Preparation of Amrit

Tejwant Singh · #19 (**permalink**) 18-Dec-2009, 23:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by harbansj24

Tejwant ji,

I have just pointed out the requirement of both the spouses taking Amrit together without going into the merits or practicality of it.
Regarding everybody taking langar together, of coarse there is objection to that. The only requirement being that Amritdharis should not take langar fron the same thali or leaf.
Ofcoarse an Amritdhari can get married to a non amritdhari and have conjugal relationship but to be considered as amridhari, he/she must retake amrit along with the spouse. if he does not, then he can continue to be Sikh without being considered as Amritdhari.

Regards

Harbans Singh

Harbans ji,

Guru fateh.

Thanks for the response. If this is a requirement, either by the oral traditions or by SRM, then these requirements should be abolished because they are against the Gurmat ideals given to us in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, our only Guru.

The concept of Langer is being abused to breed segregation and separation rather than unity of all humankind irrespective of caste, hue, faith or social status for which it was established by our Gurus.

Amritdhari just becomes a title non- grata then, if he/she marries a person who is not an Amritdhari. May be a person who is not an Amirtdhari may learn through living with such a person who has taken Amrit which will instill in her/him to become one and perhaps this person may become a better person due to this than the Amritdhari he/she had married. Doesn't this show the true meaning of the word Sikh?

If not then this title dictates superiority and apartheidic mentality rather than the Gurmat ideals of inclusiveness of "Sabh Gobind hein, Gobind bin nahin koi".

We should all fight to get rid of these window dressings in Sikhi, so that Sikhi can be looked straight through and hence can be practiced the way our Gurus showed us how to through our only Guru, Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.

Regards

Tejwant Singh

harbansj24 · #20 (**permalink**) 19-Dec-2009, 08:02 AM

Tejwant ji and Kanwardeep ji

I agree with both of you fully. Yes SRM should be suitably modified. Because these conditions flow logically from SRM which clearly states that both the spouses should be Amritdharis and that an Amritdhari should not eat from the same plate, thali or leaf of a non Amritdhari. These conditions might have been relevant when SRM was first enunciated between 1933 to 1945. But now things have changed and Sikhism being a living religion should adapt to changed situations.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/sikh-sikhi-sikhism/27522-preparation-of-amrit.html
Not only the above, but SRM requires a relook in other aspects also. But for that we need a creditable SGPC which is sadly not upto it right now, though we have top of class scholars who are absolutely capable of taking up this task.

Regards

Harbans Singh

Randip Singh · #21 (**permalink**) 19-Dec-2009, 16:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by terminator

Water-taps used to have washers made of hide from cows, and it was generally not acceptable. Now no more hides and plastics are in the forefront.

Why is this no longer acceptable?

Should we ban hides from Dholkees from which Kirtan is played?

Should we ban hides from Tablas from which accompanies shabad?

Should we ban hides from a multitude of other uses including shoes, belts, "gatray" etc?

What make plastic purer than hide? What makes one more acceptable than the other?

Tejwant Singh · #22 (**permalink**) 20-Dec-2009, 00:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randip Singh

Why is this no longer acceptable?

Should we ban hides from Dholkees from which Kirtan is played?

Should we ban hides from Tablas from which accompanies shabad?

Should we ban hides from a multitude of other uses including shoes, belts, "gatray" etc?

What make plastic purer than hide? What makes one more acceptable than the other?

Randip ji,

Guru Fateh.

Good questions.

Allow me to add a couple more.

How about Chor- the fly whisk- that is used to whisk off imaginary flies or other bugs and then matha teked with every pretentious motion?

Shall we have them made from fake platinum blonde hair?

What kind of hide was used as a water carrier by Bhai Ghanayihah when he quenched the thirst of both- friends and foes?

Tejwant Singh

Narayanjot Kaur · #23 (**permalink**) 20-Dec-2009, 02:24 AM

Gurmit Kaur ji

I think those pics of sants on lion skins were a later invention. The earliest paintings of the Guru's do not show them sitting on lion skins. I have a big collection of Guru Nanak paintings from the Persian period and that is not part of the composition. This, I think, is a 19th Century addition that came with the breakdown of Sikhi traditions during the period of British imperialism.

Gyani Jarnail Singh · #24 (**permalink**) 20-Dec-2009, 14:31 PM

Certainly our Gurus HUNTED wild animals....Guru Hargobind Ji Sahib hunted down a Lion that was a man eater and terrorising the neighbourhood...Guru Gobind Singh Ji was also a HUNTER....BUT certainly they DID NOT SIT AROUND ON "dead animals/lions/tigers....Those are found in NANAKSAREE THHATHS..and the sants are the ones nanaksaris promote.( Sant Isher singh and nand Singh are shown sitting on Tiger hides)....
A SIKH is is a SANT-SIPAHI and has no reason to place a Tiger head/hide to impress !! visitors of his "prowess"....all such fake "haumaii" exists among so called Hunters/white men of the bygone era..Sahibs..who used to hang their wild trophies on walls..deer ehads..bara singas..bull horns...tiger heads etc etc... ALL this has STOPPED NOW..but Some "sikhs" beign alte adopters seem to be gettign into the act....
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=27522

BTW the Tiger head and Hide displayed in a Nanaksaree Thaath in MALAYSIA is a FAKE TOY TIGER bought form Tesco/Toys R US..!!! He he he...i have no idea what it is meant to convey...Matha Teking to a TOY !!!

Randip Singh · #25 (**permalink**) 20-Dec-2009, 15:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gurmit Kaur

Thank you, I cannot imagine our Gurus sitting on dead animals, I have utmost respect for all later day saints, I mean no dis respect.

They used dead animals for:

Their saddles
their shoes
their belts
their sword holsters
some of their armour
The instruments they played
The seats they sat on
Animal bones for handles on weapons

I could go on ad infinitum.

They also hunted animals. They used this as a means of training their warriors and also feeding people. I think you need to read more history. Ours is a culture of Sant Siphahi, not of Vaisno-Brahmisim. A Warrior and Saint tradition that involved hunting, fighting and killing. Our religion is being polluted too much by Vaishno influences being brought in by the Jatt/Tarkhan Sant/Dera/Jatha traditions in Punjab which are distorting Sikhi.

My question is not only related to this notion of purity to do with animal hides, but one in general, regarding this purity notion of food too. Why must an Amridhari only eat from an Amritdhari etc?

We are regressing to Vaishno-Brahmisim.