Origin of Religions?
-
Peace, FreedomStands.
Most people misunderstand me, What people are experiencing as "Free will" does exist. Also, God can create any form of justice system, and God created this particular form we know of, that is all I've been saying, but people keep misinterpreting me and claiming I am denying their experience of "free will" which I am saying is something they are experiencing and I am not denying that experience they are clearly having, and I am also saying that God created the justice system. If someone says that the Justice system was before Allah or Allah didn't make everything then these are simply people who are not really following logic or even what the Qur'an says.
You bring up some fantastic points which I have been trying to make myself for the same reasons! Yes, you must know what you are worshiping, and if you "don't know" or think "it could be this or that" then you do not have a strong or accurate concept of God at all and those people are just flirting with idolatrous notions.
I have explained everything at length and in clear detail (though people still seem to misunderstand it strongly) in this post, which I'd appreciate greatly if you read, since it answers your questions
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9607171.msg362129#msg362129
I speak of only what is absolutely knowable through thinking carefully, and if anyone denies the existence of "anything" such as the experience of "stuff" in the vaguest sense or the existence of "information being experienced by them in any way" they are just being contentious liars and I frankly hate their guts for it.
As you'll see in my posts after my nice explanation there. I will read it along with you, and I hope you read it very slowly and carefully and see how cautious I have been to only speak of what is absolutely necessary to any common sense thinking person, and have not gone into conjecture or guessing and I know very clearly what it is that I worship and why it can only be that and I will not worship anything but that because I explain why anything less than that is not something I would call God ever.
Thanks for the link. I understood your post, and I agree with it to a great degree... I disagree to a degree also, however. For example, if we characterize God from that perspective, how could we rationally suggest that "he" could be encompassed within a framework of informational stimulation at all? In fact, from this standpoint, wouldn't God actually be an inanimate "it" more than anything? Logically, the only things we can associate with the notions in which Allah is characterized (by way of your description) are inanimate, at least from our perspective. For example, most of the things you mentioned can be said of the Universe, or existence/reality, itself. However, does the Universe have a "will"? Can it make "decisions"? Again, not from our perspective. The Universe, as it appears to me, is completely unaware of, and unconcerned with, our existence and experience. Worshiping God is as meaningless as worshiping the Universe; as baseless as 'bowing down' to Reality.
You seem to be depicting God, in a way, as a type of "eternal, conscious force or power". The problem I have with this is based on the comparative view of things we have NOTHING with which to associate this. God, from this viewpoint, is literally unlike anything we could possibly imagine or characterize, and that makes it impossible to define or understand him/it.
In addition, your notion raises the question of whether or not God is bound by the "laws" of cause and effect (or 'karma'. You made the statement that God 'creates what he/it wills', to which I agree. Yet, everything is stimulated through the means of previous causes, which can generally be assessed, evaluated, and even predetermined. Here's a fictional (and completely unrealistic too, but spare me) example
A man smokes a cigarette at a gas station while putting fuel in his vehicle. He pulls the nozzle out of the tank prematurely, spilling gas on the ground. He notices what he did, and gets alarmed. This causes him to jump backwards to avoid getting gas on his clothes, consequently dropping the cigarette from his mouth. The cigarette lands in the spilled gas. A fire is generated, and it quickly begins spreading. His vehicle explodes, igniting a fire throughout the rest of the gas station. The entire gas station blows up. Four people are killed in the explosion.
Which part of the explosion did God cause? Did He cause the man to begin smoking? Did He cause the spill, the dropped cigarette, the location in which it fell, the fire, the initial explosion, etc.? Did He cause all of them individually, or did one naturally lead to the others? Did God plan everything out in advance and 'cause' the man to need gas, or was this due to his excessive driving habits? Or were all the said events completely due to "chance"? That question may sound completely trivial, but I think it's important because the 'answer' illustrates exactly how much control God actually has over everyday events. Are we the ONLY 'information' being projected through our experience, or do the other factors (e.g. cigarette, gas, fire, pump, vehicle, etc.) also experience events as well, as (seemingly) 'primitive' forms of information?
Peace,
Ahmad
-
Peace, FreedomStands.
