-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
God
- Thread starter JField
- Start date
Breathe
Hostis humani generis
Short answer: it depends on the interpretation of Brahman.
A slightly more detailed answer would be something like this, I think:
My own personal, understanding of Waheguru is that it would encompass the personal aspect, as well as the impersonal, whereas people typically imagine Brahman to merely be the impersonal aspect of God-Existence, even though "Brahman" is, in many cases, synonymous with Ishvara, anyway.
In Sikhism, God is always non-dual, but some dualist schools of Hinduism exist, which still use the term Brahman but as a synonym for Vishnu. However, some (nb., not all, or most necessarily) schools of Hinduism which are non-dual will consider Brahman only as impersonal. Sikhism, I suppose, would be a middle way between them.
Waheguru has the impersonal aspect, as the root of all being; that is, to use a parable from the Bible, it rains on the righteous and the wicked. The unfathomable, deep, knowing. The Wonderful. (Wahe)
And Waheguru has the personal aspect, the teacher, our Father, Mother, Friend, the One whom we can experience, the Giver who keeps giving. The One we can fall in love with. The Teacher. (Guru)
Together, they make Waheguru: The Wonderful Teacher, The Wondrous Lord.
A slightly more detailed answer would be something like this, I think:
My own personal, understanding of Waheguru is that it would encompass the personal aspect, as well as the impersonal, whereas people typically imagine Brahman to merely be the impersonal aspect of God-Existence, even though "Brahman" is, in many cases, synonymous with Ishvara, anyway.
In Sikhism, God is always non-dual, but some dualist schools of Hinduism exist, which still use the term Brahman but as a synonym for Vishnu. However, some (nb., not all, or most necessarily) schools of Hinduism which are non-dual will consider Brahman only as impersonal. Sikhism, I suppose, would be a middle way between them.
Waheguru has the impersonal aspect, as the root of all being; that is, to use a parable from the Bible, it rains on the righteous and the wicked. The unfathomable, deep, knowing. The Wonderful. (Wahe)
And Waheguru has the personal aspect, the teacher, our Father, Mother, Friend, the One whom we can experience, the Giver who keeps giving. The One we can fall in love with. The Teacher. (Guru)
Together, they make Waheguru: The Wonderful Teacher, The Wondrous Lord.
Short answer: it depends on the interpretation of Brahman.
A slightly more detailed answer would be something like this, I think:
My own personal, understanding of Waheguru is that it would encompass the personal aspect, as well as the impersonal, whereas people typically imagine Brahman to merely be the impersonal aspect of God-Existence, even though "Brahman" is, in many cases, synonymous with Ishvara, anyway.
In Sikhism, God is always non-dual, but some dualist schools of Hinduism exist, which still use the term Brahman but as a synonym for Vishnu. However, some (nb., not all, or most necessarily) schools of Hinduism which are non-dual will consider Brahman only as impersonal. Sikhism, I suppose, would be a middle way between them.
Waheguru has the impersonal aspect, as the root of all being; that is, to use a parable from the Bible, it rains on the righteous and the wicked. The unfathomable, deep, knowing. The Wonderful. (Wahe)
And Waheguru has the personal aspect, the teacher, our Father, Mother, Friend, the One whom we can experience, the Giver who keeps giving. The One we can fall in love with. The Teacher. (Guru)
Together, they make Waheguru: The Wonderful Teacher, The Wondrous Lord.
So isn't this similar to Advaita Vedanta ?
Breathe
Hostis humani generis
Pretty much.
Sikhs only believe in one God, and do not believe in avatars. Because Sikhs don't believe in other gods or avatars, even as metaphors, there is no need for such things.
Sikhs don't because, well, Sikhs don't; these things aren't in Sikhism.
chinu
chinu
BTW.. As per Hinduism there are three types of Brahmans, they are Saguna-Brahman, Nirguna-Brahman, Purana-Brahman.
Which one you are asking to compare it with "Waheguru" ?
Not sure what you mean by Brahman, but Guru's touched on the topic of trinity and below is the explanation:
Eka Mai Jugat ViyaeeTin Chele Parvan
Ik Sansari Ik Bhandari I Lae Diban
Jiv Tis Bhave Tivey Chalavey Jiv Hove Phurman
Ohu Vekhe Ona Nadar Na Avey Bahuta Ehu Vidan
Ades Tise Ades
Aad Anil Anand Anahat Jug Jug Eko Ves
Translation~~
The Supreme spirit manifested Maya
Who conceived and delivered the Holy Triad
The Creator, the Sustainer and the Destroyer (Judge)
Yet He ordains as pleases Him for the Triad to act
Even they see Him not who Sees all
This remains the greatest wonder of all
Hail unto the Universal Lord
Primal, Pure and Eternal -Who forever is the same.
Explanation~~
This Pauri of Japuji Sahib, touches upon the Hindu Trinity of Brahma (the Creator), Vishnu (the Sustainer) and Shiva (the Destroyer). The trinity also stands for the three Gunas (attributes) prevalent in the entire Cosmos; these being Sattva, Rajas and Tamas. As far as I know that in Hindu traditions, the Triad is worshipped as three individual Gods.
