Can women be Panj Pyare?

Quote

It is strange, how much intolerant we are to the opposite-view point; especially if it sounds against our religious belief. With that degree of intolerance in our debate-mode; we deserve to achieve nothing. If someone dreams about a "state" for us; we are so eager & happy to anounce him a great gurmukh and if a gursikh disagrees with us on a certain point, we find it so easy to doubt his motives. He sounds no longer a gursikh to us.

Bhai MB Singh jeeo, I am not sure why you feel that we all have been "intolerant" in this debate. If you have got this impression from any of my post, then I would like to clarify that many times written conversation does not capture all the emotions and intentions of the contributor accurately. I did put my viewpoint strongly because if Rehitvaan Gursikhs are going to oppose Khalsa Panth, then we have no hope. My viewpoint is that one who opposes Khalsa Panth (or its independance) is Guru Sahib's Dain-daar and a Dain-daar can't get Mukti. It was my cry from heart trying to admonish a dear brother from spoiling his future. How is he going to get hurt if, prior to Khalsa Raj in the world, Sikhs in Punjab or anywhere else, get autonomy? None of us are doing any work towards such Sikh autonomy but by the same token what's the need to oppose it either?

I respectfully, while prostrating at your feet, do Benti, that you have reached a wrong conclusion that we have been intolerant. To defend Panth or a Mahapurakh as I did when Baba Banda Singh jee Bahadur's integrety was doubted is not being intolerant. Defending the basic principles of Gurmat passionately does not amount to intolerance in my opinion. Intolerance would have been if his posts had been blocked.

If I am misunderstanding, I request you to make your point more clear by pointing out specific examples of intolerance.

Kulbir Singh

Dear Guru Pyare Jeeos,

VJKK VJKF

I thought this forum was the one like no other - however in this debate it's becoming like all others - manily admins of the site should have taken this as a separate topic for discussion and keep to the topic of the subject heading Re: Can women be Panj Pyare?

I am going to rewind you all back to the main topic if I can and humbly request admins to start another topic and so this debate can be continued too? This debate on Khalistan is also very important - if admins agree please Call it "RAJ KAREGA KHALSA HAAKEE RAHEE NA KOI"

So going back on the orignal question Re: Can women be Panj Pyare?

I believe the answer should be NO - reason simple - it should be as Dhan Guru Godind Singh Jee had started and stay that way. Also please bear in mind how many other people of other kaums go around questioning or changing their traditions.

Ns44,

In that case, doesnt that mean bibian shouldnt be given a share of panj guphay of degh either? Thinking about the implications of excluding bibian from panj pyarey, I don't know how people are unable to see it as discrimination.

Nonetheless, as I think it was yourself that pointed it out, this is a question that too many Sikhs disagree on. Since no bibi is begging to be in panj, it doesnt seem crucial to come to a resolution right now.

Sukhdeep Singh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Im amazed how modern-day Khalistanis beat their
> chest for a Sikh state yet they dont know the
> first thing about governance or politics. I once
> asked a Khalistani how would a separate Sikh state
> survive against a Nuclear Pakistan and Nuclear
> India? He said how does Israel defend against all
> its enemies. I explained to him Israel is
> supported with billions of dollars by countries
> like the U.S. which allows them to have the best
> military resources in that region. I then asked
> him which countries would aide and become
> alliances to a Sikh state? It wouldnt be China nor
> would it be U.S.? Pakistan would support them for
> a brief time, but then they would eventually take
> over the state through their Nuclear might.
>
> More practical goal is for people of Punjab to
> draft a resolution demanding India to protect
> their basic rights, and for the people of Punjab (
> Hindu, Sikhi, Muslims, or Chriistian) to work
> together and make this state more prosperous both
> socially and economically. It makes no sense for
> people in the West to beat their chest about a
> Sikh State because they themselves are not going
> to leave their comfort zones to live in a
> theocracy.


Most of these people in West have no real idea of what people in Punjab want. If there was a referendum in Punjab today for Khalistan it would fail miserably. Nobody in Punjab wants a Khalistan. What they want is resources, industry, jobs, governance, better system and just better everyday living. But these western Khalistanis would not care for these real issues. They have convinced themselves that Khalistan is the solution to everything.