Thanks for the link. I understood your post, and I agree with it to a great degree... I disagree to a degree also, however. For example, if we characterize God from that perspective, how could we rationally suggest that "he" could be encompassed within a framework of informational stimulation at all? In fact, from this standpoint, wouldn't God actually be an inanimate "it" more than anything? Logically, the only things we can associate with the notions in which Allah is characterized (by way of your description) are inanimate, at least from our perspective. For example, most of the things you mentioned can be said of the Universe, or existence/reality, itself. However, does the Universe have a "will"? Can it make "decisions"? Again, not from our perspective. The Universe, as it appears to me, is completely unaware of, and unconcerned with, our existence and experience. Worshiping God is as meaningless as worshiping the Universe; as baseless as 'bowing down' to Reality.
You seem to be depicting God, in a way, as a type of "eternal, conscious force or power". The problem I have with this is based on the comparative view of things we have NOTHING with which to associate this. God, from this viewpoint, is literally unlike anything we could possibly imagine or characterize, and that makes it impossible to define or understand him/it.
In addition, your notion raises the question of whether or not God is bound by the "laws" of cause and effect (or 'karma'. You made the statement that God 'creates what he/it wills', to which I agree. Yet, everything is stimulated through the means of previous causes, which can generally be assessed, evaluated, and even predetermined. Here's a fictional (and completely unrealistic too, but spare me) example
A man smokes a cigarette at a gas station while putting fuel in his vehicle. He pulls the nozzle out of the tank prematurely, spilling gas on the ground. He notices what he did, and gets alarmed. This causes him to jump backwards to avoid getting gas on his clothes, consequently dropping the cigarette from his mouth. The cigarette lands in the spilled gas. A fire is generated, and it quickly begins spreading. His vehicle explodes, igniting a fire throughout the rest of the gas station. The entire gas station blows up. Four people are killed in the explosion.
Which part of the explosion did God cause? Did He cause the man to begin smoking? Did He cause the spill, the dropped cigarette, the location in which it fell, the fire, the initial explosion, etc.? Did He cause all of them individually, or did one naturally lead to the others? Did God plan everything out in advance and 'cause' the man to need gas, or was this due to his excessive driving habits? Or were all the said events completely due to "chance"? That question may sound completely trivial, but I think it's important because the 'answer' illustrates exactly how much control God actually has over everyday events. Are we the ONLY 'information' being projected through our experience, or do the other factors (e.g. cigarette, gas, fire, pump, vehicle, etc.) also experience events as well, as (seemingly) 'primitive' forms of information?
Peace,
Ahmad
I'm very surprised you somehow came to those conclusions when I thought I had been explicit about how God must have a "will" and "decision" making ability and can not be "blind" or a "blind force". Is it really true that you read all that I wrote and still came out of it without seeing any of those points I made? This is highly disturbing to me.
Firstly, God is neither a "he" or "she" because those terms have to do with genitalia mainly.
God is not conditioned, not bound by causation, if there is any law of karma it is law that only exists by God continuously upholding it and is under the power of God, there is nothing working "automatically" or "self-animated" without God.
Every single aspect of your example, moment to moment, was "information" and no part of it could exist if God did not create that specific information and who received it and how they received it and what they received was the specific information they received and no others received that same information. I explained all this at length in my post, so I'm kind of doubting you really thoroughly read it.
To plan out things "in advance" there has to be Time over God when Time is under God it is a perception created by God and God is not under anything nor is there any power other than God or "law or system" that "co-exists" with God or "before God" or "above God" or "with God" and things like "time" were the very names of the other "Gods" people used to associate with God (Zurvan for example). It is quite clearly Shirk.
The only "information" you yourself have specific access to is whatever you experience as you experience it which is unique to you, and all that information, that specific experience and everything in it and how it is, is the creation of God, there is no other creator.
Please, can you read it? How could it be that you read what I wrote out in such a lengthy way explaining all these things and come up with these questions when I was so explicit in my detailing all that. How could you come to these conclusions by reading all I wrote? Please tell me you didn't feel like reading the whole thing and just skimmed it to get what you thought was the "jist" and came up with those questions that were clearly outlined in what I wrote, because it is just too saddening and disturbing to me that you could have read every single word I wrote in that thread carefully and then still come up with these things even when they were explained at length in what I wrote.
Maybe try these links then as well, which also answer these things, but please read the article I linked thoroughly and slowly and carefully even if you did before, because I was very clear in that I thought
http//lunaticoutpost.com/showthread.php?tid=59014
-
Freedomstands,
Can you explain whats worship, why we need worship or what we need to worship? make it simple and short please.
