[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: ARTICLE : Sikh view of Hinduism
Jaldhar H. Vyas (jaldhar@braincells.com) wrote on Tue, 24 Sep 1996 23:27:22 GMT:
>Why? If God is unlimited, unbounded, and timeless, there is nothing you
>_can't_ say about him. He was born from the womb of Devaki, He is a
>pyramid shaped six-legged being from the planet Mars etc. All would be
>true.
If it is a baby boy born to a woman, well, it is not God! To
proclaim the knowledge of God is to proclaim oneself as some
super-God, and that is self contradictory for any reasonable
definition of what _I_ feel God is, within my limited
understanding. A baby-boy God is destructible, limited and a crying
little red thing. This, in my opinion, is a mundane
description. Of course, it is just that our worldview is probably
worlds apart :-)
>To deny it would be to limit God. In that case why become a Sikh?
No, to deny it would be to accept the limitlessness,
indescriptibility and Infinitude of God, and that, to me is a good
comforting thought that I am not dealing with just another elusive
elementary particle of matter. Good enuf reason to be a Sikh :)
>As long as you realize whatever or whomever you are currently worshipping
>is part of the unlimited boundless Supreme (as Advaitins have no problem
>in doing) you can keep on doing it. Logically then Sikhism shouldn't
>exist as it's founding generation could have just kept on doing whatever
>Hindu or Muslim things they were doing. Yet it does exist. How do you
>reconcile this?
Sikhism, in my understanding, does not believe in
parts-manifest of God in a form or image. In Sikh description of the
Universe, each particle and each galaxy is God's own realm; indeed
each organism is God's own creature, with no preference for one form
over another, and the only useful worship being in love with the
Creator. This breaks free of the limited view of parts-manifest
God, as well as the myopic [in SIkh view, i.e.] modes of worship.
Sikhism exists because of Guru Nanak sahib's perception of the
Gestalt -- the whole forest, not just individual trees, and his
description, in all his eleven physical forms [but the same unbroken
spirit] of this gestalt, the aerial view, so to say [excuse me the
weak analogy]. Sikhism does not deny that other prophets and saints
have succeeded in achieving the Grand Goal of being One with God,
and acknowledges their achievement. But, at the same time, Sikhism
provides a full toolbox of achieving the Goal for an average mortal,
there is no priestly class to be served and appeased, no rituals to
be observed; the language [of Guru Granth Sahib] is simple and
colloquial, thus available to the people across the spectrum of
society [although Sikhs have done a bad job of their responsibility
to make it easily available to non-natives], etc etc. Enough
justification for Sikhism to exist? And remember that it comes from
and agiaanee layman.
Reagrds
Rajwinder Singh rajwi@punjab.bu.edu
