Relationships in Sikhism

Women, men and mutual duties

Sikh teachings challenge the idea that women are inferior. Guru Granth Sahib 473 asks, ‘So why call her bad? From her, kings are born.’ The passage recognises women’s importance in family life and rejects their denigration.

The Rehat Maryada, Chapter 11 Article 18, gives responsibilities to both spouses. A husband should love his wife unwaveringly, share what he has, remain loyal and respect her relatives as his own. A wife should remain loyal through joy and sorrow and show the same consideration for his relatives as for hers. Marriage therefore connects two families as well as two individuals.

The code also uses traditional, gendered language: it describes the husband as the ‘lord and master’ of his wife’s love and trust. This creates a question about interpretation. A traditional reading may emphasise distinct responsibilities, while an equality-focused reading stresses reciprocal loyalty, respect and shared spiritual purpose. The teaching that women deserve respect supports questioning customs that treat them as less valuable; actual family practices should not automatically be equated with religious ideals.

Why marriage matters

Marriage is understood as more than living together or making a legal agreement. It is a spiritual partnership in which spouses support one another in religious and everyday life. Its purposes include companionship, faithful love, mutual support, raising and nurturing children, and developing responsibility towards the wider community.

Guru Granth Sahib 788 teaches that people are not husband and wife merely because they sit together. Those truly united have ‘one light in two bodies’. The image suggests a shared spiritual direction while the spouses remain two individuals. Its surrounding imagery of the soul and the ‘Husband Lord’ connects married love with devotion to God.

The Rehat Maryada applies this connection directly: spouses should model their relationship on love between the individual soul and the Supreme Soul. Carrying out the duties of household life can help them grow closer to God. A wedding begins this commitment; the relationship must then express it through everyday conduct.

How Anand Karaj expresses that purpose

Anand Karaj, meaning ‘blissful union’, takes place before the Guru Granth Sahib, normally in a gurdwara, with the congregation present. The Guru Granth Sahib is Sikh scripture and is regarded as the living Guru. Its central position shows that the couple’s shared life is to be guided by the Guru rather than centred only on themselves.

The couple sit facing the Guru Granth Sahib and receive guidance about marriage and their responsibilities. They bow to show acceptance. The bride holds the end of a sash worn by the groom, physically connecting them during the ceremony.

The central action involves the four Lavan, wedding hymns composed by Guru Ram Das, the fourth Guru. Each stanza is first recited. The groom, followed by the bride holding the sash, then walks around the Guru Granth Sahib while the stanza is sung. After each circuit they bow, then listen to the next stanza. Four hymns therefore accompany four circuits, expressing a shared spiritual journey under the Guru’s guidance.

After the fourth circuit, the couple bow and sit. The first five and final stanzas of the Anand Sahib are recited, followed by Ardas, a prayer, and the distribution of karah prashad, blessed food. Prayer, scripture and the congregation make marriage a religious and communal commitment, not simply a private celebration.

Interfaith marriage and the religious ceremony

The Rehat Maryada expects marriage within Sikhism. Article 18 explicitly says that a Sikh’s daughter should marry a Sikh and that people professing other faiths cannot be married through Anand Karaj. A shared faith can help spouses practise together and pass Sikh teachings on to children. This restriction concerns eligibility for the Sikh religious ceremony; it must not be confused with the legal possibility of a civil interfaith marriage.

There are different Sikh views about opening Anand Karaj to mixed-faith couples. Those supporting the restriction emphasise that it is a deeply spiritual ceremony expressing commitment to the Sikh Guru, rather than simply a wedding venue or cultural custom. At the stricter end, some believe it should be reserved for Amritdhari Sikhs, meaning initiated Sikhs. Others argue that excluding non-Sikhs conflicts with the Gurus’ inclusive teachings and that couples of different faiths can show love, loyalty and respect.