Worship is just a word I use for the meditative exercise of realizing or enacting "surrender". It is meant as a practice to meditate and remind oneself of our natural state of surrender before the power of God. It is for your benefit, not for the benefit of any other, nor does God benefit from it or anything at all.
Worship is an important thing to understand and practice and remember throughout the day. If Allah's promise is made true, then it will be one of the important keys that may help us to achieve the Paradise which is the ultimate goal of lasting ultimate pleasure. Buddhists do it for the same reason often and so did many others throughout history. It reminds us of our humble state before God and also gives a great energetic feeling of empowerment if one understands why they are doing it and can provide insights while praying too, its basically just a meditative exercise.
We should direct our worship to the only power that can actually do anything about anything, and that is whatever at all is the Ultimate or Utmost in power of which there is none greater, and that can only be One, and I've described what the qualities must be necessarily in my article here
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9607171.msg362129#msg362129
If you worship an idea of God that is an idol or a form, or one that has partners in power, or multiple gods or false concepts, it is said your worship goes not to any of those concepts and they can't do anything to help you and your worship is rendered wasted and you will also possibly be destroyed for it, and it has many other consequences in life too for the kind of mentality that can come along with that kind of false worship or foolish ideas and this includes flirting with the possibilities of "we don't know what God is for sure" or "God might have a body, who knows" or not being sure and not knowing and not thinking it through to the very end.
-
Peace, FreedomStands.
I'm very surprised you somehow came to those conclusions when I thought I had been explicit about how God must have a "will" and "decision" making ability and can not be "blind" or a "blind force". Is it really true that you read all that I wrote and still came out of it without seeing any of those points I made? This is highly disturbing to me.
Firstly, God is neither a "he" or "she" because those terms have to do with genitalia mainly.
God is not conditioned, not bound by causation, if there is any law of karma it is law that only exists by God continuously upholding it and is under the power of God, there is nothing working "automatically" or "self-animated" without God.
Every single aspect of your example, moment to moment, was "information" and no part of it could exist if God did not create that specific information and who received it and how they received it and what they received was the specific information they received and no others received that same information. I explained all this at length in my post, so I'm kind of doubting you really thoroughly read it.
To plan out things "in advance" there has to be Time over God when Time is under God it is a perception created by God and God is not under anything nor is there any power other than God or "law or system" that "co-exists" with God or "before God" or "above God" or "with God" and things like "time" were the very names of the other "Gods" people used to associate with God (Zurvan for example). It is quite clearly Shirk.
The only "information" you yourself have specific access to is whatever you experience as you experience it which is unique to you, and all that information, that specific experience and everything in it and how it is, is the creation of God, there is no other creator.
Please, can you read it? How could it be that you read what I wrote out in such a lengthy way explaining all these things and come up with these questions when I was so explicit in my detailing all that. How could you come to these conclusions by reading all I wrote? Please tell me you didn't feel like reading the whole thing and just skimmed it to get what you thought was the "jist" and came up with those questions that were clearly outlined in what I wrote, because it is just too saddening and disturbing to me that you could have read every single word I wrote in that thread carefully and then still come up with these things even when they were explained at length in what I wrote.
Maybe try these links then as well, which also answer these things, but please read the article I linked thoroughly and slowly and carefully even if you did before, because I was very clear in that I thought
http//lunaticoutpost.com/showthread.php?tid=59014
Actually, I did read the entire post. In fact, I read it several times to grasp the entirety of the information you were promoting. That's how I came up with the questions - because they appear to conflict with certain notions outlined in the Qur'aan itself. You said previously that you're not negating the notion of free will, but it certainly seems like you are. God is the Only One in control of anything, and every action taken by anyone (along with any of the effects orchestrated by those actions) are carefully planned and caused by God.
The example I gave concerning the smoker dropping his cigarette and initiating a fire (and explosion) are proponents of this same concept, and that's why I find it very intriguing. You're saying that God not only caused the smoker to drive to that specific gas station and get gas, you're also saying that He also caused the man to light up and smoke the cigarette. He caused the man to drop the cigarette, but He also directed the cigarette to land in that specific spot on the spilled gas, rather than causing it to fall somewhere else. That's absolute control; there's no getting around that point. With that kind of control, there can be no "free will". And that would make God a monster! If we remove the smoker and replace him with a drunk driver, an even bigger theological problem ensues, especially since, according to most Islamic enthusiasts, God explicitly condemns the drinking of alcohol. If I drink a bunch of liquor, get excessively intoxicated, hop in my car and drive down the road, and ultimately hit someone, killing the person, you're implying that God is responsible for taking the life. In fact, from the notion you provided, it seems as if I hold no responsibility in it at all God was the one Who drank alcohol (e.g. using my body, that is), got behind the wheel of an automobile, and killed someone.
