|
The following debate is taken from The
Society For Islamic Humanists
Ethicalhumanist
message # 337
Dear Zahid: I know time is a scarce commodity for you,
so I decided to summarize my questions to you in a single
post (almost like a question paper!) -- and you don't have
to waste time searching for my questions from previous
posts. When you answer, please refer to the questions with
the pre-assigned numbers (1 to 7).
Question #1: Bipedalsim (two legged walking) among early
hominids arose 4 million years ago when arboreal
(tree-based travelling ceased) among our ancestors.
Following that rational thought and reasoning arose 2
millions years ago with the coming of homo habilis
(stone-age tool maker) who embarked on goal-based problem
solving. Why did God or Gods wait until 10,000 years ago
to announce their presence as evidenced by paleolithic
painting and evidence of burial and worship found in
caves? Why were other Gods eliminated to accommodate a
single God?
Question #2: Before you judge others' knowledge, it is
imperative a committee of learned people of the field in
question to declare that you are knowlegeable in that
field and you are worthy enough to guide or judge others.
Every man or woman goes through such a process before
attaining the pinnacle in scholarly (Ph.D.) or theological
(e.g., Dalai Lama -- he has to pass several viva-voce and
written exams before the title is conferred on him) areas.
If I am missing a point, please enlighten me as to your
credentials.
Question #3: What is your opinion on Padre Pio: http://www.padrepio.com/
Does God communicate through multiple means and methods.
Or do you say that miracles from other traditions are
false and figments of one's imagination since they do not
concur with what the Islamic tradition has to say.
Question #4: As you mentioned rightly, you look things in
your perspective -- i.e., Islam, the revealtions of
Islam's God, and its traditions; whereas I am looking from
a variety of sources: Philosophy, anthropology, cosmology,
theology (of all shades and hues),etc., without making my
opinions a slave to anyone field or an individual. In life
each one has to follow our conscience: you follow yours
and I will follow mine. Again, as long as we respect each
others rights and do not infringe on others rights that's
fine. Because that is the theme we require everywhere for
a peaceful and betterment of humanity. And, finally, no
one tradition or religion holds the truth. As a secular
humanist I strive for progress based on freedom of thought
and expression. I do not say that people who do not listen
to me are doomed. Do you think that people who don’t
listen to you or Islamic teachings will be doomed? (burn
in hell or something on those lines)
Question #5
So why don’t you make your position clear by answering
this question: Should religion be a private matter between
an individual and his or her God(s), or should people be
forced to accept an individual’s view point due to fear
of retribution Furthermore, should everyone be forced to
practice religion whether they like it or not due to the
insistence of a theocratic government.
What is your call on this?
Question #6: You have not commented on the killings in
Algeria, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, and a bunch of other
so called Islamic countries. Do you know that slavery
exists in the Sudan?
Question #7: Please take a few moments and read the
following two links:
(on the origin of Koran)
http://theatlantic.com/issues/99jan/koran.htm
and (the story of Abraham)http://www.humanist.net/publications/humanist/articles/delaney.html
The intent here is for some stimulating discussion and not
to change opinions. We are best left the way we are:
"You go your way and I will go mine."
Would love to hear your views and critical comments.
Thanks,
EH
Zahid
Messages # 341,342
Thank You EH, for this, i will try my best to see how i
can answer this.
1) Bipedalism is a thing or charachteristic which
separates Humans from Animals. Nobody is Sure of the
Origins of it, so telling anything about it is in vain.
What do you mean that other gods were eliminated to
accomodate a single God. There was always a single God
concept in the Huiman Histoy. People made gods so satisfy
their will. I Read a Book, a book on Philosophy, probably
its title was, "The Origin of the Gods", or
maybe that was a chapter in that, in that how the Author
described the Concept of Gods Emerged. Maybe if someday
you get the Reference of that, tell it to me.
2) YEs You Are Right About that. As i said, i am not a
very Learned Person in the feild of Religion. My Other
GEneral Qualifications can be found on My Homepage, but
that wont Prove anything. OK, i Do Hold a Diploma in Bible
Studies from the Living Life Bible Society (if i am not
wrong). Except that, i Have Learned some basic Sanskrit
once, and Have Read Geeta and Upanishad in Hindi, but that
was some 7 years back. and As far as Quran is Concerned no
i not hold any Qualification except that i have read
Different translations of it myself, and one day plan to
Memorize it. I Know that wont be 1/10th of yours, but yes
i am a student in this feild, and i have other
restrictions, otherwise i might have had some more
knowledge like you. Since i am new in my Feild, i like to
dedicate more time to that, and some day i will dedicate
my life for Islam.
