# What To Do With The Un-Natural Growth Of Hair On Female Faces?



## Hardip Singh (Dec 9, 2010)

An interesting query had come to me from a close female relative who happens to be an Amritdhari person. One of her female Sikh colleague had hair on her face like we Sikh have our beards. She had been facing a lot of comments from her friends and relatives and were constantly advised to get rid of this unwanted growth of hair on her face. This growth of beard and mustaches in some females is not a new phenomena and is due to certain blood cell defects in the body and is usually from birth itself. 

Question now arises, we males and females in Sikhism are supposed to keep the natural hairs as have come up on our bodies but what about the un-natural growths? Whether such Sikh ladies should get rid of these by some cosmetic methods? Pl advise.


----------



## Caspian (Dec 10, 2010)

ive raised this issue in the past, but as far as i know, from an amritdhari—sikh perceptive, you cannot get rid of these hairs. Furthermore, i don't think there anytin "unnatural" about them, all females have a certain amount of facial hair, indeed the whole body is covered in hair that is just barely visible. Further more, it is not due to "blood defects" as far as i know. I think its a hormonal issue, some women have more testosterone then the average woman. (Some men have more estrogen then the average man, but both men and women have both testosterone and estrogen).

Another somewhat related issue: My sister works at a funeral home where the clients are mostly sikh. Often times family arguments will break out on whether or not to shave the corpse of a recently deceased female. Because of the way skin recedes, a stubble is sometimes noticable on a corpse after some period of time (regardless of gender). I've heard that in sikhism it doesnt really matter what you do with a body after death, whether u bury it, cremate it, or chop it up into pieces (although, sikhs prefer cremation)—would that policy extend to hair? Is it ok to shave the corpse for cosmetic reasons?


----------



## Hardip Singh (Dec 10, 2010)

Caspian said:


> ive raised this issue in the past, but as far as i know, from an amritdhari—sikh perceptive, you cannot get rid of these hairs. Furthermore, i don't think there anytin "unnatural" about them, all females have a certain amount of facial hair, indeed the whole body is covered in hair that is just barely visible. Further more, it is not due to "blood defects" as far as i know. I think its a hormonal issue, some women have more testosterone then the average woman. (Some men have more estrogen then the average man, but both men and women have both testosterone and estrogen).
> 
> Another somewhat related issue: My sister works at a funeral home where the clients are mostly sikh. Often times family arguments will break out on whether or not to shave the corpse of a recently deceased female. Because of the way skin recedes, a stubble is sometimes noticable on a corpse after some period of time (regardless of gender). I've heard that in sikhism it doesnt really matter what you do with a body after death, whether u bury it, cremate it, or chop it up into pieces (although, sikhs prefer cremation)—would that policy extend to hair? Is it ok to shave the corpse for cosmetic reasons?


 
Thanks for the response. The medical reasons you are saying might be correct but here I am refering to some female having a nice growth of beard and moustaches. You see how much odd it looks on some female face and she had to feel the guilt of such happenings. My quest is to know what's wrong in removing this unwanted beard hair from some female face. What Sikhi has to say on this?


----------



## Caspian (Dec 10, 2010)

Personally I don't think there's anything rong with removing these hairs. 

Sikhi, on the other hand, requires that all hair be kept—so when you say "My quest is to know *what's wrong* in removing this unwanted beard hair from some female face." The wrongdoing there is the act of removing the unwanted hair. It doesnt really get any more complicated then that. For example, the removal of said hair is purely for cosmetic reasons (as these hairs don't harm the individual physically), whats stopping the girl from then removing the hair between her eyebrows (some women may grow unibrows and these unibrows can also be seen as "unnatural"). Okay, so now, lets say she removes the beard and unibrow... whats stopping her from removing the armpit hair? the leg hair? etc. 

Again though, i dont think there anytin wrong with getting rid of these hairs. The more intriguing question is, if you dont think there is anytin wrong with removing these hairs—whats rong with removing any of the hairs? the leg hair, the arm pit hair etc.


----------



## Enlighten Me (Dec 10, 2010)

It's not unnatural!

She should ignore peoples comments about it.

Nowadays women are expected to be hair free when this is not the case.
As a woman myself even I get hair on my chin and I know many other females who experience the same. 

It's not unnatural when it's HAIR and it's GROWING. 

I think the woman should be brave [I know it's difficult] and challenge the unbelievable expectations placed on women to be a certain way ie. beautiful/ hairless/ skinny. But this is easier said than done and one day I hope I can do the same and stop caring about what people think.

We're beautiful regardless of how many hairs we have on our chin and we should be happy that the only problem with our bodies is excess hair growth when it could be a lot worse.


----------



## Siri Kamala (Dec 10, 2010)

Sat Sri Akal, Sardip Singh ji,

Truthfully and humbly, none of us here can know what it is like to walk in this woman's shoes or the shoes of any other woman struggling with this problem. It may, for whatever reason, be incredibly embarrassing or even disabling to her to have a noticeable amount of unwanted hair on her face.  It may prevent her from being hired for a job she might otherwise enjoy and be highly qualified for. It might prevent her from being in a relationship that might otherwise bring her and the other person great joy.  It's easy to say, "Oh, well if the hiring manager / potential mate is so shallow as to not be able to see past some facial hair on a woman she doesn't want to pursue that anyway." 

I do not think that is a fair, kind, or empathetic attitude to take. We all have to coexist with other people in the real world, not the ideal world, and in the real world, people make positive or negative judgments about us based in part on their first impression of our physical appearance.

Here are my thoughts -- and I want to start first with two questions that I realize you may not be able to answer b/c this is a friend of your relative and not someone you know well personally, but really these would be good questions to answer for *any* female (Sikh or otherwise) who is struggling with unwanted facial hair:

1) How long has she had this problem?  Was it an issue for her even as a child or is it something that she has only started to experience later in life? If it was a problem as a child it may be more of a hereditary issue. If later in life it may be a symptom of PCOS (Polycystic Ovary Syndrome)

2) Has she seen a physician, specifically a *specialist* who understands hormonal and metabolic imbalances -- an *endocrinologist* -- who can thoroughly evaluate her situation and see if there may be some sort of imbalance that is causing this problem?

If not, she may want to look into making an appointment with such a specialist as there may be a hormonal therapy that could correct the imbalance naturally such that she would not need to remove the hair -- it would go away on its own with the proper treatment. There's an excellent article about this here:
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/521355

This insistence that all hair must remain untouched, no matter what, "_because it's natural_" is a straw man argument.  Our bodies do all manner of "natural" things that are unsightly, undesirable, unhealthy, or even deadly.  Using that logic, hey, cancer is natural so we should allow it to run its course and not fight it with chemotherapy or surgery. And God forbid we should have to shave someone's head or body in preparation for that surgery, right?

Do you see how quickly that argument degenerates into absurdity?

As someone pointed out in another forum on this same topic:


> What you are saying is that these ladies are not allowed a cure for their medical problem – That in my opinion is not Sikhi. Sikhi is full of love, kindness, and compassion. I don't think God wants Sikhs to suffer from any physical ailments – even if it concerns hair. If a person has an ailment of any sort, Sikhi permits them to get that defect put right. There is no barrier at all to this basic Sikhi Right.



Furthermore, I believe this is a moot point as *kesh* only refers to the long hair found on the head on both males and females and on the faces of males. It does not refer to body hair. The proper Punjabi word for that is valha.  If the Guru had meant for us not to touch the valha specifically, I'm sure that would have been mentioned but it was not, to my knowledge. Please correct me if I am wrong on that count.

Personally, I think God cares far more about what's going on *inside* my head than what's going on *outside* it.  I don't need to wear a uniform that identifies me as God's Own Forever.  I don't need to be able to read or speak in a secret code that no one outside of 17th Century Punjab could really understand.  God meets me where I am because I am God's child and I am too weak and small to fully meet God where God is.  And so it is for all of us.

I am reminded here of a lovely song I learned back when I was a Christian by a lady named Nichole Nordemann. It's called "Small Enough" and I think there are parts of it that speak to anyone who loves and believes in The One God:

_All praise and all the honor be 
To the God of ancient mysteries 
Whose every sign and wonder 
Turn the pages of our history, 
But tonight my heart is heavy 
And I cannot keep from whispering this prayer: 
"Are You there?"

And I know You could leave writing on the wall that's just for me 
Or send wisdom while I'm sleeping, like in Solomon's sweet dreams 
But I don't need the strength of Samson or a chariot in the end 
Just want to know that You still know how many hairs are on my head 
Oh great God, be small enough to hear me now..._

If anyone is interested in hearing the song it's available here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_r5u5-Wc-vo

It still gives me goosebumps every time I listen to it -- it's just that lovely. 

So yes, God is in me, and God is small enough to know how many hairs are on my head. And God is also big enough to know that what I do with my hair says little or nothing of consequence about _what is in my heart_. I very much respect anyone who wishes to keep kesh and I will actively fight for their right to do so.  But by that same token I do not believe it is necessary to keep kesh for God to know me, to feel the devotion that is in my heart,...or for me to connect with The Divine. My  :2cents: , humbly submitted.  gingerteakaur


----------



## Caspian (Dec 10, 2010)

> I very much respect anyone who wishes to keep kesh and I will actively fight for their right to do so. But by that same token I do not believe it is necessary to keep kesh for God to know me, to feel the devotion that is in my heart,...or for me to connect with The Divine.



Agreed.


----------



## Archived_Member16 (Dec 10, 2010)

*For your information and consideration:*

*Why don't Sikhs cut their hair?*


The unshorn hair (Kesh) is part of nature and God's system. Sikhs maintains long unshorn hair (‘Kesh’) as an act of acceptance of God's Will and living as nature intended, sustaining the individual in higher consciousness. The unshorn hair is regarded with the highest importance in the Sikh religion and is one of the basic requirements for a Sikh. Dishonouring one’s hair is one of the four Bajjar Kurehats (cardinal sins), which the Guru has told a Sikh never to commit. A Sikh doesn’t disfigure their hair from head to toe because of the Guru's order to maintain the sanctity of the Kesh. Nothing else matters. A Sikh does what their Guru tells them to do.

ਮਾਈ ਸਤਿ ਸਤਿ ਸਤਿ ਹਰਿ ਸਤਿ ਸਤਿ ਸਤਿ ਸਾਧਾ ॥
ਬਚਨੁ ਗੁਰੂ ਜੋ ਪੂਰੈ ਕਹਿਓ ਮੈ ਛੀਕਿ ਗਾਂਠਰੀ ਬਾਧਾ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥
<CITE>“O mother, True, True True is the Lord, and True, True, True is the Guru.
The Word, which the Perfect Guru has spoken, I have tied to my robe. ||1||Pause||”
(Ang 1204)</CITE>
<CITE></CITE>
The Kesh act as the identity for a Sikh as well being a spiritual and practical tool that helps the body. Guru Nanak Sahib Ji, the founder of the Sikh Path, followed the ancient practice of the sages, prophets, and holy mystics of keeping the hair unshorn because keeping it in a natural state is regarded as living in harmony with the Will of Vaheguru.

*The biological functions and benefits of human body hair are for example:*

* The hair on our head protects the skull and brain
* The hair on our body acts an insulator and is linked to our nervous system
* Our eyebrows prevent water going into your eyes
* Facial hair absorb ether energy
* The hair under our armpits prevent friction and irritation when we move our arms

*----- KESH REHAT - GURBANI UPDESH -----*

There is a principle (vidhaan) of maintaining Kesh.
ਸੋਹਣੇ ਨਕ ਜਿਨ ਲੰਮੜੇ ਵਾਲਾ ॥
<CITE>"Beautiful is Your nose and long hair."
(Ang 567)</CITE>
<CITE></CITE>
Meaning, those who have beautiful nose and beautiful Kesh, they too are your nose and Kesh. Thus, a Sikh should keep full appearance (i.e. maintain unshorn hair and not pierce the nose), crowned with a turban on the head.

ਮਾਠਿ ਗੁੰਦਾਈਂ ਪਟੀਆ ਭਰੀਐ ਮਾਗ ਸੰਧੂਰੇ ॥ ਅਗੈ ਗਈ ਨ ਮੰਨੀਆ ਮਰਉ ਵਿਸੂਰਿ ਵਿਸੂਰੇ ॥
<CITE>"I have woven my hair into lovely braids, plaits, and marked the centre parting with red colouring (Sandhoor); but in the presence of You, I am still not accepted, and (because of this) I am dying suffering in anguish."
(Ang 558)</CITE>
<CITE></CITE>
Meaning, braids, plaits, making partings with the hair and adding colour to the hair etc is prohibited for the Sikh of the Guru. Such people do not get accepted the Court of the Lord.

Any form of intended disfigurement or mutilation of the body is prohibited in Gurmat, including shaving, plucking, tattooing, circumcision, piercing, colouring etc. Guru Ji says:

ਨਾਪਾਕ ਪਾਕੁ ਕਰਿ ਹਦੂਰਿ ਹਦੀਸਾ ਸਾਬਤ ਸੂਰਤਿ ਦਸਤਾਰ ਸਿਰਾ ॥ 12 ॥
<CITE>"O person of God! Purify the mind what is impure (with bad thoughts) “this is the religious tradition through which you can experience the Lord's Presence. (Abandoning circumcision, mutilation and deferment of the body etc) preserve a complete appearance with a turban on your head" this becomes the way to maintain respect and honour. ||12||"
(Ang 1084)</CITE>
<CITE></CITE>
There is one Salokh of Bhagat Kabeer Ji which is often misquoted by mischievous people trying to justify the un-Godly act of shaving or trimming their hair. 

ਕਬੀਰ ਪ੍ਰੀਤਿ ਇਕ ਸਿਉ ਕੀਏ ਆਨ ਦੁਬਿਧਾ ਜਾਇ ॥ ਭਾਵੈ ਲਾਂਬੇ ਕੇਸ ਕਰੁ ਭਾਵੈ ਘਰਰਿ ਮੁਡਾਇ ॥੨੫॥
<CITE>"O Kabeer! When you are in love with the One Lord, duality and alienation depart. You may have long matted hair, or you may shave your head bald. ||25||"
(Ang 1365)</CITE>
<CITE></CITE>
These lines criticize both those who have long matted hair or shave their head completely in order to achieve union with God. In these lines, the question of keeping or not keeping Kesh is not the case. Similarly Guru Ji says:

ਕਬੀਰ ਮਨੁ ਮੂੰਡਿਆ ਨਹੀ ਕੇਸ ਮੁੰਡਾਏ ਕਾਂਇ ॥ ਜੋ ਕਿਛੁ ਕੀਆ ਸੋ ਮਨ ਕੀਆ ਮੂੰਡਾ ਮੂੰਡੁ ਅਜਾਂਇ ॥੧੦੧॥
<CITE>"O Kabeer! You have not shaved your mind, so why do you shave your head? Whatever is done, is done by the mind; it is useless to shave your head. ||101||"
(Ang 1369)</CITE>
<CITE></CITE>
This salok (couplet) clarifies the above salok.

As well as having biological functions and benefits, the hair is sacred due to the fact that spiritual energy abides within each and every pore of hair on the body. The hairs are like electrical wires, which preserve, carry and vibrate energy. When one chants & meditates the Divine- Name (Naam), each hair vibrates. Sikhs do not forcibly or intentionally remove any hair from the body but maintain clean hair with proper washing; tying and keeping them covered are requirements for a Sikh.