How can he, therefore, justifiably throw me into hell for HIS/ITS own wrongdoing?
If God has a (and, from your perspective, the only) free will and mind, then He/It also has the ability to stop me from doing whatever I did and the outcomes associated with it. How could God possibly be "good" if, considering all the circumstances, He makes the decision to cause me to commit wrongdoing and take a life unnecessarily? If He has instituted 'divine laws' and mandates, such as 'not murdering others' or 'not drinking alcohol' (some would say 'getting intoxicated', why is He not following His Own precepts? Wouldn't that make God a hypocrite? And, if God somehow fell to the depths of depravity, which you are indirectly implying that He does quite frequently (due to causing people to commit horrendous crimes), having the knowledge of all of these events "in advance" (if we use time as a reference point) but not stopping them, wouldn't this make God to appear powerless?
My questions are based on my interpretation of your assessments. According to you, I am nothing more than information. If I asked you, "What does God do?", I assume that you would probably assert that God does EVERYTHING. And, philosophically, that presents a major problem. If God does everything, that means that I don't do anything - thereby ridding myself of all forms of blame and accountability. God is the One Who does everything. God is the One Who kills people. God is the One Who commits adultery. God is the One Who steals and robs banks and grocery stores. God is the One Who associates partners with Himself! I don't - and, in fact, CAN'T - do any of it; God is the One Who is responsible. And, based on this assessment, God is the One Who should be judged and thrown into hell - not me. I was just the 'vessel' that God used to perform all types of deplorable acts. None of it was me. It was all God.
On a larger scale, we could even conclude, based on this assessment, that God alone is responsible for the havoc wreaked by Islamic groups like ISIS and Boko Haram. God is the One Who tortured and killed millions of Jewish people during the holocaust, using Adolf Hitler as His vessel. God is the One Who caused men to travel on ships to enslave African people for hundreds of years. God is the One Who caused Islamic militants to kidnap hundreds of schoolchildren and brutally rape, torture and kill them. God is the One Who causes, by means of implanting "information" (or unavoidable direction), serial killers to slaughter masses of innocent people. Why should any of them be "punished" for crimes they ultimately had no control over? In addition, God is the One Who performs all righteous and pious acts, which negates the idea of people being "rewarded" for following His laws and policies. Everything is designed, planned and orchestrated by God. And, obviously, this throws JUSTICE out of the window completely.
So, based on this perspective, I should "worship" God; why? Simply because He's 'bigger' than I am? Not because He's good or admirable or just? It should solely be based on the idea that He's more powerful than I am and that He's in control of my life and death (even though none of that can truly be substantiated anyway)? That's called FEAR, not reverence. I can't admire God, based on those circumstances, any more than I could admire a bully who forces people to submit to his terror. God just happens to be a bigger bully than all of the other ones...
If that's not how you were trying to convey your points, then please make the correction; but that's exactly how I interpreted your essay. We are nothing more than information, and we are living out our experiences by means of this information. However, we don't have any control over the information (in which we are or receive), nor do we have any control over the experience. We're, more or less, robots doing what we've been programmed to do by our "designer". We can't turn to the right or to the left unless the "designer" causes us to do so. Everything is out of our control, and God is the One directing and causing.
On a side note, when I refer to God as a "he", I do that solely because that's the way people generally grasp the concept of God, as conveyed in the Bible, Qur'aan, etc. It's just an easier way to express the concept, based on societal norms. Even the Hindu "Brahma", who is said to be genderless, is referred to as "he". I'm not saying that God is a 'male'.
Peace,
Ahmad
-
That is nice that you read it, thank you, I was kind of surprised that those questions weren't already answered in there.
You capitalized the word "FEAR", that is good. I find that fearing God is an essential practice and natural to anyone who really understands what they might be dealing with. Each religion also seems to mention fear and the fear of God and usually in a positive way.
Yeah, I wouldn't pick on you for saying he or "He" or whatever, I try not to be annoying like that, I really can't stand when people try to break down communication by messing about obsessing over certain words like "he" or "He" or "Muslim" vs "muslim" or whatever else.
