Saroops either.

I'm pretty sure they were still performed with a fire even after Guru Ram Dass Ji composed Laavan. Prior to that people still went to Pandits.

I read a Sakhi attached to Laavan Bani in which a poor Sikh wanted to arrange a wedding but he didn't have enough money to pay for the services of the Pandit. So he went to Guru Sahib and related his issue after which the Laavan were composed, and Guru Sahib said to the Sikh you will no longer have to rely on Pandits and pay any fees.

Which is ironic because Anand Kaaraj today costs like £5-600 lmao. But also this Sakhi sheds some light on how people used to get married and one can also deduce they still continued to use fire.

Of course people find this all very hard to accept, like they do with much of our history.

so are you suggesting that circumambulations around fire and 'hindu type' weddings actually happened till very late into sikh history ?

and who used to come to perform the wedding ? pandit or granthi ? and what did they recite when the couple moved around fire ? soohi mehalla 4 or Rig vedic verses of marriage ,or both ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, MrDoaba said:

This tradition was fairly common back in the day but more or less fizzled out at some point. I believe it carried over from when people used to get married with Bedi, which is actually how many Sikhs conducted marriages until the modern day Anand Kaaraj was formalised.

Marriages were not actually performed on a large scale in front of SGGSJ, if at all - there was no mass printing of Saroops and obviously wasn't a large number of handwritten Saroops either.

I'm pretty sure they were still performed with a fire even after Guru Ram Dass Ji composed Laavan. Prior to that people still went to Pandits.

I read a Sakhi attached to Laavan Bani in which a poor Sikh wanted to arrange a wedding but he didn't have enough money to pay for the services of the Pandit. So he went to Guru Sahib and related his issue after which the Laavan were composed, and Guru Sahib said to the Sikh you will no longer have to rely on Pandits and pay any fees.

Which is ironic because Anand Kaaraj today costs like £5-600 lmao. But also this Sakhi sheds some light on how people used to get married and one can also deduce they still continued to use fire.

Of course people find this all very hard to accept, like they do with much of our history.

Nothing to say Gursikhs can't do marriages at home in a gursikh's home  who has Guru ji parkash  , no fees, and no fanfare  just simple anand karaj in Sangat. That's how I had my Mangni in Guru ji's presence at a Guru ji's presence .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, AjeetSingh2019 said:

so are you suggesting that circumambulations around fire and 'hindu type' weddings actually happened till very late into sikh history ?

and who used to come to perform the wedding ? pandit or granthi ? and what did they recite when the couple moved around fire ? soohi mehalla 4 or Rig vedic verses of marriage ,or both ? 

Agni phere were discarded by Guru ji when Anand Karaj was introduced , I would find it credible if Early Singhs did parkash of shastars in place of Guru Granth Sahib ji to which they did matha tek , if would be feasible that they would read Anand Karaj  in same way , when not in area with did not have a Darbar nearby.

The dehdhari Gurus of Namdhari mat do phere of agni devta ....and that is where they differ to standard Sikhs in terms of Anand Karaj maryada .

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, AjeetSingh2019 said:

so are you suggesting that circumambulations around fire and 'hindu type' weddings actually happened till very late into sikh history ?

and who used to come to perform the wedding ? pandit or granthi ? and what did they recite when the couple moved around fire ? soohi mehalla 4 or Rig vedic verses of marriage ,or both ? 

Please don't get in a tizzy lol. I'm not saying Sikhs are Hindu, or that we should change Anand Kaaraj etc. It's just perspective.

Yes I'm suggesting, and telling.

Pre-Laavan Bani - according to the Sakhi people went to Pandits, we can assume this would've been the Vedic ceremony.

Post-Laavan Bani - I used the word "deduce" specifically because one can come to the logical conclusion that fire remained but the hymns changed. The sakhi alludes to just Sangat performing the whole ceremony themselves, without the service of any Pandit or Granthi.

Later in Sikh history - there was lack of Sikhi so many people simply got married by the Vedic ceremony. If your grandparents are around or some bazurg ask them. It's highly probable someone in your own family got married this way. This is a well known fact. Some of my great-grandparents got married this way but they were still Sikh.

