☀️ JOIN SPN MOBILE
Forums
New posts
Guru Granth Sahib
Composition, Arrangement & Layout
ਜਪੁ | Jup
ਸੋ ਦਰੁ | So Dar
ਸੋਹਿਲਾ | Sohilaa
ਰਾਗੁ ਸਿਰੀਰਾਗੁ | Raag Siree-Raag
Gurbani (14-53)
Ashtpadiyan (53-71)
Gurbani (71-74)
Pahre (74-78)
Chhant (78-81)
Vanjara (81-82)
Vaar Siri Raag (83-91)
Bhagat Bani (91-93)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਝ | Raag Maajh
Gurbani (94-109)
Ashtpadi (109)
Ashtpadiyan (110-129)
Ashtpadi (129-130)
Ashtpadiyan (130-133)
Bara Maha (133-136)
Din Raen (136-137)
Vaar Maajh Ki (137-150)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗਉੜੀ | Raag Gauree
Gurbani (151-185)
Quartets/Couplets (185-220)
Ashtpadiyan (220-234)
Karhalei (234-235)
Ashtpadiyan (235-242)
Chhant (242-249)
Baavan Akhari (250-262)
Sukhmani (262-296)
Thittee (296-300)
Gauree kii Vaar (300-323)
Gurbani (323-330)
Ashtpadiyan (330-340)
Baavan Akhari (340-343)
Thintteen (343-344)
Vaar Kabir (344-345)
Bhagat Bani (345-346)
ਰਾਗੁ ਆਸਾ | Raag Aasaa
Gurbani (347-348)
Chaupaday (348-364)
Panchpadde (364-365)
Kaafee (365-409)
Aasaavaree (409-411)
Ashtpadiyan (411-432)
Patee (432-435)
Chhant (435-462)
Vaar Aasaa (462-475)
Bhagat Bani (475-488)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗੂਜਰੀ | Raag Goojaree
Gurbani (489-503)
Ashtpadiyan (503-508)
Vaar Gujari (508-517)
Vaar Gujari (517-526)
ਰਾਗੁ ਦੇਵਗੰਧਾਰੀ | Raag Dayv-Gandhaaree
Gurbani (527-536)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਿਹਾਗੜਾ | Raag Bihaagraa
Gurbani (537-556)
Chhant (538-548)
Vaar Bihaagraa (548-556)
ਰਾਗੁ ਵਡਹੰਸ | Raag Wadhans
Gurbani (557-564)
Ashtpadiyan (564-565)
Chhant (565-575)
Ghoriaan (575-578)
Alaahaniiaa (578-582)
Vaar Wadhans (582-594)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸੋਰਠਿ | Raag Sorath
Gurbani (595-634)
Asatpadhiya (634-642)
Vaar Sorath (642-659)
ਰਾਗੁ ਧਨਾਸਰੀ | Raag Dhanasaree
Gurbani (660-685)
Astpadhiya (685-687)
Chhant (687-691)
Bhagat Bani (691-695)
ਰਾਗੁ ਜੈਤਸਰੀ | Raag Jaitsree
Gurbani (696-703)
Chhant (703-705)
Vaar Jaitsaree (705-710)
Bhagat Bani (710)
ਰਾਗੁ ਟੋਡੀ | Raag Todee
ਰਾਗੁ ਬੈਰਾੜੀ | Raag Bairaaree
ਰਾਗੁ ਤਿਲੰਗ | Raag Tilang
Gurbani (721-727)
Bhagat Bani (727)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸੂਹੀ | Raag Suhi
Gurbani (728-750)
Ashtpadiyan (750-761)
Kaafee (761-762)
Suchajee (762)
Gunvantee (763)
Chhant (763-785)
Vaar Soohee (785-792)
Bhagat Bani (792-794)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਿਲਾਵਲੁ | Raag Bilaaval
Gurbani (795-831)
Ashtpadiyan (831-838)
Thitteen (838-840)
Vaar Sat (841-843)
Chhant (843-848)
Vaar Bilaaval (849-855)
Bhagat Bani (855-858)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗੋਂਡ | Raag Gond
Gurbani (859-869)
Ashtpadiyan (869)
Bhagat Bani (870-875)
ਰਾਗੁ ਰਾਮਕਲੀ | Raag Ramkalee
Ashtpadiyan (902-916)
Gurbani (876-902)
Anand (917-922)
Sadd (923-924)
Chhant (924-929)
Dakhnee (929-938)
Sidh Gosat (938-946)
Vaar Ramkalee (947-968)
ਰਾਗੁ ਨਟ ਨਾਰਾਇਨ | Raag Nat Narayan
Gurbani (975-980)
Ashtpadiyan (980-983)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਲੀ ਗਉੜਾ | Raag Maalee Gauraa
Gurbani (984-988)
Bhagat Bani (988)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਰੂ | Raag Maaroo
Gurbani (889-1008)
Ashtpadiyan (1008-1014)
Kaafee (1014-1016)
Ashtpadiyan (1016-1019)
Anjulian (1019-1020)
Solhe (1020-1033)
Dakhni (1033-1043)
ਰਾਗੁ ਤੁਖਾਰੀ | Raag Tukhaari
Bara Maha (1107-1110)
Chhant (1110-1117)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕੇਦਾਰਾ | Raag Kedara
Gurbani (1118-1123)
Bhagat Bani (1123-1124)
ਰਾਗੁ ਭੈਰਉ | Raag Bhairo
Gurbani (1125-1152)
Partaal (1153)
Ashtpadiyan (1153-1167)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਸੰਤੁ | Raag Basant
Gurbani (1168-1187)
Ashtpadiyan (1187-1193)
Vaar Basant (1193-1196)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸਾਰਗ | Raag Saarag
Gurbani (1197-1200)
Partaal (1200-1231)
Ashtpadiyan (1232-1236)
Chhant (1236-1237)
Vaar Saarang (1237-1253)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਲਾਰ | Raag Malaar
Gurbani (1254-1293)
Partaal (1265-1273)
Ashtpadiyan (1273-1278)
Chhant (1278)
Vaar Malaar (1278-91)
Bhagat Bani (1292-93)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕਾਨੜਾ | Raag Kaanraa
Gurbani (1294-96)
Partaal (1296-1318)
Ashtpadiyan (1308-1312)
Chhant (1312)
Vaar Kaanraa
Bhagat Bani (1318)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕਲਿਆਨ | Raag Kalyaan
Gurbani (1319-23)
Ashtpadiyan (1323-26)
ਰਾਗੁ ਪ੍ਰਭਾਤੀ | Raag Prabhaatee
Gurbani (1327-1341)
Ashtpadiyan (1342-51)