Gurbaani (the Divine Word) says:
ਰੋਮ ਰੋਮ ਮਹਿ ਬਸਹਿ ਮੁਰਾਰਿ ॥
<CITE>“On each and every hair, the Lord abides.”
(Ang 344)</CITE>
<CITE></CITE>
ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਰੋਮਿ ਰੋਮਿ ਹਰਿ ਧਿਆਵੈ ॥
<CITE>“The Gurmukh meditates on the Lord with every hair of his body.”
(Ang 941)</CITE>
<CITE></CITE>
*----- KESH REHAT - REHATNAMAS & PURAATAN GRANTH -----*

ਜਬ ਪਹਿਲੇ ਸਬ ਸਿ੍ਰਸਿਟ ਉਪਾਈ । ਤਬ ਹੀ ਮਾਨੁਖ ਦੇਹਿ ਬਨਾਈ ।
ਤਨ ਇਸ ਕੇ ਸਿਰ ਕੇਸ ਜੁ ਦੀਨੋ । ਸੋ ਇਹ ਤਨ ਸ਼ਿੰਗਾਰਿਹ ਕੀਨੋ ।
ਦਾੜ੍ਹਾ ਮੁੱਛ ਸਿਰ ਕੇਸ ਬਨਾਈ । ਹੈ ਇਹ ਦਿ੍ੜ ਜਿਹ ਪ੍ਰਭੂ ਰਜ਼ਾਈ ।
ਮੇਟ ਰਜ਼ਾਇ ਜੁ ਸੀਸ ਮੁੰਡਾਵੈ । ਕਹੁ ਤੇ ਜਗ ਕੈਸੇ ਹਰਿ ਪਾਵੈ ।
<CITE>“God created the whole universe and then he fashioned the human body. He gave man a beard, moustaches and hair on the head. He who submits to His Will steadfastly adheres to them. They who deny His Will how will they find God in this world?”
(Bhai Desa Singh Rehatnama)</CITE>
<CITE></CITE>
ਗੁਰ ਕੀ ਛਾਪ ਸਿਰ ਕੇਸ ਕੀ ਪਾਹੁਲ, ਦੇਇ ਉਤਾਰ ਸੋ ਬੇਮੁਖ ਜਾਨਹੁ।
ਬੇਟੇ ਕੋ ਬੰਧੁ ਕੋ ਛਾਪ ਮੁੰਡਾਵਤ, ਜਮ ਦੁਖ ਭੋਗ ਕੇ ਪ੍ਰੇਤ ਪਛਾਨਹੁ।
<CITE>"The Guru's stamp is Kesh and (Khandi di) Pahul, one who removes (their Kesh) is known as an apostate (bemukh). One who shaves the stamp (of the Guru) of their child (i.e. cut their children's hair), realise that person will suffer a terrible death and known as a ghost."
(Bhai Sahib Singh Rehatnama)</CITE>
<CITE></CITE>
ਸਾਬਤ ਸੂਰਤ ਰੱਬ ਦੀ, ਭੰਨੇ ਬੇਈਮਾਨ । ਦਰਗਹਿ ਢੋਈ ਨਾ ਮਿਲੇ, ਕਾਫ਼ਰ, ਕੁੱਤਾ, ਸ਼ੈਤਾਨ ।
<CITE>"God has made the human perfect, but the dishonourable destroy it.
They will find no place in the Court of God, like the unbeliever, dog and Satanist."
(Guru Nanak Janam Sakhi)</CITE>
<CITE></CITE>
ਨਾਈ ਦਾ ਹਥ ਸੀਸ ਚਿਹਰੇ ਨ ਲਗਣਾ ਪਾਵੈ । ਕੇਸਾਧਾਰੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਦਾ ਪੰਥ ਕਹਾਵੈ ।
<CITE>"The head (of a Sikh) should never have to pass through the hands of a barber. The Guru's Panth (community) calls itself Keshdhari (those with unshorn hair)."
(Bansaavaleenama, Bhai Kesar Singh Chhibar)</CITE>
<CITE></CITE>
ਇਹੈ ਮੋਰ ਆਗਯਾ ਸੁਨੋ ਲੈ ਪਿਆਰੇ ।
ਬਿਨਾ ਤੇਗ, ਕੇਸੰ ਦਿਵੋ ਨ ਦਿਦਾਰੇ ।
<CITE>"Listen O beloved ones: It (the Kesh) is my stamp. Without (wearing) a weapon and keeping Kesh, I will not give my audience."
(Gurbilaas Paatshaahee 10 - Bhai Sukha Singh)</CITE>
<CITE></CITE>
ਕੇਸਨ ਕੀ ਕੀਜਹੁ ਪ੍ਰਤਿਪਾਲ । ਨ ਉਸਤਰਨ ਸੇ ਕਟਯੋ ਬਾਲ ।੧੮।
<CITE>"Maintain and look after your Kesh. Do not remove or cut any hair."
(Gur Panth Prakaash - Rattan Singh Bhangu)</CITE>
<CITE></CITE>
*----- NAILS & HAIR -----*

Someone could argue why do Sikhs cut their nails when they don't cut their hair. Firstly, nails and the importance of hair cannot be compared. The hair is sacred that have a spiritual importance whereas the nails merely have biological function. Secondly, nails naturally remain short as they are brittle and rigid as a result of which they break off easily. A Sikh is required to do seva (selfless service) with his or her hands. When a individual uses their hands to do selfless service of washing up dirty dishes, cleaning shoes, sweeping the floor, cooking and serving food then there is no possibility for nails to remain long. 

*----- BHAI TARU SINGH JI - SCALPED ALIVE -----*

A Sikh lives in the grace and glory of God. The Kesh are magnificent. Biologically, physically and spiritually they do so much for us. Looking at the Kesh of a Sikh one sees the Sikh principle of "Living in the Will (Bhaanaa) of the Almighty." The Kesh is a symbol of Sikhism and what the fundamental belief of Sikhs. Bhai Taru Singh jee is a Shaheed (martyr) who is a living reminder of what the Kesh means to the Khalsa. When asked to give up his faith and denounce Sikhi, he preferred to have his scalp removed than cut and disfigure his Sacred Kesh.

*source:* http://www.sikhism101.com/node/148

PERSONAL NOTE:

In the final analysis the Amritdhari Sikh should pose this question and concern  to the "*Five Beloved"* ones at the nearest Gurdwara to get  proper  gurmat guidance & direction as per Sikh  *Reht Maryada*!


----------



## Caspian (Dec 10, 2010)

> The unshorn hair (Kesh) is part of nature and God's system. Sikhs maintains long unshorn hair (‘Kesh’) as an act of acceptance of God's Will and living as nature intended, sustaining the individual in higher consciousness.




Then why cut our fingernails? Why not leave them be as nature intended?




> *The biological functions and benefits of human body hair are for example:*
> 
> * The hair on our head protects the skull and brain


From what exactly? Physical trauma? I have a hard time picturing hair (no matter how long) protecting the skull from blunt force trauma. And I know of no sikh who is willing to test out that hypothesis.




> * The hair on our body acts an insulator and is linked to our nervous system


The hair that many men and women in the Indian sub contenant developed was likely a measure to better detect the presance of mosquitos on the body. As the sensation the mosquito would produce, brushing alongside ones arm hair for example, could alert the individual to the potential threat. I have difficulty accepting the fact that Indians needed the extra body hair for isulation in one of the hottest countries in the world. 

As for the nervous system bit. Every part of our body is connected to the nervous system essentially. Even if you shave the hair, the nervous system is stil connected to the root of the hair within the skin. 




> * Our eyebrows prevent water going into your eyes


At this point it seems like the author (i know you didnt write this as ive come across this text before) is grasping at straws.




> * Facial hair absorb ether energy


Not only is this sexist. As to imply that the majority of women are somehow inferior to men in a spiritual sense. But it is utterly scientifically bogus. What is ether energy? No such thing.




> * The hair under our armpits prevent friction and irritation when we move our arms


This point is almost moot. The friction produced is essentially negligble. The main use of this hair is to wick away moisture from the armpits so as not to allow bacteria to congregate in the dank moist region of the armpite. Having said that, modern cleansing habits have made armpit hair obsolete at even that job. 




> As well as having biological functions and benefits, the hair is sacred due to the fact that spiritual energy abides within each and every pore of hair on the body. The hairs are like electrical wires, which preserve, carry and vibrate energy. When one chants & meditates the Divine- Name (Naam), each hair vibrates.




Simply not true. The above paragraph makes pseudo-science look legitimate. If hair is needed for any spiritual reasons, it doesnt explain why buddhists (who shave their heads and faces and generally have much less visible body hair then sikhs) are as spiritually enlightened as the most enlightened sikhs if not more. 




> Someone could argue why do Sikhs cut their nails when they don't cut their hair. Firstly, nails and the importance of hair cannot be compared.




 sure it can, I just did it.



> The hair is sacred that have a spiritual importance whereas the nails merely have biological function. Secondly, nails naturally remain short as they are brittle and rigid as a result of which they break off easily. A Sikh is required to do seva (selfless service) with his or her hands. When a individual uses their hands to do selfless service of washing up dirty dishes, cleaning shoes, sweeping the floor, cooking and serving food then there is no possibility for nails to remain long.


Hairs dont have any verifiable spiritual importance (or else the dalai llama would be evil incarnate lol). I can see where your going with the seva bit. But having been raised in a sikh home, and on more then one occasion, finding long strands of hair in my food (both at home, and at the gurdwara) you could make the same argument against hair as u did for nails. 




> A Sikh doesn’t disfigure their hair from head to toe because of the Guru's order to maintain the sanctity of the Kesh. Nothing else matters. A Sikh does what their Guru tells them to do.




This reminds me of Euthyphros Dillema. He states (and im paraphrasing here) "Are good things considered _good_ because god has commanded it; or, are good things considered _good_ because there is something intrinsically or undeniably _good_ about them."

In this case, you are claiming that kesh is a _good_ thing because our gurus have commanded it and for largely no other defensible reason. If that is the case, Euthophro goes on to say that good things like kesh (or the other 4 k's) are largely arbritray. And if the guru's wanted, they could make anything good for the sake of it (they could have made growing the nails good and you would be sitting here, instead, trying to justify why the nails are good while similarily saying "A Sikh does what their Guru tells them to do." 

But you also attempted to suggest that kesh is _good_ because there is something intrinsically good about it (etherrrrr energyyyyy bzzzz). If that was the case, then it is good with or without god commanding it. And even if god commanded against it, it would remain good—by default, because it is _intrinsically_ good. Infact, its "good nature" would be above and beyond gods nature (or a gurus nature) to command things  

Of course, in the real world, nothing is good either intrinsically or because someone says its good. They're only good on a relative basis. Wat seems good today might look bad tomorrow depending on changes within the community.


----------



## Siri Kamala (Dec 10, 2010)

Soul_jyot ji, I very much appreciate the time you have taken to elaborate on the subject of the importance of kesh for Sikhs in such detail.

With that said, and with great respect, I must disagree with your interpretation of certain cited segments of text there above, but more importantly, this emphasis on kesh seems to be in conflict with the fact that a Sikh is commanded by the Gurus to not follow blindly rituals and superstitions which bring no spiritual or material benefit to the person or community.

I fail to see how growing my hair long (or should I say longER because my hair is already down my back, though some in the front is cut a little shorter) is going to spiritually or materially benefit me or my community. It's just hair.  If I developed alopecia tomorrow and my hair all fell out, God forbid, I'd be no less connected to God than I am now, and I doubt it would damage my community in any way.

I still say the position that dictates "it should be left to grow untouched because that is natural" is an illogical straw man argument.

An equally good argument could be made that donning the Khalsa "uniform" in Western culture, as it were, erects a wall that divides us from others in a way that alienates us from the larger community we are in and makes it LESS likely that we will be connected to others in a way that makes it possible for us to be positive contributors and admired leaders.

I once lived in Juneau, Alaska. Oddly, that was where I became acquainted with Sikhs for the first time. I worked in state government with a woman who was, along with her husband and two children, a 3HO Sikh. They were the only Sikhs in the entire city of 30,000 people.  Because she as a devout 3HO Sikh, every day she wore her white uniform. I never saw her in any other color or any other garb.

I was curious about her because I did not know anything about Sikhs at the time and there were certainly no gurdwaras in Southeast Alaska!  So I was not put off by her "differentness" or what she wore, but I can tell you for a fact that many of my coworkers snickered behind her back, thought the way she dressed was "weird," and they found it difficult to take her seriously because her uniform made it so clear that she was different and that her belief system was primary in her life.

As such, she was avoided and marginalized to some extent. It's human nature -- the confused or ignorant mind says, "No," by default to that which is strange or new.

If she had dressed in a somewhat more conventional fashion, and let people know about her faith in a more subtle way (maybe just a kara, or a decorative khanda worn in her hair), I'm guessing it would have demystified the faith for a lot of people, and they would have seen it (and her) as more approachable instead of this weird person who always wears this alien foreign costume every day.

All this to say I'm probably not the best person to come to citing chapter and verse of the Sikh rule book.  Many conservative Christians tried to do that to me when I was a Christian to explain to me why I shouldn't dance, or kiss my boyfriend, or attend a certain church, or wear certain types of clothing.  They were convinced that their interpretation of the Bible was the only "correct" interpretation.  I was not so convinced.  The exegetical analysis doesn't end there because there is also the matter of determining what rules only applied to *those particular people*, or to people *at that particular point in time* as opposed to what might apply to ALL people across the span of ALL time.  Perhaps it was critically important for Sikhs to keep kesh 300-500 years ago when they were establishing their identity as a faith, but I'm struggling to see how it is really that important now.

But mostly, things have to make sense to me.

I have yet to hear a *credible* and rationally persuasive argument that there is a reason to not cut my hair.  I have, in the past, heard reasonably credible arguments in favor of male circumcision -- those arguments have to do with the incidence of cancer in uncircumcised males being somewhat higher than it is for circumcised males, prevention of venereal disease, etc. -- but note that those are arguments that never *need to*  resort to "Because God said so" because they can stand on their own merits.

So... again, thank you. I appreciate the good and righteous intent of what you have offered me.  peacesignkaur

That said, it's just not something that resonates at all with my sense of who God is or what God wants from us.

And with that I will leave you with Akon & India.Arie singing "I Am Not My Hair"...(which is a fun and fabulously joyful and empowering song, regardless of what one believes about God or hair) -- lyrics are below:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_5jIt0f5Z4

_*Akon:*
I can kinda recall a little ways
small tryin to ball
I always been black
And my hair I tried it all
I even went flat
Had a gumby, a curly top, and all that crap

See, I was tryin to be appreciated
Nappy headed brothas never had no ladies
Then I hit the barber shop real quick
Had him give me little twists
And it drove them crazy

But then I couldnt get no job
Cuz corporate wouldn't hire no dread locks
Then I thought about my dawgs on the block
Startin to understand why they chose to steal and rob

Was it the hair that got me this far?
All these girls, these cribs, these cars?
I hate to say it but it seems so flawed
cuz success didnt come till i cut it all off

*Verse 1:*
Little girl with the press and curls
Age 8 I got a Jheri-curl
13 and I got a relaxer
I was the source of so much laughter
15 when it all broke off
18 when I went all-natural
February 2002
I went on and did what I had to do

Cuz it was time to change my life
To become the woman that I am inside
'97 dread locks all grown
I looked in the mirror for
the first time and saw
that (hey)

*Chorus:*
I am not my hair
I am not this skin
I am not your expectations (no)
I am not my hair
I am not this skin
I am the soul that lives within

*Verse 2:*
Good hair means curls and waves.
Bad hair means you look like a slave
At the turn of the century 
It´s time for us to redefine who'll we be
You can shave it off like a South African beauty
Got it on “lock” like Bob Marley
You can rock it straight like Oprah Winfrey
It’s not what’s on your head,
it’s what’s underneath (and say hey...)

*Chorus:*
I am not my hair
I am not this skin
I am not your expectations (no)
I am not my hair
I am not this skin
I am the soul that lives within

*Bridge:*
Does the way I wear my hair make me a better person?
(no, no, no, no, no...)
Does the way I wear my hair make me a better friend?
(no, no, no, no, no...)
Does the way I wear my hair determine my integrity?
(no, no, no, no, no...)
I'm just expressing my creativity!

*Verse 3:*
Breast cancer, chemotherapy
Took away her crowning glory
She promised God if she was to survive
She would enjoy every day of her life
On national television her
diamond eyes are sparkling
Bald-headed like a full moon shining
Singing out to the whole wide world like, "Heeeey..."

*Chorus x2:*
I am not my hair
I am not this skin
I am not your expectations (no)
I am not my hair
I am not this skin
I am the soul that lives within

If I wanna shave it close
or I wanna rock locks
That don’t take a bit away from
this soul that I got

If I wanna wear it
braided all down my back
I don’t see nothing wrong with that_


----------



## Navdeep88 (Dec 10, 2010)

Siri Kamala, I love how you have considered so much a woman could be dealing with, with this issue!


----------



## spnadmin (Dec 10, 2010)

Admin note:

These are acute intellectual reactions to the article posted by Soul Jyot ji regarding kesh. Comments have been issue-oriented and that is a welcome pattern for responses. Please do allow me to remind all that Soul_jyot ji is not so much speaking for himself as bringing the debate and discussion back to gurbani, gurbani urcharan and other sources. The ideas presented are from the sikhism101 site. 

Crucial to the discussion imho is this tuk. 

ਕਬੀਰ ਮਨੁ ਮੂੰਡਿਆ ਨਹੀ ਕੇਸ ਮੁੰਡਾਏ ਕਾਂਇ ॥ ਜੋ ਕਿਛੁ ਕੀਆ ਸੋ ਮਨ ਕੀਆ ਮੂੰਡਾ ਮੂੰਡੁ ਅਜਾਂਇ ॥੧੦੧॥
"O Kabeer! You have not shaved your mind, so why do you shave your head? Whatever is done, is done by the mind; it is useless to shave your head. ||101||"
(Ang 1369)

What is it driving toward? Does it conflict with the rehatnamas? Were Sikhs commanded to keep hair at the first baptism, and the creation of the panth? How do we know whether this truly happened? Is it necessary to know with certainty that Guru Gobind Singh asked his khalsa to keep hair. Should it make a difference?

One other thing to think about. The sikhism101 site is written like a Sikh Catechism, Questions and Answers to be mastered, much as is found in various Christian religions. So another thought question might be this: Is there dogma in Sikhi? The sikhism101 site makes it seem there is. If there is no dogma such as found in Christianity ,then what takes the place of dogma?


----------



## Caspian (Dec 10, 2010)

> One other thing to think about. The sikhism101 site is written like a Sikh Catechism, Questions and Answers to be mastered, much as is found in various Christian religions. So another thought question might be this: Is there dogma in Sikhi? The sikhism101 site makes it seem there is. If there is no dogma such as found in Christianity ,then what takes the place of dogma?


Thats a good point and a great question. I thought I'd start off by clarifying the definition of dogma.
*
Dogma* is the established belief or doctrine held by a religion, or by extension by some other group or organization. It is authoratative and not to be disputed, doubted, or diverged from, by the practioner or believers. - Wikipedia

Now, I would say that—originally, Sikhism, in its early stages certainly did not contain any dogma. But as sikhi grew and evolved over the course of the 10 guru's it has become dogmatic in one of two ways. The first way is by fault of the general public who take stories (i like to pick on the ganga sagar and baba deep singhs beheading) and revere them to be factual and undisputable even though they simply could not have happened. The second is through direct introduction of dogma by the gurus themselves.

(im going to use wikipedia again—so if the quote happens to be wrong or taken out of context, I apologise in advance and would eagerly await for someone to correct me with the right quote)

Guru Gobind Singh Ji goes on to create "Sikhism" (essentially making it final). He introduces the 5 K's and with respect to kesh he goes on to say at the amrit sanchar in 1699:

"My Sikh shall not use the razor. For him the use of razor or shaving the chin shall be as sinful as incest. For the Khalsa such a symbol is prescribed so that his Sikhs can classified as pure"

equating cutting or trimming the hair to the act of incest is essentially condemning it to the position where no sikh can question it. (after all, who would question that incest is not immoral?).

In this form, the dogma was primarily introduced by the 10th guru. 

Often times, I will here sikhs compare their religion to that of the relationship between a student and teacher. The teacher being the guru's. But this is quite a misnomer (almost on par with islam calling itself the religion of equality—it isnt [although, incidently, "the religion of equality" is a more apt title for sikhism]). In any student/teacher relationship there is always a means by where the pupil can question the teacher. Guru Nanak himself questioned many of practices of his time that he considred useless as well. 

Even if one is to concede, that questioning is more then welcome in sikhism (although, i have on numerous occasions, begged to differ. In general, sikh communities dont allow for dissenting voices) and sikh communities. Questioning the neccesaties of the 5 k's have yet to provide sound logical reasoning as Kamala has said before me.


----------



## Siri Kamala (Dec 10, 2010)

spnadmin ji, thank you for your thoughtful input here.  

I wonder about one other thing -- and perhaps you or Caspian or someone else can clarify for me? 

Is there perhaps one standard demanded of Khalsa Sikhs and another standard for Sikhs who are something other than Khalsa (perhaps Sehajdhari? perhaps baptized but not invested in being part of the Sikh elite to that extent?)?

I have seen this bandied about in other places on the web and I'm still not clear.  So many people talk about it as if the ONLY way to be a "True Sikh"™ is to be a Khalsa Sikh.

And yet I have read articles like this that seem to think there are many ways of being a true Sikh:
http://www.sehajdharisikh.in/articles-1.html

And this article supports that assertion as well:
http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Who_is_a_Sikh%3F


----------



## kds1980 (Dec 10, 2010)

Siri kamala ji

Theory and practical world are two totally different things.The arguement You are giving is the exactly the same argument what sikhs who want to cut their hair gave from past 20-30 years.Andd what is the condition of sikhism in India at present? Sikhs that were considered as brave honest hardworking are losing this image rapidly.Drug addiction ,alchohol ,corruption level everything is going high among sikhs.Sikhism is fastly assimilating itself into Hinduism as many many sikhs have started doing Hindu practices
.These days in India it is very difficlut to identify who is clean shaven sikh or Gurdwara going Hindu.

May be your logic that how keeping uncut hair makes me closer to god is true ,but may this logic could become One of the prime reason for the assimilation of large number of sikhs in Hinduism in India and sikhism will become part of Hinduism


----------



## findingmyway (Dec 10, 2010)

This debate seems to be going round in circles as all debates about kesh do. Kesh is not a requirement to follow the Guru Granth Sahib on ONLY a spiritual level. However, kesh is highly symbolic. It is symbolic of your commitment to Sikhi. It is a way of declaring to the world I am not afraid to be who I am and I am not afraid to stand up for the downtrodden-it was a way to stop people running away when things got tough. Once you start making small concessions, where do you draw the line? Giving in just because things are tough is not very brave! It is hard but that is how spirituality complements keeping the outer experience, as it gives us the strength to wear it with pride. Spirituality stops us caring about what the world thinks and gives us the grace to carry it off with pride that commands respect. If you do not want criticism for not reaching that stage (remember Sikhi is a journey), then do not criticise others who hold those things dear, respect them for the courage they show.
Kesh is a requirement of Sikhi, when you are ready for it. It is not for God, but for ourselves, to encourage us to be true to ourselves and not be swayed by this transient world.


----------



## Mai Harinder Kaur (Dec 10, 2010)

First, this thread is mistitled.  There is no such thing as un-natural growth of hair anywhere on the human body unless you're using Rogaine or some such.  I doubt that many women rub or spray Rogaine on their faces.

Next.  Love to all.  kaurhug

What I say next is my personal opinion.  Just my opinion.  I speak for no one but myself.   There are two sorts of Sikhs: 



Those who are Amritdhari or working toward accepting Amrit or long to receive Amrit but can't for one reason or another and those who aren't sure but feel they will have some interest in Amrit in the future.
Those who have little or no interest in Amrit.
Those in the second group I have little to say to.  I have never understood the point of being Sikh if there is no interest in Amrit.

The second group, I can talk to.  Again, this is my opinion only.  Every hair on the bottom is to be left as it is after Amrit.  (There might be a medical exception for necessary hair removal for surgery.)  I always suggest that anyone contemplating Amrit to live as a Khalsa for a few months first.  It can do no harm and might do a world of good.  The reaction might be anything from "Waheguru! I've been looking for this all my life!" to "Nope.  This isn't for me yet."

I have a few stray hairs growing on my chin and a light dusting above my upper lip.  I was mercilessly teased in high school about my hairy legs and underarm jungle.  I understood even then that this thing of hair removal fetish is simply social vanity and a search for social acceptance.  The Amritdhari Sikh - ideally - has no use for either of these.  We ARE different and proud of the difference.   Few of us, however, are ideal and remarks and looks can cut deep.  Each of us needs to decide whether the privilege of being an Amritdhari Sikh is worth it or not.  Standing against the social norms is a painful and strengthening experience.  I am sure that Guru Gobind Singh understood this perfectly well when he mandated that Khalsa have unshorn hair.

You might notice that I refrain from using the word "Khalsa."  We receive the title of Khalsa with the Amrit;  the reality is that becoming Khalsa (pure) is a long drawnout process.  I usually refer to myself as an aspiring Khalsa.  I'm just not there yet.

BTW, I believe it was Yogi Bhajan Singh of the 3HOs that came up with the idea that facial hairs on women was a deformity and should be removed.  IMO, that says more about the Yogi's taste in women than it does about kes in Sikhi.

Now to the topic of dogma.  I would say, yes, there is a dogma, something one must believe to be a Sikh.  That would be the Mool Mantra.  

ੴ ਸਤਿ ਨਾਮੁ ਕਰਤਾ ਪੁਰਖੁ ਨਿਰਭਉ ਨਿਰਵੈਰੁ ਅਕਾਲ ਮੂਰਤਿ ਅਜੂਨੀ ਸੈਭੰ ਗੁਰ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦਿ ॥

There are so many translations, none even slightly adequate!    Here is the translation from Wikipedia:   "one God, truth by name, the creator, without fear, without  hatred, timeless in form, beyond birth, self existent, (known by) the  grace of the Guru."  It's as good as any.  The paragraph on translation is really good, so I include it here:



> The Mul Mantar consists of nouns and adjectives but no verbs or pronouns. In addition, the nouns in the Mul Mantar do not have exact counterparts in European languages and the Gurmukhi script does not distinguish between upper and lower case letters. Thus, it poses a challenge to translators.
> The first affirmation, for example, Ik Onkar  has been rendered multiple ways. It has been translated as "'There is  one god', as ‘One reality is’, and ‘This being is one’" and the varying  capitalization of "God", "Reality", or "Being" affects the meaning in english.<sup class="reference" id="cite_ref-5">[6]</sup>
> A number of translations erroneously change the Mul Mantar from a list of qualities to a statement of facts and Possessive adjectives.<sup class="reference" id="cite_ref-6">[7]</sup> For example, they may change Satnam from "truth by name" to "His name is truth", which adds a masculine quality to God which does not appear in the original Gurmukhi.<sup class="reference" id="cite_ref-7">[8]</sup>



Again, this is my opinion.  Take it or leave it.  please leave me in peace.  peacesignkaur

So much more to say, but that's enough for now, I think.gingerteakaur


----------



## Caspian (Dec 10, 2010)

*Kamala*



> Is there perhaps one standard demanded of Khalsa Sikhs and another standard for Sikhs who are something other than Khalsa (perhaps Sehajdhari? perhaps baptized but not invested in being part of the Sikh elite to that extent?)?


Inorder to be considered a sikh in the religious sense—you have to wear the 5 k's. If you dont, you can call yourself a sikh in the cultural sense or w.e. But I dont think I would consider a clean-shaved individual professing to be a sikh as actually being a sikh. 

*Kanwardeep*



> Theory and practical world are two totally different things.


Which is a problem dont you think? Shouldnt sikhs be trying to consolidate between the two, or atleast comprimise between them. What point is being a sikh in theory (clean shaved sikhs who are essentially great people) when your going to be talked down upon by "practicing sikhs" (who look the part, but dont act the part).



> The arguement You are giving is the exactly the same argument what sikhs who want to cut their hair gave from past 20-30 years.


Its the exact same argument because the argument makes logical sense. Unlike the arguments in favor of keeping the kesh which have been outlined and refuted so easily above.



> Andd what is the condition of sikhism in India at present? Sikhs that were considered as brave honest hardworking are losing this image rapidly.Drug addiction ,alchohol ,corruption level everything is going high among sikhs.


This has nothing to do with the 5 k's though. When you think of the "stereotypical punjabi sikh" who is engaging in drug addiction, alcohol consumption, curruption or general buffoonary—you dont think of the clean shaved sikhs as much as you think of the sikhs with the 5 k's. There is always some truth to any stereotype, and while i dont believe all sikhs (clean shaven or practicing) are bafoons—i can definately say, its a problem thats *NOT* just affecting clean shaved sikhs.



> May be your logic that how keeping uncut hair makes me closer to god is true ,but may this logic could become One of the prime reason for the assimilation of large number of sikhs in Hinduism in India and sikhism will become part of Hinduism


Im sure your as concerned, with telling the difference between clean-shaved sikhs and hindus, as westerners are with telling the difference between a practicing sikh and a muslim. (lol, it seems like either which way you go, ur being confused for a hindu or a muslim. so i dont buy this reasoning). 

Other then that I really dont have much of an argument here. I find it silly that when it pretains to the 5 K's most sikhs on this site want all of their fellow sikh brothers and sisters to become practicing "5k adorning" sikhs. For the perserving of the religion—dont want to be assimilated right?

But when it comes to matters that seem more likely to harm the sikh public. Like the belief in superstitions and fairy tales (ganga sagar, etc). I get answers from you guys like "you should be more concerned with your own spiritual growth and not that of others." 

I find that very odd. As if the sikh community is largely a superficial one. Just as superficial as any other community and that is whats so weird about it. As a Canadian growing up Sikh in a western country. I have to deal with the superficiality of western preconceptions of "whats makes a man handsome" while simultaneously dealing with the superficiality of my sikh community over "what makes a person religious." *Thats all the 5 k's have done, they've turned religion and spirituality into a superficial matter.* As if putting a turban on a man is going to make him any more or less saintly.

I mean you talk about readily being able to differentiate between hindu's and sikhs. But this differentiation is so very superficial. It seems more important to me to be able to differentiate between *GOOD* and  *BAD* people but no amount or lack of hair, hindu thread, islamic veil, catholic collar or scientologist "doo-hickey" is going to help you do that. And I fear, atleast superficially, the 5 K's have been connected with the concept of "Good" (as it pretains to a persons character) when we know there is no such correlation.


----------



## Navdeep88 (Dec 10, 2010)

> "I find that very odd. As if the sikh community is largely a superficial one. Just as superficial as any other community and that is whats so weird about it. As a Canadian growing up Sikh in a western country. I have to deal with the superficiality of western preconceptions of "whats makes a man handsome" while simultaneously dealing with the superficiality of my sikh community over "what makes a person religious." *Thats all the 5 k's have done, they've turned religion and spirituality into a superficial matter.* As if putting a turban on a man is going to make him any more or less saintly."


 
Wow, thats some heavy baggage. it really does come down to the individual. I happen to think the idea of Sikhi is very noble, dont let an image define what it means to you, it comes from the inside out. You dont have to take everything, all at once, let go of what doesnt make sense to you, and embrace what does...thats what i did. Your wasting your time by focusing on things that irk you because the only person you have control over is you, and how you can be the best of yourself so you can help others, which is what we're really here for.

Really being angry about this, butting heads, is gonna get you nowhere, been there, done that. Go to the very basics, start reading gurbani, allow yourself to get past the external things...if your not willing to do that.... 

then (I say this not to offend or hurt anyone) if it means cutting your hair, if thats what this issue is about, an image you feel you cant carry or belong to, then I suggest you change it. If it means completely breaking away, and figuring things out on your own so you feel in control of your life, I think that is for the best. I promise you, you will come back to it, in your own way.


----------



## Caspian (Dec 10, 2010)

> Wow, thats some heavy baggage.



 Indeed. I kinda like what I said though. It makes sense to me, and i think most sikhs can agree that at some level, religion has become superficial in the sikh community. They might not want to believe it, or they might not think thats how they view things, but with respect to the general sikh consensus—i feel like my comments were warranted. 



> Your wasting your time by focusing on things that irk you because the only person you have control over is you, and how you can be the best of yourself so you can help others, which is what we're really here for.



Well yes, thats kinda what I am doing, lol kinda.... 
Trying to help others that is, its just, most of my advice doesnt come from a sikh-centric point of view. 

My advice for the girl being alluded to in the beggining of this post—get rid of your beard, dont let it define you superficially if you dont want it too. and i mean both kinds of superficial, the physical and the religious.