Can't even manage Gurudwaras properly and yet want a separate, independent political state. Childishness bordering on stupidity. ਸੁਖਬੀਰ ਤੇ ਮਜੀਠੀਆ ਨਜ਼ਰ ਨੀ ਆਉਂਦਾ, ਸੈਂਟਰ ਗੋਰਮਿੰਟ , ਸੈਂਟਰ ਗੌਰਮਿੰਟ ਦੀ ਰੱਟ ਲਾਈ ਰਖਦੇ ਨੇ. ਮਜੀਠੀਏ ਨੇ ਚਿੱਟਾ ਵੰਡ ਤਾ ਸਾਰੇ , ਪਰ ਇਹ ਕਹਿੰਦੇ ਇੰਡਿਯਨ ਗੌਰਮਿੰਟ ਕਰਦੀ ਐ.
ਭਲਾ ਦੱਸੋ ਬਾਦਲ ਨੂੰ ਵੋਟਾਂ ਹਿੰਦੂਆਂ ਨੇ ਪਾ ਕੇ ਗੱਦੀ ਤੇ ਬਿਠਾਇਆ ਐ ? ਐਵੇਂ ਈ ਹਵਾ ਚ ਗੱਲਾਂ ਕਰੀ ਜਾਣਗੇ .

Veer Kulbir Singh Ji, you are right to state that in written words, sometimes we miss or could not convey our real feelings. May be it is happening here too. I also agree that SANGAT is supreme. Even if one is not satisfied or convinced with some viewpoint, he should surrender to SANGAT's will. We are not supposed to act against the wishes of SANGAT. Surely if KHALSA PANTH has resolved for something, we should not object to it. Opposing it or disliking it is harmful for the sikh. Mukti may be something unsure for him. So only disagreement is probably about presence or absence of collective will of Khalsa Panth on the subject. It seems lacking, which you said is there already. So, if in the process of verbal discussions about that, we term or judge others as defaulters, we are being intolerant to the others, I think. Anyway, I surely lack any wisdom about such issues. Bhul Chuk lai khima karde raho ji.

A rehat dhaaree abheaasee singh/bibi deserves to be in panchaan Di sewa.

harkasimran247 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A rehat dhaaree abheaasee singh/bibi deserves to
> be in panchaan Di sewa.


I agree 100% and I am sure a lot of others too - but why must we change the reet set by our Guru Sahib Dhan Guru Gobind Singh jee?

and

sk wrote:
Ns44,

In that case, doesnt that mean bibian shouldnt be given a share of panj guphay of degh either? Thinking about the implications of excluding bibian from panj pyarey, I don't know how people are unable to see it as discrimination.

Nonetheless, as I think it was yourself that pointed it out, this is a question that too many Sikhs disagree on. Since no bibi is begging to be in panj, it doesnt seem crucial to come to a resolution right now.


-- nope I have only have an issue becuase it was the reet set in by Sahca Patsha Dhan Guru Gobind Singh Jee - and I wouldnt think it's wise for us to change - it has nothing to do with discrimination and all other sorts of arguments -- it has to do with reet set by maharaj and that is it.

I have full respect for amritdhari bibyian as any other person - any other duty or panj guphay of degh etc etc i have no issues with at all.

Quote

So going back on the orignal question Re: Can women be Panj Pyare?

I believe the answer should be NO - reason simple - it should be as Dhan Guru Godind Singh Jee had started and stay that way. Also please bear in mind how many other people of other kaums go around questioning or changing their traditions.

Guru Sahib appointed the original Punj Pyare for that time but He gave no instructions that for future only Singhs can be in Punj Pyare and not Bibiyaan. So how can you say that Guru Sahib started the reet of only Singhs for Punj Pyare?

