So do not set forth parables for Allah. Truly, Allah knows and you know not. – Qur’an 16:74
Islamic theology places absolute importance on maintaining not just the perfection of Allah, but also the perception mankind has of Him.
To this end, we hold, as part of our creed, the following understanding of God which, we would like to think, no Sikh would disagree with.
In his book, Tawhid of Allah’s Most Beautiful Names & Lofty Attributes, Prof Muhammad ibn Khalifah al-Tamimi of the Islamic University of Madinah, Saudi Arabia, cites this foundational principle which underpins the true beliefs of the Muslims:
To prove this principle, he cites the following verses of the Qur’an as evidence:
Ahl al-Sunnah [the People of the Prophetic Tradition] agree that there is nothing like Allah in His Essence, Attributes and actions.
2. His saying, “So do not set forth parables for Allah.” [Qur’an 16:74]
Ibn Jarir al-Tabari said in commentary to it: “So do NOT provide for Allah parables, nor compare Him by setting up counterparts, for He has NO like or similitude. 
Ibn Kathir said: “i.e. do not set up with Allah rivals, likes or parables“.
3. His saying, “For those who do not believe in the Hereafter is an evil description and for Allah is the highest description…” [Qur’an 16:60]
4. His saying, “…and His is the highest description in the heavens and in the earth; and He is the All-Mighty, the All-Wise.” [Qur’an 30:27]
“Allah has depicted Himself, that He has the highest description, and that is a reference to absolute perfection, which embodies matters that are present and meanings that are affirmed. …” 
5. His saying, “…Do you know of anyone who is similar to him.” [Qur’an 19:65]
It is reported on Ibn Abbas that he said when commentating on the ayah: “Do you know of any match or peer to the Lord?” …
6. As for His saying, “Say, ‘He is Allah, (the) One.” [Qur’an 112:1]
The One implies that He has no like or equal.
7. Likewise, His saying, “And there is no co-equal or comparable unto Him.” [Qur’an 112:4]
Oneness implies perfection and partnership signifies imperfection.
Two: The indication of the intellect towards the falsity of any resemblance between the Attributes of the Creator and the attributes of creation.
1. The position towards the essence is the same as the position towards the Attributes. Allah has no like unto Him in His essence, Attributes and action. …
In view of this, we know that Allah has no like and similitude; and parables that bear a resemblance to creation are not set forth for Him, rather, He has the highest description.  (bold, underline, capitalisation ours)
The above seems pretty self-explanatory: God is perfect in the absolute sense of the word and from every conceivable angle. Hence, not only would it be entirely futile to compare Him to anything by way of metaphors or similitudes, but also wrong.
It would also be important at this point to tackle the argument of contrasting and not comparing God to His creation. Let’s take the attribute of knowledge for instance. While it is true that God has given us a certain amount of knowledge of the world and the hereafter, the difference between the two would be so insurmountably vast that while it would be true to say that our knowledge in comparison to His is close to nothing, any attempts at making a direct comparison would be impossible. And it is in this sense of contrasting the attributes of God and His creation that Islam has mentioned. As an example, the companion Anas bin Malik al-Ansari reported that Prophet Muhammad (Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him) said:
In this tradition, delight or pleasure is contrasted by way of non-equivalence, i.e. to show that no matter how much pleasure one might derive, Allah will always be more delighted over His slave’s repentance. Similarly, traditions that emphasise on Allah’s mercy do so by contrasting the immeasurable vastness of His mercy to that of His servants in comparison to the mercy shown between two servants.
It is forbidden for the intellects to liken Allah, the Most High, to anything and for the imaginations to limit Him. – Imam ash-Shafi’ee
With this in mind, we would maintain that no other religion holistically, consistently and comprehensively upholds the perfection of Allah as Islam does.
In a previous paper titled Erotic Tales of the Dasam Granth, we argued that it was unbecoming of a God-fearing and God-conscious person, let alone one chosen by God for receiving divine revelation, to use sexually explicit language in conveying a moral teaching when there’s far more safer and prudent ways, particularly in an age of promiscuity, decadence and hedonism, of doing so. We, thus, concluded that if the tenth Guru, Gobind Singh, was the author of the Dasam Granth, then he could not have been a true emissary of God’s.
In this paper, however, we charge Sikhism with accusing God of using sexual metaphors involving the intimacy enjoyed between a husband and wife on their wedding night to describe the relationship between Himself and His servants!
Waheguru’s Sexual Metaphors of Waheguru
Listen, listen, O soul-bride: you are overtaken by sexual desire-why do you walk like that, swinging your arms in joy? – Guru Granth Sahib 37
Unlike the eroticism of the Dasam Granth, the following verses are recorded in the Guru Granth Sahib (GGS) itself, and metaphorically describe the relationship between the soul and God using the bizarre example of the sexual intimacy enjoyed in bed by the husband and wife!
(GGS, Nanak, 21:18-20)
Her Husband Lord does not come to her bed; day after day, she grows more and more miserable.
(GGS, Amar Das, 31:9)
Upon her beautiful and cozy bed, she enjoys the Love of her Lord. She is overflowing with the treasure of devotion.
(GGS, Amar Das, 38:12)
She does not enjoy the pleasure of His Bed; without her Husband, her ornaments are absurd. The discarded bride suffers terrible pain; her Husband does not come to the bed of her home.
(GGS, Nanak, 58:13-4)
That soul-bride keeps her Husband Lord clasped tightly to her heart, and through the Word of the Shabad, she enjoys her Husband Lord upon His Beautiful Bed.