----------



## spnadmin (Dec 10, 2010)

We have received some complaints about the direction that this thread is taking. Let's make sure we do not stoop to ridiculing the beliefs of keshdhari Sikhs who have accepted the mandate to keep hair.. To some it does sound as if that is the tone of the thread.  

When a person decides to take the sehajdhari path, that choice should be made freely. When a person takes the keshdhari path, that too should be taken freely. On either side, for some, it is hard to avoid the strong temptation to argue one has the moral high ground. Then to make self-serving arguments to make our personal choice "right." 

The threads on kesh as Jasleen ji has already stated tend to go in circles. That may  happen, not so much because we are "right," but because we feel we have to be "right," and in order to do that we need to make others look foolish or illogical.

Sikhi preaches we should not disrespect other religions. In the same way, let's not disrespect those who respect "hair" or have made a choice different from our own.

This is BTW an admin warning. Please take it seriously.


----------



## spnadmin (Dec 10, 2010)

One last time: Let's stay away from the "I am smarter, holier, more logical than thou" script. The reason why at SPN posts are deleted and members are banned nearly always goes to their inability to live in a diverse community, and almost never has anything at all to do with their message. Smart people always have a hard time suffering fools gladly. Of course, it is always the case that the other guy is the fool. 

My last note was a very gentle warning. Please do not take advantage.


----------



## findingmyway (Dec 10, 2010)

Caspian said:


> Inorder to be considered a sikh in the religious sense—you have to wear the 5 k's. If you dont, you can call yourself a sikh in the cultural sense or w.e. But I dont think I would consider a clean-shaved individual professing to be a sikh as actually being a sikh.



That makes you more narrow minded than Sikhs. Sikhi is a journey. We are all at different points. As Mai ji said, a Sikh is someone who is walking on the path. Outer appearance for some comes earlier than others!




> Its the exact same argument because the argument makes logical sense. Unlike the arguments in favor of keeping the kesh which have been outlined and refuted so easily above.


No they haven't! Neither were the reasons for keeping kesh refuted on many other threads. It is personal choice to keep it. You don't keep it as you don't believe in it-fine. However, you have no right to continually force that opinion on others. What happened to freedom of choice? There are many threads on this topic so I don't understand why we keep revisiting the same thing again and again swordfight




> Im sure your as concerned, with telling the difference between clean-shaved sikhs and hindus, as westerners are with telling the difference between a practicing sikh and a muslim. (lol, it seems like either which way you go, ur being confused for a hindu or a muslim. so i dont buy this reasoning).


That's only through lack of education in the west. In India, after the Guru's, if we did not have a different identity, Sikhism would def have been amalgamated with Hinduism just like Buddhism and Jainism were-go read some history.



> Like the belief in superstitions and fairy tales (ganga sagar, etc). I get answers from you guys like "you should be more concerned with your own spiritual growth and not that of others."


I have already dealt with this and you completely brushed me off. I HAVE SAID BEFORE AND I SAY AGAIN, MANY SIKHS DO NOT BELIEVE IN THESE AS IT IS GURBANI THAT IS IMPORTANT. These things are not a necessity for Sikhi so PLEASE STOP USING THIS USELESS ARGUMENT. The people who do not believe in superstitions are also Sikhs so this argument is not valid. A lot is being done to try and dispel these myths but these efforts are not helpful to your arguments to you continually brush them off. It is human nature. Many people believe in fairies or ghosts. Go bulldozer them



> As if putting a turban on a man is going to make him any more or less saintly.


Actually its the courage of conviction to wear it that counts. As I said earlier, inner and outer changes go hand in hand.



> I mean you talk about readily being able to differentiate between hindu's and sikhs. But this differentiation is so very superficial.


You obviously haven't read the texts from either faith! They are vastly different in their philosophies and outlook.


----------



## Archived_Member16 (Dec 10, 2010)

I find it real hard to accept that fact that a *hardliner atheist* is being allowed to speak for the Sikhs or give advice on Sikhism ( least to an Amritdhari Sikh of all the people ) on a Sikh forum? This must be in the name of "Freedom of speech"!  How generous Sikhs can be!


----------



## spnadmin (Dec 10, 2010)

Now the ball is in your court Caspian ji. How you choose to reply will make all the difference. How generous can you be?


----------



## Navdeep88 (Dec 10, 2010)

Caspian Ji,

"Inorder to be considered a sikh in the religious sense—you have to wear  the 5 k's. If you dont, you can call yourself a sikh in the cultural  sense or w.e. But I dont think I would consider a clean-shaved  individual professing to be a sikh as actually being a sikh." 

Why so much effort into you defining what a sikh is, when you claim to not be one yourself? I really do think we tend to gravitate towards what we want to become. And truthfully, I think your looking for validation. I understand your frustration with growing up in the west... and  everything that comes with that. I really do. But you cannot move  forward by holding onto it, or making judgments about who belongs where.


----------



## BhagatSingh (Dec 10, 2010)

> I have a few stray hairs growing on my chin and a light dusting above my  upper lip.  I was mercilessly teased in high school about my hairy legs  and underarm jungle.  I understood even then that this thing of hair  removal fetish is simply social vanity and a search for social  acceptance.  The Amritdhari Sikh - ideally - has no use for either of  these.  We ARE different and proud of the difference.


Unfortunately, not all women are as cool as Mai Harinder ji. peacesign

Caspian ji


> *Thats all the 5 k's have done, they've turned religion and spirituality into a superficial matter.* As if putting a turban on a man is going to make him any more or less saintly.


I think that in today's world especially, the 5ks bring us close to spirituality if conceptualized in the right way. I understand this notion that they end up doing the opposite, and that is simply the stress we as a sikh society place upon them.

So how can 5ks bring us closer to spirituality?

Well, first realize that to wear them we must essentially go against the norms of the western world. the western way of living is only one of the ways of living... and it is NOT focused around well-being. It is a capitalist, technological based worldview, which makes us see everything in profitable and mechanical way. The eastern worldview that stems from Sikhism, Buddhism and so forth, IS focused around well-being of individuals. The vision of Sikhi is happiness... not profit... not more technology... ONLY intrapersonal and interpersonal well-being.

What does this have to do with 5ks?
Realize that the way of happiness, the way of well-being comes about as a result of meditation. The essential component of meditation in the 3 Eastern religions: Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, is this idea of concentration... this idea of focusing one's attention on something, in order to quiet down our thoughts. 

Realize that our failure to quiet our thoughts is what causes suffering. People suffer if they cannot quiet their thoughts... whether they removes their hair or not! 

Coming back to how 5ks can bring us closer to spirituality. To be able to walk in the western world with the 5ks on, it is mandatory that one be able to quiet their thoughts! When all eyes turn to look at you, you must not think. If you do, you will stress yourself out. To become skilled at this you gotta practice meditation. You have to be spiritual.

Its like what Sant kabir ji said... when you practice meditation alot, then it doesn't matter whether you keep long hair or shave your head bald. You will be in bliss either way! ...I hear a bald head can be quite as bad as a beard, on women... 

gingerteakaur That's it folks. My two nickels.


----------



## Siri Kamala (Dec 10, 2010)

Good evening, findingmyway ji  



findingmyway said:


> This debate seems to be going round in circles as all debates about kesh do. Kesh is not a requirement to follow the Guru Granth Sahib on ONLY a spiritual level. However, kesh is highly symbolic. It is symbolic of your commitment to Sikhi.



One small clarification, if I may: It is symbolic to _you_ of _your_ commitment to Sikhi.

I hope that neither you nor anyone else here is claiming to know better what is in my heart and my head about Sikhi than I do... 



> It is a way of declaring to the world I am not afraid to be who I am and I am not afraid to stand up for the downtrodden-it was a way to stop people running away when things got tough.



I appreciate your personalizing that.  :grinningkudi: 

I do wish to emphasize the word choice there though -- it is *A* way. It is ONE way. It is far from the ONLY way a Sikh (or person of any other faith) can stand up for the downtrodden.  

As for it stopping people from running away when things get tough -- seriously?  If the only thing that stops a Sikh from denying their faith when the going gets tough is their uncut hair and/or turban, their faith is pretty superficial and weak.    The kind of strength that keeps someone from running scared when threats arise is an internal resource that must be developed over time and with practice.  There is no external symbol that is going to give someone that strength on the inside if it's not already there to begin with.



> Once you start making small concessions, where do you draw the line? Giving in just because things are tough is not very brave!



:sigh:
#1 - Do you really want to use the Slippery Slope argument?  I ask because the answer will be different for every person you ask, and as arguments go, it's not generally a very strong one.

For me personally -- I draw the line where it makes sense to draw the line based on my internal locus of control, the dictates of my conscience, and my relationship with God. 

Will you grant that I likely know myself, in that regard and in every other sense, better than you or anyone else here knows me?  :03:

Beyond that, extrapolating the argument out to the general population of Sikhs, unless you can demonstrate clearly that it is virtually inevitable that A leads to B and B leads to C and so on all the way down to Z, that is a logical fallacy. 

The fact is, every person is going to respond to external pressures and stimuli differently, based on their _internal_ resources and their degree of intestinal fortitude.  When challenged about their faith some people will cave in like a Chilean mine shaft. Others will not be moved, even at the cost of their own lives such as Sir William Wallace of Scotland or our own beloved Guru Teg Bahadur.  My hair does not determine my integrity, nor my determination.

I hope that, by that same token, it is not the sole factor that is determining yours.  :meditation:

#2 - There's an essential ingredient missing there for me as well -- that part about "It has to make sense to me."  I still see no rational argument for growing my hair and/or wearing a turban. Totally respect and honor those who feel it's important -- more power to them -- it's just... not something that seems important or necessary for me.



> It is hard but that is how spirituality complements keeping the outer experience, as it gives us the strength to wear it with pride.



Yeah, see... that's where you and I part ways.  It's not that I lack the "strength to wear it with pride."  That may be the story you've told yourself about me, but it is not my story that I would tell about who I am at all.

I would appreciate it if you would do me this small kindness, going forward: dignify me with *asking* me what I think or what I believe or why I say or do a certain thing. Become curious about me and open to accepting my answers as true for me. Feel free to inquire of me about whatever you like -- I'm pretty much an open book and I will likely be happy to answer your questions.

But no one likes it when someone says or implies things about them that do not jibe with what that person knows to be true of themselves. 

Can we agree to that, I hope?  peacesignkaur



> Spirituality stops us caring about what the world thinks and gives us the grace to carry it off with pride that commands respect.



I'm not sure you're really giving me enough credit -- it's a little more complicated and nuanced than that from my point of view.  It's not simply that I'm wringing my hands about what the neighbors will think.  I could put knots in your dastar telling you things I've said or done in the past that demonstrated how little I gave a fig what anyone thought in a particular situation.  When I determine that something is "a beach worth dying on," folks better lead, follow, or get out of the way. 

That said, I also choose my battles carefully, because I have learned that being *effective* and getting *results* matter a lot more than that little pat on the back I give myself for being "right" (even though everyone ignored what I said or I ended up alienating the very people I was attempting to persuade).

And well... as this is something that simply does not make sense to me, on any level beyond "because the Guru said so right here :advocate: " it's not a beach I'm willing to die on.  :a23:  That doesn't mean I'm :a39:



> If you do not want criticism for not reaching that stage (remember Sikhi is a journey), then do not criticise others who hold those things dear, respect them for the courage they show.



Wait -- exqueeze me?  To whom are you addressing that?  Because if it's addressed to me, I will need you to point out ANY instance you can find anywhere in any forum here where I have criticized anyone for holding those things dear. 

On the contrary, I have consistently stated my great respect for people who hold those things dear. I just do not share their values in that regard.

Please clarify.  



> Kesh is a requirement of Sikhi, when you are ready for it.



We will not likely ever agree because our foundational premises are not the same.  For _you_, kesh is a requirement of Sikhi. And I know you are not alone in that belief.

For me, it is not, and I know I, also, am not alone in that belief.  You may believe that we're all, the whole lot of us, wrong or insane or what have you. That's your right.  But y'know...I'm not here to argue with you and tell you you're wrong, girlfriend.  I'm just not.

I'm here to learn and to clarify in my own mind what makes sense, and where I fit in the realm of Sikhi.  I would never presume to tell you what is in your heart and never in a million bazillion YEARS would I tell you -- a sister in faith whom I am just now beginning to know -- that there is anything about your faith or your way of practicing it that is wrong or invalid.

Because, based on what I've read, that would not be in keeping with my understanding of Sikhi, and I think you deserve to have your beliefs and your practice of faith respected.



> It is not for God, but for ourselves, to encourage us to be true to ourselves and not be swayed by this transient world.



And sister-friend, if that works for *you*, then amen and more power to you in the name of Waheguru!

But it would not play out that way for me.  I've got a lot of things *inside* my head that keep me true to myself and dissuade me from being swayed by the transient world.  It's unlikely that anything I could do with my hair or place on my head could make that any weaker or stronger.

Meditation... prayer... learning, discussing -- those things, on the other hand, will go a LONG way toward solidifying my faith. 

Thank you!  :carefreekudi:


----------



## Siri Kamala (Dec 10, 2010)

Soul_jyot said:


> I find it real hard to accept that fact that a *hardliner atheist* is being allowed to speak for the Sikhs or give advice on Sikhism ( least to an Amritdhari Sikh of all the people ) on a Sikh forum? This must be in the name of "Freedom of speech"!  How generous Sikhs can be!



Good Evening Soul_jyot ji,  gingerteakaur

It's interesting that you say this. I was just thinking how interested I was in actually asking Caspian to share more about where he's coming from.  He seems friendly and quite approachable.  I don't get the sense that he is trying to be the "turd in the punch bowl" (as my boyfriend so indelicately puts it from time to time) -- rather that he is someone who was raised in the faith, is *culturally* Sikhi, but is not at a place of rest when it comes to the spiritual aspect of Sikh faith, and he's exploring that in much the same way someone who has lost a tooth probes the empty space until it heals and stops hurting. (I trust we have all experienced that feeling, at least as children...)

So dear *Caspian ji*, did I get any of ^that^ wrong? If so, please clarify.  And then, if it's not too personal or too intrusive of me to ask, can you tell me more about you, what led you out of Sikhi and into Atheism, and what you are seeking in discussing things here?

I find your contributions very worthwhile even as they are sometimes challenging.  It's clear you've thought about matters of faith a great deal.

(I'm also curious about your name and can't help but wonder if you are harkening back to ancestry that is near the Caspian sea or if you are simply a fan of C. S. Lewis's _Chronicles of Narnia_. :03: )

If we have confidence in the courage of our convictions regarding our faith, none of us need feel threatened by questions raised by an atheist, or an agnostic, or a person of another faith, yes?

And if the response is, "Oh, lordy, another one of these threads..." then that person is free to move on to other discussions they will find more productive, correct?

That is how I see it, but I am new here so I am still developing a sense of the culture, so to speak.  Let me know if I have missed something important. I am here to learn.


----------



## Siri Kamala (Dec 11, 2010)

BhagatSingh ji, thank you. That is the closest anyone has come yet to offering me an explanation of how the 5 K's can bring us closer to God.  wahkaur

That said... Meh.  I'm still not persuaded that, for where I am in my life right now, and what I'm intending to achieve both spiritually and otherwise, donning a turban and a pair of loose white cotton undies and carrying a kirpan is the magic formula that's going to get me where I need to go.  :shrug:

To me there is still the opposing (and equally valid, based on my own observations) point of view that wearing the 5 K's in Western culture (especially in the US post-9/11 amd damn the ignorance of those who cannot tell the difference...) creates an undesirable signal-to-noise ratio*.

* For anyone who isn't clear what I mean there...The concept of signal-to-noise ratio began as an abstract electrical engineering equation but has since evolved into a useful metaphor for many kinds of communication. All communication is a chain of informational signal creation ---> info. signal transmission ---> info. signal reception. At each step along the way, the useful information -- the signal -- is degraded by extraneous or irrelevant information: the *noise*. Good, effective communication, by definition, maximizes what’s important while minimizing the things that distract from the intended message.