3) I do not comment on Miracles which are perforemd by
people. Christians Perform Miracles in name of Jesus, so
what here People Perform Miracles in namre of Sai Baba,
and in the Name of Various Religious Persons. Like you
must be knowing People going to Kabrastan, and asking in
the Name of Baba or Walis, and they get things and
Miravcles (what you say) do happen. But is that a Criteria
for Judgement. Whu does this happen. It is a test from
Allah (now i know you are thinking of me as a fanatic, but
cool down). He Gives You Free will, but He decides the
Situation himself. Otherwise how would you call his test a
proper test. Someday i dream, that i am going to be a
Millionare, and i find a Wallet full of 1000$ notes, what
would i do. Do i say that it is a miiracle and keep it, or
do i earch the onwer and return it, just to remain poor as
i was. In Hope you see the Logic what i wan to say.
4) Well EH, a very good way to ask a question, after
reading this, i remembered a story in Bible. Where once
Jews come and Ask to Jesus, "Should we pay Tax".
If he says yes, then they will say he is a Ceasers Man,
and if no, they will tell Ceaser that he is opposing the
tax system. So, let me answer you in this way, that since,
I Believe that Quran is true, for the Numerous facts which
have been found, the others will also be true.
5) Religion is always a private matter. Quran does say
"Let thewre be no compulsion in religion" right!
I was Going through a book once, and i came across this
book by Bertrand Russel(if i recall it correctly). There
he said, that till the 20th Century Islam was a very
Tolerant religion, and the Europe as a whole was
Intolerant....and now its because of some wrong leaders
Teaching of Islam has been changed." (i do not recall
exactly, but this was conveyed).
6) No i dont know that slavery still exists in Quran.
About the Other killings, please clarify. If you are
telling me the RExecution of people carried out for crime
by people in Saudia, yes i do support it, and you can
compare the crime rate difference in Saudia and USA. If
you are talking of those Bomb Blast things, and millitancy
i do not support it, since it is not Islamic.
7)Now regarding your Links, i wonder what you require. You
can see Islam Awareness Homepage in Quran section for the
Authenticity of Quran. Yemen was a land of Fitna. After
our Prophet, too many prophets appeared over there,
claiming to be Muhammed(pbuh), so "Abou Bakr Al sedik"
the Caliph, fought with them and brought to common sense.
As for the Egyptian Nasr Abou Zeid, no one seems to have
heard of Him. Remember Pal, on the Net people write
things, and claim things, which are not there. I cross
Checked with a lot of People about this Person, he Does
NOT EXIST or NO ONE HEARD OF HIM. So, now what thing you
gave was a wrong thing :). This was Hindus have come up
with a thing known as TEJO MALI which they say, that Taj
Mahal was a Temple by the name Tejo Mali. And Muslims made
it a Tomb and now they wanna fight for it. If you read it
for the first time you will feel that they are saying the
truth. Then somebody found out that it is a big lie, and a
joke, but they distorted so many minds. So please do not
believe on things like this :).
Ethicalhumanist
Message #351
Zahid: First of all let me thank you for taking the
time to come up with your answers and opinions. For the
sake of convinience let us work out an indexing system. My
threads to the questions numbered 1 through 7 will go with
odd numbers. For example, my reply to your answers will be
1.1, 1.3, with respect to question #1. And if you wish to
respond, to 1.1, your answer will be 1.2; and my answer to
your response # 1.2 will be 1.3; your answer to 1.3 will
be 1.4 and so on. The same logic applies to other
questions as well. For example, 2.1, 2.3, 2.5 (replies
from EH), and 2.2, 2.4, 2.6, etc. (replies from Zahid). I
hope you agree to this. And this in the hope that you will
continue to respond until the issue is resolved one way or
the other.
Thanks,
EH
Message #352
Thread 1.1:
Zahid says: "Bipedalism is a thing or charachteristic
which separates Humans from Animals. Nobody is Sure of the
Origins of it, so telling anything about it is in
vain." Who told you that nobody is sure about the
origins of bipedalism???!!! It is written and discussed in
many volumes on anthropology, evolution, etc., from
Darwin's time, including many peer-reviewed scientific
journals (not the web pages with drivel exsisting on the
Internet). The Paleoanthropologists Mary and Richard
Leakey have published several papers which discuss the
change in the anatomic structures of the hip and knee
joints (in the hominid genus: Australopithecus) to clearly
demonstrate the evolution from quadripedal and arboreal
locomotion. If you want to get some current thought on it
you can read authors such as Richard Dawkins, Stephen Jay
Gould, among many, many others. In other words, we have
evolved from animals, and in terms of cognition and
culture the prefrontal cortex of the brain is the
clinching factor. How do you know that animal's lack
culture and teaching. For instance, recent studies have
shown that Chimps have a culture and teach other on the
usage of tools (stones) for nut cracking and twigs to fish
out ants.
