tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8309996.post8761022278275661381..comments2023-09-24T06:17:35.266-04:00Comments on Ithilien: Sunday, August 12: Visit a Gurdwara DayContarinihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16602533442067190380noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8309996.post-89903466618404617002012-08-19T19:36:03.144-04:002012-08-19T19:36:03.144-04:00Of course not--go ahead.Of course not--go ahead.Contarinihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16602533442067190380noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8309996.post-10615798700568846002012-08-08T12:49:42.434-04:002012-08-08T12:49:42.434-04:00I'll friend you on facebook and we can continu...I'll friend you on facebook and we can continue this conversation. :-) Would you mind if I sent you an email?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8309996.post-71819527393516194932012-08-08T10:13:13.777-04:002012-08-08T10:13:13.777-04:00I don't take prasad when I visit a Hindu templ...I don't take prasad when I visit a Hindu temple; I do when I visit a Sikh one. This is because I can say pretty confidently that Sikhs don't worship idols. They worship one God and do not believe that this God can be represented by images. <br /><br />I don't think that bhakti Hinduism corresponds exactly to Greco-Roman polytheism, so I'm cautious about saying that it's idolatrous. But I also don't think I can say with any confidence that it isn't, at least to some degree. I would say that Hinduism has a very different relationship with its polytheistic cultural heritage than Western religions do--a kind of monotheism developed, but in organic continuity with the ancestral polytheism. So the categories don't apply neatly, I think. Admittedly, even Guru Nanak didn't reject Hindu "idolatry" in quite the terms a Christian or Muslim would use about idolatry--he has no problem using the names of Hindu gods and proclaiming (as a Hindu would) that "Waheguru" (the true God) is all of these. His attitude seems to have been not so much that bhakti "idolatry" was evil as that it was pointless and unnecessary. There doesn't seem to be a "jealous God" conception in Sikhism. So I respect the convictions of those more conservative Christians who may wish not to participate in any way, including receiving prasad.<br /><br />Another issue I may view differently than some is Sikh reverence for their Scriptures. I accept the Catholic distinction between "dulia" and "latria," and the Sikh practice is pretty clearly "dulia," although it does borrow some trappings from Hindu bhakti (Sikhs take the "Gurbani"--the holy book--home with them and in some respects treat it like a person). <br /><br />One final point about Hinduism: in the Hindu temple nearest me, the worship service is followed by a meal (just as in Sikhism), and the food has been placed in the presence of the images of the deities. This is where I find St. Paul's discussion very helpful--the context of eating the meal is clearly just sharing hospitality, whereas receiving prasad (or passing one's hands over the holy flame) has a more clearly "religious" significance.Contarinihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16602533442067190380noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8309996.post-23873755679910374372012-08-07T20:41:48.993-04:002012-08-07T20:41:48.993-04:00I'm commenting because I so have wanted to hav...I'm commenting because I so have wanted to have a conversation about partaking of prasad! (I'm friends with your wife on facebook and found this blog through her- which I added one day long ago to my reader so this post popped up)<br />I'm a Phd in Theology and have occasion to visit other places of worship from time to time. I feel this is an important part of what being a Christian and theologian is- yet taking prasad at a Hindu temple always was profoundly uncomfortable to me, to the point that I never have. Partly because of the people I was with (all Hindu), partly because of echoes of "food sacrificed to idols" (a bit embarrassed to admit that part...) so explain how you worked this one through?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com