Further in Sikhi history - Mass printing of Saroops began, certain traditions were changed and formalised. I believe Anand Karaj as we know it today was created by Nirankaris (not the manmukh sect, the old ones). Now phere are done around SGGSJ. This is the current system and it works fine. I am not proposing we change it, but the history is still interesting nonetheless.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, MrDoaba said:

Please don't get in a tizzy lol. I'm not saying Sikhs are Hindu, or that we should change Anand Kaaraj etc. It's just perspective.

Yes I'm suggesting, and telling.

Pre-Laavan Bani - according to the Sakhi people went to Pandits, we can assume this would've been the Vedic ceremony.

Post-Laavan Bani - I used the word "deduce" specifically because one can come to the logical conclusion that fire remained but the hymns changed. The sakhi alludes to just Sangat performing the whole ceremony themselves, without the service of any Pandit or Granthi.

Later in Sikh history - there was lack of Sikhi so many people simply got married by the Vedic ceremony. If your grandparents are around or some bazurg ask them. It's highly probable someone in your own family got married this way. This is a well known fact. Some of my great-grandparents got married this way but they were still Sikh.

Further in Sikhi history - Mass printing of Saroops began, certain traditions were changed and formalised. I believe Anand Karaj as we know it today was created by Nirankaris (not the manmukh sect, the old ones). Now phere are done around SGGSJ. This is the current system and it works fine. I am not proposing we change it, but the history is still interesting nonetheless.

 

older sikhs wouldn't do lav around Guru ji just stand to hear reading and singing of Anand Karaj , I could imagine sangati roop reading singing of the Gurbani would be considered same as being in presence of Guru ji blessings wise .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

Nothing to say Gursikhs can't do marriages at home in a gursikh's home  who has Guru ji parkash  , no fees, and no fanfare  just simple anand karaj in Sangat. That's how I had my Mangni in Guru ji's presence at a Guru ji's presence .

I'm not suggesting the contrary, just speaking from a historical perspective. I'm personally in favour of simple weddings.

12 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

Agni phere were discarded by Guru ji when Anand Karaj was introduced , I would find it credible if Early Singhs did parkash of shastars in place of Guru Granth Sahib ji to which they did matha tek , if would be feasible that they would read Anand Karaj  in same way , when not in area with did not have a Darbar nearby.

The dehdhari Gurus of Namdhari mat do phere of agni devta ....and that is where they differ to standard Sikhs in terms of Anand Karaj maryada .

Shastar Maryada was not around till far later and you know this yourself. There is no suggestion of what you're saying.

See why does it have to be "Agni Devta"? I don't think Namdharis actually believe in Agni Devta lol. It's just a fire. Again from what I've heard when the the current Anand Kaaraj was being formalised, Namdharis had representation. They just decided to retain the fire.

One is left wondering why Namdharis don't do phere of their Baba or his picture.

FYI for the most part, Namdhari Maryada is actually very similar to Hazoor Sahib; very strict. Not excusing their other beliefs however.

Quote

older sikhs wouldn't do lav around Guru ji just stand to hear reading and singing of Anand Karaj , I could imagine sangati roop reading singing of the Gurbani would be considered same as being in presence of Guru ji blessings wise .

Perhaps. I've heard this being the case as well. But again it makes you wonder why four Laavs if one is just to stand.

 

Edited by MrDoaba

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, MrDoaba said:

Please don't get in a tizzy lol. I'm not saying Sikhs are Hindu, or that we should change Anand Kaaraj etc. It's just perspective.

Yes I'm suggesting, and telling.

Pre-Laavan Bani - according to the Sakhi people went to Pandits, we can assume this would've been the Vedic ceremony.

Post-Laavan Bani - I used the word "deduce" specifically because one can come to the logical conclusion that fire remained but the hymns changed. The sakhi alludes to just Sangat performing the whole ceremony themselves, without the service of any Pandit or Granthi.

Later in Sikh history - there was lack of Sikhi so many people simply got married by the Vedic ceremony. If your grandparents are around or some bazurg ask them. It's highly probable someone in your own family got married this way. This is a well known fact. Some of my great-grandparents got married this way but they were still Sikh.