I find it curious that you would somehow feel that you didn't do the thing when you are the one doing the thing? Do you have any experience contrary to that? It is you who is doing the thing, you are the one, those are your hands moving, your body doing it, whatever else. Just like if a tree catches on fire, it is the tree that is burning.
It might help you to understand what I was saying if you think of a book in which things are written yet the characters in the book are the ones doing the things, they have no idea that they are in a book and it is being written. Yet if this is too mind-boggling and offensive to you, then don't concern yourself with it at all, and concern yourself only with the immediate level of awareness where you are clearly doing the things.
God is the only power, the power in and behind everything, but if that is where you find some objection, then there are many options of Shirk that are welcoming and ready to associate with God other creators. As for me though, I can not ever claim any other power or creative ability attributed to any but God, and this is a religion called Islam.
It is a religion that believes that deaths are not accidental even if they appear to be, but they are all precise and not even a minute of difference can be made in them.
These ideas are present in both the Bible and the Qur'an and elsewhere.
"Chance" "Justice" "Time" are not considered co-powers with God, but just elements and concepts that are put in some realities and experiences. Reality could be any way at all, we are experiencing something particular this moment, but we could experience anything else too, this has been mentioned in the Qur'an too in several ways, talking about how experiences can be changed and reality.
Not even "Justice" can save you in the end, from that "Monster" behind the veil of life, that is like Death. God will be the Judge because God is the one with power. If we had the power, we would be able to fight it, but God is known as the Irresistible. The Unstoppable.
Some people are born into luxurious estates, some are born into squalor, some are born with terrible diseases, some are born perfectly healthy but then have parts of their bodies damaged. Certainly anyone with power could stop these things or stop death itself. We should work diligently, as much as we are able and aware, against all harm, particularly the most lasting kinds. Don't worry about things you might not be able to understand at this time, if you can understand avoiding harm and seeking pleasure and particularly avoiding the most lasting harm (hell) and seeking the most lasting pleasure (paradise) then do that.
-
Peace, FreedomStands.
I find it curious that you would somehow feel that you didn't do the thing when you are the one doing the thing? Do you have any experience contrary to that? It is you who is doing the thing, you are the one, those are your hands moving, your body doing it, whatever else. Just like if a tree catches on fire, it is the tree that is burning.
It might help you to understand what I was saying if you think of a book in which things are written yet the characters in the book are the ones doing the things, they have no idea that they are in a book and it is being written. Yet if this is too mind-boggling and offensive to you, then don't concern yourself with it at all, and concern yourself only with the immediate level of awareness where you are clearly doing the things.
This is ultimately what my issue is, given the concept you presented. I would, of course, only concern myself with my immediate actions and activities, because I'm not consciously aware of other factors acting in accordance with a predetermined purpose and set of values. However, in reality, is it really ME acting at all? If God is the One Who made the decision that I'd do whatever I would do, and I have no power to usurp God's decree, then how am I in control of my actions? Logically, I have no choice but to do the thing that God ordained for me to do, whether I know these "plans" in advance or not. I'm not actually acting in accordance with anything I've decided, whether it seems to be so or not; I'm merely doing what God has dictated that I do, whether I'm consciously aware of His plans or not.
There is no freedom of choice as far as humans are concerned - there is only God's choice and determination.
So, if we view this rationally, how can I be held accountable for my (seeming) choices? For instance, if I choose to murder someone in cold blood, and I act according to this decision, how do we perceive this? Have I really made the decision to murder someone, or did God actually devise the plan? When I (seemingly) decided to take someone's life, is it based on a notion that I've executed? Or, am I merely acting according to "the plan" that's already been devised for me? And, hypothetically, if God decides that I will brutally murder someone in cold blood, but I don't want to be a murder, is there any way for me to go against His plans and avoid killing?
God is the only power, the power in and behind everything, but if that is where you find some objection, then there are many options of Shirk that are welcoming and ready to associate with God other creators. As for me though, I can not ever claim any other power or creative ability attributed to any but God, and this is a religion called Islam.
It is a religion that believes that deaths are not accidental even if they appear to be, but they are all precise and not even a minute of difference can be made in them.
These ideas are present in both the Bible and the Qur'an and elsewhere.
I'm not negating any of that, nor am I asserting the existence of another power beside God. I'm solely talking about control. God is certainly in control, but I think we disagree on the degree of control He exhibits.
