Ron Singh

OK this is weird. I just pressed ALT + TAB and got:

<a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=43&t=000053" target="_blank">http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=43&t=000053</a>

Exactly what I was seeking.

roshan

sikh, ive been to gurdwaras before, and i always see sikhs fanning the guru granth. to me, this is just worshipping the guru granth, and it is no better than the worship of idols, which sikhism opposes.

Ron Singh

Ah yes, good observation. The first ten gurus were of human form. They made the one we have now, the Guru Granth Sahib, the holy book. The first ten were fanned because of respect. Others voluntarily fanned them because of respect. The fanning of the Guru Granth Sahib is for the same reason, and is to remind the Sikhs that it isn't to be treated just like any old book. The tenth Guru wanted it to be respected and sought after for spiritual help. Bowing to it is not bowing to the paper that the Guru Granth Sahib is, but the sikh ideals and identity, and giving that respect. Also, I hear that fanning it with that hair-like torch is aids in keeping off the dust.
Thanks.

roshan

thanks for the info.

roshan

btw sikh, from what ive heard of the guru granth, there are several references to hindu gods there.

what is the explanation/reason for this?

Ron Singh

Yes, this is also something I found very shady. Sikhs are strictly monotheistic. Hindus beleived in polytheism. Sikhism tried very hard not to insult or to degrade or to call any other religion false. There were mention of other Gods, but I beleive they were in a hypothetical sense, or in a connotation of the God. For instance, if there were a God of intellegence, call it BoobyDooby. There might be sayings such as: "Humans are wise and advanced, and know much of BoobyDooby". All of the Gurus were express to say that there is only one God, but never did they say that there are not multiple Gods. You may say that it is implied, but the Sikhs did not want to discourage anyone from practicing freely. This might be confusing, and I don't know all the answers, but if I do say something rediculous, I just want to say in advance that I know not much of Sikhism. I'm 15 years old, and haven't had my ideas fully organized.

Dr. Jagan Mohan

This is a misconception common among people who think they know Hinduism. Perhaps Hinduism is better explained by 'Henotheism' or 'Panentheism'?

The best is not to define Hinduism in such words. Because the concept of God in Hinduism has many tones and shades. Right from Strictest Monism of Shudda Advaita to Strong Theism of Dualistic Dwaita Schools of Thought.
And not to forget the Animilistic religions of Lower Hinduism practised by Tribes inside the all embracing cover of Hinduism.

The Japji II part says:
The Guru is Shiva, the Guru is Vishnu and Brahma; the Guru is Paarvati and Lakhshmi.

Now to your question what's wrong with Sikhism.. here is a perspective from my Sri-Vaishnavite point of view (Vishistadwaita School of Thought: Qualified Monism):

Sikhism is a modern and rational religion with much beauty and spirit... and there is nothing 'wrong' with Sikhism... But that is hardly a reason why anybody should convert to Sikhism if that is what you are subconsciosly trying to hint/coerce.

Sikhism evolved out of the Devotional movement of the middle ages in Hinduism. Basically a Eastern religion with firm basis on Karma, Moksha, Samsara and Dharma, it borrowed various elements from Islam in order to bridge the differences between the two religions and thus create a compromise. Although on this aspect/account it failed, it nevertheless grew up as a seperate religion thanks to the 'Khalsa Panth' which really set aside the Sikhs as followers of a seperate religion with distinguishing marks. Untill the foundation of Khalsa Panth, Sikhs were undistinguishable from Hindus.

What is missing in Sikhism is the Lack of Philosophical Basis. While Vaishnavite Schools of Theism relyied upon the VedantaSutras (Also known as Brahmasutras) for their Philosophical Ground, Sikhism, while stressing on Devotional aspect of Theism (Bakthi), somewhat negleted the Philosophical or Jnana part of Religion.

Hence, Sikhism is at loss for explaination of various questions from a valid authoritative point of view. Questions such as 'the Nature of the Soul', 'Nature of Origin and Fate of the Universe', 'Purpose of God and his actions' etc.. cannot be adequetely answered purely on the basis of the Guru-Granth Saheb. If I should ask you as to the purpose of the Origin of this Universe, it would be difficult for you to answer entirely from the Guru Granth.

Just as Christianity cannot answer Philosophical Questions and it derives much of its philosophical ground from Greek Philosophers, Sikhism is ever connected to basic/Common Eastern Philosophical schools such as Vedanta, Purva Mimansa and Yoga for Apologetics.

Just as Christianity is connected with Judaism through its Old Testament part of the Bible, Sikhism is connected with Hinduism. It is not to demean this great religion which had brought much needed reformations in religious and social spheres of Northern India during the Muslim Era, but it should be seen in the perspective of its evolution into a seperate mature religion.

Buddhism in its 2500 and odd years of existence had managed to provide itself with a large body of philosophical scriptures, noteworthy being those of Nagarjuna who propounded the Nihilistic School of Thought. Sikhism, being the youngest world religion is yet to form a basis of that sort of it to truly cut itself off from Hindu Philosophical umbical cord.

Sikhism is not different from Vaishnavism (Devotional School based on Worship of Vishnu as the Supreme Reality):
1. Vaishnavite Schools reject Casteism based on Birth.
2. Grace of God is essential for Moksha or release from the cycle of Birth and Death (Samsara) (Quote from Japji: By the karma of past actions, the robe of this physical body is obtained. By His Grace, the Gate of Liberation is found)
3. Concept of 'Naam/Sabad' and 'Kirtan' or Chanting of God's Name is common to Both Vaishnavism and Sikhism.
4. The necessity of Guru or Teacher for realisation of God is also central to both paths.

The only vital difference being the use of Icons in worship which is basically liturgical can be noted.

Vaishnavism predates Sikhism right to the Vedic Age (1200 BCE).
Concluding it may be rightly said that Sikhism is the cummulation of Devotional Schools in Hinduism and seperated as a new religion mostly on part of introduction of the Khalsa Panth.

[ April 24, 2002: Message edited by: Dr. Jagan Mohan ]</p>

hinduwoman

Sikh, since Sikhism basically derived from hinduism with Islamic elements added, it is only natural that they would include hindu gods as well. In Hinduism, Brahman is the supreme Formless Soul with the other gods its manifestation. The original gurus viewed it from this angle.

Boro Nut

If it was formless, why would it matter which angle you viewed it from?

Boro Nut

vagrant

But the existence of god issue is core. The sikh practices are just as pointless as the baptists, JWs, etc. For the discussion to have any true meaning god, specifically the one as defined by sikh faith, must exists. And you know how we feel on that. Its like discussing the morality of the tooth fairy: a pointless and reasonably absurd exercise.