ਰਾਗੁ ਜੈਜਾਵੰਤੀ | Raag Jaijaiwanti
Gurbani (1352-53)
Salok | Gatha | Phunahe | Chaubole | Swayiye
Sehskritee Mahala 1
Sehskritee Mahala 5
Gaathaa Mahala 5
Phunhay Mahala 5
Chaubolae Mahala 5
Shaloks Bhagat Kabir
Shaloks Sheikh Farid
Swaiyyae Mahala 5
Swaiyyae in Praise of Gurus
Shaloks in Addition To Vaars
Shalok Ninth Mehl
Mundavanee Mehl 5
ਰਾਗ ਮਾਲਾ, Raag Maalaa
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Videos
New media
New comments
Library
Latest reviews
Donate
Log in
Register
What's new
New posts
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Welcome to all New Sikh Philosophy Network Forums!
Explore Sikh Sikhi Sikhism...
Sign up
Log in
Discussions
Hard Talk
DDT Challenged Sikh Rehet Maryada. And Hukamnama Response From Akal Takht
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Harkiran Kaur" data-source="post: 208292" data-attributes="member: 18224"><p>It's not so much that they have their own RM that urks me, but it's the outright blatant disrespect for the RM that IS the Akal Takht accepted one that makes me upset.</p><p></p><p>Some people try to say that Taksalis just 'add to' the SRM and that 'adding' to something is not bad... </p><p></p><p>But this is not true... SRM gives equality to all humans.... including women. This includes ALL seva including seva as Panj Pyaras. </p><p></p><p>Damdami Taksal discriminate against women (because they say we are impure) by restricting women from nearly all seva. (All prominent seva anyway. I think they allow langar seva for women, but Granthi, Kirtani / Raagis, participating in Akhand Paaths, and of course, they would never entertain women doing seva as Panj Pyaras. Their outright thought is: Women are not allowed. This is outright discrimination and is going directly against SRM, not adding to it. They are keeping women from all the main leadership roles and roles as authority in spiritual teaching. They are relegating women to the stereotypical role that women are only good for menial work like in the kitchen. What kind of message does this send to our youth? I'll give you a hint, there are young taksalis / those who gravitate to taksal ideology that think women are a lower status to men, that women should even mathatek to their husbands because their husbands are a higher status over them (and hence deserve more respect), that female body is a 'downgrade' to a male body (punishment for past karma?) etc. It's really really sad!</p><p></p><p>SRM outright says women can be Panj Pyaras, yet Taksalis outright have sexist rule in their RM saying women are not allowed (holding grudge because "no woman gave her head that day"). The implication of this, is that women are spiritually lower status than males, because if you look at the practical outcome, it's that women must rely on men for their spiritual progression (or progression in the faith) while men do not have to rely on women. If women can only take amrit from males... it makes the statement that females are lesser in eyes of our Creator. This is no different than Christianity etc making outright statement that Eve was only made as a servant to Adam and therefore women are under male authority and lesser on the spiritual totem pole. Most Christian denominations do not allow women to have any leadership role (or "usurp" authority from the men) women are to be obedient and submissive. And DDT thinks this same way. In fact their RM actually outright tells Singhs to view their wives as their 'faithful follower' while the Singhni is told to view her husband as her 'God' (Parmeshwar). This is not Sikhi is it????</p><p></p><p>They also keep women off tabiya because menstruating women are seen as impure - the wording in their own RM says "during menstruation" but since they can't go checking all women for that time of the month (and they don't trust us) they just keep all women from kirtan and sitting on tabiya including akhand paaths too. And even if they did allow women when it was not that time of the month, most women would not want to advertise whether or not they are on their period anyway and would likely just refrain from seva so they wouldn't have to publicly claim "hey I am not bleeding right now, so I am ok to do seva". It's just degrading no matter how you look at it! And besides, this also goes against SRM which I think condemns Hindu ideology like sootak. </p><p></p><p>They can enforce whatever they want in their own deras (and people have choice to go there or not)</p><p>but now with this hukamnama that clarified everything, they can no longer blatantly disrespect the Sikh Rehet Maryada. They can no longer make frivolous claims that it was never accepted by the panth and installed by Akal Takht as the panthic RM. Those claims should now be put to rest!