Jump to content
Guest Akaal

Throwing flowers on wedding

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, MrDoaba said:

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.

 

Lets stop fooling ourselves ? What purpose does the fire serve ? Is it "Agan Singh" ? lmao . Whenever they're using ritualistic fire, the implicit meaning is fire god 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

in their own words:

The ritual for marriage ceremony, was first performed by Satguru Ram Singh in 1863. Simply put the couple is required to circumambulate four times around the sacred ceremonial fire (havan) along with recitation of hymns of "Lavan" from Sri Adi Granth Sahib. The first-ever inter-caste marriage was performed on June 3, 1863, in Khote village of Ferozepore in Punjab. The Anand form of marriage remained a dead-letter until Sri Satguru Ji advocated it. The first Marriage performed according to the Anand Marriage form was that of Bhai Samund Singh's daughter at Haripur (Khote). District Ferozpur.
http://www.namdhari-world.com/marriages.html

all the flavours of vedic marriage are there , tying knots between  the bride and groom , the havan , although combined with Dasam Granth and Guru Granth Sahib ji paat , then amritsanchar to couple

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, AjeetSingh2019 said:

they don;t believe in amrit sanchar or 5 ks

read the article , I have met a namdhari bibi and talked with her for hours and she said to me 'nitnem is necessary you can't leave it ever'  they have kept the rehit of daily life but they have fallen into dehdhari guru trap and milgoba of vedic rasams

Share this post


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

so they're better than us in this regard 

seems so ...maybe we can lift the good khalsa habits they have preserved and reintroduced them in our lives  such as that nitnemi attitude.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Not2Cool2Argue said:

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

Yeah heard many variations of this sakhi. Do you know what the actual source is? The point I was making is, throughout ithiaas, when Maharaaj seeked to change something, especially as big of a sanskaar as this, things have been clearer. I just find it odd that there isn't any Bani with the Sakhi - and - that a marriage ceremony came up only at the time of Guru Ramdas Ji. Big gap. Something doesn't quite add up.

Hmm possibly with regards to the Pandit, although Vedic Saloks whilst walking around a Gutka? Idk about that.

 

8 hours ago, AjeetSingh2019 said:

Lets stop fooling ourselves ? What purpose does the fire serve ? Is it "Agan Singh" ? lmao . Whenever they're using ritualistic fire, the implicit meaning is fire god 

Nobody is fooling themselves. For some reason, and I don't actually know why, you want the fire to be representitive of Agni Devta.

A fire can symbolise many things. Meanings and definitions change (as is the case for many things within Sikhi itself); it doesn't necessarily mean it's anthropomorphized or personified in the way you want it to be.

This is the same level of reasoning people use to reject the use of jyot (and other practises in common) in Gurdwaras.

 

1 hour ago, jkvlondon said:

seems so ...maybe we can lift the good khalsa habits they have preserved and reintroduced them in our lives  such as that nitnemi attitude.

I've always said, that if Namdharis were normal Sikhs, they would be one of the most rehitvaan, shardavaan Sampardas we have. Their Maryada is solid and they have many good qualities which they put into practise. Plus their Nitnem is big.

I've been to Bhaini Sahib and it's really quite a sight. They have this little building where non-stop Jaap/Simran has been going on since like the 1920s. SGGSJ was prakash in one of the buidings as well; was some kinda of triple Akhand Paath going on.

And fyi Ajeet, they do believe in Amrit Sanchar and Panj Kakkar, however they don't wear the Kirpan - they were banned from keeping Shastar during Brit rule and for some unbeknownst reason continued to stay without them.

They have kept many Puratan traditions going. It's a shame they've fallen in other areas. And before anyone says it, no I am not promoting Namdharis or letting their manmat views off.

Share this post


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

Yeah heard many variations of this sakhi. Do you know what the actual source is? The point I was making is, throughout ithiaas, when Maharaaj seeked to change something, especially as big of a sanskaar as this, things have been clearer. I just find it odd that there isn't any Bani with the Sakhi - and - that a marriage ceremony came up only at the time of Guru Ramdas Ji. Big gap. Something doesn't quite add up.

Hmm possibly with regards to the Pandit, although Vedic Saloks whilst walking around a Gutka? Idk about that.

 

Nobody is fooling themselves. For some reason, and I don't actually know why, you want the fire to be representitive of Agni Devta.

A fire can symbolise many things. Meanings and definitions change (as is the case for many things within Sikhi itself); it doesn't necessarily mean it's anthropomorphized or personified in the way you want it to be.

This is the same level of reasoning people use to reject the use of jyot (and other practises in common) in Gurdwaras.

 

I've always said, that if Namdharis were normal Sikhs, they would be one of the most rehitvaan, shardavaan Sampardas we have. Their Maryada is solid and they have many good qualities which they put into practise. Plus their Nitnem is big.

I've been to Bhaini Sahib and it's really quite a sight. They have this little building where non-stop Jaap/Simran has been going on since like the 1920s. SGGSJ was prakash in one of the buidings as well; was some kinda of triple Akhand Paath going on.

And fyi Ajeet, they do believe in Amrit Sanchar and Panj Kakkar, however they don't wear the Kirpan - they were banned from keeping Shastar during Brit rule and for some unbeknownst reason continued to stay without them.

They have kept many Puratan traditions going. It's a shame they've fallen in other areas. And before anyone says it, no I am not promoting Namdharis or letting their manmat views off.

they are the ones who started the little metal kirpan on the kangha , maybe somebody should explain to them you cannot do ifazat of anyone with your kanga...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, jkvlondon said:

they are the ones who started the little metal kirpan on the kangha , maybe somebody should explain to them you cannot do ifazat of anyone with your kanga...

Wellll....point taken...but if one was really inclined lol..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/18/2019 at 10:44 PM, Guest akaal said:

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. 

So you saying the men came up with the idea of throwing petals? Very unlikely, but if that is the case they are a bunch of gays.

Covering your face should not be allowed in the gurdwara. In the old days ladies covered their faces because they didn't want other men seeing them  there was very little contact between men and women in those days. In those days is a man accidentally brushed against a woman, the woman saw that as an attack on their honour and dignity .that tradition has died out now and there is no need for it.     using a veil todays is just a stupid fashion trend and should not be allowed in the presence of guru granth sahib 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

in 'So Dar', it says "Wind, water and fire sing of You. The Righteous Judge of Dharma sings at Your Door. "

fire since ancient times is a divine 'witness'.  like for a modern wedding to be legal, you need a legal (human) witness to authenticate it.

people seem to forget that publishing presses only came to Panjab about 150 yrs ago.  Before that, I doubt people had such easy access to SGGS Saroops.  

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