Peace,Ahmad
-
Satan is given respite, so why is not all of the flesh also given respite?
Salaam
-
Peace, FreedomStands.
This is ultimately what my issue is, given the concept you presented. I would, of course, only concern myself with my immediate actions and activities, because I'm not consciously aware of other factors acting in accordance with a predetermined purpose and set of values. However, in reality, is it really ME acting at all? If God is the One Who made the decision that I'd do whatever I would do, and I have no power to usurp God's decree, then how am I in control of my actions? Logically, I have no choice but to do the thing that God ordained for me to do, whether I know these "plans" in advance or not. I'm not actually acting in accordance with anything I've decided, whether it seems to be so or not; I'm merely doing what God has dictated that I do, whether I'm consciously aware of His plans or not.
There is no freedom of choice as far as humans are concerned - there is only God's choice and determination.
So, if we view this rationally, how can I be held accountable for my (seeming) choices? For instance, if I choose to murder someone in cold blood, and I act according to this decision, how do we perceive this? Have I really made the decision to murder someone, or did God actually devise the plan? When I (seemingly) decided to take someone's life, is it based on a notion that I've executed? Or, am I merely acting according to "the plan" that's already been devised for me? And, hypothetically, if God decides that I will brutally murder someone in cold blood, but I don't want to be a murder, is there any way for me to go against His plans and avoid killing?
I'm not negating any of that, nor am I asserting the existence of another power beside God. I'm solely talking about control. God is certainly in control, but I think we disagree on the degree of control He exhibits.
Peace,Ahmad
What is the degree of control you think God exhibits and how is it possible that anything else has control that God has not designed, or put into action? Is there another power called "Chance" that God doesn't control and is also not programmed by God?
God has said in the Qur'an that the deaths of people and the spans of their life are specific, even the location in which they die is specific, so if you murder someone then how can it be said they died before their determined place and time?
The Qur'an at least seems to strongly point to total control of God.
One says then, why should we be punished for what God made us do?
It isn't like that though, its that God has created this concept called "punishment" or suffering and then designed some stories or individuals who are supposed to go through that, it is God freely creating whatever God wills. So God creates "kaffirs" and "muslims" and every detail of their life stories, they are just like works of art.
-
Religion = Tradition
The origin of tradition is as old as human civilization itself.
And tradition evolved over time.. up until now it's still evolving..Islam, Christianity, Judaism is not merely a Tradition it is an ORGANIZED TRADITION.
Invented by politician / the powerful to maintain tight control over the society and expand their realm.With world domination as it's ultimate goal it gives a good justification on why the society need to sacrifice their life in a war for the sake of the politician.
To achieve such justification each of the tradition mentioned above need to have a claim of SUPERIORITY.
- Islam/Christianity/Judaism uber alles..
- We are the choosen people
- Others are inferior (kuffar/goyim/pagan etc..)
Yet it also ironically portrait an INFERIOR deity..
The fight / war is for the glory of the deity.. to help Him fight the other deities from other tradition and proved their deity is superior than other deities..Salam / Peace
-
Religion = Tradition
The origin of tradition is as old as human civilization itself.
And tradition evolved over time.. up until now it's still evolving..Islam, Christianity, Judaism is not merely a Tradition it is an ORGANIZED TRADITION.
Invented by politician / the powerful to maintain tight control over the society and expand their realm.With world domination as it's ultimate goal it gives a good justification on why the society need to sacrifice their life in a war for the sake of the politician.
To achieve such justification each of the tradition mentioned above need to have a claim of SUPERIORITY.
- Islam/Christianity/Judaism uber alles..
- We are the choosen people
- Others are inferior (kuffar/goyim/pagan etc..)
Yet it also ironically portrait an INFERIOR deity..
The fight / war is for the glory of the deity.. to help Him fight the other deities from other tradition and proved their deity is superior than other deities..Salam / Peace
Though it may end up like that, all the various religions, even Hinduism and stuff seem to generally be talking about the same concepts or God pretty much.
-
Though it may end up like that, all the various religions, even Hinduism and stuff seem to generally be talking about the same concepts or God pretty much.
The Indus civilization introduce the conception of "Asakhyata" and "Ananta" to the world.
An originally religious / traditional concept which now commonly taught in 5th grade Math class around the world.
http//mathforum.org/dr.math/faq/infinity/numline.gifAsmkhyata is countless / cannot be counted but we know the value must be finite.