Further in Sikhi history - Mass printing of Saroops began, certain traditions were changed and formalised. I believe Anand Karaj as we know it today was created by Nirankaris (not the manmukh sect, the old ones). Now phere are done around SGGSJ. This is the current system and it works fine. I am not proposing we change it, but the history is still interesting nonetheless.

 

 

 

 

So during marriages of 4th guru onwards , they married by fire ? and that includes Guru Gobind singhji as well ? 

I am genuinely curious because of the many claims made by RSS about "reminding sikhs of their past" , this is also one that one commonly encounters, that ancient sikhs and gurus married by fire and that it wasn't until those evil pesky britishers who drove a wedge between hindus and sikhs and voila Anand karajs started 

Whats the meaning of 'laav ' ? perhaps it could mean something altogether then ? 

Anyways , regardless , I would reckon Hinduism have had far, far more changes to it considering its almost 10 times older than sikhism is (500 vs 5000 !) . Hinduism is so old infact, that rig vedic deities like Indra, Asvins , Maruts,  etc are not even heard of today , let alone worshipped 

Sikhi is more pristine in comparison in the turmoils of time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, MrDoaba said:

See why does it have to be "Agni Devta"? I don't think Namdharis actually believe in Agni Devta lol. It's just a fire. Again from what I've heard when the the current Anand Kaaraj was being formalised, Namdharis had representation. They just decided to retain the fire.

 

I have a english pdf of Rig veda , the oldest scripture of Hinduism, the oldest of the 4 vedas ,  and perhaps the most revered . 

It starts with a hymn praising Agni and asks it to reside over the 'straw and fodder' of the havan.

HYMN I. Agni.

1 I Laud Agni, the chosen Priest, God, minister of sacrifice,
The hotar, lavishest of wealth.
2 Worthy is Agni to be praised by living as by ancient seers.
He shall bring hitherward the Gods.

Looking at the index of the scripture , I am surprised , Agni is like everywhere in it almost. So , yes the marriage rites are basically asking Agni devta . "Agni devta" is the main witness of hindu marriage . 

 

EDIT ----

A hymn in another mandal says 

HYMN LIX. Agni. 1 THE other fires are, verily, thy branches; the Immortals all rejoice in thee, O Agni

So , I think Agni may not be the "fire" as in flames, but rather the heat energy pervading the universe, be it in form of fire energy, metabolic heat in body, nuclear heat inside sun, power plants, etc or the latent fuel inside wood , etc. It basically refers to the "heat" form of god . I could be wrong though. and I don't think I have enough time to go through the vast expanse of the text . 

Edited by AjeetSingh2019

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, AjeetSingh2019 said:

So during marriages of 4th guru onwards , they married by fire ? and that includes Guru Gobind singhji as well ? 

Honestly, I don't know. I will look into the matter and see if some answers comes up. Bear in mind I was talking about regular Sikhs. Not the Gurus themselves. Even if there was a fire, it wouldn't have been Vedic in any sense.

6 minutes ago, AjeetSingh2019 said:

I am genuinely curious because of the many claims made by RSS about "reminding sikhs of their past" , this is also one that one commonly encounters, that ancient sikhs and gurus married by fire and that it wasn't until those evil pesky britishers who drove a wedge between hindus and sikhs and voila Anand karajs started 

Well the difference is in what is meant and being suggested. To them "fire" means the whole Vedic shebang and a return to it. One can equally call out practises from Vedic times which are now obsolete and say "lets return to them!" right back to these groups.

It's not hard to concieve in reality that certain things remained similar but the intention of disucssing the matter is important.

In the case of weddings, there is very little information. Guru Sahib rejected the janeu for example, to which there is a Sakhi and Bani attached. But it is not until Guru Ramdas Ji that Sikhs get their own ceremony, and again I will repeat I was deducing with regards to the use of fire. Lots of ambiguity. Maybe the couple did just stay sitting or standing whilst Laavan were read by Sangat, maybe not.

As for Sikhs such as my great-grandparents, that was just a matter of circumstance. One cannot use that argument to promote a return to Vedic style weddings.

