Fateh ji.
I read the following article where Ms Rose writes about EkOngKaar. This also explains about a few terms generally used in incorrect context e.g. monotheism.
Regards.
*******************************************
On EkOngKaar
Kamalla Rose Kaur
EK ONG KAAR means there is ONE Creator and ONE Creation and they are ONE in the same. The Creator/Creation are ONE. This is, technically, Monism/Pantheism, not Monotheism. Unlike Western religions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) GOD does not stand separate from creation nor is creation "fallen" or sinful.
For Sikhs GOD is the whole kit and kaboodle. GOD is Creation Itself.
Kamalla Rose Kaur
*******************************************
Following is the response by Preet Mohan S Ahluwalia for above quote.
Before we address this issue we should define a few terms first.
Monotheism - a doctrine of belief that there is only ONE deity
Pantheism - a doctrine which equates God with Nature.
Monism - a view that reality is basically one.
Transcendent - a reality that transcends (is beyond)
Immanent - Dwelling in Nature (Indwelling)
Now that we have these definitions out of our way, things should become clear. There are primarily two sets of philosophy - the Eastern and Western. Semitic religions - Judaism, Christianity and Islam are monotheistic since they provide for a Transcendent God. The God is up there in what they call heaven. Indian philosophy does not have this concept of God. To understand the Indian philosophical thought you will need to understand how the two core terms - purusa and prakriti - are defined in Hinduism.
Primarily, Hinduism does not have a God who is a Creator or Controller of this creation. In Hinduism, the Absolute (God) is:
"rigid, motionless, and totally lacking initiative or influence, and He cannot call forth our devotion and worship. Like the Taj Mahal which is not conscious of the admiration it arouses from the worshippers. Sankara's view appears to be a finished example of error. His God is bloodless absolute."(Indian Philosophy, Dr. Radhakrishnan)
This is the Hindu concept of sat-chit-anand, where there is no place for a Creator God. Sikhism rejects this view because Sikh philosophy calls God, Karta Purukh, the Creator of this creation.
Since we have a Creator who "created" this universe, this creation and the Creator are NOT the same. The creation put together DOES NOT equal the Creator. This is what Sikhism suggests.
"The Universe is the creation of God BUT NOT identical with God, which is the basic distinction between monotheism and Indian monism or pantheism....." (ref: Naam In Sikhism, Daljeet Singh)
Undoubtedly, the creation came from within the Creator - His act of creation - however the Creator also exists beyond His creation.
"[from] nothingness the Formless one assumes a form, the Attribute free becomes full of attributes." (SGGS: p.940)
Says Guru Nanak:
From the state of shunya, the latent form
became active. The elements of air and
water were evolved out of shunya...
within the fire, water and living beings
is His Light and the power of creation
lies within shunya..
From shunya came out the moon, the sun and the firmament..
The earth and heaven have been evolved out of shunya. (SGGS: 1037-38)
There is an act of creation as the Guru suggests. Since the creation came from within the Creator it is Divine in Nature. This is the reason why Sikhism considers creation divine and not fallen or sinful. One must also appreciate Sikhism as an ecosophical religion for this very reason.
Sikh phislosphy makes God BOTH Transcendent and Immanent.
ape nerai duri ape hi ape manjhi miano,
ape vekhai sune ape hi qudrati kare jahano (SGGS, I.25)
He is the transcendent as well as immanent, and
He is also the appearances.
He is the Pure Consciousness, and
He is also the Creator of Nature
ape qudrati sajikai ape kare bicaru (SGGS, I.143)
God creates Nature and single and alone
He contemplates it
The problem with Eastern and Western philosophy is the LACK of unity between the Creator and His creation. This creates a disharmony which is NOT evident in Sikh philosophy because God is present in Nature, in his Immanent form.
"God creates the universe, takes His abode in it and sustains it."(SGGS p.788) "He who permeates all hearts is Transcendent also."(SGGS p.294) "He pervades the body and is yet detached."(SGGS p.514) "Having created the world, He stands in the midst of it and is separate too."(ref: Religion and Society... Part V)
Writes Dr Muthumohan:
"The disharmony of God and man is involved in any religious doctrine which teaches a transcendent God, a God whose existence is somewhat independent of man....A view of God as transcendent moral judge takes moral autonomy and responsibility out of the hands of man and places it beyond him....A transcendent God makes human autonomy impossible...Consequently Hegel sees a contradiction between the transcendent God and human freedom.
