Why?

[Khalsa Fauji]

i agree

Most paintings are basic depictions, but if it bugs you that the people who painted them dont know what the Gurus looked like then get a Nanaksar copy of Guru Nanak Dev Jis saroop

149058[/snapback]

Gurfateh!!

Sorry what do you mean get a Nanaksar copy of Guru Nanak Dev Jis saroop???

Is thats Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji Maharaaj?? @

Bhul Chuk Maaf!

Gurfateh!!

[crayzy]

no i meant the painting of Guru Nanak Dev Ji done by Baba Nand Singh

[mann_kaum_layee_qurbaan]

how about i paint a picture of your father and say here, this is what i think your father looks like, now hang it up on your wall. all these pictures are pakhand.

pagal kuri i'm gad there are people like you who have pyaar for sahbad guru and don't care for these meaningless pictures. how many people can tell me what picture is of guru angad dev ji? we all know guru nanak dev ji's pic and guru gobind singh ji's pic cause we have been brainwashed by the pics....it is all a big joke. people say kids get inspired, please, pics came around when sobha sio came about so when the khalsa was at its height in the 18th and 19th century what inspired thousands of khalsa children then? It is just laziness on teh parents part...parents give their kids little pics of guru nanak for good luck, just excuses man.

gurbaani says that idols which themsleves sink in the world ocean cannot save man i don't know how a painting will....i know people say sikhs don't worship them, we all know sikhs worship them. my dad stands with folded hands everyday in front of the guru pics, and so do most of your parents...we are just in denial. we can deny it all we want but these pics are idol worship..not long before we will be inspired by a huge statue of guru gobind dingh on a horse..i mean why not we got the pics might as well make a cool statue too.

[crayzy]

Baba Nand Singh and a couple other people had pargat darshan of Guru Nanak Sahib Ji

There are plenty of paintings of the Guru Sahibann way way older than Sobha SInghs, go to a museum that displays Sikh artefacts, I've seen armour with Guru Nanak DevJi etched on it.

No its not idol worship coz we dont believe that the painting is going to give us anything, and we're not worshipping it.

If thats what it means to you dont do it. But making assertions that its idol worship is ridiculous.

Each one of of us has a subjective relationship with Guru Sahib, you seem to think you can come up with a set of cleanly defined rules of how to do every single task as a Sikh - this will hinder your progress, you will not be able to recognise truth through anbhav; kitabi giani ideas of truth will blind you.

[Kharkoo4Life]

Kharkoo4Life: Thank you for the amazing historical background. I wasn't aware of any of that - it's helped me a lot. So basically, photographs shouldn't be kept in Gurdware hunna? Gurdware are suppose to emphasise the importance of Gurbani and not visual images (which can be gathered by connecting with Gurbani)

Thanks again.

149043[/snapback]

Yes you are right pagal that No pics of any guru shud be present inside a gurdwara. In fact they shouldnt be present anywhere period. Gurbani clearly tells us that the shabad is the guru:

bwxI gurU gurU hY bwxI ivic bwxI AMimRqu swry ]

The Word, the Bani is Guru, and Guru is the Bani. Within the Bani, the Ambrosial Nectar is contained.

And if we wish to follow the teachings of the guru then we must accept the above that the guru is not a person but the shabad roop bani. And we already have that inside every gurdwara in the form of SGGS, so why then would we also in the same place try to install a different version of the guru as well at the same time (i.e in the form of a painting)? The guru cant be both at the same time. Either we accept the guru as bani or accept the guru as a person.

And we cant simply say the pics are for inspiration for as u rightfully state urself, isnt gurbani enough inspiration? And yes a child may not understand gurbani but does that mean we go out and change the form of the guru just to make it easier for them? Children can learn just like adults but they need different approach. Kids can pick up what is goin on around them more than we may realize. Cartoons, fairytales, toys etc show that the mind of a child will absorb and be influenced by whatever is around it. So the onus is on the parents that rather then simply showing the kids a "artificial picture" of the guru that they should take the time to teach their kids about sikh history, bout sikh principles. And for a little child this can be easy as simply telling the kids about being honest, kind and sharing wiht other people. FOr it is these virtues, or gunn, which the guru represents. And by teaching the kids about these noble virtues we are in fact teaching the kids about our true guru.

I know everyone says that the pics are nothing but a way to show respect to the guru. But has anyone ever considered that muslims, a religion founded much before Sikhism, not even till this day have ever allowed a single picture, or painting to be made of their prophet mohammed. They go so far as to not even allow one to write his name or say his name without the utmost of respect. Has anyone wondered why no picture of mohamed exists? The muslims are strictly against idol worship and to prevent the followers from revering mohammed as an idol they strictly preventing any drawing of him. Yet we as sikhs, being told openly by our guru not to worship any idol, not only pay money to have paitings of the guru in our home, we proudly tell other non-sikhs that this is a pic of our 1st guru or 10th guru etc. Why have the muslims been able to prevent this type of deterioration of their teachers true value over many thousands of years while we as sikhs have allowed our gurus to be made into mere human portraits over only 500 yrs?

For hundreds of hears after the departure of guru gobind singh, sikhs were able to withstand the most atrocious crimes against them and still be able to derive inspiration from the guru, including the kids. THey didnt rely on paitnings and that is why they were able to withstood so much. They relied only on the true form fo the guru which is gurbani. And regardless of how we say the pics are innocent, and do no harm, the truth is that their presence cause more harm and confusion in the younger generation then it does inspiration. That is why instead of having gurbani resonating in their minds, or playing in their cars, many kids will simply have a wallet pic of the guru or pic hangin from their rear view mirror and think to themselves that my guru is with me. We need to remove ourselves from this physical mindset and focus on the spiritual mindset which can be delivered only thru gurbani (not a pic).

[Kharkoo4Life]

While talking about teh guru, of whether our guru has physical form or not, there are some points we need to remember, which we often overlook. If we look ar gurbani, the whole focus is on man's mind, thinking, not the body. That is why, according to Gurmat, the spiritual state of enlightenment or divine perfection has no relation to one’s body. This is why God has no body, the Guru does not refer to a body, a Sikh does not refer to a body and neither does a sadhu,sant, brahmgyani etc refer to any physical body. Everything is linked to a mental or spiritual state, not a physical state. That is why even the Guru spoke this about himself:

sbdu gurU suriq Duin cylw ]

The Shabad is the Guru, upon whom I lovingly focus my consciousness; I am the chaylaa, the disciple.

If the guru was willing to do this, to focus his whole attnetion on the shabad guru, who are we as mere students to override the teacher and dare to start our own approach and focus even a second of our consciousness on a physical version of the guru?

Even when referring to God, Gurbani states:

rUpu n ryK n rMgu ikCu iqRhu gux qy pRB iBMn ]

He has no form, no shape, no color; God is beyond the three qualities.

He does not exist in the physical realm that is why He is beyond any physical quality or description. Because a sadhu also exists in the mental realm and is not confined to any physical constrictions, when Gurbani mentions a sadhu, it also states:

swD kI aupmw iqhu gux qy dUir ]

The greatness of the Holy people is beyond the three qualities.

All physical form falls into visual perception. That is why when we base anything on physical parameters, we judge and analyze it with our visual senses. We want to see that this man has a long flowing beard, that he wears a round white dastaar and that he dresses in a long chola. We apply this to our everyday perception of sants today, and use this same visual perception to visualize our gurus. Our reference guide has become a visual image and not Gurbani. Gurbani tells us that:

idRstau kCu sMig n jwie mwnu iqAwig mohw

Nothing of the visible world shall go along with you; abandon your pride and attachment.

Whatever we see with our eyes will eventually one day disappear. So what then remains?

nwmu rihE swDU rihE rihE guru goibMdu ]

The Naam remains; the Holy Saints remain; the Guru, the Lord of the Universe, remains.

khu nwnk ieh jgq mY ikn jipE gur mMqu ]56]

Says Nanak, how rare are those who chant the Guru's Mantra in this world.

No picture is permanent, and since our guru is eternal, how can we call what we see in the pic our guru?

Nothing that is seen with our eyes is permanent. It is all transient and shall fade with time. If our link to a guru is also based on appearance, then that bond shall also break with time. That is why when the Guru says “rihE guru ” we should understand that a guru is not any physical being, for no being lives forever. Hence, only that Guru remains eternal and beyond death, who exists beyond mere body. That is why our Guru is Shabad Guru, as this is eternal. Whenever we fall into the trap of using only the physical appearance to judge someone, we will fail. Thus, the greatest hurdle in man’s link to God is:

ndrI AwvY iqsu isau mohu ]

He is attached to what he sees.

ikau imlIAY pRB AibnwsI qoih ]

How can I meet You, O Imperishable God?

Man’s whole focus and understanding is centered around what he can see. His only proof to believe something is that he should be able to see it. That is why to accept someone as a sant, all that is necessary is that he be visible to their eyes. When accepting their Guru, he too must have a visible form, even to the extent that when the time comes to worship their God, He too must fall in the grasp of their sight. Hence, we see countless paintings and drawings of the Guru, countless idols and statues depicting the Gods, even though each may be completely different from the other, people keep accepting them as true because they have a need, that in order to believe something, they must be able to see it. Thus, with people becoming attached to this physical form, the Guru puts forth the question, Dear Lord, You are formless and beyond our sight, so how then can one become attached to You?

gux mih eyko inrmlu swcw gur kY sbid pCwqw hy ]6]

The One Immaculate True Lord abides in virtue; through the Word of the Guru's Shabad, He is realized.

He is not reailzed through some painting or drawing but through the shabad. This is our true guru. And any attempt to even keep a so called picture of the guru will only draw us further away from the true guru, rather than bring us closer.

[mann_kaum_layee_qurbaan]

excellent kharkoo4life you hit the nail on the head!

[PaGaL_KuRi]

no i meant the painting of Guru Nanak Dev Ji done by Baba Nand Singh

149067[/snapback]

Fateh Ji

I've taken in note the points you have made. The one point that has bugged me is the above quote. I'm not fussed over whether the portraits/pics/photos are real or not, I'm just concerned of the effect.

People have started worshipping photographs, y'know 'matha thek de aah.' I personally believe that it shouldn't happen.

It doesn't make a difference whether the picture is real or not - it's the influence.

Bhul Chuk Maaf

[crayzy]

well, its the stopping of picture worship that should stop, not the abolition of pictures.

<.<

the KKK use the cross as a symbol, doesnt mean christians should stop using the cross too.

[PaGaL_KuRi]

not long before we will be inspired by a huge statue of guru gobind dingh on a horse..i mean why not we got the pics might as well make a cool statue too.

149072[/snapback]

You have a very strong opinion on this topic, I'm glad someone understands where my question actually came from. I'd just like to add onto the above quote.

Not long? Haven't you been to 'Methi Wala' Gurdwara in India? On entrance there is a huge statue of Guru Gobind Singh Ji on his horse. Along side, you have statues created of the Sahibzade and other historical events. Doesn't this say it all? Now is the time to stop it... if things get any further, then think of the consequences:

- The next generation could form a sort of 'mandar' at home in which the photographs are kept and they bow down to the photographs instead of going to a local Gurdwara...

- Sikhi will no longer exist!!!! - Think about it, worshipping Guru Nanak Dev Ji's photograph and other photographs yet not listening to Gurbani etc - is that really going to be Sikhi??

I don't mean to be rude or anything, I mean even I have pictures of them up around the house, but thats due to my parents believing more into culture than religion and it's something I don't have control over..

Just think about it!