(GGS, Amar Das, 127:5)
Then, when the King of spiritual wisdom comes to her bed, He shall take her, and enjoy her.
(GGS, Nanak, 359:12)
I am thirsty with desire and longing for my Husband Lord. … I am adorned with Truth, and I have applied the mascara of the Fear of God to my eyes. … My bracelets, robes and ornaments beautifully adorn me. The soul-bride becomes totally happy, when her Husband Lord comes to her home. By the charms of virtue, I have enticed and fascinated my Husband Lord. He is under my power …. Renouncing all other brides, my Beloved has become my lover. The sun has risen, and its light shines brightly. I have prepared my bed with infinite care and faith. My Darling Beloved is new and fresh; He has come to my bed to enjoy me.
(GGS, Arjan Dev, 737:10, 13, 15-8, 20-3)
O Nanak, the soul-bride enjoys and ravishes her Beloved; God is pervading and permeating everywhere.
(GGS, Amar Das, 770:6)
This night, I did not sleep with my Husband Lord, and now my body is suffering in pain. Go and ask the deserted bride, how she passes her night.
(GGS, Farid, 1379: 9)
Ironically, Sikhism places a lot of emphasis on the important issue of fidelity and sex. So much so that the Guru Granth Sahib categorically advises against lust literally being the last thing on one’s mind at the point of death:
Further still, a verse from arguably the most sexually explicit chapter of the Dasam Granth, the Charitropakhian, warns against approaching another man’s wife even in one’s dreams!
O woman! Women from every corner come to me to get their wishes fulfilled. They bow their heads in respect.
The Sikhs are my sons, their wives my daughters.
O woman! Tell me how is it possible for me to form physical relations with them? 
Yet, the use of the carnal human act of copulation as metaphors for God seems to entirely undermine all these convoluted and extreme measures of safety.
The language employed for these metaphors will invariably evoke the graphic sexual imagery of foreplay and/ or intercourse associated with said union! And to argue that not everyone would be inclined to think in this way concedes that, at the very least, one person will, which, of course, is bad enough.
But, what’s far worse, is that these metaphors force a conceptual substitution of the husband for God. Hence, much less maintain and uphold the sanctity of God, Sikhism abhorrently fosters the erotic conceptualisation of our Creator!
Who has not been ruined by sexual desire? What am I? – Guru Granth Sahib 1194
So what is the wisdom in employing such language to metaphorically describe a relationship let alone one involving the Creator Himself? Couldn’t He have chosen something non-sexually- and family-friendly?
No heart imagines Him [God], except that it is destroyed. – Sheikh Mar’i ibn Yusuf al-Karmi al-Hanbali
What benefit, for instance, would those who have hit puberty derive from being told that a true relationship with their Lord could be as intimate as that between a man and his wife on, of all days, their wedding night?! For one, such a metaphor would, at least experientially, be wholly lost on them. And if such pubescent youths reside in a society where scantily-clad women and pornography are a normal part of growing up, and where premarital relationships are fully encouraged, then what will they envisage when reading such verses other than sexually forbidden thoughts concerning God?
In addition, the language does nothing but anthropomorphise God in a most vile way. After all, which God-conscious person would want to reduce the sacred relationship between the human and the divine down to the carnal pleasures and sexual appetites of man? Who would want to visualise themselves as a bride being “ravished” in bed by her lover when thinking of God?
What’s more, once the doors for such an approach are opened, then where’s it all to end and how far can metaphors of this nature be taken?
These metaphors, in fact, run contrary to the following verse in the Sikh scripture which states:
If the true mark of wisdom entails detachment, then what’s the authors’ justification for including such verses that would conversely serve to strengthen the attachment to sexual desires?
And if “lust, anger, egotism, jealousy and desires are eliminated by chanting the Name of [the] Lord” (GGS 1389:1), then the Guru Granth Sahib and the Dasam Granth contribute significantly in making certain that lust and desires remain completely intact.
We seek refuge in Allah from such evil!
This is merely the inevitable consequence of forsaking the true guidance of God, and striking metaphors and similitudes for Allah. It is for this reason that one of the great early scholars of Islam, the well-known Imam ash-Shafi’ee was quoted on the authority of ar-Rabee’ ibn Sulayman, and cited by Sheikh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, as declaring:
Similarly, Sheikh Mar’i ibn Yusuf al-Karmi al-Hanbali said:
All this should be more than enough evidence to prove to those sincerely seeking after the truth that the Gurus were most assuredly false representatives of God.
It should, therefore, be evident from the above that it is Islam that stands to guard and maintain the absolute perfection of Allah, while at the same time providing mankind with an holistic and consistent method for protecting against all inappropriate and blasphemous thoughts of our beloved Creator.
 Fn. 221: Tafsir al-Tabari, 14/148
 Fn. 223: Al-Sawa’iq al-Munazzalah, 3/1032 and Sharh al-Tahawiyyah, p.144.
 M. ibn K. al-Tamimi (2002), Tawhid of Allah’s Most Beautiful Names & Lofty Attributes, (Al-Hidayah Publishing & Distribution), pp. 114-8
 S.K. Singh, Charitropakhyan: Story of Roop Kaur, (Translation by Prabhjot Singh), pp. 13-4.
 Fn. 335: Majmu’ Fataawa of Sheikh al-Islam 4/6.
 U.S. al-Ashqar (1999), The Names and Attributes of Allah According to the Doctrine of Ahl-us-Sunnah wal Jama’ah, (Jam’iat Ihyaa’ Minhaaj Al-Sunnah), pp. 194-5.