Zahid says: "There was always a single God concept in
the Huiman Histoy. ". You are totally wrong and off
the mark. The early homosapiens (humans) worshiped
multiple Gods and formed a metaphor and linked them with
the Sun, moon, wind, fire, earth, etc. And then came Zeus,
Mithra, Shiva, etc. I think no culture or civilization
began worship by proclaiming there is only one God. It has
always been a process of reduction. Perhaps there will be
a time when One God (1) will become Zero (0).
Zahid also said: "People made gods so satisfy their
will". Since you say this, it appears that even the
single God who was procalimed specially by the Jews and
the Muslims was made by semitic tribes in the Middle East
to "SATISFY THEIR WILL"!!!
-EH
Message # 353
1.2
Zahid you say: "I Know that wont be
1/10th of yours, but yes i am a student in this feild, and
i have other restrictions, otherwise i might have had some
more knowledge like you. " Please don't take me wrong
and think that I am trying to parade my knowledge. My
question #2 to you was to know what you know, since you
started to judge my knowledge and concluded that I do not
know much about Islam. Perhaps nobody on this earth knows.
Even a Ph.D. in Islam will learn something new every day.
I feel humbled when I think of how much knowledge exists
out there from the time of Aristotle and even before to
the year 1999. We as a whole (humanity) do not know much,
nor is it possible to have an encyclopedic knowledge of
every field which exists out there. Although recent
philosphers in the U.S. say that education should be
designed for consilience -- i.e., bringing together of
knowledge from diverse areas. For example, I would say
that a computer science graduate's education is incomplete
if he does not know a little of areas such as history,
philosophy, ethics, psychology, etc. So it is a common
quest for all humanity to learn and share knowledge. It is
nice to know that you have taken the effort to formally
learn about the bible, Sanskrit, and the Upanishads. In
fact, you may have seen the common theme they all have:
mythologies and Good vs. Evil, and who triumphs, of
course, the Good. In fact, the Bhagavad Gita is a classic
example. Humanity always needed such stories to triumph in
the face of hardships and dangers. Finally, I would say
that all humanity put together perhaps knows only 1/10th
of the entire knowledge exists out there. Keep learning,
keep reading and expand your horizon. If you wish to take
inspiration from Islam go for it; never look back; and
commit that you will recognize that individuals differ
greatly from one another and are capable of choosing paths
best suited for them to attain salvation, nirvana, or
whatever they wish to attain. And believe your religion is
unto to you and avoid coaxing and cajoling others into
accepting your interpretation of life and God. As for me,
a secular democracy is fine since it allows people to
follow their conscience without infringing on others'
rights.
-EH
Zahid
Message #359
***1.2***
Thats a nice way EH for the game, i will try to be Quick,
but if i am a bit late, do excuse me, as i gnereally have
lot of work, so in the Night Cyber Cafe's Close down
early, and accesing this site from Company is a risk :)
Regarding Darwins Theory you are seeing Just One sided
View of the Darwins Theory. Today The Researchers Do not
Hold True DARWINS Theory. I think you did not see
"Chamber and Spencers" Paper on Evolution, which
is contrary to Darwin and also Lewontins Paper. They have
also Published Numerous Papers, look at them. Thats why i
said that.
In fact there were 2 Thesis, which i had a look once on
this topic, where the authors had explained why it failed
completely. And now you wont find this theory in text
books any more, why ???
When i said, there was a single God in Human History, i
said if you see the Scriptures which exist, you will find
it. The Hindus for Example have 33 Crore Gods, where do
they came from. See the Vedas, there as such is only one
god. Then for their own sake they expand one to many,
saying that they are attributes or something that sort.
They have the Same Funda as christins, like God is one in
Many.
Ethicalhumanist
Message #362
1.3
Dear Zahid: It was a very interesting reply. Can you give
me the exact citation (journal name, year, issue number
and page numbers) for the article referred to you by
Chambers and Spencers and the one by Lewontins. I hope you
are not getting carried away by what you are hearing and
reading on the Internet vicariously. Let me make it clear:
I always try to get my information from peer-reviewed
journals where an editorial committee (peers) verifies the
validity of the finding before it is allowed to be
published. And personally I have gone through that process
myself when publishing papers from the research studies I
have done. I would say that there are two kinds of
sources, which are fairly reliable: (1) peer-reviewed
scientific journals such as Science, Nature, Journal of
Physical Anthropology, Learning and Cognition, etc.; and
(2) reliable media such as CNN, Time, Newsweek, Atlantic
magazine, which are reputed since they practice sincere
journalism where they cover both sides of an issue
(freedom of press in honest terms) and do not indulge in
propagandistic word play. For example, they are not like
Cine Blitz which published the gossip of Bollywood. So
likewise I suggest that when it comes to scientific work
or even opinions about certain matters do not stick with
private web pages. You are welcome to quote from such web
pages in this forum but you should do so with a disclaimer
stating that it is one or a few person’s opinions which
have not been critically reviewed.
