Men Are Demi-Gods Over Women?

[Harkiran Kaur]

Sangat Ji,

WJKK WJKF

Please take a look at this thread on another forum. There are a couple members on there (P and R) who are trying to say that Sikhi says women are to view their husband as a God over them, that women should have no say in decisionmaking (in family or otherwsie) and that women are to serve their husbands as the Gods they are over them. These guys are trying to paint a picture of women as mindless, simple, domestic, reproductive robots that answer every becking call of thier husbands who are vastly superior to them - so superior in fact that they are seen as a 'Demi-God'.

The user called R specifically tries to justify his chauvenistic thinking saying women are cowardly, homely, submissive by nature and that women will never be happy unless they are being dominated and 'assertively' controlled by men.

It started as a result of someone trying to challenge the anand karaj tradition of male in front. They are trying to say that male in front pretty much states the woman's place as inferior to the man and that she will be subservient and obedient and blindly 'follow' him and never take the lead.

<link removed - Ishna>

Nowhere have I ever read that women are supposed to be mindless doormats serving men's every whim and seeing men as Gods over them. Nowhere in Gurbani, nowhere on any Sikh website, or book. So where are these guys getting this from??? One user P is twisting one single tuk out of context of the original shabad to say that women are to serve their husbands as God (Parmeshwar). The original tuk stated that those (soul)brides who take the Transcendent Lord as their husband... its in the shabad speaking against the practice of satee. It seems Damdami Taksal have twisted it to say that women need to serve their (physical) husband as a God over them.

Since I always thought Sikhi treats everyone equally, doesn't this go against Gurbani? Against Gurmat?

As Gurmukh look upon ALL with the wingle eye of equality, for in each and every heart the divine light is contained. - I don't think this says the divine light is only in men's hearts, or to only see men with single eye of equality...

What should I do about these guys?

Ishna's note: I've removed the names and the link to avoid inter-forum troubles. Your message is valid and stands on its own, sister, and doesn't need to point back to the source. Thank you for understanding.

 

[Ishna]

Bhainji

I had a look through Damdami Taksal Rehat Maryada and could only find one reference:

A Singh must look upon his wife as his faithful Singhni and a Singhni should look upon her husband as Parmeshwar(God).

I only did a search for 'wife' and only had a quick look. You may want to be more thorough, or may already be familiar with it. http://www.vidhia.com/Rehat Maryada/Gurmat_Rehat_Maryada_-_Damdami_Taksal.pdf

I did not get the impression, from the quick glance I took, that Damdami Taksal emphasize a female subservient position. I feel this may be a Punjabi cultural influence. You may ask them for evidence to back up their claim.

You ask a hard question, what can you do about these guys? This kind of thinking is potentially what leads to domestic violence. I truly hope these men respect and treasure their wives (if/when they have them), and do not abuse them. I do not know enough about how to tackle the issue except to ask them for evidence, and to try to teach them.

 

[Harkiran Kaur]

Ishna Ji, how can a husband and wife share an equal relationship is she is told to view her husband as Parmeshwar (God) while he is told to view her as a follower (faithful Singhni denotes follower). Why not tell both spouses to view each other as embodiment of God? Why not tell both to view each other as faithful. If you go to DDTs .org website, and click on Rehet Maryada, there are even spots where it lays out specifically what they mean when you mouse over the term Parmeshwar... that women are to 'serve their husband as God' while the husband is not required to do the same for his wife. And they speak of accepting their respective 'roles'.

This by the way is the shabad (or part of it) which DDT twisted to arrive at their command that women see men as God:

ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਜਿਨਿ ਪ੍ਰਿਉ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਕਰਿ ਜਾਨਿਆ ॥
Kaho Nānak jin pari▫o parmesar kar jāni▫ā.
Says Nanak, she who looks upon the Transcendent Lord as her Husband,
ਧੰਨੁ ਸਤੀ ਦਰਗਹ ਪਰਵਾਨਿਆ ॥੪॥੩੦॥੯੯॥
Ḏẖan saṯī ḏargėh parvāni▫ā. ||4||30||99||
is the blessed 'satee'; she is received with honor in the Court of the Lord. ||4||30||99||

Clearly it is saying that she (as in soul bride) who takes God as her husband (not speaking of physical marriage but in having full faith in God) is the blessed satee... (instead of burning herself on her physical husband funeral pyre) she will transcend all pain because she (male or female... its speaking of soul bride / husband lord) put full faith in Waheguru.

Now DDT, takes these two lines out of context of the shabad and twist it to say that wives who look upon their husband as a God, will be received in the court of the Lord. These guys on the other forum, take it even further to justify that women are vastly inferior to men.

So being married and holding the husband's palla apparently means (to these guys) that the woman is acknowleding her vastly inferior status and will obey and follow her husband's dominance over her while serving him as a God and acting as a baby machine, domestic robot without a mind or wishes or opinion of her own.

Paruse other posts on that forum and you will see a horrible pattern arising... and anyone who disagrees with them are called 'anti-gurmat' So any female advocating equality in Sikhi is called anti-gurmat. Its only Gurmat apparently if women are treated like doormats and dominated and seen as inferior.

It makes me so mad!

 

[Ishna]

I'd rather not visit that forum. I have encountered that sentiment enough on all other Sikh forums I've visited, and even occasionally on this one, but not in the last few years.

I think it is primarily a cultural influence, as Mai Bhago is clear historical proof for us that women were held in high regard - and even moreso, than men, by Guru Sahib himself!

Case closed.

 

[Harkiran Kaur]

But if nobody says anything or tries to show them the truth, they will go on believing this drivel! And its only us women who will say anything (since men obviously benefit from women being seen as inferior) so women have to be the ones to challenge this thinking.

 

[chazSingh]

Hi Harkiran,

hope you are well...we haven't spoken in a while

that thread is a beautiful representation of truth and false...the dualistic nature of life...both swirl around each other...there are people on it speaking the truth, and others who believe in the falseness of their thoughts...

i wouldn't get angry at what they think...let it be. As long as you are living in accordance with the truth, that's all that matters...and inspire others to do so. To truly recognize the light and contemplate what it is...we have to first come to knowledge of its existence...and to do that we have to wonder into the darkness for a while

some people you will never change...and it's not worth your god given energy.

 

[Ishna]

Your energy would be far better spent tackling the problem at grass-roots level - activism and community/social work on the ground in Punjab, or support of charities that do that if you can't do it yourself, and promotion of education and positive literature to the youth.

Forum arguments will do nothing but exhaust you.

I don't think it's entirely fair to say that women are the only ones who will challenge this - plenty of brilliant and proper Singhs are campaigning for equality and an end to domestic and family violence.

And just as many women will defer to tradition and enforce it upon their children, as men who will take advantage of it for their own comfort.