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Harkiran Kaur, post: 208292, member: 18224"] It's not so much that they have their own RM that urks me, but it's the outright blatant disrespect for the RM that IS the Akal Takht accepted one that makes me upset. Some people try to say that Taksalis just 'add to' the SRM and that 'adding' to something is not bad... But this is not true... SRM gives equality to all humans.... including women. This includes ALL seva including seva as Panj Pyaras. Damdami Taksal discriminate against women (because they say we are impure) by restricting women from nearly all seva. (All prominent seva anyway. I think they allow langar seva for women, but Granthi, Kirtani / Raagis, participating in Akhand Paaths, and of course, they would never entertain women doing seva as Panj Pyaras. Their outright thought is: Women are not allowed. This is outright discrimination and is going directly against SRM, not adding to it. They are keeping women from all the main leadership roles and roles as authority in spiritual teaching. They are relegating women to the stereotypical role that women are only good for menial work like in the kitchen. What kind of message does this send to our youth? I'll give you a hint, there are young taksalis / those who gravitate to taksal ideology that think women are a lower status to men, that women should even mathatek to their husbands because their husbands are a higher status over them (and hence deserve more respect), that female body is a 'downgrade' to a male body (punishment for past karma?) etc. It's really really sad! SRM outright says women can be Panj Pyaras, yet Taksalis outright have sexist rule in their RM saying women are not allowed (holding grudge because "no woman gave her head that day"). The implication of this, is that women are spiritually lower status than males, because if you look at the practical outcome, it's that women must rely on men for their spiritual progression (or progression in the faith) while men do not have to rely on women. If women can only take amrit from males... it makes the statement that females are lesser in eyes of our Creator. This is no different than Christianity etc making outright statement that Eve was only made as a servant to Adam and therefore women are under male authority and lesser on the spiritual totem pole. Most Christian denominations do not allow women to have any leadership role (or "usurp" authority from the men) women are to be obedient and submissive. And DDT thinks this same way. In fact their RM actually outright tells Singhs to view their wives as their 'faithful follower' while the Singhni is told to view her husband as her 'God' (Parmeshwar). This is not Sikhi is it???? They also keep women off tabiya because menstruating women are seen as impure - the wording in their own RM says "during menstruation" but since they can't go checking all women for that time of the month (and they don't trust us) they just keep all women from kirtan and sitting on tabiya including akhand paaths too. And even if they did allow women when it was not that time of the month, most women would not want to advertise whether or not they are on their period anyway and would likely just refrain from seva so they wouldn't have to publicly claim "hey I am not bleeding right now, so I am ok to do seva". It's just degrading no matter how you look at it! And besides, this also goes against SRM which I think condemns Hindu ideology like sootak. They can enforce whatever they want in their own deras (and people have choice to go there or not) but now with this hukamnama that clarified everything, they can no longer blatantly disrespect the Sikh Rehet Maryada. They can no longer make frivolous claims that it was never accepted by the panth and installed by Akal Takht as the panthic RM. Those claims should now be put to rest! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Discussions
Hard Talk
DDT Challenged Sikh Rehet Maryada. And Hukamnama Response From Akal Takht
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top