"All transcendental systems of thought speak of freedom in a negative sense as freedom from something else. This means the construction of reality and the other, thus a dichotomic model of being. Classically, the other is the body, the world, the temporal existence. In ancient Greek philosophy, Parmenides, followed by Plato, dichotomised the life into the world of Truth and the world of opinions, the latter meaning the empirical world characterised by changing, chaotic, relative and so as non-being. Christianity continued this tradition naming the earthly life originally sinful and chaotic. In India, we have the Vedic-Vedantic life of thought which declares that Brahman alone is the reality (at the "Paramartika" level as they say) while the earthly life is "maya" or illusion. However, Vedanta maintains, at the "Vyavaharika" level the caste order, rituals and the "karma" theory to totally determine the earthly existence...."(ref: Sikhism - Concept of Freedom, Dr Muthumohan)
Also,
" According to tradition, the Fifth Guru declined to include in Guru Granth Sahib a hymn by a contemporary saint, Bhagat Kanhaa, saying, "I am He, O, I am the same," because this hymn was felt by the Guru to be evidently contrary to the Sikh thesis that man is not and can never be God, though he can be His instrument....(Concept of Naam, Daljit Singh)
and,
"....Sikhism, though often mixed up with the Sant tradition of the Hindu Bhakti movement, is metaphysically different from the advaita Vedanta of Shankara as well as from theistic Vedanta of Ramanuja and others.
"The nirguna bhakti envisions this [God / man] relationship as, say, between the finite space bounded in a pot, and the outer infinite space; once the pot is broken, the finite is again indistinguishably one with the infinite - the two remained one substance all the time. For the saguna bhakti, the man God relationship is of the nature of the relationship between the inflowing river and the ocean; the river on getting submerged into the ocean loses its earlier determinate (nam-rup) 'identity' and 'otherness' and becomes indeterminately one with the substance of the latter.
" In the Sikh bhakti, the individual WITHOUT losing his self-identity, his form, realizes a unity of spirit with God. Guru Amar Das states the ideal as such:
"Two forms united in the oneness of spirit"
"According to Sikhism, man in communion with God realizes his true self, that is, he comes to partake of the humanly realizable attributes of Godhead...(ref: The Quintessence of Sikhism-The Doctrinal Sovereignty, Jasbir Singh Ahluwalia)
This should clarify any doubts Ms Rose might have. Man and Nature is counter-distinguishable from the Creator. They are NOT the same as the Creator though in the Creator both have their origin.
Ms Rose had expressed her desire to EDUCATE non-Sikh audience on Sikh philosophy. My recommendation to her is this: Ms Rose please get your facts straight. You may like to consider taking a course in Basic Sikh Philosophy so that you are better equipped to accomplish your goal.
In conclusion: Sikhism is a monotheistic faith in which the Creator is both Transcendent and Immanent.
Regards
Preet.
I read the following article where Ms Rose writes about EkOngKaar. This also explains about a few terms generally used in incorrect context e.g. monotheism.
Regards.
*******************************************
On EkOngKaar
Kamalla Rose Kaur
EK ONG KAAR means there is ONE Creator and ONE Creation and they are ONE in the same. The Creator/Creation are ONE. This is, technically, Monism/Pantheism, not Monotheism. Unlike Western religions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) GOD does not stand separate from creation nor is creation "fallen" or sinful.
For Sikhs GOD is the whole kit and kaboodle. GOD is Creation Itself.
Kamalla Rose Kaur
*******************************************
Following is the response by Preet Mohan S Ahluwalia for above quote.
Before we address this issue we should define a few terms first.
Monotheism - a doctrine of belief that there is only ONE deity
Pantheism - a doctrine which equates God with Nature.
Monism - a view that reality is basically one.
Transcendent - a reality that transcends (is beyond)
Immanent - Dwelling in Nature (Indwelling)
Now that we have these definitions out of our way, things should become clear. There are primarily two sets of philosophy - the Eastern and Western. Semitic religions - Judaism, Christianity and Islam are monotheistic since they provide for a Transcendent God. The God is up there in what they call heaven. Indian philosophy does not have this concept of God. To understand the Indian philosophical thought you will need to understand how the two core terms - purusa and prakriti - are defined in Hinduism.
Primarily, Hinduism does not have a God who is a Creator or Controller of this creation. In Hinduism, the Absolute (God) is:
"rigid, motionless, and totally lacking initiative or influence, and He cannot call forth our devotion and worship. Like the Taj Mahal which is not conscious of the admiration it arouses from the worshippers. Sankara's view appears to be a finished example of error. His God is bloodless absolute."(Indian Philosophy, Dr. Radhakrishnan)
This is the Hindu concept of sat-chit-anand, where there is no place for a Creator God. Sikhism rejects this view because Sikh philosophy calls God, Karta Purukh, the Creator of this creation.
Since we have a Creator who "created" this universe, this creation and the Creator are NOT the same. The creation put together DOES NOT equal the Creator. This is what Sikhism suggests.
"The Universe is the creation of God BUT NOT identical with God, which is the basic distinction between monotheism and Indian monism or pantheism....." (ref: Naam In Sikhism, Daljeet Singh)
Undoubtedly, the creation came from within the Creator - His act of creation - however the Creator also exists beyond His creation.
