Beautiful! It's indeed refreshing to read somthing like this once in a while. This is a pointer towards real tawheed. Beautiful!

No, we are playing with words. We use the term believe with a variety of meanings and then finally everybody is happy he is right, just have in your head that particular meaning of "believe".

If you know of course you believe, it would be idiotic not believing something you do know.

The belief that the Qur'an speaks about is not the "faith" without proof that some people take for believing. The believing of the Qur'an is the one based on conviction. The belief that comes from having gone through several stages of questionning and enquiring and digesting and checking that allows you to be convinced of something. That I think is what the faith in Qur'an means, al yaqin.

Salaam

I definately agree that it mostly becomes a play with words, a semantic game, and then misunderstandings arise, either willfully and by mistake. Politics, and I guess much of human communication, is like this. I guess it stems from that we all in fact live in our own worlds, with our own unique perspectives, and sometimes the overlap is very large and sometimes it is not so large.

When I say 'believe', I mean anything which you do not have direct experience of. Which means alot of things.
Conviction can be based on different degrees of honesty and reason.
The one with blind religious faith has conviction, but so do you when you have e.g. observed something for a long time, pondered on it, heard different view points about it and then drawn a sensible conclusion about it.

People can have faith, believe or be convinced, yet without actually knowing. Real knowing is rare. But I think the most important point is not whether you know or not, but rather whether you admit that you don't actually know something for sure, regardless of your convictions, beliefs or faith.

Admitting you don't know keeps doors open. But people are afraid of that. What if something they are convinced of suddenly becomes less convincing? Scary! People are actually afraid of letting go of certain beliefs. Fear.

sun

But then again... it's all about words.

Isn't the whole marriage and monogamy business all about 1) social stability, and 2) personal stability (practical, financial, psychological, physical...)
Not sure same sex unions is rejected here. What would be the point to reject it?
Just pondring. Not taking any particular side.

Reminds me of Sweden. They have clubs for that.

Clubs for what??

I agree with Jafar that not knowing isn?t the worst of things actually it?s maybe even humbling but I also think not knowing makes one feel deficient.

Hey all,

People feel deficient and lost when in a state of not knowing. That's why people 'believe' stuff. A belief is comforting and soothing... something you can hook your mind and identity on. A crutch.
But people often claim to know when they actually only believe. You 'believe' when you actually 'don't know'. But it's hard to admit.

I haven't yet felt like watching it... maybe some other time.
But the over-sexualisation in society is evident to me anyway.
For example, virtually all music is about sex, at least the main stream music.

It is actually exactly like drug abuse, but even more tricky.

It's like drugs because is causes physical pleasure.
Physical pleasure always turns into mental pleasure (because they are two sides of the same coin).
Mental pleasure can easily turn into habits and then addiction.

The tricky thing is that sex is a natural biological drive which is something good. So, cocaine is not something natural, normal and good, but sex is. Because it is natural and good, it is harder to see when it is going too far.

But sex is just one aspect of human life which can go wrong. It seems the human being can make just about any aspect go wrong. In some cultures where sex is taboo and repressed, violence is often glorified and takes the role of the perversion of the society. Small children running around with toys looking like real weapons pretending to kill each other. Innocent? Well, there are degrees to everything.

In some places sex is perverted, in others violence is perverted. They are all basic human emotions or drives.

One society looks down upon the sexual one and its vulgarity and perversion, whil the other society looks down upon the violent one and its vulgarity and perversion. Just different aspects of the same set of human weaknesses. Holier-than-you is a stupid way to go.

The whole point is that we are very un-spiritual. We are very carnal... indulging in sex and violence... and other stuff like greed, pride and arrogance. We are slaves to our basic, carnal emotions and drives... the beast. We are so close to the beast, and so far from the spirit.