Some argue that since the original Punj did not have any Bibiyaan; therefore, today too no Bibiyaan can be in Punj Pyare. The original Punj were from particular castes and particular states and nationalities. Would you interpret this to mean that only people from those caste backgrounds and states/nationalities can do Seva in Punj? You could stretch it further and say that the Jathedar of Punj Pyare must be from Lahore because Bhai Daya Singh jee was from Lahore. All these are lame excuses. It's true that perhaps Sikhs today are too influenced by neighboring religions and are still indulging in discrimination against Bibyaan and practice caste system but this does not make these practices part of Gurmat.

If Bibiyaan are fulfilling all the duties of an Amritdhari Gurmukh, then how can they be deprived of their rights of being Amritdhari. If Bibiyaan had different Amrit, different Kakaars, different Nitnem, different Rehit etc then we could argue that they have different functions and duties but since they both Singhs and Bibiyaan have the same Amrit, same Kakaars, same Nitnem and same Rehit, then how can their rights not be same?


Kulbir Singh

Kulbir Singh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So going back on the orignal question Re: Can
> women be Panj Pyare?
>
> I believe the answer should be NO - reason simple
> - it should be as Dhan Guru Godind Singh Jee had
> started and stay that way. Also please bear in
> mind how many other people of other kaums go
> around questioning or changing their traditions.
>
> Guru Sahib appointed the original Punj Pyare for
> that time but He gave no instructions that for
> future only Singhs can be in Punj Pyare and not
> Bibiyaan. So how can you say that Guru Sahib
> started the reet of only Singhs for Punj Pyare?
>
VIsual Bhai Sahib -- males stood up - and I can take your argument and say Guru Sahib didnt know what was going to happen when he asked for a had - -- antarjamee Dhan Guru knew all and created the perfection we have and we should not even go anywhere near about thinking of changing it.

> Some argue that since the original Punj did not
> have any Bibiyaan; therefore, today too no
> Bibiyaan can be in Punj Pyare. The original Punj
> were from particular castes and particular states
> and nationalities. Would you interpret this to
> mean that only people from those caste backgrounds
> and states/nationalities can do Seva in Punj? You
> could stretch it further and say that the Jathedar
> of Punj Pyare must be from Lahore because Bhai
> Daya Singh jee was from Lahore. All these are
> lame excuses.

true - lame excuses

It's true that perhaps Sikhs today
> are too influenced by neighboring religions and
> are still indulging in discrimination against
> Bibyaan and practice caste system but this does
> not make these practices part of Gurmat.

not by neighbouring religions but it's an inherit caste /punjabi issue that prevails.

> If Bibiyaan are fulfilling all the duties of an
> Amritdhari Gurmukh, then how can they be deprived
> of their rights of being Amritdhari. If Bibiyaan
> had different Amrit, different Kakaars, different
> Nitnem, different Rehit etc then we could argue
> that they have different functions and duties but
> since they both Singhs and Bibiyaan have the same
> Amrit, same Kakaars, same Nitnem and same Rehit,
> then how can their rights not be same?

you too all the knowledgeable people on this forum have misinterpetd my point. Humble bentie Bhai Sahib I have 100% respect for bibyian this is not about DISCRIMINATION - please I am not even going to go here. They are not being deprived of anything
>

Dhan Guru Sahib knew what he was doing - I am sure if antarejamee sache patsha wanted women to be in the punj - the kautak that happenned in 1699 would have included women without a shadow of any doubts - tell e you do agree with this point - or anyone on this forum??

Quote

Dhan Guru Sahib knew what he was doing - I am sure if antarejamee sache patsha wanted women to be in the punj

I used to be dead against women being in Panj Pyare but think about this: When Guru Sahib asked for a head (five times), who was the call made out to? Was it only to men or were women part of the assembly?