"[from] nothingness the Formless one assumes a form, the Attribute free becomes full of attributes." (SGGS: p.940)
Says Guru Nanak:
From the state of shunya, the latent form
became active. The elements of air and
water were evolved out of shunya...
within the fire, water and living beings
is His Light and the power of creation
lies within shunya..
From shunya came out the moon, the sun and the firmament..
The earth and heaven have been evolved out of shunya. (SGGS: 1037-38)
There is an act of creation as the Guru suggests. Since the creation came from within the Creator it is Divine in Nature. This is the reason why Sikhism considers creation divine and not fallen or sinful. One must also appreciate Sikhism as an ecosophical religion for this very reason.
Sikh phislosphy makes God BOTH Transcendent and Immanent.
ape nerai duri ape hi ape manjhi miano,
ape vekhai sune ape hi qudrati kare jahano (SGGS, I.25)
He is the transcendent as well as immanent, and
He is also the appearances.
He is the Pure Consciousness, and
He is also the Creator of Nature
ape qudrati sajikai ape kare bicaru (SGGS, I.143)
God creates Nature and single and alone
He contemplates it
The problem with Eastern and Western philosophy is the LACK of unity between the Creator and His creation. This creates a disharmony which is NOT evident in Sikh philosophy because God is present in Nature, in his Immanent form.
"God creates the universe, takes His abode in it and sustains it."(SGGS p.788) "He who permeates all hearts is Transcendent also."(SGGS p.294) "He pervades the body and is yet detached."(SGGS p.514) "Having created the world, He stands in the midst of it and is separate too."(ref: Religion and Society... Part V)
Writes Dr Muthumohan:
"The disharmony of God and man is involved in any religious doctrine which teaches a transcendent God, a God whose existence is somewhat independent of man....A view of God as transcendent moral judge takes moral autonomy and responsibility out of the hands of man and places it beyond him....A transcendent God makes human autonomy impossible...Consequently Hegel sees a contradiction between the transcendent God and human freedom.
"All transcendental systems of thought speak of freedom in a negative sense as freedom from something else. This means the construction of reality and the other, thus a dichotomic model of being. Classically, the other is the body, the world, the temporal existence. In ancient Greek philosophy, Parmenides, followed by Plato, dichotomised the life into the world of Truth and the world of opinions, the latter meaning the empirical world characterised by changing, chaotic, relative and so as non-being. Christianity continued this tradition naming the earthly life originally sinful and chaotic. In India, we have the Vedic-Vedantic life of thought which declares that Brahman alone is the reality (at the "Paramartika" level as they say) while the earthly life is "maya" or illusion. However, Vedanta maintains, at the "Vyavaharika" level the caste order, rituals and the "karma" theory to totally determine the earthly existence...."(ref: Sikhism - Concept of Freedom, Dr Muthumohan)
Also,
" According to tradition, the Fifth Guru declined to include in Guru Granth Sahib a hymn by a contemporary saint, Bhagat Kanhaa, saying, "I am He, O, I am the same," because this hymn was felt by the Guru to be evidently contrary to the Sikh thesis that man is not and can never be God, though he can be His instrument....(Concept of Naam, Daljit Singh)
and,
"....Sikhism, though often mixed up with the Sant tradition of the Hindu Bhakti movement, is metaphysically different from the advaita Vedanta of Shankara as well as from theistic Vedanta of Ramanuja and others.
"The nirguna bhakti envisions this [God / man] relationship as, say, between the finite space bounded in a pot, and the outer infinite space; once the pot is broken, the finite is again indistinguishably one with the infinite - the two remained one substance all the time. For the saguna bhakti, the man God relationship is of the nature of the relationship between the inflowing river and the ocean; the river on getting submerged into the ocean loses its earlier determinate (nam-rup) 'identity' and 'otherness' and becomes indeterminately one with the substance of the latter.
" In the Sikh bhakti, the individual WITHOUT losing his self-identity, his form, realizes a unity of spirit with God. Guru Amar Das states the ideal as such:
"Two forms united in the oneness of spirit"
"According to Sikhism, man in communion with God realizes his true self, that is, he comes to partake of the humanly realizable attributes of Godhead...(ref: The Quintessence of Sikhism-The Doctrinal Sovereignty, Jasbir Singh Ahluwalia)
This should clarify any doubts Ms Rose might have. Man and Nature is counter-distinguishable from the Creator. They are NOT the same as the Creator though in the Creator both have their origin.
Ms Rose had expressed her desire to EDUCATE non-Sikh audience on Sikh philosophy. My recommendation to her is this: Ms Rose please get your facts straight. You may like to consider taking a course in Basic Sikh Philosophy so that you are better equipped to accomplish your goal.
In conclusion: Sikhism is a monotheistic faith in which the Creator is both Transcendent and Immanent.
Regards
Preet.