I must also take into consideration the comfort levels of the existing people in my life, most of whom are white and Anglo, many of whom are Christian (culturally if not spiritually), and all of whom are going to give me something between this look -->  and this look --> :shock: when I explain to them that I have found my true faith in Sikhi.  

Understand -- it's not that I fear their reaction or even their disapproval. It's that I want them to feel as safe with this as I do, and as such I intend to meet them where they are, approaching them slowly and gently with an outstretched hand, as one might to give food to a semi-feral cat.  And that takes patience and time.

If I show up at my boyfriend's parents home on Christmas morning with my kirpan and my hair in a turban, they're going to feel frightened of me, and they'd likely ask him if he had lost his mind, dating this crazy white girl who's some sort of weird Muslim-Hindu wannabee.   But if they come to know me and trust me and feel safe with me over time... if first I only wear the kara (which I actually do wear now, 24 hours a day, and never remove except at the insistence of the annoying TSA agents :roll: ), and at some point someone will notice and ask me about it and I will tell them a little about my faith...and then maybe some other time I will show them my kirpan, and talk about what it symbolizes, both for the faith and for me personally, etc...  Then they will accept it, and will respect and protect that aspect of who I am as I respect and protect it for myself because they have come to love and value me.

As God has very kindly, very patiently, very gently met me where I am, so I intend to meet those in my life with the news of my newfound faith -- kindly, patiently, gently...so that they will understand that I am still *me* and not be unintentionally and unnecessarily alienated from me by the fact that I am wearing what appears to them to be a foreign and possibly threatening costume.

And I guess all I ask here is that people not judge my decision to take that approach.  It is one that is mindfully and consciously chosen.  Maybe someday I will even go so far as to leave my hair untouched.  It's hard for me to imagine but stranger things have happened in my life for sure. In any case, I'm not particularly worried about it.

And more importantly, I don't get the sense that God is really wringing hands about it either.  busyknitting  :thx:


----------



## findingmyway (Dec 11, 2010)

Siri Kamala ji,
I am completely flabbergasted by your reply! From many of your other posts you seem to have such a level head yet have taken this all so personally! Why? It's interesting that you don't want to believe in kesh at all yet have the picture of a woman with kesh and dastaar as your avatar....

You seemed to have missed one of the most important messages in my post-Sikhism is a journey -we are all at different points of that journey.  

Now I'll add to that-we cannot change the faith system according to our own personal gripes. The messages are there for a reason and that is what I was trying to explain by my post. I was answering the questions about why. If we choose to accept or not is personal choice. Not accepting however does not justify you rejecting because it doesn't sit right with you. I don't mean you personally but everyone, including myself. In the interests of honest disclosure I am not amritdhari yet but am working on it. I also don't keep 100% of my kesh-I keep 99% but am working on it. I have huge respect for those who do keep 100% as they are braver than me. As an interesting aside, since you have made this whole thing  personal. You think it's fine to wear a kara but not kesh when they have  similar ideologies? Is it because one is more socially acceptable than  the other? I do not ask for a response to this as it is for your  personal consideration only. 



Siri Kamala said:


> One small clarification, if I may: It is symbolic to _you_ of _your_ commitment to Sikhi.
> 
> I hope that neither you nor anyone else here is claiming to know better what is in my heart and my head about Sikhi than I do...



No-one is claiming about you or anyone else. We can only know ourselves (and often not even that!) If you are a Sikhi follower, you believe in all 11 Guru's from Guru Nanak to Guru Granth Sahib. The 10th Nanak, Guru Gobind Singh mandated kesh for those choosing to become part of the Khalsa through taking khanda di pahaul. There were political and moral reasons for this. It has been discussed in immense detail on other threads to I am only going to summarise briefly for you. At that time the Mughals were ruling India and intent of forcibly converting all to Islam. Our Guru's stood up for the right to retain freedom of choice for all. It was hard to stay by your convictions when your head was being called for! We were given the 5K's partly for practical purposes and partly for symbolic purposes and partly to complement inner strength. By standing out you couldn't run away even if you were tempted. By standing out, it was a constant reminder to be true to the cause even in moments of weakness. All human beings have moments of weakness. Standing out also allowed people from afar to identify you so they could come to you for help, otherwise they couldn't tell who to go to as you wouldn't be visible in a crowd! Not every Sikh takes khanda di pahaul, but IF and when you are ready then it is a declaration to the world that you are. You may be committed and that is fine without. However, declaring it visually means that others know what you stand for too. Whether you want to make that declaration is YOUR choice entirely. However, demeaning others who make that choice is wrong. One of the basic things Sikhi teaches us is tolerance. There are a few sects like the AKJ who have a strict rehit and look down on others. Mainstream Sikhs recognise that Sikhi is a journey. We do not think badly of the clean shaven Sikhs in our Gurdwara. Yet many of the anti-kesh group of people are incredibly intolerant of keshdhari Sikhs in my experience. They behave in a way they accuse the others of behaving. Interesting isn't it?! *What happened to freedom of choice and mutual respect?*



> I do wish to emphasize the word choice there though -- it is *A* way. It is ONE way. It is far from the ONLY way a Sikh (or person of any other faith) can stand up for the downtrodden.
> 
> As for it stopping people from running away when things get tough -- seriously?  If the only thing that stops a Sikh from denying their faith when the going gets tough is their uncut hair and/or turban, their faith is pretty superficial and weak.  The kind of strength that keeps someone from running scared when threats arise is an internal resource that must be developed over time and with practice.  There is no external symbol that is going to give someone that strength on the inside if it's not already there to begin with.


Most of this I have answered above. Inner and outer experience go hand in hand. No-one is saying that external symbol alone is going to keep someone from running. It does however help if the external symbols are kept for the right reason. If you look at India today, a lot of Hindutva influences have crept onto Sikhism. If it wasn't for the external appearance, Sikhi there would have been incorporated into Hindusim just like Buddhism and Jainism have been. Keeping kesh is a choice. Yet anti-kesh people do not accept that is a choice and insist we all get rid of it!! I don't see the logic in that argument. Accept you have made the choice to either keep it or not and respect the other person for their choice. The external appearance endorses what's on the inside and helps in moments of weakness. Also see above.



> #1 - Do you really want to use the Slippery Slope argument?  I ask because the answer will be different for every person you ask, and as arguments go, it's not generally a very strong one.


I disagree. That is your opinion. I belong to a medical family and am a health care worker myself. All too often I see the other side of the slippery slope. As a % of the world's population, few people have the inner strength to stick by their beliefs every moment of their lives and not do something they regret later. We may have to agree to disagree on this point as our life experiences are obviously very different. The only thing I will add is it is important to ask why make the concessions? This I ask not for personal debate but for private reflection as the answer to that will give you an indication of the strength of your conviction. This applies not just to you, but also to me and everyone else.
 


> For me personally -- I draw the line where it makes sense to draw the line based on my internal locus of control, the dictates of my conscience, and my relationship with God.


Good for you! However, not everyone behaves the way you do so you cannot extrapolate this to the whole of humanity. 
 


> The fact is, every person is going to respond to external pressures and stimuli differently, based on their _internal_ resources and their degree of intestinal fortitude.  When challenged about their faith some people will cave in like a Chilean mine shaft. Others will not be moved, even at the cost of their own lives such as Sir William Wallace of Scotland or our own beloved Guru Teg Bahadur.  My hair does not determine my integrity, nor my determination.



See above. Each person is different so the Guru's gave us tools. Which ones we use is personal choice. You use what works for you and stop ridiculing others for using other tools.



> #2 - There's an essential ingredient missing there for me as well -- that part about "It has to make sense to me."  I still see no rational argument for growing my hair and/or wearing a turban. Totally respect and honor those who feel it's important -- more power to them -- it's just... not something that seems important or necessary for me.



That's fine if you choose not to. There are many many threads on this topic so should you ever feel the urge, feel free to take a look. Just because sthg isn't right for you doesn't make it not right at all. You are looking at things from a very personal point here and not taking into account other factors. You say you respect but this whole post indicates otherwise as it has been a very personal attack on someone who does hold kesh dear. Rather than respecting that point of view, you have chosen to accuse me of not knowing you and judging you when I wrote a very general post. Forgive me I fail to see the respect in your words but all I see is not me, not me, not me.



> Yeah, see... that's where you and I part ways.  It's not that I lack the "strength to wear it with pride."  That may be the story you've told yourself about me, but it is not my story that I would tell about who I am at all.
> 
> I would appreciate it if you would do me this small kindness, going forward: dignify me with *asking* me what I think or what I believe or why I say or do a certain thing. Become curious about me and open to accepting my answers as true for me. Feel free to inquire of me about whatever you like -- I'm pretty much an open book and I will likely be happy to answer your questions.


This debate has got nothing to do with you on a personal level but has to do with principles found within Sikhi. Your life is none of my business unless you choose to share it with me. Equally my life is nothing to do with you unless I choose to share it. Caspian is the one that judged by saying only those who keep the 5K's are Sikh but I refuted him. How far you want to take things is only for you to know and decide. None of my business. That does not give you the right to say Kesh is not important just because you don't see it that way. Our 10th Guru said otherwise. With all due respect, his opinion matters more to me than yours.



> But no one likes it when someone says or implies things about them that do not jibe with what that person knows to be true of themselves.


Re-read my post. I said no such thing. I didn't even use yours or anyone else's name! You are the one implying such things about me so it should be me that is hurt here :disguestedkudi: 


> I'm not sure you're really giving me enough credit -- it's a little more complicated and nuanced than that from my point of view.  It's not simply that I'm wringing my hands about what the neighbors will think.  I could put knots in your dastar telling you things I've said or done in the past that demonstrated how little I gave a fig what anyone thought in a particular situation.  When I determine that something is "a beach worth dying on," folks better lead, follow, or get out of the way.




All I'm reading here is me-ism which Sikhism teaches us to avoid! Really don't understand why you insist on making a general discussion about values that applies to everyone, a personal thing!! :dunno:



> Wait -- exqueeze me?  To whom are you addressing that?  Because if it's addressed to me, I will need you to point out ANY instance you can find anywhere in any forum here where I have criticized anyone for holding those things dear.


It was not addressed to you but in this thread you have criticised Sikhs who believe in the sanctity of kesh. I don't see the point of alcohol but you don't see my going round telling all my friends to stop drinking just because I don't get it :}--}: I respect their decision, they respect mine. I don't understand why kesh is such a constant issue. The Guru gave it to us as a gift. Some choose to accept, some don't. Some accept head hair, some accept all hair. Do what works for you. Things change, people change-you might, you might not. Only you can decide for yourself. END OF



> On the contrary, I have consistently stated my great respect for people who hold those things dear. I just do not share their values in that regard.


You don't share-no problem. However, by criticising those values constantly you are showing that you do not respect those values or those people. Read up on the history to know more. If you don't do this, no skin off my nose. I'm not the one with a bugbear! I'm not the one who requires others to share my point of view to be firm in my faith!
 


> We will not likely ever agree because our foundational premises are not the same.  For _you_, kesh is a requirement of Sikhi. And I know you are not alone in that belief.



It is not me that has this belief, but Guru Gobind Singh Ji gave this instruction. However, I also stated Sikhi is a journey so if you do not keep kesh it does not mean that you are not Sikh. If you openly demean kesh as useless because you do not understand the reasoning behind it then I would argue that you are still early on that journey, possibly looking for another path. If you understand it but do not keep it then you are still on that journey. IF you decide to keep kesh then you are still on that journey. We are all at different points based on our understanding and experiences. 



> I'm not here to argue with you and tell you you're wrong, girlfriend.  I'm just not.


Really?! Because that's all you've done this entire post!! You claim I attacked you personally with my post and I take offense to that. Re-read my original words. No person was mentioned.
 

You cannot extrapolate your beliefs and personality to the rest of the world as not all people are the same. I avoided doing that and spoke about general principles from my understanding of Sikhi through my limited knowledge of Gurbani and history. I am constantly learning like any Sikh. However, if we start debating issues on personal feelings rather than gurmat we will never learn as it just becomes he said vs she said vs they said. If you have anything to say about the principles then feel free to post. If you have issues with me personally then pm me so we can sort it out.


----------



## findingmyway (Dec 11, 2010)

Siri Kamala said:


> And if the response is, "Oh, lordy, another one of these threads..." then



The reason for such a response is no that we don't want questions. I learn a great deal from other's questions. I don't believe in anything that doesn't make sense to me so questioning only strengthens my faith. However, topics such as kesh have been debated a hundred million times. There are 6 pages dedicated to the topic when you put hair or kesh in the search box here on SPN!! Sometimes it worth looking at old threads then adding NEW thoughts otherwise we don't move forwards, just keep going in circles like a dog chasing its tail :sigh:


----------



## Navdeep88 (Dec 11, 2010)

Different faiths have different ways to stay on a path to God. In Sikhi, the prescribed way is to wear the 5ks and a full commitment to the Gursikh lifestyle to stay on that path. It is obviously not the only way for all people, but this is the SIKH philosophy network, and anyone who chooses to come on here to learn about the sikh faith has to accept that. This is coming from someone who does not keep their hair... I dont think that doesnt make me a Sikh because no one here has actually said, if you cut your hair your out! No one has told me on here that if you cut your hair, I refuse to communicate with you. No one has even said people who cut their hair are bad. So if people like myself come on here, it is to learn from people who are further along on that journey than myself. I acknowledge that I am not where they are, and thats the whole point, I get a chance to come on here by my OWN choice and see the things they have to offer, and so far, no one has refused and I think it would go against Sikhi if they did, because afterall, as a Sikh, you are a "learner" foremost.


----------



## Siri Kamala (Dec 11, 2010)

Annnnd... Ta Da!  This, in summary, is why communicating in text rather than face-to-face absolutely sucks.  :crash:

I'm a mediator. I've moderated a dozen or so email discussion groups in my time.  I should know this by now.   

And yet I think sometimes, I get so caught up in my enthusiasm for a discussion that I forget this one basic thing: the message won't matter if the medium in which the message is conveyed is inadequate to the task of fully delivering the intended content of the message -- it's like Shakespeare trying to send a sonnet using smoke signals. The signal-to-noise ratio results in a recipe for fail.

So... dear *findingmyway ji* , since there are no olivebranchkaur smileys available, I'll have to use this one ---> :flowers: and this one ---> peacesignkaur  to convey my intent.

And I want to apologize for my contribution to this misunderstanding. I was under the impression that your feedback was directed to me personally (which resulted in my responding to what you were saying in a more personal manner). Now it is clear to me that it is not.  peacesignkaur

And I also want to underscore that there is no part of me that wants to argue you or anyone else out of their position/beliefs about kesh, the 5 K's, or anything else.  My _sole intent_ -- as God is my witness -- has simply been to hold forth that, like you, I am also finding my way -- _my *own* way_ -- and that my only real quibble is with the notion that sehajdhari is the beginning of a progression and amritdhari is the journey's end. I realize that this is probably the way most people see it.  

Maybe it's the Martin Luther in my DNA, for I am his descendant, but I guess for me these are simply different-but-equally valid paths to the same goal, not a progression. I don't mind being a bit iconoclastic.  I daresay, from what I've seen, being iconoclastic is a proud tradition among Sikhs.    I've had people tell me, back when I was a Christian, that I was not a "real" Christian because I was pro-choice, or believed gay people should have the right to get married, or don't think anyone is going to burn in Hell for having premarital sex.  If you've read anything about Fred Phelps and his crowd, you know there are still people out there saying things like that ... and then there are other Christians who will yell at them to tell them that *they* are not real Christians because "REAL Christians" do x, y, and z and avoid doing a, b, and c.

And everyone can cite scripture and say, "See?  It says it right here..."  :advocate:

Meh.  :shrug:  Some need in them is met by defining their faith in clear black-and-white terms and by trying to "save" other people from "going astray" as they see it.  IMO, as long as no one is hurting themselves or someone else, I'm perfectly happy to live and let live.

I also want to underscore that I am not _arguing with you to "prove you wrong," nor am I trying to persuade you to my POV_ there.

I am simply stating how I see it.  There is no criticism or judgment of you or others, stated or implied, in my saying how I see it. I suppose someone could infer that -- I would strongly prefer that no one put words in my mouth or guess (incorrectly) at my intent.  

