Revision as of 08:42, 2 November 2017 editNarrSingh (talk | contribs)17 editsm →WP:NPOV← Previous edit | Revision as of 14:10, 2 November 2017 edit undoMs Sarah Welch (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers34,946 edits →WP:NPOV: rNext edit → | ||
Line 55: | Line 55: | ||
I feel this article does not conform to ] and shows editorial bias. The article relies heavily on a book by Harjit Oberoi which has been heavily criticised by mainstream Sikh Scholars (see {{cite book | last = Mann | first = Jasbir | title = Invasion of religious boundaries : a critique of Harjot Oberoi's work | publisher = Canadian Sikh Study & Teaching Society | location = Vancouver B.C., Canada | year = 1995 | isbn = 0969409281 }}) and as such given it undue weight. It also gives no space for the opposing mainstream view nor gives any insight into significant primary sources (Sri Guru Granth Sahib and Dasam Granth) or primary historical sources such as the Dabistan. A lot of work is needed to get this article up to scratch! ] (]) 08:38, 2 November 2017 (UTC) | I feel this article does not conform to ] and shows editorial bias. The article relies heavily on a book by Harjit Oberoi which has been heavily criticised by mainstream Sikh Scholars (see {{cite book | last = Mann | first = Jasbir | title = Invasion of religious boundaries : a critique of Harjot Oberoi's work | publisher = Canadian Sikh Study & Teaching Society | location = Vancouver B.C., Canada | year = 1995 | isbn = 0969409281 }}) and as such given it undue weight. It also gives no space for the opposing mainstream view nor gives any insight into significant primary sources (Sri Guru Granth Sahib and Dasam Granth) or primary historical sources such as the Dabistan. A lot of work is needed to get this article up to scratch! ] (]) 08:38, 2 November 2017 (UTC) | ||
:A Cambridge University Press published scholar such as Oberoi is more mainstream than an author published by SPS-style Canadian Sikh Study Society! According to NPOV guidelines, "Articles must not take sides, but should explain the sides, fairly and without editorial bias." Oberoi, other scholars and this article are explaining the mainstream and significant sides. These must be summarized. No, we don't interpret Sikh scripture or primary texts etc in wikipedia. Please see RS and OR guidelines. ] (]) 14:10, 2 November 2017 (UTC) |
Revision as of 14:10, 2 November 2017
Sikhism Start‑class | |||||||
|
NPOV
I'm concerned that some of the language in this article, particularly in the "Historical Incidences", does not clearly convey to the reader that these are apocryphal stories. I could find no easy way to clarify this in a concise manner, so it may be easiest to just rewrite these sections. Even if their truth can be reasonably verified, it still could use some rewriting to make it more encyclopedic. Thanks, Chris (talk) 03:45, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
- Better to give writer like i have added: according to writer of Dabestan Mazheb(Karantsingh (talk) 05:48, 3 November 2015 (UTC))
- There are many verses in Adi Granth (Primary Scripture of Sikhs), as well as Dasam Granth(Secondary Scripture) as well as Sikh Rehat Maryada; followed by Sikhs which supports that Sikhism have no relation with Idolatry. This is not proven fact that Guru Nanak or any other Guru promoted Idol worship as all of their hymns are critical to it. It is required to add more of their hymns which support this fact that Idolatry have no place in Sikh religion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 153.110.241.229 (talk) 05:16, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
Ms Sarah Welch completely ignored inner refrences of Guru Granth Sahib and Dasam Granth
Treating Mcleod as his/her Guru "Ms Sarah Welch" completely ignored sayings of Kabir, Arjan Dev, Gobind Singh, Ram Das and change all text. So following original text for future reference of Seekers:
During the era of the Sikh gurus and bhagats, in Hinduism, a murti (Devanagari: मूर्ति), or murthi, or vigraha or pratima was worshiped, rituals were performed, and Sikhs believed that spiritual wisdom was lacking in Indian society. This was believed to have been a manipulation by the priestly caste to keep the power in their hands. Sikh gurus and bhagats spoke out against this practice and informed people about the perceived spiritual disadvantages of idol worship.