Now let me explain more about Darwinian theory. What
people confuse about Darwinian theory is that they think
that evolution is totally random and is based on one-step
selection, similar to the one I gave in my previous post
about typing of the sentence (Zahid is Best Islamic
Thinker). And it appears to me that you seem to have
fallen for that. Neo-Darwinists such have a Hawkins and
Gould have modified the theory in that they state that it
is not one step selection where random tries are given
until an elegant solution is obtained (for example, the
ability to see through a well developed organ such as an
eye, or the ability to walk on two legs). It is, in fact,
a process of “CUMULATIVE SELECTION” where the previous
solution is used as the building block to refine it
further and develop the next solution. So the example of
typing that sentence is one-step selection, where every
attempt begins with a totally new random selection, which
is not the right method to interpret Darwinian theory.
However, cumulative selection starts with random mutation
of the genes but refines itself from that point onwards
– in a nonrandom manner -- to adapt to the environment
and becomes better and better. You and me and our
descendents will keep evolving since it is unstoppable.
Some times completely random mutations do take place since
the genes do not know what environmental changes to expect
– and most of the times they lead to congenital birth
defects (six fingers, two heads, and changes in the
autonomic nervous and immune systems). And sometimes these
nonrandom changes end up being helpful. I hope you are
clear about it now. If you are a total disbeliever in
Darwinian theory, than I would like to know from you,
whether birds, animals, trees, and humans fell out of the
sky??? Or perhaps you might say that God used clay to
mould them?
As far as Gods are concerned you fail to see the fact that
humans always take a anthropomorphic view of things around
them. Does a country have two kings? Does your institution
have two principles? Does India’s cricket team have two
or five captains? Institutions are lead by one person and
governed by a bunch of people. For example, a Prime
Minister and a bunch of ministers for this and that. So
the same concept applies to the human’s approach of
making Gods until Moses came with the idea of one God.
-EH
Message #363
3.1
Zahid: You say you don’t believe non-Islamic miracles
by stating “Christians Perform Miracles in name of
Jesus, so what here People Perform Miracles in namre of
Sai Baba, and in the Name of Various Religious Persons.”
How is that you believe in the miracle of the Angle
Gibrael coming down from the heavens and communicating
with a lonely human sitting in a cave, who later is
proclaimed as a Prophet. (note: this is not to be deemed
as an attack on anybody’s sacred belief systems; but
such statements are necessary for critical analysis). You
also say “It is a test from Allah (now i know you are
thinking of me as a fanatic, but cool down). He Gives You
Free will, but He decides the Situation himself.” You
seem to be contradicting yourself: “Freewill” and
“He decides the Situation himself”. If God is
omniscient He will a priori know the outcome of the
freewill he gives to humans. So from your statement it
appears that God gave Adolf Hitler freewill, following
which Hitler exercised it to fulfill his plan he sketched
out for the Jewish problem(Final Solution) in Germany in
his book Mein Kempf, and promptly executed 6 million Jews
in the holocaust. The existence of freewill appears to be
governed by one’s internal value system, external
environment, and at a neurotransmitter level by dopamine
(reward and punishment). Is it God given? I would strongly
doubt it and it is questionable. If one goes by
Skinner’s stimulus-response theory of stimulus,
response, conditioning, etc., the thesis of “God
given” freewill sounds vapid!
-EH
Message # 372
4.1
Zahid your faith is deep and profound and you have found
your calling in Islam, the Koran – and it gives you a
lot of meaning in life. Furthermore, I should hereby
conclude that your “faith” in Islam makes you believe
that it is God’s word and is irrevocable. And, I should
also add that you think that the Koranic revelations are
out of bounds for human analysis, and if at all someone
comes up with a rational explanation (e.g., the link to
the article on Koran’s origin in the Atlantic Monthly)
you are bound to summarily conclude that they are false.