To the best of my knowledge, unless you can point out something I have missed (that's not a challenge -- that's an honest request -- if I've missed something please point it out because I wish to correct that!), I have never once, in my time here, criticized or demeaned or even really called into question what others feel is right for them regarding kesh or anything else (with there being a notable exception when it comes to Yogi Bhajan and the harm done to many people by him and the 3HO organization -- I'll admit that makes me very angry and indignant and brings out the victim advocate in me...).

I am simply enjoying the discussion, and even a little debate, about what it means and why people believe what they do, and that exploration is helping me to flesh out my own ideas and ideals and find my own center. This is all so new to me!  :grinningkudi: 

Re: my Avatar...  I was thinking to myself, "Someone is going to whack me over the head with that in about 3, 2, 1..."  And sure enough.  :sigh:  So... to clarify, I'm really not this huge, un-self-aware hypocrite.  :wink:  

I got the image from this video clip here about Sundri, the Brave Kaur:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZDAT_kWMvs

I just thought she looked pretty, and maybe a little like I would look, blue eyes and all, if I put on a blue turban. I wanted something girlie. And I wanted something obviously Sikhie. And I wanted something that was an avatar and not an actual photo.  This kind of had it all so that's what I decided to use.

Anyway... all this to say I'm sorry for my part in this misunderstanding.  Can we have a "do over" going forward?  kudihug


----------



## findingmyway (Dec 11, 2010)

Thank you for the apology. The flowers have been moved to my windowsill :blinkingkudi:




Siri Kamala said:


> my only real quibble is with the notion that sehajdhari is the beginning of a progression and amritdhari is the journey's end.



This statement I don't completely agree with as amritdhari is not the end but there is still a long way to go. It is not like a journey on the motorway (or freeway for the other side of the Atlantic) but more like country roads. The roads split off and cross continually. Some go straight through pretty countryside, others go off in roundabout directions. Some are rough, others smooth. You might encounter glorious weather on the way or a mad storm impeding your progress. The journey never ends as being Sikh means constantly learning til the end. I learn from the kids in my class as well as my parents as well as this forum and many other places. Once you reach amritdhari stage you make the commitment. That commitment, that contract still has to be upheld!

I was invited to speak to local university students Sikh society a couple of months ago. One of them asked me what were the rules to be a Sikh. I replied that they should not get bogged down in rules from the beginning as forced changes would be rejected at some stage. First learn and understand the Guru Granth Sahib Ji, apply to your life, fall in love with the bani and the rest would come by itself without as much effort or stress. That is my experience anyway for what its worth gingerteakaur


----------



## Navdeep88 (Dec 11, 2010)

Findingmyway ji, 

"I was invited to speak to local university students Sikh society a couple of months ago. One of them asked me what were the rules to be a Sikh. I replied that they should not get bogged down in rules from the beginning as forced changes would be rejected at some stage. First learn and understand the Guru Granth Sahib Ji, apply to your life, fall in love with the bani and the rest would come by itself without as much effort or stress."

I think the greatest issue (for those of us who grew up in the west) is that the process is usually the other way around. As kids, our parents want to introduce us to the best possible way of living but they only know the way they grew up and dont understand how different it is in the west... so in many ways, they just expect you to take what they're giving (which is usually a lot of rules) because you're they're kid and they want you to be good. communication is not always easy. it becomes a lot easier when you become an adult!


----------



## Mai Harinder Kaur (Dec 11, 2010)

Some Sikhs contentedly live their whole lives as  sehajdhari.  I admit that I don't really understand that, but I don't need to.  That is their journey and I wish them well.

The road less traveled begins at the Y where the others accept Amrit.  That is only the beginning of the journey.  It gives the title of Khalsa, but most all of us start out as a buck private and slowly advance until a few - a very few - of us are actually worthy of the title Khalsa.  It is a long, difficult journey and at the end, if we actually learn to live with our hearts striving upward, we can reach that "far unattainable star."  And at that point, who cares if we Kaurs have a bit of socially unacceptable facial hair?!

So, my dears, please just relax and take the road laid out before you, remain in chardi kala and take joy in the journey which is yours.  It is your road and you don't have to listen to or accept anyone who tells you otherwise.  When the going gets rough - and it will, whatever road you have taken, read  (or reread) "The Little Engine That Could" or whatever works for you.  

Remember, when things get really hard, an ice cream cone icecreamkaur or a nice cup of ginger tea gingerteakaurhas helped many get through a rough time.


----------



## Siri Kamala (Dec 11, 2010)

findingmyway said:


> Thank you for the apology. The flowers have been moved to my windowsill :blinkingkudi:



:afriends2: Awesome.



> This statement I don't completely agree with as amritdhari is not the end but there is still a long way to go. It is not like a journey on the motorway (or freeway for the other side of the Atlantic) but more like country roads. The roads split off and cross continually. Some go straight through pretty countryside, others go off in roundabout directions. Some are rough, others smooth. You might encounter glorious weather on the way or a mad storm impeding your progress. The journey never ends as being Sikh means constantly learning til the end. I learn from the kids in my class as well as my parents as well as this forum and many other places. Once you reach amritdhari stage you make the commitment. That commitment, that contract still has to be upheld!



Good point!



> I was invited to speak to local university students Sikh society a couple of months ago. One of them asked me what were the rules to be a Sikh. I replied that they should not get bogged down in rules from the beginning as forced changes would be rejected at some stage. First learn and understand the Guru Granth Sahib Ji, apply to your life, fall in love with the bani and the rest would come by itself without as much effort or stress. That is my experience anyway for what its worth gingerteakaur



  That has been my natural instinct -- to learn to read the Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji and see what I can gather from that.

I guess part of what I will always find challenging when relating any scriptural learning to my own decisions / choices / embrace of faith is the apparent contradictions I see there with either other parts of the scripture, or with what I am told by the Rule Book that serves as the official interpretation of that scripture and the intent of its authors.

I look at how we struggle with this very issue here in the US regarding interpretation of our own US Constitution -- ultimately the interpretation of it falls into the laps of either our 9 Supreme Court Justices or our congresspersons.  And this is a document that is only a little over 200 years old, and is written in an English that pretty much any person who can read and understand modern English could interpret successfully.

Arguments over the interpretation of the 2nd Amendment alone could fill an entire city library, I suspect.

So how much more debate will there almost inevitably be over the meaning and relevance of a *spiritual* text (rather than a legal one) that is over 500 years old, and is written in a language that no one commonly speaks today?

For example, this passage... (Shalok Sehskritee, First Mehl & Fifth Mehl - Part 001, 1353 : 5 -- 1353 : 16)
_
One Universal Creator God. Truth Is The Name. Creative Being Personified. No Fear. No Hatred. Image Of The Undying. Beyond Birth. Self-Existent. By Guru's Grace:
Shalok Sehskritee, First Mehl:
You study the scriptures, say your prayers and argue;
you worship stones and sit like a crane, pretending to meditate.
You speak lies and well-ornamented falsehood,
and recite your daily prayers three times a day.
The mala* is around your neck, and the sacred tilak mark is on your forehead.
You wear two loin cloths, and keep your head covered.
If you know God and the nature of karma,
you know that all these rituals and beliefs are useless.**
Says Nanak, meditate on the Lord with faith.
Without the True Guru, no one finds the Way._

*The mala is a Buddhist thing, is it not?  Do Sikhs use a mala in some manner?

**This seems to be saying that it's really not that important what we wear (and seems to also be saying that, even doing good things is as unworthy as doing bad things like lying or worshiping stones if your heart and mind are not focused on God).  It's saying that what matters most is that we meditate on the Lord with faith, does it not?  Or am I misunderstanding somehow?

Also this is the version that I have found most convenient for reading and study, but I have no idea if it is considered a worthwhile translation of the Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. 

Is that a good version to use, you think?

Thanks again.


----------



## findingmyway (Dec 11, 2010)

Siri Kamala ji,
I tend to use a variety of translations as no one covers everything. Gurmukhi uses mostly Panjabi words which are still spoken today. It's the poetry that needs study more than the words themselves. There are words from other languages too such as Persian depending on where the Guru's were at the time and who they were talking too. Unfortunately English lacks the vocab to be able to translate in full beauty! There are many threads which discuss particular shabads in detail so it's worth having a look at those too as you get different viewpoints. Here's one that might be of interest
http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/gurmat-vichaar/32638-use-metaphor-gurbani-how-use-when.html

As for the highlighted lines, the passage is condemning useless rituals. Mala is a beaded necklace used by Hindus for counting the number of times they say God's name in meditation. Sikhi does not believe in counting but in remembering and living according to bani constantly (if I use any terms which you don't understand, feel free to let me know). Loin cloths were worn by sadhu's (holy men who rejected the world and lived away from all to meditate). The tilak is a mark on the forehead given by the priest at the Hindu temple. At the time, these things were considered more important than how a person behaves-it was all show. This mentality is what Guru ji is condemning. At the beginning Guru ji says you sit in front of statues and pretend to pray-another form of showing off so it is EMPTY rituals and showing off how pious you are that is being condemned. So rather than praying in a way that shows off, remember Waheguru always and act according in a true way. When looking at a shabad, always look at it as a whole as it will talk about the same message and flow logically. The next verse after the one you have posted talks about how only when a Gurmukh connects with Waheguru, is that life 'successful'. That is what allows us to stay away from immorality. The next bit is about what shabad means, ie knowledge. The best knowledge is that of God itself and living according to Gurbani gives us the tools to break down the barriers keeping us feeling separated. Finally, Waheguru itself is the soul of all angels so rather than using intermediaries so we should aim to bridge a connection with Waheguru itself. This a quick understanding. Hope all I've said makes sense.
Regards,
Jasleen


----------



## Siri Kamala (Dec 11, 2010)

Jasleen ji, thank you -- that's all VERY helpful!


----------



## Ishna (Dec 12, 2010)

Hi everyone

Can we please discuss the difference and usage of the words _kesh_ and _valha_ as mentioned in this snippet of Kamala ji's post:



Siri Kamala said:


> Sat Sri Akal, Sardip Singh ji,
> As someone pointed out in another forum on this same topic:
> 
> 
> Furthermore, I believe this is a moot point as *kesh* only refers to the long hair found on the head on both males and females and on the faces of males. It does not refer to body hair. The proper Punjabi word for that is valha.  If the Guru had meant for us not to touch the valha specifically, I'm sure that would have been mentioned but it was not, to my knowledge. Please correct me if I am wrong on that count.



Kesh as head hair/male beard makes sense to me as an article of uniform for the Khalsa.  My understanding is that long, clean hair was insisted upon because it would be more difficult for a Khalsa to run and hide and pretend to be of another religion.

It would also be difficult to anchor a turban without a joora (top-knot of hair).

I find it difficult to comment on this topic as I have very fair skin and hair -- you wouldn't notice I have hairy legs unless you're really looking.  It would be hypocritical of me to insist a dark-haired lady who is being ridiculed for her mo should keep it if she doesn't want to.

If there is so much emphasis on a lady keeping her beard hairs, why isn't there the same insistance on wearing turban?  That would be a double standard.

Ishna


----------



## harmanpreet singh (Dec 12, 2010)

icecreammunda my understanding 


Singh means  Lion  ie with  Facial hair  ,  but  Lioness ( Princess )  is without facial hairs .






:grinningsingh:


----------



## Mai Harinder Kaur (Dec 12, 2010)

harmanpreet singh said:


> icecreammunda my understanding
> 
> 
> Singh means  Lion  ie with  Facial hair  ,  but  Lioness ( Princess )  is without facial hairs .
> ...



She does, however, have whiskers. :grinningkaur:


----------



## findingmyway (Dec 12, 2010)

Kesh = uncut hair

It might not be long for whatever reason but it must be uncut. However, it can be on any part of the body-it is all hair afterall!


----------



## spnadmin (Dec 12, 2010)

And he loves here just as she is. Look at their expressions!


----------



## Siri Kamala (Dec 12, 2010)

spnadmin said:


> And he loves here just as she is. Look at their expressions!



We will conveniently, for the sake of going along with the fun, ignore the reality that both of them will mate with multiple partners, that female lions have no choice in the matter, and that once she is impregnated, he will wander off...  :grinningkudi:


----------



## Mai Harinder Kaur (Dec 12, 2010)

Siri Kamala said:


> We will conveniently, for the sake of going along with the fun, ignore the reality that both of them will mate with multiple partners, that female lions have no choice in the matter, and that once she is impregnated, he will wander off...  :grinningkudi:


Yeah, these analogies can go only so far.

However, he will not wander off.  Lions live in stable family units (prides) and the males stick around until another male defeats them in combat.

However, male lions don't do much work.  They just wander the perimeter of the pride territory and make babies.  The lionesses do all the hunting and raising of the young.  He still does the lion's share of the eating, though.  It's a great life for him, I suppose, but let us not encourage our Singhs to act like the lion animal, at least not in that respect.

In any case, I do not cut, trim, dye, dilapidate, laser, pluck or otherwise mess with or alter any hair anywhere on my body.   A personal choice, based on what I think was the intentions of my Guru.  And that is that for me.

Others are free to do whatever they choose.


----------



## Siri Kamala (Dec 12, 2010)

SSA, Mai ji  gingerteakaur

Interesting ~ is there some sort of scriptural support for the idea of not coloring the hair? I can understand not bleaching it as that removes natural melanin, etc. but there are many dyes (such as hennas) that do not take anything away from the hair, they only add color over it (which, in a way, is not all that different from wearing hairspray or styling gel or even a pretty bow on one's hair).  I'm genuinely curious (and appreciative as I'm sure you've answer these types of questions and engaged in similar discussions with others a million times). 

I did let my underarm hair and leg hair grow out at one point a few years ago, partly as an experiment to see what it was like. I had a couple of girlfriends who were real crunchy-granola types who never shaved and I was in a place in my life where no one was going to see it anyway so... why not?  ;-)  It was far more interesting than I had expected -- the way I could feel even just a little air movement on my leg hairs (which are baby-fine and almost invisible because I am very fair-skinned).  It became less noticeable the longer the hair was there, but it was really almost freaking me out at first -- like I had spiders on my legs or something. LOL!

Anyway, I could almost see a "that makes sense" argument in favor of not shaving leg hairs if being able to detect subtle changes in air movement was a key survival mechanism.  

Thoughts? (and thanks!)  peacesignkaur


----------



## Mai Harinder Kaur (Dec 12, 2010)

Dear Siri Kamala ji,

First be aware that I intensely dislike cosmetics.  This is a personal, not a religious, thing.  I even refused to wear make up at my anand karaj which sort of freaked everybody out.

To be official, the SRM only speaks of dying the beard.

I really am not into legalisms.  I hold my hair to be sacred and try to do nothing that will harm it.  I use shampoo and conditioner and hair oil.  I guess my only objection to something like henna would be that I prefer the natural and also that I think colouring the hair is usually just physical vanity which is something I personally never liked for myself.  If it gives you a lift and helps you feel better, I see nothing really wrong with it.  Such things just don't make me feel better or happier.

I guess I am a bit of a hippy in preferring the "natural" !:grinningkaur:

Please notice that I am trying very hard to separate my preferences from Sikhi "rules."  

Here is a shabad I have always liked.  Feel free to skip the beginning lecture if you don't want to listen to it or your Punjabi isn't up to it.  My Punjabi isn't really up to it, but I catch "kesh" and "Sikhi" and "Nanak" quite a few times.  I am not preaching and saying to take this literally.  It is a lovely thought, though, to me.

<object height="344" width="425">


<embed src="http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/v/rnWcEOYR3lE?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" height="344" width="425"></object>


----------



## Siri Kamala (Dec 12, 2010)

I will listen to it as soon as I get my banana bread for the company holiday party in the oven. LOL!  

Suffice it to say that my Punjabi isn't up to it because my Punjabi is almost nonexistent. (Working on it though -- downloading fonts an' stuff from Billie the Cat's site...)

Thanks for clarifying where the line is drawn between what is "Mai-based" and what is Sikhi rule-based.

