Taranjeet singh
SPNer
Kabir Guru Connection
Sikhism has been treated as a sect of Hinduism in his book titled ‘Religion of India’, the extracts of which are reproduced for discussion purpose.
The book is widely quoted by many Sikh philosophers. [Ref: Dr. Rajinder kaur, author of ‘God in Sikhism’ has given some of the comments but have not countered the statements. Likewise Dr. Sher Singh has also quoted and has given his own observations. Dr. Sher Singh has taken an over simplistic view by saying that they were not contemporaries.]
There is no reply to the question that relates to Kabir-Guru relationship. Entire controversy revolves round this.
Some of the comments have been high lighted. It is for the SPN intelligentsia to take appropriate steps by discussing it down. The questions posed, I hope would be clear.
This has been taken from a copy of the book from internet as it may not be possible to trace the book now. It may be present in some libraries.
It befuddles me as to how casual an author or a theologian can be. It may also reflect the author’s ignorance. But this ignorance to an unwary reader may give completely a wrong and undesirable portrayal of Sikhism. Western mind is influenced easily by authors which sell well in their regions vis a vis Asian authors and philosophers. S Radhakrishnan {one of the Ex Presidents of India and widely respected}, a renowned philosopher, has also not done full justice to Sikhs in his many popular books on Philosophy. I have not read them and hence shall not be able to comment much upon this. Mr. Khushwant has stated Sikhs as “Keshdhari Hindus”. He could have done better. His books also sell well.
I have given extracts only that carry the most controversial portions.
I find some of the comments fairly disturbing and no solution will be found unless we accept the problem. Problems do get magnified when we shun away from them and do not identify these as problems. Tomorrow there may be a question that Kabir wrote/articulated in the form of ‘Dohe’ and how Come Granth contains ‘shabad’ and not ‘Dohe’. Was the form of his utterances altered? I am therefore tempted to say that there is a problem of not citing the position correctly.
I think the best way to tackle the Kabir –Guru Relationship is to analyze the ‘Shabads’ of Kabir ji and find out some point of differences as per Broad Sikh philosophy that is generally accepted by Sikh intelligentsia so that we can accentuate the teachings of Gurus and also effectively tackle the issues in statement.
May be SPN members-forum leaders have some better ideas. Why not share? This is not a debate. Contribution of everyone is welcome. Let us enrich SPN with whatever knowledge we can gather to discuss the proposition stated above.
For the sake of convenience I have divided the above write up in various paragraphs and have numbered them. In case some member wants to reply to Sl.2 instead of the entire List., one may state so. It is for this purpose that para numbering has been provided .
Here it goes….
1...But the most remarkable of the numerous sects connected more or less directly with Kabir is that of the Sikhs, the " disciples," which alone of all the branches of Hinduism took shape in the end as a national religion, or rather, we should say, gave birth to a nation.
2. The founder of their faith, Nanak, was born in 1469 in the Punjab, a short way from Lahore, in the commercial caste of the Khatris. For a while he led a wandering life, and it was probably in the course of these travels that he entered into relations with the disciples of Kabir. Like this last, he constituted himself the apostle of a unitary religion grounded on monotheism and moral purity.
3.But, like him, and others besides, he was a Hindu at bottom; he rejected the Vedas, the Shastras, the Puranas, as well as the Koran ; but he retained the majority of the samskras, or private ceremonies, which were abolished only a long while after, and he even did not break in an absolute way with caste, which he tolerated as a civil institution, and of which the sect, in spite of attempts afterwards made in the direction of its complete abolition, has always preserved some traces. It has never ceased, for instance, to testify considerable respect for the Brahmans; and almost all the gurus are said to have maintained some of them about their person in the character of domestic priests.
3a.Moreover, since the publication of the Granth, the Bible of the Sikhs, there cannot, in a dogmatic reference, be any longer much question of the profound influence of Islam on the thinking of the founders of this religion.
4.From first to last, both as regards the form and the foundation of its ideas, this book breathes the mystic pantheism of the Vedanta, reinforced by the doctrines of Bhakti, of grace, and of absolute devotion to the guru.
5. It is specially distinguished from the sectarian literature in general by the importance which it attaches to moral precepts, by the simplicity and spiritualistic character of a worship stripped of every vestige of idolatry, and especially by its moderation in regard to mythology, although we find in it a considerable number of the personifications of Hinduism, and even detect at times in it a sort of return to the Hindu divinities.
6. But it would be difficult to eliminate from all this is due to Mussulman influence.
7. Practically, it is true, the Sikhs came in the end to worship a personal God, and their religion may be defined a deism more or less tinctured with superstition.
8. But that was a modification which it must necessarily undergo, pantheism, which may indeed become the faith of a limited circle of mystics, being inconceivable as the positive belief of a large community.
[Extracts: Religion of India. A Barth, 1932: Pages 242-244; minor corrections were made by me in some words that were misspelled on account of PDF to word conversion,]
Some other Observation[/I]
9. “The system of Nanak Theism and its main teachings are highly spiritual in character: yet the whole Hindu Pantheon is retained”[ Farquhar Modern Religious movement in India, p112]
10.”The system of Nanak is greatly indebted to Ramanuja’s theistic idealism”.[ Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, p 670]
E & O.E
Sikhism has been treated as a sect of Hinduism in his book titled ‘Religion of India’, the extracts of which are reproduced for discussion purpose.
