Divorce in the Presence of Guru Granth Sahib

Mai Harinder Kaur · #10 (**permalink**) 23-Oct-2009, 01:14 AM

I know that both Islam and Judaism have religious divorce, both controlled by the men, of course.

I see the biggest problem with a religious Sikh divorce would be that if there has been a true marriage, then the two are "one light." How could that light possibly be separated?

I know it takes time and experience for that "one light" to develop, but what if, after passage of time, the two are still only sitting together?

Now, please don't jump too hard on me for this, but if the two are not "one soul in two bodies," then although there has been a ceremony, perhaps there is no marriage, in the Sikh meaning of marriage. What then? Or is this an ideal we aspire to , but don't really expect to reach?

Do we forget that what we do in the presence of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is the same as if Guru Nanak Dev ji or Guru Gobind Singh ji were sitting there officiating? Was it just oversight on their parts that there is no Sikh divorce? Don't hit me, please! That is a rhetorical question. Our beloved Guru jis knew exactly what they were doing and did it in exactly the perfect way. The problem is in our understanding.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/sikh-sikhi-sikhism/27170-divorce-in-presence-guru-granth-sahib.html

Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=27170
Please forgive me if I am out of line here. I really don't have any answers.

Questions. No answers. :happykaur:

Narayanjot Kaur · #11 (**permalink**) 23-Oct-2009, 01:20 AM

Mai ji

You are raising some good and relevant questions. The legal facts are that a divorce is a legal event. What happens religiously depends on a the religion. Each handling it differently.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=27170

You have put your finger on the pulse of the problem in this story above -- the marriage/s are/were not marriages. They were economic arrangements.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=27170

In the US, Canada and India there is no requirement to be married in a church or gurdwara -- a civil ceremony is not only available but accepted.

Before we are too hard on the parties in this scenario -- look at your marriage license. A marriage is a legal contract. A divorce is a legal termination of that contract. These contracts have legally binding economic reaities attached to them. Gain and loss. That cannot be argued away.

What is a greater concern for me, only me, is that the presence of the Guru has been somehow woven into a play with a pure economic plot when it should not be.

kds1980 · #12 (**permalink**) 23-Oct-2009, 01:46 AM

The question here is not whether divorce is acceptable or not.The question is whether this type of divorce is acceptable? .Guru gobind singh ji gave Panth the authority to make timely decisions and with present circumstances and condition of women in sikhism I think this type of divorce will become a tool of oppression of women within sikh community.

Soul_jyot · #13 (**permalink**) 23-Oct-2009, 01:46 AM

I am totally amazed by the lackasdical attitude of the Akal Takht Jathedar !
Considering the seriousness of this matter, he passes the buck to a committee !
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=27170
As the Guardian of the Sikh Reht Maryada, his action speak of him being irreverent to the Sikhs at large !
OBSERVATION:The incidence took place at a SGPC controlled Gurudwara and it was overseen by the Granthi & his partner who are also employees of the SGPC !

Mai Harinder Kaur · #14 (**permalink**) 23-Oct-2009, 01:52 AM

Although I realise that not all Sikhs accept the Sikh Rehat Maryada, I thought it might be useful to write what it says. On the page about marriage, it says (Chap. XI, Article XVIII. Statement l):
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=27170

l. No Sikh should accept a match for his/her son or daughter for monetary consideration.http://www.sgpc.net/rehat_maryada/section_four_chap_eleven.html

I believe it also says somewhere that marriage is not a business arrangement, but I'm not sure where and lack the time for looking for it right now. So much would be solved if we would follow the SRM.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=27170

(Although I believe the SRM needs revision - I see gender inequality in this page on marriage, for example - I feel, as a Sikh, I am obliged to follow it until such revision. But please, let us not be sidetracked into a discussion of SRM. This discussion on divorce is too important and SRM debate belongs in a different thread.)

kds1980 · #15 (**permalink**) 23-Oct-2009, 01:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mai Harinder Kaur

Although I realise that not all Sikhs accept the Sikh Rehat Maryada, I thought it might be useful to write what it says. On the page about marriage, it says (Chap. XI, Article XVIII. Statement l):

l. No Sikh should accept a match for his/her son or daughter for monetary consideration.Sikh Reht Maryada, The Definition of Sikh, Sikh Conduct & Conventions, Sikh Religion Living, India
I believe it also says somewhere that marriage is not a business arrangement, but I'm not sure where and lack the time for looking for it right now. So much would be solved if we would follow the SRM.

(Although I believe the SRM needs revision - I see gender inequality in this page on marriage, for example - I feel, as a Sikh, I am obliged to follow it until such revision. But please, let us not be sidetracked into a discussion of SRM. This discussion on divorce is too important and SRM debate belongs in a different thread.)

Mai ji

what kind of gender inequality you see on that page?

Mai Harinder Kaur · #16 (**permalink**) 23-Oct-2009, 02:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kanwardeep Singh

Mai ji

what kind of gender inequality you see on that page?

Kanwardeep Singh ji,

I would be happy to discuss that, but not here. If we are to discuss possible revision of SRM, let's start a new thread for that. This divorce topic is too important for us to be sidetracked here.

harbansj24 · #17 (**permalink**) 23-Oct-2009, 04:41 AM

Right. I do not think that we have acquired the maturity to build in proper safe guards for a divorce procedure in SRM which can then be accepted by the law making authorities of the country concerned.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=27170

It was quite easy for the Indian Govt to accept marriage performed in a Gurudwara as legally tenable as no financial give or take is supposed to be involved.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=27170

But with the highly Patriarchal nature of Sikh Society, I would not trust the SGPC or the Jathedars of various Takhts to come out with a fair divorce procedure.

Narayanjot Kaur · #18 (**permalink**) 23-Oct-2009, 05:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by harbansj24

Right. I do not think that we have acquired the maturity to build in proper safe guards for a divorce procedure in SRM which can then be accepted by the law making authorities of the country concerned.

It was quite easy for the Indian Govt to accept marriage performed in a Gurudwara as legally tenable as no financial give or take is supposed to be involved.

But with the highly Patriarchal nature of Sikh Society, I would not trust the SGPC or the Jathedars of various Takhts to come out with a fair divorce procedure.

Because of this thread harbansj24 ji, I am learning something new -- and it is something I really did not want to learn -- but learn nonetheless. And I agree with you. It is a worry. And there is a precedent for it in the local law courts that are used in Muslim communities in India to govern family law and civil disputes. Is this the way Sikhs want to go? Does it perpetuate oppression of women and children? Does it stress materialism and disadvantage religious belief. Is this what Guru Nanak had in mind?