And here is your pretty fish just because I love the idea of being able to change colors from one moment to the next like a chameleon.   (chuckle)  

Okay -- on to the land of Nannerbread!


----------



## Siri Kamala (Dec 12, 2010)

Watching the lecture part of the video now.  AH!  I've figured out why the cadence and the syllables sound vaguely familiar!  I'm a fan of Bhangra music!  Dur.  So obvious.  Now I just have to find a way to make it make sense.

So interesting to me that, of all the musical forms that could have really spoken to me, it was Bhangra that makes me want to dance around the room every bit as much as a Scottish fiddler's reel   (I blame my DNA for that one -- I figure the love of Banghra and Sikhi must be fond remembrances of a past life?  Does anyone talk about that here at all -- past lives and reincarnations and what access we have to any of that?)

Two thoughts about the video:
Waaah!  I want an English translation of the lecture!  :acry2:

and

Could they have made the background that's displayed during the refrain any *more* nauseating...?  :sigh:  LOL   I get motion sickness so easy these days.  Bleah.  (Side note: the little green smiley who looks like he's about to barf has the same number assigned as the "feedback please" sign-holding smiley -- A26 -- I thought as Mistress of Smileys, you'd want to be apprised!)

Thank you for sharing that, Mai ji -- great stuff!  Are there more like that out there?

If so, could you please post the link?

:thx:


----------



## Ishna (Dec 12, 2010)

Greetings all



Mai Harinder Kaur said:


> Dear Siri Kamala ji,
> To be official, the SRM only speaks of dying the beard.


 
This is why a rule book without justifications does not do the trick.  We can't interpret this as "don't dye the beard".  We need to ask ourselves *why* not?  If we don't know why we're doing something, it's blind ritualism.

I doubt the Guru would instruct people not to dye their beards and leave it at that.  I'm sure the Divine Energy that created the Entire Universe and multitude of worlds and millions of creatures would be concerned if you dyed your beard or your collar to match the cuffs (teehee, naughty Ishna!).

I spent my highschool years with hairy legs and armpits (I was Pagan at the time).  My mum was so angry with that choice.  She yelled at me one day "You're a Pagan, you worship a Goddess, at least you can make yourself look feminine!"  My response was something along the lines of "this is how my Goddess made me, so this is her standard of feminine, why should I question that?" with ample lashings of teenage know-it-all tone, teehee.

It wasn't until I left my boyfriend that I started shaving, to attract a partner.  Now that I am married, I find myself in a predicament -- my husband prefers hairlessness.  I don't care either way -- it really doesn't phase me in the foggiest whether I have hairy legs or not.  But I don't want to embarris him, so I shave for his sake.

By getting hung-up on keeping my hair as bad as getting hung-up on removing it?  I think Kabir ji's point (and by extension, the Guru's) is that it doesn't matter whether you have hair or not, it's your state of mind which is the overriding factor.  I can't fathom why we would be told over and over and over again that the physical is an illusion, you can do all kinds of charity but if you don't vibrate Naam it is all useless, yet at the same time be told we need to keep every hair on our body.

I keep my head hair as an outward sign of my committment, which I think is what Guru Gobind Singh ji was intending.  No one needs to know what is or isn't under my clothes.

I respect those who keep their hair.  More power to you, Mai ji and others who have made this decision.

I fear I'm going off thread topic so I'll be quiet now.

Ishna


----------



## spnadmin (Dec 12, 2010)

ishna ji

What I am about to say is only a small part of all that I have to say on this subject. And I do not really think that I, as one more person weighing in, would be helpful at this time. So all I want to point to is the cultural component of the controversy regarding kesh. For if it were not true that, in some cultures being smooth is a mark of femininity, and in others shaving is required for cleanliness, and for yet others it means both femininity and cleanliness, we would not be having this conversation at all.

Now your mother summed up the cultural reality from where she was standing, from her vantage point. 





> She yelled at me one day "You're a Pagan, you worship a Goddess, at least you can make yourself look feminine!" My response was something along the lines of "this is how my Goddess made me, so this is her standard of feminine, why should I question that?" with ample lashings of teenage know-it-all tone, teehee.



My mother would often scold me to wear a girdle and rouge -- because in the mid-West United States a proper woman always wore a girdle and rouge. And to show how culturally bound that is -- today we don't even call it "rouge" but "blush," and no one wears a girdle unless they have a hernia. We wear "body shapers." 

So in Guru Nanak's time what was the story? Muslims shaved all parts of their body and clipped their hair and their beards because to do so was to be "clean." True even today. This was cultural as much as religious because culture and religion were not then, nor are they now, easy to untangle. I suspect that Hindus had diverse views on the subject of hair, because some ascetics did not shave or clip their hair and others did shave, again as a matter of religious practice, integrated with a particular religious culture. 

Shaving and being thin are two hallmarks of femininity in *some parts *of the western world, as is getting a regular manicure and pedicure. But these are also hallmarks of femininity in parts of the eastern world as well. Chinese women are expected to keep thin, and in Thailand, following the delivery of a child women wear stomach wraps so that their abdomens will snap back into shape and not sag. 

In other part of the western world, hair on your legs, armpits, and upper lip are considered marks of beauty, as in Italy or Argentina. Among African American women shaving is not generally pursued. 

So in my humble opinion, the discussion of kesh has to acknowledge that some of the expressions of worry are at rock bottom about finding the strength to challenge cultural norms - which can change and do change. And the argument that kesh does not in and of itself lead you to God is kind of like dodging the challenge.

Now back to the question of why practicing Sikhs keep kesh, or should keep kesh. At this point I plan to keep my thoughts to myself - f*or now.* There has been and will always be a wide variety of answers given to this question. It is probably more important for any individual to know why he or she does it, without having to feel the need to give justification, or *without having to go to court to defend the right to do it. 
*

And every time a Sikh protests, he/she is only making it that much easier for the courts all over the world *to question all of the kakkars *required of amritdhari Sikhs.

So I know I have not helped to answer your question, but I think you reflected in a very useful and insightful way.  I did not say I would be brief LOL


----------



## skeptic.freethinker1 (Dec 28, 2010)

Hardip Singh Ji,

I think it is perfectly fine to remove such unnatural growth of hair from her face.

Key word out here is unnatural. Take an example of a benign tumor that  grows on somebody's forehead. If the tumor is benign(non-cancer) then it  isn't really harmful to the person's health. But such growth would  still be surgically removed because it is unnatural. 

My father is a keshdhari sikh and an established surgeon. Couple of  times a month he gets such a patient who wants to have a surgery done to  remove a benign tumors or excess skin growth from face or other body  parts. Last year he got a patient who happened to be a devout sikh lady.  Her tumor was just above her right ear but was neither painful nor  malignant i.e. it was completely harmless. But she wanted it removed. 
Now to perform the surgery my father needed to at least shave the region  where he was going to make the incisions in the skin. It became an  issue when she stated that she didn't want any of her hair cut.
My father being a sikh himself understood what here thought process was  but her demand was impossible to meet. So my father asked her that since  both- her hair and the tumor are a gift from God why was she doing away  with one while trying to keep the other. Her response was because the  tumor is *unnatural.* Anyhow she finally agreed to having small amount of hair shaved around the tumor and surgery went well.

If removing a benign tumor is not wrong then removing unnatural hair isn't wrong either, since both are gifts of God.


----------



## spnadmin (Dec 28, 2010)

I was thinking of changing the thread title because it is actually misleading. How is hair on any part of the body "unnatura? " I asked before, and no one has explained that yet. There is always hair on a human face, sometimes nearly invisible down, and other times heavy, on both men and women. Get out a magnifying mirror and check - you may have light lip hair. Others may have a heavier coat.

At what point does facial hair become abnormal though benign? Is it more abnormal for women or more un-natural for men to have a heavy coat of lip and chin hair?

So I think what we are really talking about is "excessive." But wait -- What is excessive? Excessive facial hair. What does that mean? What standard, and whose standards are used to determine "un-natural" or "excessive?" What model of natural or acceptable do we use to decide whether hair is either un-natural or excessive? I think I will leave the title alone.


----------



## Ishna (Dec 29, 2010)

Spnadmin Ji

No one has responded to your question because it is very tricky to answer!

There can't be one kind of "normal" amount of facial hair for women, because everyone's body is different so some may produce more and others may produce less.  The average of this is the amount which would be "normal", but since so many women remove their hairs then this is an impossible average to calculate.

Some info from the first Google result I found...  http://www.hormonehelpny.com/column/hormoneshair2.htm 

"Because I see many women with increased hair growth in my practice, I am often asked how much hair is normal for a woman. There is no absolute answer. Half of American women remove facial hair at least once in a while and ten percent remove it two or more times a week. Many of the women I see in my practice remove even more often. Some even use a razor once or twice a day because their facial hair grows as quickly as a man’s. Heavy hair growth on women is not as rare as people think because women with this unfortunate problem do all they can to hide it. "

"There is no sharp dividing line between normal and abnormal amounts of hair. Facial and body hair is a very personal matter and so a personal definition is appropriate: hair that is enough to make a woman afraid that it will show is too much. However this does not mean that a medical problem is present.  A few hairs in the following locations are normal for a woman: outer corners of the upper lip, the chin, around the nipples, between the navel and pubic region and the tops of the thighs. If a woman has more than light growth of hair in these places or if there is wider coverage of face and body, then the condition of hirsutism can be said to be present. This degree of extra hair is reason for medical evaluation, especially if accompanied by irregular periods or weight problems."

 If so many American women remove their hairs, that suggests the hair being present is actually normal, to me anyway.

My step-daughter is quite dark haired.  She is constantly removing her arm, leg and lip hairs.  At first she was saying its because she likes how it feels and looks.  Now she's getting older and the novelty is wearing off, she's come around to the logical reason "because society tells me I have to remove it to be accepted".

So I guess that's the crux... a woman is free to keep her most likely biologically normal facial hair if she's willing to be unaccepted by (a high percentage of Western) society.  Looked at sideways... thought to have a social disorder... thought to be a bit mentally slow... thought to be dirty... thought to not care enough about herself or too dumb to realise... those are big pills to swallow, and would be more of a block to someone's spirituality I think than putting ones foot down against societal "norms".

Unfortunately I don't see society changing anytime soon with regards to facial (or other!) hair on women (unless it's on their head!!!).

Ishna


----------



## spnadmin (Dec 29, 2010)

Thank you very much for your incisive answer Ishna ji



> So I guess that's the crux... a woman is free to keep her most likely biologically normal facial hair if she's willing to be unaccepted by (a high percentage of Western) society. Looked at sideways... thought to have a social disorder... thought to be a bit mentally slow... thought to be dirty... thought to not care enough about herself or too dumb to realise... those are big pills to swallow, and would be more of a block to someone's spirituality I think than putting ones foot down against societal "norms".



It is all about bucking the system. That is something that Sikhs have done throughout history.


----------



## Ishna (Dec 29, 2010)

Bucking the system is a lot easier when you have a strong Sangat behind you.  I look around my local sangat... most of the women there have preened eyebrows and I haven't seen any mustaches or beards on the ladies yet... Most of them wear makeup and really pretty salwar kameez and I overheard an older lady saying (within earshot of me, the white girl who wears the same salwar kameez to Gurdwara week-in week-out because it's the only one she owns and they're not cheap where she lives!!) you should always wear your best clothes because you're in the company of Guruji... made me feel self conscious and wonder briefly if I should be wearing makeup too so I "look my best".

Of course, I don't, but perhaps some Sikhs have this idea now?

It has to start with the Sikh community accepting hairs, and sadly this doesn't seem to be the general case.  I would love to anonymously survey my local sangat!

Spnadmin ji, can we run a poll on the acceptance of bodily and facial hair on women for this online sangat?

Ishna


----------



## Mai Harinder Kaur (Dec 29, 2010)

I hate make up.  This is personal preference, not part of my religious belief.  I just don't like painted faces.  When I am told that I'd look so much better with make-up, "I always reply, "Not better, just different.  More socially acceptable.  The make up comment is usually followed by how cute I would look with a sexy, fluffy hairdo.  The response to the is, "Hey, lady, I'm 58.  I'm way past cute."  By the time they're ready to tackle my facial hair, they have almost always given upon trying to "improve" my appearance.

I did once give myself a virtual make over to see what I'd actually look like.  The hilarious - to me, at least - results can be found at  https://sites.google.com/site/thanksandchardikala/improving-on-perfection


----------



## Ishna (Dec 29, 2010)

I'm with you on the make-up Mai ji!  The best anyone can get out of me is a smear of lipstick occasionally.  I swear I look like a raccoon if I try to put anything around my eyes!

And also, thanks for the link to your site!  "Can I improve on perfection?"  Good title, teehee!! cheeringkudi

Ish


----------



## Mai Harinder Kaur (Dec 29, 2010)

Ishna said:


> I'm with you on the make-up Mai ji!  The best anyone can get out of me is a smear of lipstick occasionally.  I swear I look like a raccoon if I try to put anything around my eyes!
> 
> And also, thanks for the link to your site!  "Can I improve on perfection?"  Good title, teehee!! cheeringkudi
> 
> Ish



Thanks, Ishna ji!  I had a lot of fun putting that site together.  It's really funny, isn't it, that we are taught to be self-deprecatingly humble when, in fact, we are perfect.  (But don't tell anyone that;  few understand the difference between recognising Akaal Purakh in us and haumai.)


----------



## spnadmin (Dec 29, 2010)

Ishna said:


> !
> 
> Spnadmin ji, can we run a poll on the acceptance of bodily and facial hair on women for this online sangat?
> 
> Ishna



We could do that, but I have some reservations. 

I suspect that most responders would be men, giving a man's perspective. 
Men guiding women because "they are a confused lot" has been a bone sticking in my throat for several years. 

The opinion of  practicing Sikhs would probably be in a very small minority, on an issue that affect them more than others.

My main question would be -- "the matter of dishonouring the hair" -- is resolved in SRM, regardless of what the majority view might be. 

Let me see what the leaders and moderators consensus is.


----------



## Siri Kamala (Dec 29, 2010)

You could always set up two separate surveys -- one for women only and one for men only. It would be interesting to see how the responses compare, yes?  :grinningkudi:


----------



## spnadmin (Dec 29, 2010)

siri kamala ji

We will try to figure out how to do that too, as it really would be interesting. Kudos to you for figuring out what I said. There were 2 typos that were really bad. I have fixed them.  The matter, by way of an update , is now being discussed by mentors and forum leaders to decide whether to proceed.  Thanks.


----------



## Ambarsaria (Dec 29, 2010)

I see that there are probably two aspects to the original inquiry.  I see these as,



Hirsutism:  Causes and cure for Hirsutism which many searches indicate can be traced to endocrine disorder  issues.
Sikh Rehat Maryada:  Does Sikh Rehat Maryada (SRM) has a role in it.
My opinion on the two issues to the best of my abilities as follows,1.  Hirsutism:  If one has reasonable access to good health care specialist this perhaps should be looked at first.  It is possible that the condition itself may foretell more chemical or other bodily ailments that may be determined though Endocrinologist centric or other appropriate medical investigation.  If a suitable, available and affordable solution is found this perhaps is the best path.​I am not a medical doctor so the above are from concerned reading and searching if it is helpful.

If a solution is found in this approach then a philosophical question does get raised.  If taking medication (it is not against SRM) solves the issue why other methods if more affordable or economical should not be sanctioned aside from the SRM reference to bodily hair sanctity.

2.  Hirsutism hair removal and SRM:  It  is my understanding that even though SRM is pretty comprehensive that its application to specific situations like posed in this thread is subject to interpretation.  If a baptized sikh person (specially a baptized sikh lady) feels it to be a virtual mental anguish/disease according to their consideration (or the specialists as in 1 above) that they should be allowed access to a remedy of choice.  If one is unsure this should be handled and argued at the "matta" level in the presence of 5 amritdhari baptized sikhs for consideration again brought forward by the person or their friends.  I believe the SRM allows for that.

If the issue is considered global the "matta" can be sent for review at the level of "gurmatta".
​Just my input to the dialog.