Guru Sahib did not ask for a male's head which shows that he included women. The call was made to the entire Panth not a particular section of it. It was from the Panth that five came forward. This showed that the Panth passed the test. The whole bickering over men vs. women have been created by us who fail to see past the gender lines. Why should half of the Panth be excluded (women be punished) for eternity just because they did not stand up? And for that matter why should all men be granted this priviledge just because five of them stood up 300 years ago? Were the original Panj Pyare representing the entire Panth or just male section? The answer is self-evident. We don't need to debate on this. Guru Rakha

Thank you for your reply, Bhai Kulbir Singh Jee. Couldn't agree more with you. The arguments put forth in favour of only allowing Panj Pyare to be Male Gursikhs are, quite frankly, illogical and hold no credible basis. It's refreshing to see so many RehitVaan Gursikhs agreeing that Panj Pyare Seva can be taken up by our respected mothers, sisters and daughters.

Bijla Singh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dhan Guru Sahib knew what he was doing - I am sure
> if antarejamee sache patsha wanted women to be in
> the punj
>
> I used to be dead against women being in Panj
> Pyare but think about this: When Guru Sahib asked
> for a head (five times), who was the call made out
> to? Was it only to men or were women part of the
> assembly?

i know and i agree Bijla Singh Jeeo how th call was made sir.

>
> Guru Sahib did not ask for a male's head which
> shows that he included women. The call was made to
> the entire Panth not a particular section of it.
> It was from the Panth that five came forward. This
> showed that the Panth passed the test. The whole
> bickering over men vs. women have been created by
> us who fail to see past the gender lines. Why
> should half of the Panth be excluded (women be
> punished) for eternity just because they did not
> stand up? And for that matter why should all men
> be granted this priviledge just because five of
> them stood up 300 years ago? Were the original
> Panj Pyare representing the entire Panth or just
> male section? The answer is self-evident. We don't
> need to debate on this. Guru Rakha


No no no its not about gender at all and should never be - its about the kuatak Maharaj did in my opinion as i said before

Dhan Guru Sahib knew what he was doing - I am sure if antarejamee sache patsha wanted women to be in the punj - the kautak that happenned in 1699 would have included women without a shadow of any doubts - tell me you do agree with this point - or anyone on this forum??

Secondly how about the Hukham mahajab below - mentions sings -- doesn't mention kaurs - please don't ry and justify that two on gender basis - the reasons are beyond our own thinking Bijla Singh Jeeo - only Guru Sahib knows ,

"Gur kee karnee kahe dhavo"


paa(n)ch si(n)gh a(n)mrith jo dhaevai(n) thaa(n) ko sir dhhar shhak pun laevai ||apun mil paa(n)cho rehith jo bhaakhai thaa(n) ko man mae(n) dhrirr kar raakhai ||
Offer you head and take the Amrit prepared by five Singhs. The code of conduct (Rehat), which they bless you with, should be enshrined in one's heart.
Krith Bilaas Paathshahee Dasvee

I agree we shouldn't discuss this matter -at all or change it in anyway either as KHALSA so far has been blessed plenty of Gursikh Bibyiaan and Gursikh Singhs an will continue to do so without any need to change the reet set by Dhan Dhan Guru Gobind Singh Jee Maharaj. There are no doubts what soever .

Quote

Dhan Guru Sahib knew what he was doing - I am sure if antarejamee sache patsha wanted women to be in the punj - the kautak that happenned in 1699 would have included women without a shadow of any doubts - tell me you do agree with this point - or anyone on this forum??

As Bijla Singh pointed out, Guru Sahib tested Khalsa and Khalsa passed by the Kirpa of Guru Sahib. Khalsa is Khalsa. Why divide it between caste, creed, nationality or sex? Guru Sahib never said that men Khalsa can do Seva and not women Khalsa? Khalsa is allowed to do Khalsa. If women are part of Khalsa, then they too can do Seva in Punj Pyare.

