Guru Granth Sahib Ji's Stand on Marriage...

Discussion in 'Sikh Sikhi Sikhism' started by Admin Singh, Jul 1, 2004.


  1. Admin Singh

    Administrator Supporter SPNer

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Messages:
    5,509
    Likes Received:
    4,746
    Taken from elsewhere on the internet...


     
    jasbirkaleka likes this.

  2. Amarpal

    Mentor Writer Content Master SPNer

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2004
    Messages:
    593
    Likes Received:
    360
    Dear Khalsa Jee, (Ideal Singh),

    The operative for our lives is, 'Ek noor se sub jag upjaya kaun bhele kaun mande'. In accordance with this the two sexes are equal; what applies to girls applies to boys too and vice versa.

    Rehatnama is not part of sikh scripture. It is made by people like you and me. It is not absolute and is intended for some different purpose; it has not come from divinities.

    Where ever there is conflict between the two, in my opinion it is good to follow what direction 'Sri Guru Granth Sahib' gives - it says all are equal.

    With Love and Regards for all.

    Amarpal
     
    jasbirkaleka likes this.
  3. Seeker

    SPNer

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2004
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Generel Clarification :: If you are interested in exchanging links with Sikh Philosophy Network, Contact Admin. Thank You :)

    Please continue with the discussion.

    God bless
     
  4. sukhi

    SPNer

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2004
    Messages:
    23
    Likes Received:
    5
    ok, i'm going to stray a little from the original question... what does Sikhi say about marriage in general? why is it so important?
     
  5. CaramelChocolate

    SPNer

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    588
    Likes Received:
    61
    If when gender is referred to in Sikhism, it is really gender neutral, wouldn't this promote a YES on same-gender marriage within Sikhism?

    ~CaramelChocolate~
    The little philosopher
     
  6. Amarpal

    Mentor Writer Content Master SPNer

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2004
    Messages:
    593
    Likes Received:
    360
    Dear Member (Caramel Chocolate),

    What is said in the posting is Sikhism considers the two sexes as equal.

    You know that nature creates the two sexes with some purpose. sexual pleasure is a small inducement given by nature so that the species procreate. Sexual pleasure is not the end but a means to continue various forms of lives on this planet.

    If the two individuals of the same sex enter into what you call as marriage then the nature's provision is violated the very reason for which nature created two sexes gets negated and only lust remains. Spitituality demands effacement of negative attibutes from life, which includes lust. Having sex in marriage is not lust, it is the means to comply with the intent of nature for which the two sexes were created.

    Since all religions of the world aim towards spirituality, so called marriage between the two individuals of the same sex cannot be accepted by any religion. Certainly not by Sikh Religion.

    The question posed by the other member Sukhi I will respond in my next posting.

    With Love and Respect for all.
    Amarpal
     
  7. Amarpal

    Mentor Writer Content Master SPNer

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2004
    Messages:
    593
    Likes Received:
    360
    Dear Khalsa Jee (sukhi),

    Sikh religion does not insist that one should get married or not. It provides for spirituality with the frame work of family. if one does not want to get married it is not an un-sikh-like act.

    From secular view point, the society is not yet evolved where the single girls can consider themselves as safe as boys. Laws of the land are not strong and their implementation is very slow. The victim girl is not sympathased by the society. The stigma remains on her making her life difficult. These have nothing to do with religion or Sikhi. From this considerations it is better for girls to get married; in some measure marriage provides social, economic and physical protection to the girl who has lesser muscle power and is vulnerable. I know girls who had remained unmarried and have not suffered any of the disabilities I have suggested above. These girls knew how to conduct and carry themselves in society; they did not depend on others; they choose the individuals with whom they talk or interact carefully and what to talk also they decided; when to be out and when to return back to their home was also doctored so as not to give any chance for comments. But in old age when the mobility is low one longs for company, these ladies and even men who have remaind unmarried are suffering from.

    Not getting married is not a crime in Sikh Religion. Our Guru Sahib knew that 'Institution of Marriage' is not natural, it is man made for orderly conduct of society, which will change with time. Getting married or not the individual has to decide, it is not a matter with which Sikh Religion concern itself, if the couple want to get married the needed provision exist in the scripture.

    With Love and Respect for all.

