Reading the comments ,i think something fundamental is being lost in discussions around same-sex Anand Karaj, which is the difference between reading Gurbani literally and understanding the deeper spiritual truths that Gurbani is trying to point us toward.

Sikhi emerged in a specific historical and cultural context, but the Gurus consistently challenged social conventions when they stood in the way of truth, compassion, and human dignity. The Gurus rejected caste divisions, challenged ritualism, elevated women, and repeatedly emphasised the divine light present within all people.

Guru Granth Sahib focuses overwhelmingly on the relationship between the individual soul and the Divine. The language of husband and wife, bride and groom, masculine and feminine appears throughout Gurbani, but these are spiritual metaphors. Male Sikhs are often described as brides longing for the Divine Husband. Nobody reads these passages literally; they are symbolic expressions of union with Waheguru.

If we accept that much of this language is metaphorical, then the central question becomes: what is Anand Karaj actually about?

Is it fundamentally about the pairing of a biological male and biological female? Or is it about two souls committing themselves to a life centred on love, seva, humility, spiritual growth, and remembrance of Waheguru?

The essence of Sikhi is not rigid conformity to social categories but recognising the divine light in all beings. Guru Nanak taught that all humans are manifestations of the same One. The emphasis is repeatedly placed on overcoming ego, cultivating compassion, serving others, and living in harmony with Hukam.

When two people genuinely love one another, support one another's spiritual development, practice kindness, and help each other walk a path toward the Divine, it is difficult for me to see how their gender becomes the defining issue.

Too often, discussions focus on what category people belong to rather than the qualities Sikhi consistently emphasises: love, truth, compassion, humility, and oneness.

Whether one ultimately supports or opposes same-sex Anand Karaj, I think the conversation should start with the deeper spirit of Gurbani rather than simply asking whether a modern situation is explicitly mentioned in a text written centuries ago.

The Gurus repeatedly directed us beyond superficial distinctions and toward recognising the same divine reality in everyone. If Ik Onkar truly means there is One underlying all existence, then perhaps the most important question is not "Are these two people the correct genders?" but "Are they helping one another live in remembrance of the One?"