Quote

Secondly how about the Hukham mahajab below - mentions sings -- doesn't mention kaurs - please don't ry and justify that two on gender basis - the reasons are beyond our own thinking Bijla Singh Jeeo - only Guru Sahib knows ,
"Gur kee karnee kahe dhavo"
paa(n)ch si(n)gh a(n)mrith jo dhaevai(n) thaa(n) ko sir dhhar shhak pun laevai ||apun mil paa(n)cho rehith jo bhaakhai thaa(n) ko man mae(n) dhrirr kar raakhai ||
Offer you head and take the Amrit prepared by five Singhs. The code of conduct (Rehat), which they bless you with, should be enshrined in one's heart.
Krith Bilaas Paathshahee Dasvee

In Rehitnamas and even Gurbani many times Hukams are given to male Gursikhs and at other times to female Gursikhs. As an example, one of the Bajjar Kurehit written in Rehitnamas is "Par Istree Gaman". Does this mean that if women do "Par Purakh Gaman" then it's not a Bajjar Kurehit? Sure it's a Bajjar Kurehit for men and for women to do adultery. Where it says Singhs in Rehitnamas, it implies both genders; otherwise Bibiyaan would be exempt from a lot of Rehit as some Jathebandees claim.

Quote

I agree we shouldn't discuss this matter -at all or change it in anyway either as KHALSA so far has been blessed plenty of Gursikh Bibyiaan and Gursikh Singhs an will continue to do so without any need to change the reet set by Dhan Dhan Guru Gobind Singh Jee Maharaj. There are no doubts what soever .

But Guru Sahib never started the reet of prohibiting women from doing Seva in Punj Pyare, so there is no question of changing this reet.

Kulbir Singh

Kulbir Singh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dhan Guru Sahib knew what he was doing - I am sure
> if antarejamee sache patsha wanted women to be in
> the punj - the kautak that happenned in 1699 would
> have included women without a shadow of any doubts
> - tell me you do agree with this point - or anyone
> on this forum??

answer the question - YES or NO. please


> As Bijla Singh pointed out, Guru Sahib tested
> Khalsa and Khalsa passed by the Kirpa of Guru
> Sahib. Khalsa is Khalsa. Why divide it between
> caste, creed, nationality or sex? Guru Sahib
> never said that men Khalsa can do Seva and not
> women Khalsa? Khalsa is allowed to do Khalsa. If
> women are part of Khalsa, then they too can do
> Seva in Punj Pyare.
>

your opinion - i respect it whole heartedly even though i dont agree with it.

> Secondly how about the Hukham mahajab below -
> mentions sings -- doesn't mention kaurs - please
> don't ry and justify that two on gender basis -
> the reasons are beyond our own thinking Bijla
> Singh Jeeo - only Guru Sahib knows ,
> "Gur kee karnee kahe dhavo"
> paa(n)ch si(n)gh a(n)mrith jo dhaevai(n) thaa(n)
> ko sir dhhar shhak pun laevai ||apun mil paa(n)cho
> rehith jo bhaakhai thaa(n) ko man mae(n) dhrirr
> kar raakhai ||
> Offer you head and take the Amrit prepared by five
> Singhs. The code of conduct (Rehat), which they
> bless you with, should be enshrined in one's
> heart.
> Krith Bilaas Paathshahee Dasvee
>
> In Rehitnamas and even Gurbani many times Hukams
> are given to male Gursikhs and at other times to
> female Gursikhs. As an example, one of the Bajjar
> Kurehit written in Rehitnamas is "Par Istree
> Gaman". Does this mean that if women do "Par
> Purakh Gaman" then it's not a Bajjar Kurehit?
> Sure it's a Bajjar Kurehit for men and for women
> to do adultery. Where it says Singhs in
> Rehitnamas, it implies both genders; otherwise
> Bibiyaan would be exempt from a lot of Rehit as
> some Jathebandees claim.

apologies disagree. - there are tons more i can give but don;t want to make this a petty debate.

> I agree we shouldn't discuss this matter -at all
> or change it in anyway either as KHALSA so far has
> been blessed plenty of Gursikh Bibyiaan and
> Gursikh Singhs an will continue to do so without
> any need to change the reet set by Dhan Dhan Guru
> Gobind Singh Jee Maharaj. There are no doubts what
> soever .
>
> But Guru Sahib never started the reet of
> prohibiting women from doing Seva in Punj Pyare,
> so there is no question of changing this reet.