The British Sikh Report 2017 demonstrates this disagreement: 54% of respondents felt negative or very negative about the restriction on Anand Karaj for mixed-faith couples, while 30% felt positive or very positive. These are respondents’ attitudes to access to the ceremony, not a change to the Rehat Maryada or a measure of how many had interfaith marriages.

A justified judgement should consider both the religious meaning of the ceremony and the argument for inclusion. Respecting people of other religions and deciding who can undertake a specifically Sikh religious commitment are related, but distinct, questions.

Cohabitation and commitment

Cohabitation means living together as a couple without marriage. Traditional Sikh teaching places intimate relationships within marriage, so cohabitation conflicts with that framework. Marriage makes responsibilities explicit through a public religious commitment and provides a valued setting for family life.

However, some Sikhs in Britain have become more tolerant of cohabitation, particularly when they expect the couple eventually to marry. This is a more accepting attitude towards the couple’s circumstances, rather than necessarily a rejection of marriage as the ideal.

Someone defending cohabitation might argue that an unmarried couple can nevertheless show lasting love and responsibility. Someone opposing it might respond that those qualities should be expressed through marriage and its public commitment. The disagreement concerns whether love and responsibility are sufficient without marriage, rather than whether unmarried people are incapable of caring for one another.

Faithfulness and the commitment to marriage

Adultery breaks the expectation of exclusive faithfulness and damages trust. Guru Granth Sahib 274 praises the person whose eyes do not gaze upon ‘the beauty of others’ wives’ and who overcomes harmful desires. This supports self-control rather than allowing attraction to undermine marriage. The Rehat Maryada’s duties of loyalty reinforce that message.

Sikh tradition regards Anand Karaj as a sacrament, a sacred religious union, rather than merely a civil contract. This helps explain why marital breakdown is a serious religious concern: a couple have committed themselves before the Guru to a shared life, not simply entered an agreement they can casually abandon.

Two different situations need distinguishing:

• Divorce legally ends a marriage.
• Separation means spouses live apart, but they may remain married.

Separation and divorce: commitment, reconciliation and protection

A traditional Sikh response is to oppose separation as well as divorce because marriage should last throughout life. During a debate about Sikh marriage law in India in 2012, Avtar Singh, then president of the Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee (SGPC), argued that separation after marriage was not appropriate. Giani Gurbachan Singh, then the Akal Takht’s high priest, likewise emphasised the duty to uphold the marital union for life. This position connects directly with the ideal of ‘one light in two bodies’ and the Rehat Maryada’s expectations of lasting loyalty.

However, living apart has also been a practical Sikh response to a broken marriage. Traditionally, a woman whose marriage broke down might return to her parents; couples today may also live separately. Separation does not itself dissolve the marriage, so it can leave open the possibility of reconciliation. It may also provide distance from an intolerable relationship while legal decisions are considered. This practice should not be mistaken for unanimous religious approval of separation.

Families, the gurdwara and the sangat, the Sikh congregation or community, may help couples resolve difficulties before divorce. Guru Granth Sahib 143 teaches that spouses’ concern for their children should reunite them when they dispute. Reconciliation can preserve a valued relationship and family stability.

Nevertheless, many Sikhs accept divorce as a last resort when attempts to save the marriage fail. Mutual care and respect also provide reasons not to insist that someone endure cruelty. In the 2012 debate, Professor Gursharanjeet Singh argued that divorce was a social reality and should be legally available in special circumstances. A Sikh woman seeking divorce after alleged abuse argued that protecting women and the vulnerable was also consistent with Sikh principles.

These contrasting responses weigh lifelong commitment against the reality of a relationship that has become harmful or irretrievably broken. A justified judgement should consider whether reconciliation can restore a caring relationship, rather than treating remaining together as the only measure of a successful family life.

Remarriage after bereavement or divorce

The clearest explicit remarriage guidance in Article 18 concerns bereavement. A widow may remarry if she wishes, and the same permission applies to a widower. Their remarriage may use the Anand marriage ceremony. The code also says that, generally, a Sikh should not marry a second wife while the first is alive. This supports monogamy.