As individual pieces of life (yet parts of a whole), spirits, we have been injected into this physical realm for some time. Spirit is impregnated into the dust and clay, and after a few years, we, the spirit, are released and the dust and clay is returned to this planets physical realm. But while in this robe of clay, we turn blind to our spiritual identity, and instead start identifying with our highly temporary vehicle of this body and Earth. We identify with our body, gender, race, looks, and even the mental constructions like ethnicity, religion, creed, ideology, memories, experiences. Yes, all these make us unique, but this is still not the real us. We are pieces of life, deep inside a marvelous physical-mental matrix of clay and dust. But regardless of how fantastic this physical realm is, there is more to it, but we miss it because we don't know how to sense it. This is the challenge of life, to stop being a blind slave to it in terms of real awareness.

I think it is equally crucial not to seriously associate anything with ourselves, just like we are told not to associate anything with God... and for pretty much the same reason.

)

Peace Zulf.
What do you make of Qoran?

Does it not answer thisWho says we know about 'one true God' now?

There is nothing here under the sun that has not been taught by someone or something.

GOD bless you.
Peace.

The Quran? I don't know. But I'm biased in favor of divine inspiration... but I find interpretations disturbing.
So, if I find something disturbing, it can be for different reasons.
I will always be biased and subjective, but the question is to what extent and in what questions.
I can be biased and at the same time right or wrong.
Perhaps I find stuff disturbing simply because the text interpretations are wrong, against common sense and reason... but common sense and reason are at the same time very subjective.
But I think it is best if we cross reference everything against everything else, if you know what I mean. Insight can come from anywhere, or be triggered by anything.

From experience it seems like this
Nobody is right about everything. You can find people who are really enlightened or insightful about something, and then they have very odd ideas about something else.
So, nobody is perfect in knowledge and understanding. When you realize this you can avoid disappointment. Some people are not comfortable with such disappointment and instead prefer perfect people with perfect knowledge, and so they get stuck in sects and what not.

I actually think that the brain/mind/intellect is a sharp double edged sword.
It is a curse upon us, a burden and challenge, while at the same time we can fine tune it and use it to understand it's dangers and thereby avoid being trapped in blindness by it.
The intellect can enslave you, but also be used to make your way forward and design thinking habits which prevent you from being intellectually enslaved/blinded.
"I don't know" is much better that a false and factually incorrect idea.

sun

Would someone know he/she is commiting idolatry if that person lived away from multi-cultural civilizations and before the Internet? In other words, happen you did not know about "one true God", would you "shirk"?

Who says we know about 'one true God' now?
All we know is what we are taught and what we get from our interpretations of old texts.
Multi-cultural settings are nothing but several mono-cultures side by side. Shifting from one to another COULD be like staying within only one. From one, to another one.

My point is only that things might not be as clear and straight forward as many religious people may claim.
Cheers
O0

I wonder exactly how people make partners equal to God.
What are some examples?
I've never seen any cases where people have an all-mighty God, and then they keep another entity beside God who is of equal powers. Not even Hinduism seems to be doing this.
Perhaps in cases where some group might argue that the creator is not all-mighty and then have other powers filling those gaps... but are there any examples of that in the world?

All the best

Greetings all,

Just some questions...

What is Allah?
How do you believe in Allah?
Experience, cultural blind faith or philosophical assumption?
I cannot see any differences between so called believers and non-believers except for rituals and claims of faith. No differences in
attitude or behavior.

How do you follow the guidance of Allah?
What is this guidance? Books? What about all interpretations which in turn end up pretty much subjective?
Is there some other guidance?

How do you set up partners with Allah?
Can Allah even have partners? Isn't that a contradiction in terms?

What does 'partner' mean anyway?
Aren't we all agents of the Creator in various odd ways?

When we get a grip on this, perhaps we can approach what shirk might mean... -\ o ignore ;D

The main brainwashing today is feminism, socialism, parliamentary majoritism (commonly referred to as democracy), etc.

1. Can feminism be only one thing?
2. What is socialism to you??
3. What are alternatives to democracy that are better?
4. Who is doing this brainwashing?

Yes, Kamal Salibi lifted the lid of the free for all that are the stories of the bible, but the books by Pazuzu go much deeper and thoroughly ont he wghole business, which is logical, because the first time that somebody discovers some new aspect of something, of course, it must be somewhat tentative. Nobody never has come out with a whole new view and it has come out already perfect with everything fitting and without any flaws. If it was so humanity would have no history nor history would have been corrected so manyt imes.

