[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: ARTICLE : Sikh view of Hinduism



Sorry for the late followup; been very irregular in reading newsgroups
lately.

In article <ghenDxL7Jt.L4J@netcom.com>,
Sankar Jayanarayanan  <kartik@Eng.Auburn.EDU> wrote:

>This is one of the major attacks on Hinduism by the Sikh Gurus:
>
>------------------------
>(Guru Gobind Singh, 33 Swaiyyas)
>
>"...
>

> "The All-pervading God, Unconquerable and Unconceived, how could He
> as Rama be born from the womb of Kaushalya?

Where is it said He was born from the womb of Kausalya?

> If one calls Krishna the Immortal God, then why did he surrender
> himself to the power of Death?

Where is it said He surrendered Himself to the power of Death?

> All loving is He and All Holy too then why did He drive Arjuna to battle?

Because to fight for dharma was Arjuna's duty, and his own nature.

> If Krishna be God, the Treasure of Mercy, why the huntsman pierced
> him with an arrow?

Where is it said that He was pierced with an arrow?

Btw, I'm aware that some people make this objection wrt Bhiishma's
shooting at Krishna, which allegedly hurt the latter; however, this is
answered easily enough.  The commentary on the very first verse of the
Vishnu-tattva-vinirNaya deals with the Lord's alleged mortal
fallacies, which are subject to upajiivya-virodha with respect to the
Agama identifying Him as such.

> He who saves the families of others, why did he get his own annihilated?

Because no mortal entity can ever be the kin of the Lord, and these
weren't.

> He who's called the Primeval God, unconceived, how did He enter into
> the womb of Devaki?

You know what I'm going to say...

> Yea, He who has neither father nor mother, how could He call Vasudeva His 
> sire?

Ditto.

> He (God) belongs not to the Raghu clan (of Rama), nor to the family
> of yadvas (like Krishna), nor is He Rama's spouse; not one of these
> is the God of the universe.
>
> You forsake the One and cling to many; but thiswise even Sukhdeva,
> Prasara and Vyasa (famous Hindu sages) fell in error."

On the contrary, it is clear that Guru Gobind Singh had no training in
shaastra, particularly in the theory of prAmANya.  Perhaps your
exclusion of Dvaita from the list of things he was unaware of has an
ironic twist to it :-)

> I personally think these arguments are immature. The sikhs give
> these and other similar arguments and then pride themselves on
> following a "superior" faith.

I have much regard for Sikhs and for their faith, but I honestly do
not think it to be founded on a sounder basis than Vedanta, and I
certainly do not think these objections to be worthwhile ones.

Regards,

Shrisha Rao

>-Kartik


Advertise with us!
This site is part of Dharma Universe LLC websites.
Copyrighted 2009-2015, Dharma Universe.
More than one instance of Sumo is attempting to start on this page. Please check that you are only loading Sumo once per page.