SINGHAN DA PANTH NIRALA

Author: Panthic
Date: 03-28-06 08:51



Continued...

C.K.: It is said that there was no female among the Five Beloved Ones, so females are not eligible for Amrit.

S.K: This is a foolish argument. Guru Sahib laid down a principle that whosoever, whether male or female, is readily willing to offer in Sacrifice his/her all, mind, body and family is eligible for being initiated into Panth. It so happened that in the call of first selection, Bhai Daya Singh Ji, Bhai Dharam Singh Ji, Bhai Himat Singh Ji, Bhai Mohkam Singh Ji and Bhai Sahib Singh Ji offered themselves for the sacrifice. Had a female made such an offering, she too would have been included in the Five Beloved Ones.

The Guru just established the example, that any sacrificing individual is eligible for being initiated with Gurmat Amrit. Some ignorant people are so lowly in thought that they consider eligible only those who belong to the castes same as the castes of The Five Beloved Ones. However, The Guru, having established the ideal of sacrificing Beloved Ones got countless men and women baptized in his own presence. This Amrit was same, of the Double-edged sword that was first administered to the The Beloved Ones. Thus many women became Singhanian and countless men of different castes became singhs and renounced casteism. There was no more discrimination after getting baptized.

"One Sikh, two from Sadh Sangat and WAHEGURU is personified in the gathering of five" and the "exalted ones are recognized and they are acknowledged leaders," Gurbani quotes formed the basis by Guru Sahib for selecting only Five, after testing their mettle. He dropped the scene at that or else many Gursikhs were ready for the demanded sacrifice. Subsequently, many deserving persons got initiated with Amrit. Those, who were destined and ready, availed the opportunity and this process shall go on eternally. The discrimination on the basis of sex or caste is unthinkable nor is there any waiting for a propitious time for this.

C.K.: It is established that the Amrit of the double-edged sword is common for all, men and women alike, from the time of Sri Guru Dasmesh Ji. However, it is still felt that living code for men and women should be distinct.

S.K.: Why so? Amrit is the commonality between everyone, Amrit-Naam Gurmantar is the same and all are ordained to abide by the same Naam-devotion and the four strictly forbidden practices are the same for men and women. The Baptised Singh is committed to forsake sexual relations with other than his wife and the Baptised lady is equally strongly committed to forsaking sexual relations with the exception of her husband. Any violation of this discipline makes a man/woman apostate.

C.K.: Yes, but there should be some difference in the code of the five Kakkars.

S.K.: On what basis?

C.K.: Women shy away from tying a turban.

S.K.: Ladies of other faiths may be shy of tying a turban. However, how can Singhnian, baptized ladies feel ashamed in abiding by the ordained conduct. Prior to 1900, there were many Sikh wives, who felt shy of wearing a "kachhera." This was a parallel case of resistance to the tying of the turban at the present time. Even the half-baked Singhs felt odd about their wives wearing a "kachhera". Thus such women remained uninitiated and without Amrit. Only when the Guru Panth decided against sexual relationships with unbaptised wives was this resistance broken. It was thus made compulsory for a Sikh wife to be baptized and wear a "kachhera". In both cases, the resistance is created by fool-hardy self-oriented minds and a rebellion against Guru’s command of Gurmat.

C.K.: Yes, the question of resistance to the "kachhera", one of the
"kakkars", was unreasonable and was justifiably settled, but how is
"dastar" a "kakkar"? It is a "D" in this case and not a "K", like "kachh", "kara", "kirpan", and "kangha". How can you replace "kes" as a "kakkar" with "dastaar"?

S.K.: This is where the major mistake lies. The fifth kakkar is "keski" and not "kes". "Kachh, kara, kirpan, kangha, keski, abiding by this discipline of "Five Kakkar" alone is a Sikh." In the "Rehatnamas" of Guru Gobind Singh Ji’s ordained "Rehat", "Keski is clearly stated as a "Kakkar". It is by omission that "Keski" was reduced into "Kes" and over a period all "Rehatnamas" aligned with the omission. It is debatable whether the omission was an innocent one or purposely made by dishonest persons. However, there is no ambiguity in the fact that "kes" cannot be a "kakkar". The confusion created by the omission came handy to all those opposing the turban.

C.K.: How can keeping "kes", unshorn hair, be called manmat or self-indulgence?

S.K.: It is punishable to say a word against keeping unshorn hair.
Sikhi is about maintaining one’s "kes" to the last breath. To do away with hair is not mere self-indulgence, rather it is an apostate deed. However, it is manmat to think of "kes" as a "kakkar". If a baptised person is without a "kakkar" that person is not considered apostate, rather the person is given a minor punishment and says a prayer for pardon. Removing any hair, on the other hand, calls for re-baptism. Calling "kes" a "kakkar" is to reducing the importance of "kes" and the worst manmat. It is prohibited to keep "kes" uncovered. Thus, it is mandatory to keep "kes" covered with a "keski" and to keep a "kangha" in the "kes". Any voluntary violation calls for punishment.

Involuntarily misplacing a "kakkar" is a minor offence that does not amount to a major offence and does not necessitate re-baptism. However, a person short of any "kakkar" cannot be called an abiding Sikh. Without a "keski", a baptised lady falls short of two "kakkars".

C.K.: How come?

S.K.: Without a "keski", a baptised lady is not tying a knot of hair at the top of her head and is likely to have parted hair and braids or have pleated hair in order to conform with fashion. In either case, she cannot keep a "kangha" in her "kes".


To be continued...