I never said that - the reet was set in stone on basis of gender - i am saying Maharaj knew already knew 5 singhs would stand up - hence we must respect and continue the same as good Khalsa. - This is nothing against gender or anyone - bibyian should welcome it and not belittle and challenge it on gender basis - is that mature of them to do so ? Did purratan Sikhs even challenge this for the last 300 odd years. No because it works - and will contiune to work.

>
> Kulbir Singh


Thanks for your input however Kulbir Singh Jee and Bijla Singh - I AGREE TO DISAGREE on this matter.

Quote

> Dhan Guru Sahib knew what he was doing - I am sure
> if antarejamee sache patsha wanted women to be in
> the punj - the kautak that happenned in 1699 would
> have included women without a shadow of any doubts
> - tell me you do agree with this point - or anyone
> on this forum??

answer the question - YES or NO. please

The question is not correct and not related to this discussion. Of course Guru Sahib knows everything past, present and future but the test was for Khalsa Panth and Khalsa did pass the test. The test was not about men and women but of Khalsa Panth. Khalsa Panth did give 5 heads to Guru Sahib. If Guru Sahib had asked for heads of only men and then of only women, and women had not stood up, then your argument may have been valid.

Guru Sahib did not declare from that day that only men can do Seva in Punj from now on, and only men from these castes and nationalities can do Seva.

Kulbir Singh

Kulbir Singh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > Dhan Guru Sahib knew what he was doing - I am
> sure
> > if antarejamee sache patsha wanted women to be
> in
> > the punj - the kautak that happenned in 1699
> would
> > have included women without a shadow of any
> doubts
> > - tell me you do agree with this point - or
> anyone
> > on this forum??
>
> answer the question - YES or NO. please
>
> The question is not correct and not related to
> this discussion. Of course Guru Sahib knows
> everything past, present and future but the test
> was for Khalsa Panth and Khalsa did pass the test.
> The test was not about men and women but of
> Khalsa Panth. Khalsa Panth did give 5 heads to
> Guru Sahib. If Guru Sahib had asked for heads of
> only men and then of only women, and women had not
> stood up, then your argument may have been valid.
>
>
> Guru Sahib did not declare from that day that only
> men can do Seva in Punj from now on, and only men
> from these castes and nationalities can do Seva.
>
>
> Kulbir Singh


Great answer - case closed - i agree to disagree.- you continue to misinterpet - therefore please close the thread - enough said.

Reading this debate a thought came to mind if anybody can answer,
Why are our all Guru Sahiban Male none female and if I expand it further all the major religions every prophet is male. Is there a reason for it?

Two main arguments i have heard against allowing Bibian to do seva in Punj are
1) The original Punj Pyare were all male so we could keep this tradition alive
2) There should be no mix of Singhs and Singhneeian doing seva in Punj

Regarding point 1, we have to taken into account what the Punj represent. The Punj Pyare are acting representatives of Guru Sahibs themselves. Guru Sahib in Deh roop, were not Gurus because of their humanly form, but because of the jot that lived inside of them. It was Akal Purakhs will that all Guru Sahibaan took male body forms, but the fact they were male is irrelevant because it was the jot that we are too worship. This is made more evident when Guru Granth Sahib ji was put on the throne as the Eternal Guru, it showed that the Jot alone is what made Guru Sahib since there would no more humanly forms of Guru Sahib after then. Guru Sahibs gender, caste, creed etc. have no relevance to the authority they hold.

The same than can be said about Punj Pyare. During the first Amrit sinchar, Guru Gobind Singh Ji asked for Punj Gursikhs to make a sacrifice. It just so happens that the Gursikhs that stood up were all male, but that does not mean that Guru Sahib didn't want any Bibian to give their heads. The gender of the Punj Pyare are just as irrelevant as any other social or physical attribute of the Punj Pyare, We give authority to the Punj because of the power that has been given to them through Guru Sahib. The Punj Pyare are 5 Aatmas representing Guru Sahib, not 5 BODIES, it is really important to note this difference.


Guru Sahib has said that he lives through his Khalsa and all authoritative power should be given to the Khalsa panth. Ultimate authority of not only Amrit sinchars but Panthic matters as well. If one says that Bibian shouldn't be allowed to do seva in Punj, than Singhneeian should also have no representation in any panthic decisions, because at the end of the day its Punj Gursikhs order that is supreme in any circumstance. How absurd would this be to rid Bibian of any opinion in all Panthic Matters.

Regarding point 2, I have heard different reasons as to why there shouldn't be mixing of Singhs and Singhneeian in Punj, but have yet to hear a compelling argument. One absurd suggestion is related to kaam, as abhlakhees might have bad thoughts if a Bibi is doing seva. This is completely absurd, anyone who has this type of thought during an amrit sinchar, would not be given amrit de daat in the first place.

It seems like chauvinistic Punjabi cultural attitudes have creeped into our Sikhi, and we shouldn't let this happen. Let us build upon what makes sense in terms of Gurmat, and not our chauvinistic punjabi cultural views, that has convinced even those who are not of the same mind-set that Bibiaan should be excluded from seva.

I'm with NS44 Ji on this, and backing bibian for this seva is 'modern' thinking to fit western idealogies of equality. I dont believe there to be any evidence that bibian historically served in the Punj and no sampardaic jathey have females in the Punj and unless something has recently changed in the Jatha no bibian have performed this seva. The Panj Piyare have to be not only spiritually superior but also physically in relation to the masses and hence their bodies complete. Both powers are transferred to make Amrit. In this regard (physical level) we cannot compare both sexes. In the Ardas we daily say Panja Piyariaan not 'Piyareean'.......so we should look to history and elders when we dont have answers not use our own thinking to please everyone.

In hindsight I should have stayed quiet as the last thing we need is to stoke yet another controversy, so I apologise. Should have kept my thoughts to myself.

Gurdarsh Kaur had one wish before she took her last breath: to be able to chak Amrit and become Guru Vaali.
However, the times were so tense and severe, that all the male members of the Sikh community had fled to escape persecution and possible execution from the ruling Hindu oppressers. The Singhs would only come out when the need of clock called them to show their military duty. Sometimes they fought protecting Muslims, sometimes Dalits and protecting the honor of so-called "low-caste" hindu women, or protecting the meek and weak in general. The dictating BJP had surpassed all limits of oppression and torture, and had gone on an ambush of tracking down and eliminating every Singh they came across. The RSS wanted to make sure that Brahmins remained on top of their hierarchical system. They had subjugated many Gurudwaras. The Khalsa women would hold private top secret Smaagams in their homes. They also were on high alert on the ongoing oppression around them. The Jathedarni of the jatha of Khalsa women, Mata Dalbahadur Kaur wanted to organize a gupt Amrit Sinchaar, to have those partake Amrit who had been blessed yet. Many younger girls from Sikh backgrounds and even low-caste hindu women kept pushing her. But the Jathedarni and the rest of the charismatic personalities had their doubts. It had been a while since the last Amrit Sanchaar was organized and held. But since the Singhs had fled, there hadn't been an Amrit Sanchaar in over 2 years. The Khalsa women had their doubts and skepticism as to whether or not they should do Panj Peyaareyan di seva. One night, Mata Dalbahadur Kaur jee had a dream in where Dasam Pita jee gave Partakh Darshan to Jathedarni jee. He told her that when He created the Khalsa in 1699, he had done no distinction or discrimination between Khalsa men and women. Singhs and Singhnis were both His Sikhs and deserved equal love of Dasmesh Pita jee. He gave her the Hukam to organize an Amrit Sanchaar and He Himself would do the Kautak. The next morning Jathedarni jee narrated this Kautak to all the Singhnian. They then decided that an Amrit Sanchaar would be held regardless of the presence or absence of Khalsa males. Soon after, more and more Amrit Sanchaars started being conducted. These women and girls who had transformed into Khalsa, were filled with such valour and fierceness that the local RSS units would run away when they saw them and close their "shaakhaas". Together as one Khalsa, this army of Khalsa females shook the very roots of Delhi and sowed the first seed of Khalsa raaj. The BJP goons soon fell at their feet and begged for mercy. These women alone took revenge for 1984 and the many casualties that happened after. Khalsa males no longer had to go into hide out and became the emperors and rulers of India. Sikhi began spreading far and wide. From Kashmir to Himalayas to Bengal to Rajasthan to Gujarat etc. They then attacked Pakistani troops and took over the Khalsa land and property which was stolen and seized by Muslims in 1947. Finally, the Khalsa had control over Siri Nankana Sahib and other Gurudwara Sahibs of what used to be "Pakistan". Once again, Khalsa Raaj was finally established and fully running. All this possible because the distinction or discrimination between men and women had ceased to exist. Khalsa was only Khalsa. Even the current prime minister of India had to take another janam and take Amrit to become Khalsa.