Ananta is endless or begin-less, a truly infinite23432942308490^1000000000000 is Asmkhyata for those without computers
While Brahman is Ananta
No beginning, no ending in all dimension, a true infinite.
In Yangtze civilization they recognized something called Tao which also possess Ananta characteristics..It's however not a 'deity'.. one that can be "persuaded" through ritual or sacrifice...
-
The very word Rahman itself means fullness or absoluteness. Brahman is likely having its etymological roots from that.
The "Rabb" is the sustainer or platform for such absoluteness. And the "Rabb" is not really a deity in traditional terms being separate but the one who is in it is it, and thus only the (allah) rahman is there.
That is the only way you get Oneness. The traditional sectarian Islam is actually dualistic even if those deluded will call it monotheism, since there is only one thing in existence and that is this Rabb and only those under its umbrella are existent who become Rahman (absolute). In that regard Hinduists are right. The rest Quran calls Al-mowt, i.e. lifeless, even if they appear to be alive in their bodies.
Jesus in the Biblical Gospels actually taught Hinduism even if the fools will not see it. He said one thing that can make people wake up "Let the dead bury their dead" implying that they were "al-mowt" and without any kindled spirit. I feel the comment was a bit sarcastic myself, but Jesus was only human. He meant it as a parable.
There is a point in the Biblical Old Testament when Moses meets "Rabb" and asks for the nature and the Rabb replies "I am that am I". Furthermore, the Rabb says to Moses to go to the Bani Israel saying "I AM has sent me", i.e. the reflexive form of himself. The text gives away even there about the integral part the Rabb has in humans rather than the Rabb being a separate deity for worship. Such practice is Paganism and banned in the "Ten Commandments" which message the malicious clerics did away with when interpreting them.
The second statute said "Do not take ANY image of anything in either Heaven or Earth and worship it". It is explicit, i.e. worship is not a question. That means also making the so-called Allah god into an image of worship (the word Allah comes from the root Alif-Lam-Lam. Look it up. Allah is root + ha )
Furthermore the malicious clerics changed what the first statute said "Serve/keep to inseparably (Elohi) uniquely (ahad)". Wahad means uniquely or in unity. The command says to BE IT. It does away with a separate god entity to worship but for the person to be symbiotic.
And when done this they reinforced the third statute "No vain talk!" That means do not question the doctrine or conjecture.
This made the separate god delusion to survive through the centuries.
Be well
-
The Indus civilization introduce the conception of "Asakhyata" and "Ananta" to the world.
An originally religious / traditional concept which now commonly taught in 5th grade Math class around the world.
http//mathforum.org/dr.math/faq/infinity/numline.gifAsmkhyata is countless / cannot be counted but we know the value must be finite.
Ananta is endless or begin-less, a truly infinite23432942308490^1000000000000 is Asmkhyata for those without computers
While Brahman is Ananta
No beginning, no ending in all dimension, a true infinite.
In Yangtze civilization they recognized something called Tao which also possess Ananta characteristics..It's however not a 'deity'.. one that can be "persuaded" through ritual or sacrifice...
Oh, I see, that is an interesting definition there. In my idea there is no persuasion either really.
-
The very word Rahman itself means fullness or absoluteness. Brahman is likely having its etymological roots from that.
The "Rabb" is the sustainer or platform for such absoluteness. And the "Rabb" is not really a deity in traditional terms being separate but the one who is in it is it, and thus only the (allah) rahman is there.
That is the only way you get Oneness. The traditional sectarian Islam is actually dualistic even if those deluded will call it monotheism, since there is only one thing in existence and that is this Rabb and only those under its umbrella are existent who become Rahman (absolute). In that regard Hinduists are right. The rest Quran calls Al-mowt, i.e. lifeless, even if they appear to be alive in their bodies.
Jesus in the Biblical Gospels actually taught Hinduism even if the fools will not see it. He said one thing that can make people wake up "Let the dead bury their dead" implying that they were "al-mowt" and without any kindled spirit. I feel the comment was a bit sarcastic myself, but Jesus was only human. He meant it as a parable.
There is a point in the Biblical Old Testament when Moses meets "Rabb" and asks for the nature and the Rabb replies "I am that am I". Furthermore, the Rabb says to Moses to go to the Bani Israel saying "I AM has sent me", i.e. the reflexive form of himself. The text gives away even there about the integral part the Rabb has in humans rather than the Rabb being a separate deity for worship. Such practice is Paganism and banned in the "Ten Commandments" which message the malicious clerics did away with when interpreting them.