The book is widely quoted by many Sikh philosophers. [Ref: Dr. Rajinder kaur, author of ‘God in Sikhism’ has given some of the comments but have not countered the statements. Likewise Dr. Sher Singh has also quoted and has given his own observations. Dr. Sher Singh has taken an over simplistic view by saying that they were not contemporaries.]
There is no reply to the question that relates to Kabir-Guru relationship. Entire controversy revolves round this.
Some of the comments have been high lighted. It is for the SPN intelligentsia to take appropriate steps by discussing it down. The questions posed, I hope would be clear.
This has been taken from a copy of the book from internet as it may not be possible to trace the book now. It may be present in some libraries.
It befuddles me as to how casual an author or a theologian can be. It may also reflect the author’s ignorance. But this ignorance to an unwary reader may give completely a wrong and undesirable portrayal of Sikhism. Western mind is influenced easily by authors which sell well in their regions vis a vis Asian authors and philosophers. S Radhakrishnan {one of the Ex Presidents of India and widely respected}, a renowned philosopher, has also not done full justice to Sikhs in his many popular books on Philosophy. I have not read them and hence shall not be able to comment much upon this. Mr. Khushwant has stated Sikhs as “Keshdhari Hindus”. He could have done better. His books also sell well.
I have given extracts only that carry the most controversial portions.
I find some of the comments fairly disturbing and no solution will be found unless we accept the problem. Problems do get magnified when we shun away from them and do not identify these as problems. Tomorrow there may be a question that Kabir wrote/articulated in the form of ‘Dohe’ and how Come Granth contains ‘shabad’ and not ‘Dohe’. Was the form of his utterances altered? I am therefore tempted to say that there is a problem of not citing the position correctly.
I think the best way to tackle the Kabir –Guru Relationship is to analyze the ‘Shabads’ of Kabir ji and find out some point of differences as per Broad Sikh philosophy that is generally accepted by Sikh intelligentsia so that we can accentuate the teachings of Gurus and also effectively tackle the issues in statement.
May be SPN members-forum leaders have some better ideas. Why not share? This is not a debate. Contribution of everyone is welcome. Let us enrich SPN with whatever knowledge we can gather to discuss the proposition stated above.
For the sake of convenience I have divided the above write up in various paragraphs and have numbered them. In case some member wants to reply to Sl.2 instead of the entire List., one may state so. It is for this purpose that para numbering has been provided .
Here it goes….
1...But the most remarkable of the numerous sects connected more or less directly with Kabir is that of the Sikhs, the " disciples," which alone of all the branches of Hinduism took shape in the end as a national religion, or rather, we should say, gave birth to a nation.
2. The founder of their faith, Nanak, was born in 1469 in the Punjab, a short way from Lahore, in the commercial caste of the Khatris. For a while he led a wandering life, and it was probably in the course of these travels that he entered into relations with the disciples of Kabir. Like this last, he constituted himself the apostle of a unitary religion grounded on monotheism and moral purity.
3.But, like him, and others besides, he was a Hindu at bottom; he rejected the Vedas, the Shastras, the Puranas, as well as the Koran ; but he retained the majority of the samskras, or private ceremonies, which were abolished only a long while after, and he even did not break in an absolute way with caste, which he tolerated as a civil institution, and of which the sect, in spite of attempts afterwards made in the direction of its complete abolition, has always preserved some traces. It has never ceased, for instance, to testify considerable respect for the Brahmans; and almost all the gurus are said to have maintained some of them about their person in the character of domestic priests.
3a.Moreover, since the publication of the Granth, the Bible of the Sikhs, there cannot, in a dogmatic reference, be any longer much question of the profound influence of Islam on the thinking of the founders of this religion.
4.From first to last, both as regards the form and the foundation of its ideas, this book breathes the mystic pantheism of the Vedanta, reinforced by the doctrines of Bhakti, of grace, and of absolute devotion to the guru.
5. It is specially distinguished from the sectarian literature in general by the importance which it attaches to moral precepts, by the simplicity and spiritualistic character of a worship stripped of every vestige of idolatry, and especially by its moderation in regard to mythology, although we find in it a considerable number of the personifications of Hinduism, and even detect at times in it a sort of return to the Hindu divinities.
6. But it would be difficult to eliminate from all this is due to Mussulman influence.
7. Practically, it is true, the Sikhs came in the end to worship a personal God, and their religion may be defined a deism more or less tinctured with superstition.
8. But that was a modification which it must necessarily undergo, pantheism, which may indeed become the faith of a limited circle of mystics, being inconceivable as the positive belief of a large community.
[Extracts: Religion of India. A Barth, 1932: Pages 242-244; minor corrections were made by me in some words that were misspelled on account of PDF to word conversion,]
Some other Observation[/I]
9. “The system of Nanak Theism and its main teachings are highly spiritual in character: yet the whole Hindu Pantheon is retained”[ Farquhar Modern Religious movement in India, p112]
10.”The system of Nanak is greatly indebted to Ramanuja’s theistic idealism”.[ Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, p 670]
E & O.E
Last edited:
