Bridegroom Walking Ahead

[Kanwaljit.Singh]

Waheguru ji ka Khalsa, Waheguru ji ki Fateh ji, a few of the questions I answered on Sikhnet forum. Even when it comes to our own Sikh religion and Guru's directives, we are becoming a lot questioning and critical. We are not accepting. Please let me know your views.

in the process of Anand kaaraj, the couple circles around the Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji ji , is taken from the Hindu vivah vidhi around the fire.

The whole 'process' of Anand Karaj means that you consider your soul and your spouse's soul as one. And you present it to Guru for Union with God. But we are more concerned with what we are doing physically in Gurudwara. Our mind is not in control to meet Lord. Hindu's go around fire because they believe it to be a medium to worship deities. We go around Guru Granth Sahib because for us Guru Sahib is the only Medium to meet God.

A few changes have been make in sikh weddings- no more brothers around to take the bride around the circle, no face covering (ghund) as the woman are not children when they get married these days and they can do the whole process by themselves.

Yes having a brother help you go ahead with your spouse at every turn surely made it a bit dramatic. Women are independent. And earlier women (and men with sehra) covered their face. It was because till marriage ceremony wasn't done, they wouldn't like to 'show' their face. But it is inappropriate to do it in front of Guru.

I am still wondering why the woman has to walk behind the man? if this was just the idea that man had more power or physical or financial strength than woman in olden days, so he walked infront to symbolise his leadership, i think it is time to change.

When travelling through a jungle or strange lands, man would always walk ahead, so that if someone attacks, he should take the brunt and save his wife (and children). It is all about how you look at things. And the maryada is fixed. Our maryada is totally equal in nature. No need to change things.

They should walk together to seek Guru's blessings for the future. Sikhi is the first religion in India to have allowed woman freedom and equality, why sybolise inequality in the holy matrimony???

They walk together. It is not as if he is ahead, he gets blessings first or more blessings. If you wish to get blessings, your mind should be 100% connected with Guru and Shabads being sung. You shouldn't care if your husband is going ahead. Why is he is walking before YOU. That is pure Ego.

 

[Randip Singh]

I read somewhere that the Groom walking ahead with a sword amongst Sikhs has to do with the fact the weddings (especially Sikh ones) were raided, so even when they getting married they had to be on guard.

 

[Navdeep88]

I dont understand why the groom walking ahead is so problematic. Even today, with our independence, I still rely on the men in my life (my father and my brothers) for help when needed. And that is the nature of relationships between males and females, females are physically weaker, its just how things are. And the men who are in a position to protect, it makes sense for them to be ahead. That is not to say that they don't rely on women, they do everything for the protection and needs of their wives, mothers, sisters, children.

Thats just my perspective. When a woman's pregnant, she needs her husband's assistance physically to get around doesn't she? Its just how things are PHYSICALLY. If a person wants to read into it, from a feminist perspective, then you can come up with all sorts of things about how its about superiority or inferiority, and those would be true if the marriage is non-consensual or forced. If thats not the case then it just happens to be physical circumstance, REALITY.

 

[kds1980]

I dont understand why the groom walking ahead is so problematic. Even today, with our independence, I still rely on the men in my life (my father and my brothers) for help when needed. And that is the nature of relationships between males and females, females are physically weaker, its just how things are. And the men who are in a position to protect, it makes sense for them to be ahead. That is not to say that they don't rely on women, they do everything for the protection and needs of their wives, mothers, sisters, children.
Thats just my perspective. When a woman's pregnant, she needs her husband's assistance physically to get around doesn't she? Its just how things are PHYSICALLY.

A handful of men and women just want to inject extreme gender similarity Which was never part of sikhism O/W for 90% + men and women This is not even an issue.There are cultures in India where women walk ahead but it does not mean that women their were treated fairly or equally more than other cultures.

 

[spnadmin]

The bridegroom walking ahead is far far down on my list of the ills of patriarchy.... if it is on the list at all. At the wedding he walks ahead of his wife. After the wedding, if he is wise, he listens to his wife. Small price to pay.

