Dear Spn,Vouthon ji
This may be disrespectful on my part.
However, is there anything you have noticed in Gurbani yet than cannot be equated to something said by a medieval saint, Christian mystic or Jesuit priest?
Could there be a reason why Guru Nanak, who was fully aware of Catholic theology in his lifetime, did not simply say to Brahmins and Muslims... just pack it in because that is what I am going to do? Roman Catholics have got it right. There is really nothing more that I Guru Nanak can offer.
Because Christianity is greater in numbers than Sikhism it is quite possible to sweep Sikhism away by sweeping its teachings into a "friendly" faith with "amenable" thoughts and ideas. Hindus continue to try to co-opt the teachings of Guru Nanak and Muslims continue to claim him as their own. Until I have a chance to cross-examine Mr. De Mello I with-hold judgement on Jesuits. What about you? Is there anything in Gurbani that does not remind you of Catholic teachings?
I am not offended in the least. I can completely see where you are coming from, although I asure you that I could compile a list of the differences between Sikhi and Catholic Christianity. I just don't because its a Sikh forum and I don't want to be quoting irrelevant (to Sikhs) Catholic specific teachings that no poster here will reap any benefit from other than me.
I quote from sources in which I find affinities to Sikh thought within my own tradition. I do this on all the forums I am on, generally my approach has been well received, such as by Baha'is, Buddhists and others I have dialogued with in the past. I know my own tradition best, so its my natural way of posting meaningfully, so to speak but without any dogma or doctrine-specific teachings. Its just my style of posting.
Of course there are things in Sikhi that do not agree with Catholicism.
Sikhs do not accept the idea of incarnations of God, virgin births, the resurrection, priesthoods, monastic orders. We also have differing philosophical standpoints, Sikhi in India, Catholicism in Ancient Israel and Greece. To western Catholic mysticism there is no speaking of a "merging" between the soul and God that I have seen in some understandings of Sikhi. A union with distinction or difference, yes but not a "merging" (some of our mystics use the word "merge" in a metaphorical sense but never literally as to mean complete absorption and loss of any independent identity).
In Sikhi there is no place for asceticism or flight from the world, whereas this is quite prevalent in some sectors of the very broad Catholic spirituality (although others such as Eckhart are critical of asceticism so these things are never cut-and-dried).
Morally I cannot honestly say that I find much difference but that is only because, I suspect, human nature is one and people in different cultures who are saintly generally reach the same or similar ethical frameworks by a simple use of human reason and a deep insight into our own empathy for others.
Theologically, philosophically and certainly in terms of structure, there are differences s one would expect. There are also abundant similarities too, however and I have been impressed by how much of the Granth I agree I can attest too without hesitation.
I never expect Sikhs to believe in any of these distinct things I believe in.
Sikhi is a distinct religion from Catholicism. That does not mean that we cannot meet on common ground where we do find ourselves to agree. Dialogue between Sikhs and Catholics has been more fruitful than between Sikhs and other Christian denominations.
There are common areas where we can meet, however, and since my joining this forum I have preferred to focus on them.
I could create a thread though detailing in quite some depth, our differences. That too is important for dialogue. The reason I have refrained from doing so is that I haven't really seen the need too.