The Vedic tradition believed that three deities were responsible for creation, sustenance and destruction of the universe - Brahma, Vishnu and Mahesh. However, Gurbani uses their reference and explicitly says that all the functions of the deities are in fact all present within Waheguru – which means that one should give up worship of deities and worship the True One (Waheguru).
Guru Nanak clearing defining God as ONE only, explains in this Pauri that the Triad too is under the One Universal God - the Silent One, the Knowable yet Unknown.
Happy to further explain this concept if needed
Eka Mai Jugat ViyaeeTin Chele Parvan
Ik Sansari Ik Bhandari I Lae Diban
Jiv Tis Bhave Tivey Chalavey Jiv Hove Phurman
Ohu Vekhe Ona Nadar Na Avey Bahuta Ehu Vidan
Ades Tise Ades
Aad Anil Anand Anahat Jug Jug Eko Ves
Translation~~
The Supreme spirit manifested Maya
Who conceived and delivered the Holy Triad
The Creator, the Sustainer and the Destroyer (Judge)
Yet He ordains as pleases Him for the Triad to act
Even they see Him not who Sees all
This remains the greatest wonder of all
Hail unto the Universal Lord
Primal, Pure and Eternal -Who forever is the same.
Explanation~~
This Pauri of Japuji Sahib, touches upon the Hindu Trinity of Brahma (the Creator), Vishnu (the Sustainer) and Shiva (the Destroyer). The trinity also stands for the three Gunas (attributes) prevalent in the entire Cosmos; these being Sattva, Rajas and Tamas. As far as I know that in Hindu traditions, the Triad is worshipped as three individual Gods.
The Vedic tradition believed that three deities were responsible for creation, sustenance and destruction of the universe - Brahma, Vishnu and Mahesh. However, Gurbani uses their reference and explicitly says that all the functions of the deities are in fact all present within Waheguru – which means that one should give up worship of deities and worship the True One (Waheguru).
Guru Nanak clearing defining God as ONE only, explains in this Pauri that the Triad too is under the One Universal God - the Silent One, the Knowable yet Unknown.
Happy to further explain this concept if needed
BTW.. As per Hinduism there are three types of Brahmans, they are Saguna-Brahman, Nirguna-Brahman, Purana-Brahman.
Which one you are asking to compare it with "Waheguru" ?
I suppose I meant Nirguna Brahman, but what is Purana Brahman ?
I appreciate this. Any bit of knowledge is greatly appreciated. Thank you
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
The Puranas credit the trinity for creation, sustainance, and destruction, and not the Vedas. There is no Shiva in the Vedas. Even Puranas accept that the trinity is the manifestation of One Brahman (Ek Onkar for Sikhs) according to the three gunas (attributes). Differences in Hinduism and Sikhism, and Hinduism and Buddhism are hard to find.
Sb1995
Om Sai Ram
The God's mentioned in the Vedas are Agni (God of Fire) , Indra(God of Rain), Surya(Sun God), etc.. Rigvedic deities - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Well that's is a completely different concept of god according to Sikhism
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
You have not got me correct, Gursikh. You see, there were two groups of people. The Indian people, and the Central Asian migrants, the Aryans. Vedas were the texts of immigrants with Gods such as Indra, Agni, Soma, Ashwini Kumaras, Mitra, Varuna, Soma, Vishnu, Saraswati, Ushas, etc. Indians worshiped Shiva, Rama, Krishna, Durga, Ganesha, Hanuman, etc. The Aryans initially settled in Punjab and Haryana, which they termed as Aryavarta, Brahmavarta, and Saraswat Pradesh.
That is because a mighty river flowed through this region. This is somewhere around 1,900 BC. Most probably Sutlej and Yamuna were tributaries of Saraswati at that time. Later due to earthquakes, the tilt of the land changed pushing Sutlej into Sindh and Yamuna into Ganga and Saraswati became just a small stream with water only in the rainy season. Although water that had seeped into the ground is still there in Ganganagar region. The remainants of Saraswati are there in India and Pakistan as Hakra and Nakra streams. The old course of Saraswati has hundreds of prehistoric settlements such as Kalibangan, Ganeriwala, Rupar, Rakhigarhi, Harappa, Mohenjodaro, etc.
The Aryans did not remain foreigners for a long time and mixed with the local population. They too started worshiping the Indian Gods. Similarly, Indians took up yajnas and accepted the Gods and Goddesses of the Vedas. Vedas were accepted by the Indians as pious books and Sanskrit became the academic language of India. This is what later gave rise to Hinduism. Nothing popped up anew, but the two streams, equally old joined together. Some Gods in this mix-up lost their importance, some became more popular. Vishnu and Rudra gained, while Indra and Agni lost some of their sheen; Ushas lost but Saraswati remained popular, etc.
If you want to read Vedas kindly go to http:/www.sacred-texts.com. Check in Hinduism/Vedas. Apart from their religious importance, they are very important from the angle of Aryan history.
Last edited:
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
How can one make an idol of a beam of light or electricity? Brahman is 'physical energy'. That is why there is no idol. We do not understand it fully. The Vedas term it as 'Neti, neti' (Not this, not that).
Last edited: