Jump to content

This Pic of Guru Gobind Singh ji is copied from Jesus ?


Guest
 Share

Recommended Posts

42 minutes ago, indersingh1313 said:

its just an artist's point of view or imaginations and he copied or imagined with his painting! many different paintings or picture are getting made by different artists nowadays too. I don't see anything wrong with it. 

 

I'm not saying the following statement represents the whole truth about the situation, but...in a way it's kind of punk rock similar to wearing boars teeth etc. 

In some instances perhaps the art used a specific motif to send a message. 

Or like wearing two dastar or two shastar when only certain people could be seen doing so legally at the time. 

I'm not making any sense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

Aside from surface similarities to other religious figures, according to Sikh theology these pictures of Guru Sahibs don't make any sense. 

Why are they pictured on their knees praying to a force in the heavens when Sikhi tells us that they themselves are that same force? Who are they praying to?

When did gurus say they're that force ? every time in baani Guru sahibs referred to themselves as servants of god , or more humbly as "servants of servants of god" (daasan das) , in baani gurus ask for dust of feet of those who even for an instant meditate on god , Guru sahibs are more humble than anything you can even imagine , and this is as per baani . 

It is our sentiment that has equated them to god, they themselves never claimed so , and Guru Gobind singh ji went one step further and said "Jo humko parmesar uchre , narak kund main sab pare. mo ko daas tavan ka jaano, ya main bhed na ranch pachhano" (pardon exact accuracy) , but it translates to "Whoever calls me god will fall in pit of hell. Know me as slave of almighty , and have no doubt in this " 

Having said that, I would also like to add that brahmgyaanis and truly enlightened people never refer to themselves in a revering way. Gurus were god in the sense that water is water. But they never boasted about it . 

Who they're praying to ? the above pic of Guru Gobind singh ji fits the guru's poem "mitar pyaare nu , haal murida da kehna" . This reverent pose with folder hands towards heaven is wrong however , since god is not "upwards" but omnipresent, and therefore best seeken inside rather than outside . Abrahamics however think (due to common misinterpretation of their texts )  that allah/god/yahweh resides on heaven. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, AjeetSingh2019 said:

When did gurus say they're that force ? every time in baani Guru sahibs referred to themselves as servants of god , or more humbly as "servants of servants of god" (daasan das) , in baani gurus ask for dust of feet of those who even for an instant meditate on god , Guru sahibs are more humble than anything you can even imagine , and this is as per baani . 

It is our sentiment that has equated them to god, they themselves never claimed so , and Guru Gobind singh ji went one step further and said "Jo humko parmesar uchre , narak kund main sab pare. mo ko daas tavan ka jaano, ya main bhed na ranch pachhano" (pardon exact accuracy) , but it translates to "Whoever calls me god will fall in pit of hell. Know me as slave of almighty , and have no doubt in this " 

Having said that, I would also like to add that brahmgyaanis and truly enlightened people never refer to themselves in a revering way. Gurus were god in the sense that water is water. But they never boasted about it . 

Who they're praying to ? the above pic of Guru Gobind singh ji fits the guru's poem "mitar pyaare nu , haal murida da kehna" .

That doesn't change the fact that Sikh sants and mahapurash says there is no difference between God and the Guru. In fact, Sikh theologians clearly state that Guru Sahibs were not even avatars of God (an extension of his total form) but God in human form.

So were Guru Sahibs being humble? Self effacing? Faux modesty? 

Quote

This reverent pose with folder hands towards heaven is wrong however , since god is not "upwards" but omnipresent, and therefore best seeken inside rather than outside . Abrahamics however think (due to common misinterpretation of their texts )  that allah/god/yahweh resides on heaven. 

Yeah, that's what I said. Why are you trying to argue with me? ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

That doesn't change the fact that Sikh sants and mahapurash says there is no difference between God and the Guru. In fact, Sikh theologians clearly state that Guru Sahibs were not even avatars of God (an extension of his total form) but God in human form.

So were Guru Sahibs being humble? Self effacing? Faux modesty? 

Yeah, that's what I said. Why are you trying to argue with me? ?

This is a tricky topic . But if you read eight ashtapadi of Sukhmani sahib , it deals with Brahmgyaanis . In it is one line which says "brahm gyaani alone knows other brahm gyaani" . there're other passages in SGGS which talks of discerning signs of brahmgyaanis by which you can usually spot them from the otherwise outwardly saintly crowd. 

Abrahamic texts don't necessarily say God resides on a cloud . For instance , Ayat-al-kursi (verse of throne) from Quran (last of 4 abrahamic scriptures) speaks of god in a way that suggests panentheism . 

Attaching the text here : 

Allah! There is no god but He - the Living, the Self-subsisting, Eternal. No slumber can seize Him nor Sleep. His are all things in the heavens and on earth. Who is there can intercede in His presence except as he permitteth? He knoweth what (appeareth to His creatures As) Before or After or Behind them. Nor shall they compass aught of His knowledge except as He willeth. His throne doth extend over the heavens and on earth, and He feeleth no fatigue in guarding and preserving them, For He is the Most High, the Supreme (in glory).

 I think its an emotionally stirring spiritual passage from a scripture which has not-so-good stuff too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • yeh it's true, we shouldn't be lazy and need to learn jhatka shikaar. It doesn't help some of grew up in surrounding areas like Slough and Southall where everyone thought it was super bad for amrit dharis to eat meat, and they were following Sant babas and jathas, and instead the Singhs should have been normalising jhatka just like the recent world war soldiers did. We are trying to rectifiy this and khalsa should learn jhatka.  But I am just writing about bhog for those that are still learning rehit. As I explained, there are all these negative influences in the panth that talk against rehit, but this shouldn't deter us from taking khanda pahul, no matter what level of rehit we are!
    • How is it going to help? The link is of a Sikh hunter. Fine, but what good does that do the lazy Sikh who ate khulla maas in a restaurant? By the way, for the OP, yes, it's against rehit to eat khulla maas.
    • Yeah, Sikhs should do bhog of food they eat. But the point of bhog is to only do bhog of food which is fit to be presented to Maharaj. It's not maryada to do bhog of khulla maas and pretend it's OK to eat. It's not. Come on, bro, you should know better than to bring this Sakhi into it. Is this Sikh in the restaurant accompanied by Guru Gobind Singh ji? Is he fighting a dharam yudh? Or is he merely filling his belly with the nearest restaurant?  Please don't make a mockery of our puratan Singhs' sacrifices by comparing them to lazy Sikhs who eat khulla maas.
    • Seriously?? The Dhadi is trying to be cute. For those who didn't get it, he said: "Some say Maharaj killed bakras (goats). Some say he cut the heads of the Panj Piyaras. The truth is that they weren't goats. It was she-goats (ਬਕਰੀਆਂ). He jhatka'd she-goats. Not he-goats." Wow. This is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard in relation to Sikhi.
    • Instead of a 9 inch or larger kirpan, take a smaller kirpan and put it (without gatra) inside your smaller turban and tie the turban tightly. This keeps a kirpan on your person without interfering with the massage or alarming the masseuse. I'm not talking about a trinket but rather an actual small kirpan that fits in a sheath (you'll have to search to find one). As for ahem, "problems", you could get a male masseuse. I don't know where you are, but in most places there are professional masseuses who actually know what they are doing and can really relieve your muscle pains.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use