Today Egytology is not what was when it started and where everything about ancient Egypt was nonsense from the bible and some more nonsense of projecting back on Egypt the history of Greece and Rome.

In Ehyptology nothing has ever been discovered that matches the Bible stories. And it is not lack of documents and writings that prevents there being something about those stories if they had ever happenned. In fact if there was even a little piece of Egyptian documentation of them, we would have been served that piece to saturation.

With all my respct for Kamal Salibi, because it took a great deal of vision and guts to put forward his view, the books by Pazuzu deserve to be read by themselves. May be he also is nto 100% infallible, but certainly what he says, is far more founded and satisfying that the third or fourth hand stories of the bible, as regards Egypt.

And the last nail on the thing is the Qur'an itself. The contents of the Qur'an do not support the idea that the events adscribed to Egypt happenned there, in the same way that what the Qur'an says about 3isa does not match what the gospels say about Jesus.

Salaam

I agree with what Huruf says.

Also

1. Pazuzu is inspired by Salibi, but doesn't rely on his work.
2. Pazuzu is human, i.e. fallible and not perfect. It is unwise to accept or reject something in its entirety. Evaluate each piece of info.
3. If one wants to pass judgement on Pazuzu's work, then at least read ALL of it, and not just bits and pieces.
4. Pazuzu cross references religious texts with non-religious material such as poetry, historical records and maps, focusing mostly on name places. I would like to see people pointing out inconsistencies and flaws in detail, not in general.

Greatings all,

People don't seem to be able to tell the difference between 'know' and 'believe'.
Religion (all religions) is all about believing and believers.
Simply, when you don't know, then you believe.
It's would be better to admit not to know, because then you will be open.
Once you believe, you pretend in front of yourself that you know, while you actually only believe, and doors close.
We know what we know, and we don't know what we don't know.

All problems of the world are of a two-fold cause

1. We believe (i.e. we don't know, but claim to know)
2. We identify with our beliefs (because we have no clue what we are)

Then our minds, in an attempt for self-preservation, clash with anyone who has a different belief.

Religions are almost nothing but belief.
Honestly, how much do we really KNOW about what our religions teach? How much?

Something will advance if there are alot of people of the same vibration carrying it forward.
A bad system will also flourish if there are lots of people who follow their carnal delusion.
As people wake up to reality, good things will automatically happen to them.
As far as the different systems of the world are concerned, they will only be as good as the people who propagate it.

'God alone' is only as good as how realistic people's understanding of 'God' and 'alone' is.
Might be a bit better than other religious movements, in that it is less dogmatic and less fearful to dissent.

The more we subscribe to 'I don't know', the more chance we have to get closer to truth and reality. As soon as we declare that we 'know', we close the door to insights. In this way, religions are the most sure way AWAY from knowledge, insight and improvement.

We should be straight enough to admit 'I don't know'. Either we know, or we don't. That we don't know, instead we have faith in. Faith is not the same as knowing. In this way, the religious believer and the atheist are the same. They all claim to know. Belief and disbelief are the same.

So, advancement may occur once we admit what we don't know, and stop identifying with what we believe in.

Well, we identify with all that is of this physical world... like the body (race, gender, sexual preferences, talents), environment (family, nationality, religion, profession), and mind (aptitudes, likes and dislikes, memories, experiences, education, temperament) etc.

This is what we think we are. But perhaps we are something else, beyond body/mind/environment.
We argue about God when we don't even know our selves.

We identify with all that is not really us.

The lowest level of this kind of identification is when we become too much like an animal... instinctive drives, hormones, survival etc. It is then that we rape, murder and steal. We are totally driven by fear and chemicals in a basic survival mode... like an animal out of control. In media today, everything is about sex, greed and murder. Everywhere sex, and our heroes are assassins and money will happiness and status.

What a failure

Nice diagram

This is why we should not associate anything with Rabb, because it will just create images, which necessarily are incorrect.
The human mind is very fond of personifying everything, even God. Disaster, or at least delusion, is the consequence.
We even associate things with ourselves that have nothing to do with our real selves. We limit ourselves and others, and so bloodshed, supremacy and the like come as a natural consequence.

