Do you think that if Bullah Shah and Mother Teresa of Avila were to have wed they would have disputed over their devotional practices? There is a point within all religions where only the Divine, Universal essence remains. Sants, Gianis, Jnanas, Baktas, Sufis and Jivan-Muktas see nothing but the Divine and feel nothing but love and compassion.
I think that whenever any two join with aspirations to mutually assist each other to achieve that perspective and understanding, the marriage can and will succeed. The binding is everlasting, because the real objective that binds them together is God and they see God within each other. They can accept each other’s seeming imperfections, because they recognise that they are not the other person’s problems, but one’s own difficulty in accepting and believing that God lives within and guides the spouse too.
But what happens when life-partners are not practising at the same devotional level? If two become one, in which direction will this one move to maintain harmony? I have read of a Sufi mystic whose wife was rude and inhospitable to visitors, who came for his advice. When asked about her, the Sufi explained that it was she who reminded him of what he did not want to be!
Regarding Andrew ji and his Amritdhari fiancé, how can we know what is destined? Yet Narayanjot Kaur ji, you raise a very valid point. Would she become a patit by not marrying a Sikh man and does she take her Amrit vows and obligations too lightly?
Perhaps Andrew ji should review the Sikh Rehat Maryada and then talk to his Amritdhari fiancé directly about her Sikh vows. http://www.sgpc.net/rehat_maryada/section_six.html
