Hi!
I'm following the course indicated in the title thread and I just read "Traditionally, a guru was anyone who imparted either religious or secular knowledge of a particular domain. The guru in Sikhi came to acquire a spectrum of meanings--discussed at greater length in a separate section--with Guru Angad's succession exemplifying the role of Guru Nanak as a “king who ruled both the temporal and spiritual worlds.” Further, the Sikh Gurus came to be bear the title of “Sacha Padshah” or “true king.” Their court possessed the trappings of a royal court, serving as a reminder to Sikhs that their Gurus' authority was above that of other “earthly” kings"
I'm European (from Barcelona) and "king" has for me historical connotations of "power over others" which I find difficult to reconcile with the idea of the Gurus that I have built so far.
What kind of authority did they have? What do they mean with "heir court possessed the trappings of a royal court"?
I'd be grateful for any the comments about it.
Thanks!
I'm following the course indicated in the title thread and I just read "Traditionally, a guru was anyone who imparted either religious or secular knowledge of a particular domain. The guru in Sikhi came to acquire a spectrum of meanings--discussed at greater length in a separate section--with Guru Angad's succession exemplifying the role of Guru Nanak as a “king who ruled both the temporal and spiritual worlds.” Further, the Sikh Gurus came to be bear the title of “Sacha Padshah” or “true king.” Their court possessed the trappings of a royal court, serving as a reminder to Sikhs that their Gurus' authority was above that of other “earthly” kings"
I'm European (from Barcelona) and "king" has for me historical connotations of "power over others" which I find difficult to reconcile with the idea of the Gurus that I have built so far.
What kind of authority did they have? What do they mean with "heir court possessed the trappings of a royal court"?
I'd be grateful for any the comments about it.
Thanks!