The way out of our human condition is to learn about our real nature, or at least approach it as much as possible. Unfortunately, religion doesn't seem to teach this anymore. To the contrary, religion is just a huge identity masturbation, which effectively takes us away from reality.

Identity, Peace and Misery

Such rules clearly show that the Islam that is being described is totally and completely about identity. This characteristic (being all about identity) is also what totally ruins it in the face of reality and truth.
In general, when we human beings engage in identity politics, identity hobbies, or any other kind of identity illusions, we end up inviting and establishing segmentation, discrimination, supremacy, separation and all such things that effectively destroy the peace on Earth between people.

When we identify with things like religion, sects, ideologies, professions and any other characteristics like tribes, blood lineage, gender, sexual inclination or aptitudes, we are essentially doing what we are told not to do when it come to God, i.e. to associate anything with God. It is clear that even associating things with ourselves creates havoc in the world. By identifying with all these things that we essentially are not, we move away from reality, and into illusion and misery.

Intolerance, shame and excuses

Such rules, that evict you from the "fold of Islam" by the slightest act of thinking in a natural way, also clearly shows that this system has something to hide. There is something rotten and to avoid the shame of exposure, harsh and strict rules are needed to curb any kind of questioning and thinking.

When somebody or something cannot be discussed, questioned or criticized, we know that something is sore and something is kept hidden. Only healthy things can stand and tolerate an open, transparent and critical review.

Basically, when the instrument of Politically Correctness kicks in and shuts your thinking and talking down, then we know that we have something at hand that is not healthy and sound, and which therefore cannot tolerate examination. That which cannot be questioned and discussed is in someway diseased, and political correctness is used to hide the shame.

In essence, the human being is frightened, scared. When you have no peace of mind, or peace from an erratic and autonomous mind, and hence no connection to the all-connectedness of Creation, then you necessarily become fearful and see threats everywhere.

If I may generalize a bit, right-wingers are seeing a threat in all that they are not grown up with. When Islam comes, they suddenly turn Christian. They hate gays and anything that is not the majority norm. It is plain old fear. Then of course, all sorts of reasons are used as excuses for their points of view Culture, religion, freedom, welfare of the elderly, preservation of race and language, and what-not. The common denominator is however always fear, and the defense against a threat. Basically, such people's minds view the world as a place full of threats... regardless of context.

Left-wingers, in my opinion, are living in denial, which is another defence strategy of the mind. They want to believe that there are no differences among people. Forget judging.. they deny the existence of differences altogether.

An example of these groupings is Sweden, where people seem to be either left, or right, and not many in the public eye at least, are sensibly neutral and down to earth. Either you hate/dislike everything about immigrants (except the food, which is not something particularly threatening), or you insist that all immigrants are just like swedes (apart from skin color and language). Things like cultural pros and cons and habits and temperament are ignored and denied.

Either standpoint is extreme and not realistic. Right-wingers go full out on fearful defence thinking, while left-wingers go full out on willful and ignorant gullibility and naivety.

All in all it is all about FEAR. Lack of peace of mind, maturity, experience and wisdom brings fear to the mind. Then there are different ways to deal with fear, as I mentioned above... right or left, anger or denial.

Cheers )

those who ate contamination and toxins by accident or intentionally will not be judged on the Day of Judgement for eating it,

Sure? Aren't we being judged for everything we do?

but they will be judged for eating pig meat. So pig meat is by far more dangerous than toxins and contamination.

I wonder how it is dangerous... more than other meats.
Seems like blind faith to me, even in my case.
Is it about just testing your blind faith.. or is there something more to it, physical?

peace

Peace all,
Sorry for being a smart-a$$, but I think it would be wise for people in this thread to take the emotional levels down a notch. Anyone who really wants answers and a debate should perhaps consider keeping it simple, to the topic, and not quote each separate sentence in the adversary's post and reply with an equally small response/question, making each post frustratingly fragmented and deviating and thus rendering the chances for proper responses highly unlikely. Stick to one issue and finish it off when it leads no further.

If Satan would have been a separate spirit being, then he would have been sitting laughing at the emotional bickering that is going on here.

Reset!

Cheers