 

[Gyani Jarnail Singh]

Its NOT just walking ahead...
So much MORE...
Say they decide that BRIDE will walk ahead.....will THAT Satisfy everyone and close the subject ?? Of course NOT....because that is NOT Gender equality ??
2. OK..they SHARE the "ahead" part...NOW who GOES FIRST ?? Bride or Groom ?? Whichever it is..there is NO GENDER EQUALITY.....why should woman go first..why not Man..why should Man go first..why not Woman ???..wheres the EQUALITY ??
3. OK they give up the Going Round.and..decide to STAND STILL !! is the subject closed and settled ??? who says so...Say Man stands on the RIGHT and Woman stands on the LEFT ?? WHY NOT the other way around...??
4. So they SIT..again the same quesations arise...
5. So they ????????????????????????????what do they DO ???
that there will be absolutle STILLNESS..each and every perosn is perfectly SATISFIED..its all equal ??
6. Bride is on the Groom's SHOULDERS !! again not equal...why not the Bride carry the Groom ??

NO ONE WILL EVER GET MARRIED.....ha ha even EXITING the GURDWARA will be a question..who GOES FIRST !! I wonder why people with IDLE MINDS like to draw lines in the WATER..Panne meh leek in Gurbani....

 

[findingmyway]

I have heard of many weddings where the both bride and groom walk together. Surely the couple should decide what suits them. I don't see why who walks where should be mandated.

 

[Gyani Jarnail Singh]

My parents stood in front of SGGS and listened to the laavna s they were read..and then sung..all the time until the very last laav was sung and completed. That time it was ok to do that...1940's....as i say Idle Minds indulge in such drawing lines in water..now a days too many people wnat this and that...like some couples wnat to get married underground..others in swimming pool..some in a hindu mandir..some in a gurdwara a church...some in an baloon floating in the sky etc etc...sikhs also begin such why this and why that...

 

[Ishna]

NO ONE WILL EVER GET MARRIED.....ha ha even EXITING the GURDWARA will be a question..who GOES FIRST !!

That one is easy Gyani ji -- the woman goes first cos the man is holding the door open for her!

Sometimes in Australia a poor honourable man holding a door open for a woman coming in / going out, she will abuse him for making a gesture which apparently suggests she's incapable of opening the door for herself. That makes me mad, because no one should be punished for doing something nice!

For those who know me and how stuck I am on gender issues, the marriage ceremony is one I don't really worry about. As Gyani ji says, you have to do something, and no matter what you do, you can read gender issues into it.

My own wedding was a fairly traditional Christian wedding in a church (when I say Christian, we're not Christian, we just really liked the church, so the minister negotiated a ceremony with minimal references to God and Jesus - thumbs up to the Uniting Church for being so inclusive). I wore a veil, my biological father walked me down the aisle and handed me to my husband. The Sikh wedding ceremony has way less patriarchal influences than mine did.

But I don't care -- to me these were traditional actions which have lost their patriarchal meaning to me and most of the people around me. They were done because it's a nice thing to do. I think so anyway.

Is it the same for Sikhs? Does todays Sikh mind see a Sikh wedding, see the husband leading the bride and think "he's doing that because he's the boss in this situation", or do they see it and think it's great just for what it is?

 

[Enlighten Me]

I find this so trivial.

It does not matter who walks in front or who walks behind, what matters is that when they are married they both treat each other with respect, love etc...

Making a woman walk in front/with her partner does not guarantee equality.

Women will be equal when their husbands don't hit them... [I know many punjabi women who have experienced domestic violence, I don't mean to generalise]...

Women will be equal when they aren't forced to reproduce, women will be equal when they can live their life how they want with the support of their family/in-laws.

Women will be equal when they're allowed to work with that degree they worked so hard for instead of using it to lure in a good ristha.

Women will be equal when they are valued in terms of their personality rather than their appearance, height, skin colour.

Women will be equal when their only purpose in life isn't to get married/reproduce.

Women will be equal when they can support their own parents in old age rather than taking care of their husbands...

Daughters will be equal when their arrival on this planet is celebrated as much as that of a son.

[I realise that most of this applies to pind-life].

Rant over.