    Amarpal
     
  8. CaramelChocolate

    SPNer

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    588
    Likes Received:
    61
    sexual pleasure is a small inducement given by nature so that the species procreate.
    So if I were a heterosexual and I had started puberty and had the desire to have sex, even if I was at a tender age of twelve, this is God's way of telling me I have to procreate?

    If the two individuals of the same sex enter into what you call as marriage then the nature's provision is violated the very reason for which nature created two sexes gets negated and only lust remains.
    A same-gender couple getting married does not affect you. If they believe it is right, then why not let them.
    So if a marriage is not built around procreation [meaning they don't have kids] then the relationship is built on lust? This is not true. Because then that would mean that women who are unable to procreate are also exempt from relationships because this would be lust.
    Sex does not equal lust, sex is a physical expression of love. In my opinion the Gurus promoted attachment to sex was wrong and not neccesserily the act of sex between two adults that love each other.

    Spitituality demands effacement of negative attibutes from life, which includes lust.
    I assume this is a typo and you meant spirituality.
    Spirituality promotes love, and if two men, two women or a man and a women love each other, then it is not wrong for them to physically express this love.

    Having sex in marriage is not lust, it is the means to comply with the intent of nature for which the two sexes were created.

    Since all religions of the world aim towards spirituality, so called marriage between the two individuals of the same sex cannot be accepted by any religion. Certainly not by Sikh Religion.
    So just because I am not a heterosexual I cannot be spiritual or aim towards an spirituality, or being a non-heterosexual and spiritual is not allowed?

    Sikh religion does not insist that one should get married or not. It provides for spirituality with the frame work of family. if one does not want to get married it is not an un-sikh-like act.
    So marriage is only for families in Sikhism? Fair enough, but this is nothing against non-heterosexuality.
    If we are all equal in Sikhism and two men or two women wish to get married then they should not be stopped, if they are then this is inequality.

    Not getting married is not a crime in Sikh Religion. Our Guru Sahib knew that 'Institution of Marriage' is not natural, it is man made for orderly conduct of society, which will change with time.
    Anand karaj, the Sikh marriage ceremony is also called 'the union of two souls'. This does not mention a family unit and since the souls are genderless it really does not imply that having a family is the only reason for marriage. The fact that the soul is genderless promotes the possibility of a same-gender marriage even more.

    ~CaramelChocolate~
    The little philosopher
     
  9. Amarpal

    Mentor Writer Content Master SPNer

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2004
    Messages:
    593
    Likes Received:
    360
    Dear CarameChocalate Jee,

    I am giving my response in the order in which you have posted here.

    i) In my posting I have used the word Nature and not God. What you have said is allowed by nature. It is happening in Animal Kingdom. Every civilised society has its rule and we human follow it to maintain order and justice for all. We do not do indulge in procreation when one of the participant it self has not physically fully grown. It is for the good of the mother and the child to be born. I can make out from the wording 'tender' that you are fully aware of it.

    ii) If same-gender individual want to indulge in sex, on one can stop them. The way I will view them is reflected in my posting. A woman who can not bear child is an exception, rule are not made for exceptions, they are treated separately. I will take a sypathatic view of the misfortune of such people. Any way, when the couple gets married this disability is normally not known to them. Sex is a physical expression of love, yes as long as the sexual act is real sharing, otherwise not; it is exploitation it, is lust. Even when it is intense and complete sharing there is an element of give and take; it is not pure love, it is physical need originating from the harmones that are generated in the body. This is my view.

    iii) Spirituality promotes love, yes I agree with you. Love means giving without any selfish interest, not even any thought of getting any thing in return. Any love which invoves give and take is a form of trade. if a love is directed towards a specific person it indicate a possibility of interdependency - some selfishness, fulfilment of some thing which is lacking in the individual. This is not the love of spiritually evolved people; they are selfless, they give pure love to all.

    iv) Any one whose thoughts, speech and actions are not fine tuned to the common good of nature and all the beings is not truly spiritual, the individual may be on the path to spirituality. For this to happen the individual should have full natural control on her/his senses and the facutlies to act. There is gradual progress towards spirituality, it is not an on-off process, one keeps on eveloving. Those who are given to desires, more it is so, farther they are form spirituality.

    v) Marriage in Sikh Religion is between man and woman, else it is not a marriage.

    vi) I have not concluded by deliberation on soul so do not feel confident in talking about it, but I agree with you that as the soul is describe it is formless and consequently should be gender less. The same-gender indivdual are having gender. The extrapolation from fromless, gender-less entity to forms with gender is probably too much.