 

4 minutes ago, AjeetSingh2019 said:

Looking at the index of the scripture , I am surprised , Agni is like everywhere in it almost. So , yes the marriage rites are basically asking Agni devta . 

Yes I'm aware that within Hindu weddings it is indeed Agni Devta. But we are talking about Namdharis, and from what I have seen, there is no invocation from Rig Ved - that's what I'm saying, we assume that the fire present in a Kooka wedding is considered as Agni Devta when in actual fact to me, it seems as though it's....just a fire. Which really has no particular meaning per se; just a continuation of one aspect of the ceremony. They read Suhi Mahalla 4.

A fire is only Agni "Devta" if one believes and invokes.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, MrDoaba said:

In the case of weddings, there is very little information. Guru Sahib rejected the janeu for example, to which there is a Sakhi and Bani attached. But it is not until Guru Ramdas Ji that Sikhs get their own ceremony, and again I will repeat I was deducing with regards to the use of fire. Lots of ambiguity. Maybe the couple did just stay sitting or standing whilst Laavan were read by Sangat, maybe not.

There is actually a sakhi of Guru Nanaks wedding.that kandh still stands. And the sakhi says Guru ji refused the fire and used the kitaab or books he carried in which he wrote his bani. 

About the laava sakhi, it might be that the pandit was needed to make it official like registry marriage or to do katha afterwards or to even say tue vedoc shaloks while sikhs did phere around a gutka? 

Idk but there is that sakhi of Guru Nanak Dev ji refusing the agni

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bhujang

Read Prem Sumuragh granth, 

It states that lavaan were done around the fire(in the presence of Aad Guru Granth Sahib Ji) before the inception of the SGPC. It was actually the blasphemous nirankaris thats started the tradition of doing lavaan around Aad Guru Granth Sahib Ji. The Agni Dev as stated in this rehatnama bore witness to the marriage. 

Share this post


Link to post
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...



  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It's just banter mate. Y so serious?
    • Sorry their knowledge, more into miya than what Guru taught you, it doesn't matter how big I am my knowledge you should follow,  if not go somewhere else 
    • Does it matter,  why don't you people focus on his knowledge 
    • Guest Jigsaw_Puzzled_Singh
      Everything, and I mean absolutely EVERY LITTLE THING, the white man has was stolen from brown and black people. EVERYTHING...including medicine. Appropriate it...steal it...call it what you want but the fact is that white people have throughout history right up to the present day, steal what brown and black people have and then call it their own. In a few posts on this thread I have mentioned how white people stole eastern philosophy and then claimed it as their own (and called it western philosophy) even through the original practitioners of that philosophy made it abundantly clear that the white northern european was a barbarian incapable of intellectual thought but really it runs far more deeper than that. White people have always been about TAKING, TAKING and TAKING. They habitually take and then claim as their own. They are habitual thieves. Here's some more examples: The cure to smallpox was actually invented by a black slave, Onesimus. Here's the story of how the white man stole it from him and claimed it as their own: https://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/blog/onesimus-smallpox-boston-cotton-mather   Picasso stole his 'art' from ancient African art and claimed it as his (western intellectalisms) own:   Now you know me....You know I could go on and on here. The point is that white people...ALL WHITE PEOPLE....are not only thieves but they are also habitual liars. They LIE. And they teach their children to LIE. They lie because they cannot handle the truth. Not only do they lie about true history but they also lie day to day when it comes to getting jobs, their qualifications etc. You see the priviledge they have created for themselves enables them to lie. They're not held accountable the way we are.  What we're seeing now from white people though is a desperate attempt to preserve their priviledge. Their lies are being exposed and history is fast catching up with them. For example, not only are the Chinese and Indians now at the forefront of medical advances the Chinese are giving white people payback in the sense that a hundred odd years ago the white man deliberately pushed opium on the Chinese masses and now the Chinese are paying back that favour by flooding the white man with opiods. At the end of the day thieves always get their comeuppance.
    • India in it's current political format is. But it definitely exists as a geographical entity or even as some civilisational entity and is far more connected than what Pakistan is. The strands that keep it together are more indigenous.  Islam and not being India is what makes Pakistan.  
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use