Attitudes to remarriage after divorce vary. Some Sikhs accept it after a marriage has legally ended; others take a more restrictive view or seek guidance from the Sikh community. Permission after bereavement should not be treated as an automatic rule for every situation following divorce. Simply living apart also does not legally free someone to marry again.

Arranged and assisted marriage in Britain

An arranged marriage involves families or others helping to identify a partner, with both people consenting. An assisted marriage places greater emphasis on the individuals directing their choice while receiving help with introductions. The approaches can overlap: family involvement and personal choice need not be opposites.

The Sikh Missionary Society in the UK describes parents arranging marriages with their children’s consent. Prospective spouses can reject a suggested match. Assistance may also involve matchmaking or dating agencies, sometimes with parental support. These approaches allow people to seek a compatible partner while retaining help from family or others.

Family involvement can offer support, knowledge of a prospective partner and a shared religious background. Families may get to know one another before the wedding, and parents may value the prospect of children being raised within Sikhism. A concern is that family expectations could become pressure, so genuine freedom to accept or refuse matters. A forced marriage lacks that consent and is different from an arranged marriage.

The British Sikh Report 2020 shows variation between generations of respondents. About 80% of those aged 65 and over reported arranged marriages, compared with about 13% of those aged 20–34. This shows that arranged marriage was much more common among the older respondents; it does not mean that every younger Sikh rejects family assistance or that all assisted introductions were counted as arranged marriages.

The Rehat Maryada provides principles for judging a proposed match: caste and descent should not determine it, child marriage is forbidden, and a match should not be accepted for monetary gain. It also rejects consulting horoscopes to select an auspicious wedding date; the parties should choose a suitable date by mutual consultation. These principles distinguish Sikh religious guidance from customs that families may inherit.

A justified judgement about family involvement should therefore consider both its potential support and the couple’s freedom. The central question is not merely who makes the introduction, but whether the resulting relationship reflects consent, respect and mutual responsibility.

• Purposes: spiritual partnership, companionship, faithfulness, mutual support and nurturing children.
• Guru Granth Sahib 788: ‘one light in two bodies’ — more than physical togetherness.
• Anand Karaj: Guru Granth Sahib and congregation; guidance, bowing and connecting sash.
• Four Lavan → four circuits, with bowing after each.
• Conclusion: Anand Sahib, Ardas and karah prashad.

Contemporary relationships

• Rehat Maryada expects Sikh marriage; Anand Karaj is restricted to Sikhs.
• Mixed-faith ceremony debate: shared Sikh commitment versus inclusion. Civil marriage is a separate question.
• British Sikh Report 2017: 54% of respondents viewed the mixed-faith ceremony restriction negatively; 30% positively.
• Cohabitation: traditionally opposed; some British Sikhs are more tolerant, especially if marriage is intended.

Faithfulness and marital breakdown

• Guru Granth Sahib 274: control desires; do not desire others’ wives.
• Sacred, lifelong union supports opposition to separation and divorce.
• Separation: traditionally opposed by some authorities, including SGPC president Avtar Singh in 2012; nevertheless, spouses have lived apart when marriages break down. They remain married unless a legal process changes this.
• Divorce: family and community encourage reconciliation; many accept divorce as a last resort. Commitment must be weighed against harm and failed reconciliation.
• Article 18 explicitly permits widows and widowers to remarry by Anand rites if they wish.
• Remarriage after divorce: attitudes vary; distinguish it from remarriage after bereavement.

Arranged and assisted marriage

• Family introductions and assistance can coexist with personal choice; consent is essential.
• British Sikh Report 2020: arranged marriages reported by about 80% of respondents aged 65+, compared with about 13% aged 20–34.
• Article 18 rejects caste-based selection, child marriage, monetary matches and horoscope-based wedding dates.