    I agree marriage should be a union at physical level and at the level of soul.

    With this I close.

    With love and respect for all.

    Amarpal
     
  10. CaramelChocolate

    SPNer

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2004
    Messages:
    588
    Likes Received:
    61
    Amarpal, I say this with no offence but in the way you type I do find it hard to understand your message.

    Sex is a physical expression of love, yes as long as the sexual act is real sharing
    Here you are basically saying that it is NOT wrong for same-gender to have sex if it is for sharing and love etc.

    v) Marriage in Sikh Religion is between man and woman, else it is not a marriage.
    I would like a quote for this.

    Before anyone decides to bring up people wanting to marry their children, animals and computers etc, remember that - the reason why same-gender couples should be allowed to marry and have sex together is because they can both consent to these, same with opposite gender couple.
    I am not saying that people would do this, but homosexuality has been compared with paedophilia and this is wrong and hateful. Paedophilia involves sex with a minor or someone who is not mentally advanced to understand the logic behind sex or has not phyiscally reached the stage where their body is ready for sexual acts. With two consenting adults [man-women, women-women or man-man] can consent and feel the emotional attachment to express this love physically, this is why it is not paedophilia - because they consent.

    ~CaramelChocolate~
    The little philosopher
     
  11. Harpreet Singhh

    SPNer

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2012
    Messages:
    19
    Likes Received:
    9
    SSA Ji
    I want to know that what about the cousin marriages in Guru Granth Sahib Ji, is there any thing written for forbidden cousin marriages?
    According to Guru Granth Sahib Jj cousin can marry or not or they are consider as brother sisters?
     
  12. Harkiran Kaur

    SPNer

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2012
    Messages:
    590
    Likes Received:
    1,328
    I have a question about marriage... kind of in a different direction. And it has been worrying me now for some time.

    I know that Sikh Marriage is considered not just a physical union but essentially the two people become the same soul in two bodies. I understand that.

    My question is about divorce. ANd a very real case where the Sikh man I met was pressured into an arranged marriage and from day one, they never got along. For years they tried to 'make it work' with him sleeping on the floor, on the couch,... basically anywhere but with her. Until they finally separated. And then I met him.

    My question is, since divorce is not looked upon highly, is it possible for him to be not only divorced legally but within Sikhi as well so that he and I could marry via Anand Karaj? And would he always be spiritually in union with her now (same soul two bodies), making our marriage only physical, and hence... I would never really be married to him on a spiritual level?

    Should we part ways and not pursue this if he is forever spiritually unified to this other woman?
     
    #12 Harkiran Kaur, Dec 30, 2012
    Last edited: Dec 31, 2012
  13. Luckysingh

    Writer SPNer

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2011
    Messages:
    1,614
    Likes Received:
    2,728
    There is no problem as far as I see.
    Marriage is the union of two souls in God's court or in presence of God's shabad. It is the beginning of a seal created with the shabad. A seal that can't be created naturally by birth such as father-child,grandfather-daughter-child...etc..

    Now, even if we have a naturally created seal such as a mother-child, and the mother does not fulfill her role in life to her child OR she has no love or care/duty for this child. This young child as you know would be taken care of by some other responsible. This responsible whether it is a relative or the state would ensure that the child receives the motherly love from another being who would be taking the role of mother.

    Everything would be done to ensure this child does not grow up in this world deprived of parental care and love.

    In the same manner, if one soul in the marriage completely refuses to act their role, then they have stepped out or 'void' this God created union. It would be completely unjust for the deprived partner not to be eligible for a God created seal with someone else.
     
  14. Ishna

    Ishna Philosophy, yes. Religion, no.
    Writer SPNer

    Joined:
    May 9, 2006
    Messages:
    2,394
    Likes Received:
    4,351
    Sikhi says nothing about divorce.

    There has been great debate in India about the Anand Marraige Act not including a divorce clause. If I remember rightly the jathedars at SGPC were of the opinion divorce should not be allowed in Sikhi.

    I say bullocks to that. A marriage should be given great committment and every chance to grow and flourish but if it's not going to there's no point flogging a dead horse - divorce and get on with it.

    But it's all personal opinion, Sikhi and Guru Sahib is silent on it.

    My vote - he should just get a divorce. Sounds like their story has ended a long time ago. The divorce is just an administrative formality.
     
Loading...

Share This Page