The second statute said "Do not take ANY image of anything in either Heaven or Earth and worship it". It is explicit, i.e. worship is not a question. That means also making the so-called Allah god into an image of worship (the word Allah comes from the root Alif-Lam-Lam. Look it up. Allah is root + ha )
Furthermore the malicious clerics changed what the first statute said "Serve/keep to inseparably (Elohi) uniquely (ahad)". Wahad means uniquely or in unity. The command says to BE IT. It does away with a separate god entity to worship but for the person to be symbiotic.
And when done this they reinforced the third statute "No vain talk!" That means do not question the doctrine or conjecture.
This made the separate god delusion to survive through the centuries.
Be well
An excellent post MoF.
Thank you.
Usually your posts are quite long, but this one summarizes the essence very well!
It is interesting that you mention Jesus' message to bear Hinduism's contents, something that Schopenhauer noticed and emphasized too.Peace
-
An excellent post MoF.
Thank you.
Usually your posts are quite long, but this one summarizes the essence very well!
It is interesting that you mention Jesus' message to bear Hinduism's contents, something that Schopenhauer noticed and emphasized too.Peace
Based on what I read in the Gospel.. It seems this Jesus character teaches "Eastern Religion" customized for the Jews..
Eastern religion (Buddhism, Taoism, etc..) are focusing on DEEDS and that's why they're being labeled as "DHARMIC" religion (Dharma is a Sanskrit word for deed) in contrast to the western religion which are focusing on FAITH/BELIEF and RITUALS.Based on the writings in the Gospel; Jesus is focusing on DEEDS in contrast to Rabbanic Judaism who are focusing on RELIGION/RITUALS (Sabbath, beard, headscarf, stoning adulterer, destroying statue/idols, offering/sacrifice, prayer utterance etc..).
"Reap what you sow" is definitely a description of "Karmic" law originated from the east (Hinduism/Buddhism)
"Lead by serving", "Simple life" and "Haughty shall be humbled and humble shall be exalted" are definitely originated from Taoism -
Jafar,
That is because clerics and scholars pervert what one should do. Just see what Jesus of the Biblical Gospels says himself, speaking of forsaking the decree for their wicked traditions. There was never any ritualism but one should be whole in Brahman/Rahman by attaining its ways and cease to exist as a body but separate the spirit from the flesh as our friend Jesus said who taught more Hinduism or Buddhism than the Middle-Eastern Allah idolization faiths.
Even the word Allah itself means "Be Such Is" and refers (bismillah alrahman) to the "in spirit as Al-Rahman. Parallel that to Brahman in Hinduism, i.e. be in absoluteness.
And both Jesus and the eastern faiths teach similar to Gnosticism, that one should abstain from the flesh for it is but a distraction. In the real interpretation of Quran the 'Rabb' says the world is a 'contradiction'. The faith that existed and was strong called Manicheism but extinct in the second millennium was a kind of Gnosticism.
And Jesus said the kingdom (deen) is available right here right now while the malicious clerics teach you wait for a nonexistent resurrection. The only resurrection is in endless cycles of reincarnation called Gehennom (Gehenna/Hell). It is better to fix your life right now to be completed (Rahman) in your Rabb.
-
Based on what I read in the Gospel.. It seems this Jesus character teaches "Eastern Religion" customized for the Jews..
Eastern religion (Buddhism, Taoism, etc..) are focusing on DEEDS and that's why they're being labeled as "DHARMIC" religion (Dharma is a Sanskrit word for deed) in contrast to the western religion which are focusing on FAITH/BELIEF and RITUALS.Based on the writings in the Gospel; Jesus is focusing on DEEDS in contrast to Rabbanic Judaism who are focusing on RELIGION/RITUALS (Sabbath, beard, headscarf, stoning adulterer, destroying statue/idols, offering/sacrifice, prayer utterance etc..).
"Reap what you sow" is definitely a description of "Karmic" law originated from the east (Hinduism/Buddhism)
"Lead by serving", "Simple life" and "Haughty shall be humbled and humble shall be exalted" are definitely originated from TaoismThank you Jafar for the clarification and argumentation.
As you are a true erudite, it is always a pleasure to read your enlightening posts.Peace