Originally Posted by
Gaurapriya
The tradition of Gaudiya Vaishnavism that I was brought into was semi-aniconic, that is, the possession of divine images was discouraged as a practice. I was told that as our lineage has taught for generations, simplicity was key to a devotional life.
Part of this was not to have divine images on one's wall as decoration. Since a divine image, especially an image concerning Vishnu-tattva, was holy, it would degenerate our reverence for God. Such images are only proper on the altar. Even then, the altar should be absolutely simple, consisting of at minimum one's Guru, and Sri Chaitanya.
As a result, images as decoration would be under the mood of 'shanta-rasa,' things that would remind us of Krishna, but not directly Him (such as cows, or Gaudiya temples, or scenery of Navadwip and Vrindavan). The only image that would be ubiquitously stamped everywhere, was the OM, the tilaka, or the gurus.
Unlike ISKCONites and other Hindus, where images can be placed rather everywhere, the organisation was semi-strict regarding this principle.
Does anyone else practice aniconism fully or partially in their lives as Hindus? I know that there are aniconic sects of Hinduism (Arya Samaj, Ekasarana Dharma, Pranamami, etc.), but in practice, it just seems quite difficult in a religion where holy images are literally everywhere!
Bookmarks