Bhagat Kabir Bhagat Kabir, whose hymns are present in Guru Granth Sahib, was strictly against any form of idol worship. He said Kabeer, someone sets up a stone idol and all the world worships it as the Lord. Those who hold to this belief will be drowned in the river of darkness. ||136|| Guru Nanak Guru Nanak, who strictly condemned the idol worship flourishing in Indian society among Hindus also suggested the same in Shalok: The Hindus have forgotten the Primal Lord; they are going the wrong way. As Naarad instructed them, they are worshipping idols. They are blind and mute, the blindest of the blind. The ignorant fools pick up stones and worship them. But when those stones themselves sink, who will carry you across? ||2|
Guru Ram Das Guru Ram Das, the fourth Guru of the Sikhs, also wrote that an idol worshipping is ignorant (Agyani) and a useless effort. In his hymn in Malhar Raga, he narrated, The ignorant and the blind wander deluded by doubt; deluded and confused, they pick flowers to offer to their idols. They worship lifeless stones and serve the tombs of the dead; all their efforts are useless. ||3||
Guru Arjan Dev Guru Arjan Dev also emphasise on finding God within his own self and called Idol worshipper a faithless cynic. In his hymn in Suhi Raga, he narrated, Soohee, Fifth Mehl:Within the home of his own self, he does not even come to see his Lord and Master. And yet, around his neck, he hangs a stone god. ||1|| The faithless cynic wanders around, deluded by doubt. He churns water, and after wasting his life away, he dies. ||1||Pause||. In another hymn he exclaimed, Those who call a stone their god-their service is useless. Those who fall at the feet of a stone god-their work is wasted in vain. ||1||.
Dasam Granth In letter to Aurangzeb called Zafarnamah, Guru Gobind Singh called himself an "idol breaker" (But-Shikan - ਬੁਤਸ਼ਿਕਨ).
In many compositions Guru Gobind Singh called Idol worshipper a Foolish, Lowest intellect as Animals. In 33 Savaiyey, Guru Gobind Singh states in Line 19 and 20: You will not get a place, even very small one in the abode of the Lord; therefore O foolish creature ! you away become careful even now, because by wearing a garb only, you will not be able to realise that Accountless Lord. Why do you worship stones ?, because the Lord-God is not within those stones; you may only worship Him, whose adoration destroys clusters of sins;
Smiting of the nose of Durga's idol
As per narration of Dabestan-e Mazaheb, Bhai Bhairo, a Sikh, smote the nose of an idol of Hindu goddess at Naina Devi near Anandpur Sahib. Hindu kings made a complaint to Guru Gobind Singh, who asked Bhairo to clarify his position. Bhairo denied that he had removed the nose from the idol and in turn asked the idol to become witness. When the complainant kings argued that the goddess cannot speak, Bhairo replied that if the goddess (idol) cannot speak and protect her own body then what good you expect from her?
Shaligram desecration by Bhagat Sadhna
Bhagat Sadhana got Shaligram Shilas and used them as weights in his butcher shop. Sadhna annoyed Vaishnav Sadhus and Pundits with this act. On one hand, he was of lower profession and caste, and on the other, he was belittling their idol worship by using the idol while handling the flesh of animals, which is considered a sin by the authorities of this branch of Vaishnavism. Those religious scholars frequently argued and debated with him, and Sadhna always outwitted them. It is recorded that one of Vaishnav saints took the Shaligram Stones with him. Sadhna had no issues with this and did not object. The Vaishnav saint continued worshipping the Shaligram but got no internal pleasure and wisdom, as he had seen in the state, behavior and thoughts of Sadhna. With dashed hopes he returned the Shaligram Stones. Sadhna preached that "Shaligrams Stones" are not god as these are lifeless stones, and can not give any wisdom to a living being.
(115.114.127.158 (talk) 10:15, 20 October 2017 (UTC))
- 115.114.127.158: Welcome to wikipedia. We can't accept personal interpretation of primary sources and WP:SOAP. Please see WP:NOR and WP:RS guidelines. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 13:41, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
Lead sentence
@122.173.196.84: Please don't edit war. It is the mainstream view, of multiple scholars. Please explain your concerns with the lead sentence. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 23:09, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
Disruption
Casktopic: This edit was disruptive deletion of sources and sourced content. What are your concerns? Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 13:09, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
WP:NPOV
I feel this article does not conform to WP:NPOV and shows editorial bias. The article relies heavily on a book by Harjit Oberoi which has been heavily criticised by mainstream Sikh Scholars (see Mann, Jasbir (1995). Invasion of religious boundaries : a critique of Harjot Oberoi's work. Vancouver B.C., Canada: Canadian Sikh Study & Teaching Society. ISBN 0969409281.) and as such given it undue weight. It also gives no space for the opposing mainstream view nor gives any insight into significant primary sources (Sri Guru Granth Sahib and Dasam Granth) or primary historical sources such as the Dabistan. A lot of work is needed to get this article up to scratch! NarrSingh (talk) 08:38, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
- A Cambridge University Press published scholar such as Oberoi is more mainstream than an author published by SPS-style Canadian Sikh Study Society! According to NPOV guidelines, "Articles must not take sides, but should explain the sides, fairly and without editorial bias." Oberoi, other scholars and this article are explaining the mainstream and significant sides. These must be summarized. No, we don't interpret Sikh scripture or primary texts etc in wikipedia. Please see RS and OR guidelines. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 14:10, 2 November 2017 (UTC)