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## Ishna (Dec 29, 2010)

Thank you for your valuable input Ambarsaria ji.  I am in agreeance with you about seeking appropriate medical consultation.  If it is determined that a chemical imbalance is the cause of someone's "excess" facial hair, and solving the problem by correcting the imbalance will make the hairs go away, then what is the harm in removing them by other possibly less-expensive methods.

I have just one comment, and that was where you said: 



Ambarsaria said:


> If a solution is found in this approach then a philosophical question does get raised.  If taking medication (it is not against SRM) solves the issue why other methods if more affordable or economical should not be sanctioned aside from the SRM reference to bodily hair sanctity.



Taking medication is not against SRM *specifically* but it wasn't written with a crystal ball to see hair removal methods of the future.  Instead of looking at the Rehat Mayada as precise instructions I think it needs to be understood what the reasons are behind the examples given, similar to the "don't dye your beard" example.  Obviously the intent is not to dye any of your hairs, but if we take the example given of just your beard, then technically we can dye all our other hairs and it won't be against the Rehat Maryada!

Similarly, if we read we may not cut hairs or use a razor, we should be able to take medication and use lazer hair removal because the SRM doesn't say we can't use these!  Logically, the meaning behind not cutting it or using a razor means we don't remove our hairs at all, whatever the method may be.

I'm still hung up on the meaning of the word "kesh" and why the word for all body hair wasn't used when it was first decreed.  Personally I'm convinced it means head hair/man's beard only as part of a uniform but I could be shooting myself with my own smoking gun here!!!  haha

I guess it's up to the individual to assess all the information and make their decision as they are guided to make it.

I am unfamiliar with the term "matta" -- can someone explain this to me please?  Can the Panj Piare give guidance outside the rules of SRM after taking into consideration the circumstances, etc?  I could understand that if I was amritdhari and in the position of having hirsuitism(sp) and I wasn't sure about taking the meds or removing my hairs, I'd feel a lot better given "permission" by the Panj Piare to do so in light of the situation, but I'm not sure this is what you were getting at.

Ishna


----------



## Ambarsaria (Dec 30, 2010)

Thank you Ishna ji.  I wonder if the following could be of help,

http://www.sgpc.net/rehat_maryada/section_six.html

The Matta and Gurmatta description is at the bottom part of the above.

The complete Sikh Rehat Maryada document reference is as follows,

http://www.sgpc.net/sikhism/sikh-dharma-manual.html

Sat Sri Akal


----------



## findingmyway (Dec 30, 2010)

Ishna said:


> I'm still hung up on the meaning of the word "kesh" and why the word for all body hair wasn't used when it was first decreed.  Personally I'm convinced it means head hair/man's beard only as part of a uniform but I could be shooting myself with my own smoking gun here!!!  haha



*KESH=UNCUT HAIR*
notice there is no reference to length or position but simply to what is natural

Anyone who says the meaning is otherwise is doing so to justify not keeping kesh. My advice is to focus on Gurbani first then the strength and desire to keep kesh will hopefully come from within.


----------



## Gyani Jarnail Singh (Dec 30, 2010)

Kesh is normally used for Hair on the Head....and the Comb is also used on the head hair and sometimes for the beard/muchhaan !! a true Sikh RESPECTS all ROM ROM..becasue ROM ROM is mentioned in GURBANI....and Rom covers each tiny hair on a body !!

BUT people always tend to "Split Hairs"............and Kesh are being split all the time (thats why we have split ends !!)
Others split the Kirpan..its length etc..yet others split the kachera....whether it hsould have a Naala (string/drawstring) or Rubber Band..or pins and buttons...whatever...karra.....should a karra be striped..black iron..stainless steel..gold...????  and the KANGHA ??? what about the COMB...?? LUCKILY for us the Comb or Knagha comes ALREADY SPLIT...or some would be busy splitting that also...( like just HOW MANY needles should a Kangha have...20...25...31..41..how many is per SRM..Taksal Maryada..???.to each his/her own splitting....while the Gurmatt Following ones go along their way merrily following the Guru's Instructions...

There is NO COMPULSION..folks....split your hairs or split the Nitnem Banis...( yes banis also get split..some like five..others love seven..and yet others even more as daily Nitnem...)...or have Split "personalities"....just DO IT !cheerleadercheerleaderswordfightwelcomemunda:redturban::blueturban::happysingh::singhsippingcoffee:


----------



## spnadmin (Dec 30, 2010)

Gyani ji

I detest those endless replies on facebook that say "U r rite veer ji!" But my take on what you said  U R RITE VEER JI.

The important thing is to begin...not only to begin but to take steps, even if they are baby steps...and stay within the clean cut boundaries of gurbani ...everything else is either icing on the cake, or too much to digest, according to the individual.


----------



## Siri Kamala (Dec 30, 2010)

Can someone direct me to where in Gurbani it specifically says we should not cut hair?

I see all manner of exhortations against "matted" hair, both in the Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji and in the Dasam Granth, but nothing at all about cutting hair.  What am I missing?  Thanks!
animatedkhanda1


----------



## spnadmin (Dec 30, 2010)

Sri Kamala ji

There is an unforgettable scene in the movie Apostle where Robert Duvall spars with another true-believer. The two old-time religionists vie for dominance throwing one line from the Bible after another at one another, in competition. If I can find a video clip of the scene I will post it here. I bring up this image because the Hebrew and Christian scriptures are used often as quick reminders of how to live in grace or wander in sin. Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji is not such a scripture, and it is often so demoralizing to read someone using one or another tuk to prove the high ground in a debate about living in grace or wandering in evil. It indeed is just like the scene from Apostle.

The way to read Guru Granth is to take the full measure of all of what it offers about a subject -- such as hair. The shabads as a whole put grace and evil into a dharmic context. Looking at all the shabads each contributes another facet of understanding of the Gurmukh's way. One tuk or one shabad will not do it. Let me share just one that puts hair into context, and we can discuss it.



ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਮਧੁਸੂਦਨੁ ਨਿਸਤਾਰੇ ॥
guramukh madhhusoodhan nisathaarae ||
गुरमुखि मधुसूदनु निसतारे ॥
The Gurmukhs are emancipated by the Lord.


ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਸੰਗੀ ਕ੍ਰਿਸਨ ਮੁਰਾਰੇ ॥
guramukh sangee kirasan muraarae ||
गुरमुखि संगी क्रिसन मुरारे ॥
The Lord Krishna becomes the Gurmukh's Companion.


ਦਇਆਲ ਦਮੋਦਰੁ ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਪਾਈਐ ਹੋਰਤੁ ਕਿਤੈ ਨ ਭਾਤੀ ਜੀਉ ॥੨॥
dhaeiaal dhamodhar guramukh paaeeai horath kithai n bhaathee jeeo ||2||
दइआल दमोदरु गुरमुखि पाईऐ होरतु कितै न भाती जीउ ॥२॥
The Gurmukh finds the Merciful Lord. He is not found any other way. ||2||


ਨਿਰਹਾਰੀ ਕੇਸਵ ਨਿਰਵੈਰਾ ॥
nirehaaree kaesav niravairaa ||
निरहारी केसव निरवैरा ॥
He does not need to eat; His Hair is Wondrous and Beautiful; He is free of hate.

ਕੋਟਿ ਜਨਾ ਜਾ ਕੇ ਪੂਜਹਿ ਪੈਰਾ ॥
kott janaa jaa kae poojehi pairaa ||
कोटि जना जा के पूजहि पैरा ॥
Millions of people worship His Feet.

ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਹਿਰਦੈ ਜਾ ਕੈ ਹਰਿ ਹਰਿ ਸੋਈ ਭਗਤੁ ਇਕਾਤੀ ਜੀਉ ॥੩॥
guramukh hiradhai jaa kai har har soee bhagath eikaathee jeeo ||3||
गुरमुखि हिरदै जा कै हरि हरि सोई भगतु इकाती जीउ ॥३॥
He alone is a devotee, who becomes Gurmukh, whose heart is filled with the Lord, Har, Har. ||3||

ਅਮੋਘ ਦਰਸਨ ਬੇਅੰਤ ਅਪਾਰਾ ॥
amogh dharasan baeanth apaaraa ||
अमोघ दरसन बेअंत अपारा ॥
Forever fruitful is the Blessed Vision of His Darshan; He is Infinite and Incomparable.


ਵਡ ਸਮਰਥੁ ਸਦਾ ਦਾਤਾਰਾ ॥
vadd samarathh sadhaa dhaathaaraa ||
वड समरथु सदा दातारा ॥
He is Awesome and All-powerful; He is forever the Great Giver.

ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਨਾਮੁ ਜਪੀਐ ਤਿਤੁ ਤਰੀਐ ਗਤਿ ਨਾਨਕ ਵਿਰਲੀ ਜਾਤੀ ਜੀਉ ॥੪॥੬॥੧੩॥
guramukh naam japeeai thith thareeai gath naanak viralee jaathee jeeo ||4||6||13||
गुरमुखि नामु जपीऐ तितु तरीऐ गति नानक विरली जाती जीउ ॥४॥६॥१३॥
As Gurmukh, chant the Naam, the Name of the Lord, and you shall be carried across. O Nanak, rare are those who know this state! ||4||6||13||

_First, He does not need to eat; His Hair is Wondrous and Beautiful; He is free of hate._ The Gurmukh referred to here is Waheguru whose image is radiant and the wondrous and beautiful hair gives the image of Him a numinous quality, above hatred. The idea then is to assimilate to this numinous quality by becoming a Gurmukh, by filling our hearts with the numinous Lord. _He alone is a devotee, who becomes Gurmukh, whose heart is filled with the Lord, Har, Har. ||3||_ In this state, one knows the Naam and is carried across the terrible world ocean, _As Gurmukh, chant the Naam, the Name of the Lord, and you shall be carried across. O Nanak, rare are those who know this state! ||4||6||13||
_

Guruji will never say, You should not cut your hair. Rather, in this instance the qualities of godliness are signaled by the image of "wondrous" hair. Now my one effort here is paltry, because it fails to bring all the shabads together in one place to see how their meaning complements one vs. the other. That is why daily reading of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is so important to get the big picture.


----------



## Siri Kamala (Dec 30, 2010)

wahkaur  ~ That is most excellent insight, spnadmin ji!  Would love to see the Duvall clip if you should be able to find it.

It seems very true, though, does it not, that for many Sikhs the keeping of kesh is sort of a... litmus test... of one's authentic Sikhness.  Almost as if to say that is the starting point, and if one is not leaving one's hair untouched, all the rest is moot -- that person cannot call themselves a Sikh.  

There also seems to be a lot of store set on the 52 Commandments of Guru Gobind Singh Ji, but I do not have a sense of a) the value/priority appropriately given to these 52 Commandments, either individually or as a whole compared to what we read in the Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, nor b) how _*normative*_ these commandments were intended to be (i.e. do all 52 apply equally to all people of all nations for all time? Were some only intended to apply to some people, or some nations, or for some limited period of time?)

I'm trying to get a sense of what may have been simply appropriate for a given context but which is not really *essential* to manifesting one's Sikh faith.  It's all so new and overwhelming that my powers of discernment fail me much of the time...  :06: :52: :hmm:


----------



## spnadmin (Dec 30, 2010)

The site you give for the 52 Commandments of Guru Gobind Singh is a "Sikh" site that posts much inaccurate material, and material that is often heavily infused with "sanatan" i.e., Brahminical leanings. The 52 commandments themselves have not withstood the scrutiny of historians.

A valuable collection of criticisms can be found at the allaboutsikhs.com site which I find to be trustworthy.Here is a link to an SPN discussion on the matter. You will notice that one of the early Posters could not see any credible way Guru Gobind Singh would issue an order in the name of Ganesh. 

http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/sikh-sikhi-sikhism/21223-52-hukams-guru-gobind-singh-ji-2.html

There are a number of rehats written alleging to represent the hukamnamas of Guru Gobind Singh, of which I have 5 or 6 saved on my computer. If they are authentic at all, they were written by Sikh leaders during the period of the missls, following the death of Guru Gobind Singh, when the Sikh quom re-organized after significant decimation by the Persians.  The only one that has more credence is written by Bhai Nan Lal. It is often referred to as Gospel by sects within Sikhism. Thus they are not now nor were they ever normative.


----------



## Siri Kamala (Dec 30, 2010)

kudihug  THANK YOU, Mata spnadmin ji!  This is fabulous.  And I feel quite relieved.

What of the Dasam Granth?  How does that figure into the picture?


----------



## findingmyway (Dec 30, 2010)

Siri Kamala ji,
This part of the forum is a mine of information on this topic:
http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/dasam-granth/


----------



## Siri Kamala (Dec 30, 2010)

Oh, wow *findingmyway Ji* -- my head hurts just looking at the sheer volume of information there.

In thumbing my way through the (online English version) of the Dasam Granth I was able to find, I was puzzled by the many references to Vishnu and thought (imagine Jerry Seinfeld's voice here) "Heeeeey... WAIT just-a-second here..."  Because it did not sound very...Sikh to me. 

So to get more to the heart of the matter I am seeking to discern, when people say "Study Gurbani," obviously that means study the Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, but what *else* does "Gurbani" include for the purposes of most Sikhs?


----------



## findingmyway (Dec 30, 2010)

Siri Kamala ji,
For me personally the Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji is all I need. However, this is off topic for this thread so if you desire we can continue this discussion in another thread.
Thanks,
Jasleen


----------



## Ambarsaria (Dec 30, 2010)

Siri Kamala said:


> wahkaur  ~ That is most excellent insight, spnadmin ji!  Would love to see the Duvall clip if you should be able to find it.
> 
> It seems very true, though, does it not, that for many Sikhs the keeping of kesh is sort of a... litmus test... of one's authentic Sikhness.  Almost as if to say that is the starting point, and if one is not leaving one's hair untouched, all the rest is moot -- that person cannot call themselves a Sikh.
> 
> ...


Siri Kamala ji I hope the following is of some help.

The practical sikhism has been described as sant-sipahi.  A saint and a soldier in that order.  This duality can be associated with some liberties as spiritual and worldly affairs.

The duality concept also goes back to the miri-piri  (worldly-saint) as per association with Guru Hargobind ji.

Guru Gobind Singh ji, formalized and established Khalsa and finalized the formation and reality of amritdhari and baptized panth.

In my mind, Guru Granth Sahib ji is an essential element of sikh spiritual life and soul food.  However it is not a literal or verbatim description of miri (worldly) or sipahi or panthic rules book.  The panthic as one sikh associated to many is through baptization and Sikh Rehat Maryada (SRM).  

SRM is the best guiding principles established around 1945 to address some salient spiritual and personal (like nitnem, personal behavior, etc.) like in the below,

http://www.sgpc.net/rehat_maryada/section_one.html

What complements the personal is the panthic portion in the rest of SRM as for example in the following and reading further through the SRM,

http://www.sgpc.net/rehat_maryada/section_three_chap_four.htm

Hope it is of some help.

Sat Sri Akal.

PS:  In terms of your inquiry in the following,

      "So to get more to the heart of the matter I am seeking to discern, when  people say "Study Gurbani," obviously that means study the Sri Guru  Granth Sahib Ji, but what *else* does "Gurbani" include for the purposes  of most Sikhs?"

There is only Guru Granth Sahib ji but I am a novice in the knowledge of punjabi words and vocabulary as embodied in Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji.  What else one can do perhaps is read Viakhia treatises.  I don't know off hand to the best and specially ones in English but perhaps others can guide.  One also has to remember that context is as important as the original words, sentences and stanzas.  I have seen lot of 
swordfight when people focus on individual words or sentences to prove their points or show the guiding light.  Guru Granth Sahib ji is too rich too complete as a whole to be subjected to such use.  This is just my belief.​


----------



## findingmyway (Dec 30, 2010)

Ambarsaria ji,
I agree that the SRM is important but I wouldn't put it into the category of gurbani, more as supporting documents. 
Please can I request all to return to the original topic here and take up further discussions in a new thread or a relevant older thread.
Thank you kindly :happykaur:


----------



## Ambarsaria (Dec 30, 2010)

I agree with you.

I am sorry if my writing gave any indication of any comparison between Guru Granth Sahib ji and SRM.   There is no need to compare and even in my dreams I wouldn't do that.

Sat Sri Akal.


----------