Nice story singh_91.

I hope to see the day when truly in our Panth there ceases to be significance on placing distinction between male and female, and as you said, Khalsa becomes Khalsa.


I am greatful to the gursikhs in this thread who have stood up for bibian's right to not be excluded from any sort of seva. Guru Gobind Singh jee allowed bibian to give their heads on the battlefield, then why would he have excluded them from giving their heads at Anandpur Sahib in 1699? They were not excluded, they had the same option to stand up as everyone else in that crowd. Bibian were not the only ones who did not immediately grab that opportunity that day. I doubt all the gurmukh men and bibian in the crowd were afraid; that's a ridiculous accusation that has become a part of our ithiaas. All those gurmukh men and bibian just happened to not get to stand up FIRST. Does that mean that Guru Gobind Singh jee henceforth banished everyone on the crowd from ever coming forward to take that seva ever again?

If Guru Sahib did not forbid every male who didn't get the chance to come forward before the original panj pyarey, how can we assume Guru Sahib did however choose to forbid bibian? Why would Guru Sahib not exclude everyone then? Why only bibian?

If Guru Sahib does not care what gender we are, then why would he have cared enough at that time to choose to exclude the bibian who didnt come forward first but not the men?

If Guru Sahib cared so much about gender, why did he name bibian KAUR which meanz PRINCE and NOT PRINCESS (which everyone says)?


As for the argument the Guru Sahib was male so Panj Pyarey must be too: Panj Pyarey, no matter who they are, can never replicate our Guru. When we say panj pyarey are Guru Roop it means that Guru Sahib acts through them and initiates his shakti through them. It is Guru Gobind Singh jee giving amrit through the hands of those five sikhs. It doesnt mean that those five sikhs become Guru Gobind Singh jee. So it is absurd to make the argument that the roop of thr panj pyarey must replicate the roop of Guru Gobind Singh jee. Panj pyrarey are not a replication of Guru Sahib, they are a medium through which Guru Sahib himself acts and carries out his own work.

Finally, it was Guru Gobind Singh jee himself that said that anyone who considers his roop to be God will go to hell. Harsh words, but if we cannot get past the illusion that Guru Sahib is his body and that we are our body, then there is no hope for us. I myself struggle to remind myself that gender doesnt matter, and I can honestly say that I am very aware that it is a huge bigan in my spirituality. I wish with all my heart that these distinctions between men and women can cease to be and that all gursikhs can start treating Kaurs like gursikhs too.

Interesting story by singh ji and good write up by sk ji.

Bhai Sahib Randhir Singh Ji and other sikh saints and writers have written very strongly about gender equality as an important GURMAT principle. Bhai Sahib Ji has written that in JOT VIGAS and Prof Puran Singh Ji in The Spirit Born People.

MB Singh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Interesting story by singh ji and good write up by
> sk ji.
>
> Bhai Sahib Randhir Singh Ji and other sikh saints
> and writers have written very strongly about
> gender equality as an important GURMAT principle.
> Bhai Sahib Ji has written that in JOT VIGAS and
> Prof Puran Singh Ji in The Spirit Born People.


Bhai Sahib, could you possibly share those passages from Jot Vigaas please?

Bhein ji, It is page 41 in the book. I have not the book at this time. May be when I get it, I will quote the words.

VAHEGURU JI KA KHALSA, VAHEGURU JI KI FATEH

[www.bsrstrust.org]

Last book on the website.