On those grounds (don’t take me wrong), according to the
Western civilization’s interpretation of people
accepting the scriptures as the word of God on blind
faith, you will be categorized as a fundamentalist. In my
opinion, you are just acting out your deep and profound
psychological need for a creator and to take solace in Him
(or Her?). And this has been the case in a vast majority
of humans from the dawn of civilization. I would accept
this question to be resolved, if you accept that
individuals differ within and between religions greatly
and should be left to discover the meaning of life at a
personal level without infringing the liberty of others.
This applies to me as well. I do not want to indoctrinate
you with my ideas but only demonstrate to you in a civil
manner that I greatly differ from your interpretation of
the meaning of life; I want you to blossom in life, but if
you were to become a leader of a nation or community and
if I were to be a citizen , I will not accept you if you
persecute me for my beliefs -- on the lines of freedom of
religion, thought, and conscience.
-EH
Message # 373
5.1
You are right about Europe being intolerant. Before the
reformation, enlightenment, and renaissance periods in the
second millenium of the modern era, Europe was a hell-hole
due to the policies of the catholic church. In the case of
Islam you say – and people have said – that “There
he said, that till the 20th Century Islam was a very
Tolerant religion, and the Europe as a whole was
Intolerant....and now its because of some wrong leaders
Teaching of Islam has been changed." But you seem to
be forgetting the Arab imperialism (similar to European
colonialism) which followed the rise of Islam. The Arab
armies conquered nations all the way up to Spain (e.g.,
the caliphate of Cordoba/the Moors; luckily the Moors
broke away from the Meccan Arabs and allowed culture to
flourish due to the synergy of Christian, Moslem, and
Jewish cultures). In our own subcontinent (10th century),
Mohammed Bin Qasim arrived as an invader and defeated the
Raja of Sind. He and his Arab army were not invited into
the sub-continent to enlighten the local populace and free
them from their idols. Mahumud of Ghazni’s raids on the
Somnath temple (and other temples) are legendary. I
don’t see any tolerance in Islam before the 20th
century. Islam was a convenient vehicle for imperialistic
expansion for the Arab and the Ottaman empires. That is
the problem when religion is mixed with politics. I have
no problems if Islam is used at the personal level to
nourish the soul. Well I should conclude that in the 20th
century Osama bin Laden has replaced Mahumud of Ghazni.
Hope more enlightened thinkers like you arrive on the
horizon so that Islam is not interpreted wrongly at least
in the remaining one year of the 20th century and
thereafter! You also said “Religion is always a private
matter. Quran does say "Let thewre be no compulsion
in religion" right!” kudos to you. We have common
ground there. You cite the teaching of the Koran and I
believe in the Universal declaration of Human Rights
adopted in 1948 at the U.N. (based on human reasoning).
You should also note that quotes from afreethinker
contradict your citation of “no compulsion…”. Are
there different versions of the Koran, or are there any
printing errors? Please clarify.
-EH
Message#374
6.1
Good to know that you do not believe in violent approaches
to enforce one’s opinions on others as demonstrated by
religious militants around the world. You say that crime
rates are much lower in Saudi when compared to the USA. So
do you mean that executions and amputations of hands
without due process (for example, absence of the right for
an accused to legal representation in a court of law) is
OK? What about stoning to death of adulterers, is it OK?
Or do you mean to say that the Islamic jurists of our
times are misinterpreting Islamic law, and that Islamic
law is much more humane than secular law (regarding
secular law – also known as nature’s law -- you may
want to read a little about British philosopher John
Locke’s political theory [separation of church and
state, structuring of the legislative, judicial and
executive branches of government, etc], which inspired the
making of the U.S. constitution. As far as crime is
concerned the biggest problem in the U.S. is the easy
availability of guns for private purchase, due to the
second amendment, which states the right to bear arms.
Personally I do not agree with the second amendment as a
humanist and pacifist, and express my dissent. And let me
also add there are aspects of U.S. democracy, which have
to be reformed. If you are interested in political theory
I can throw more light on those aspects.
-EH
Message #381
7.1
Zahid about the article on the origins of the Koran and
Yemen you say “After our Prophet, too many prophets
appeared over there, claiming to be Muhammed(pbuh), so
"Abou Bakr Al sedik" the Caliph, fought with
them and brought to common sense.” I would like to learn
a little more from you about the word “fought” you
have used in the above sentence within the context of your
answer for my question #5, where you stated that Islam was
a very tolerant religion until the 19th century and lost
its direction – became intolerant -- in the 20th
century. So does fought mean silencing opponents through
their execution, or Gandhi like satyagragha (non-violent
protest)?
About the Egyptian Nasr Abou Zeid, you say “no one seems
to have heard of Him. Remember Pal, on the Net people
write things, and claim things, which are not there. I
cross Checked with a lot of People about this Person, he
Does NOT EXIST or NO ONE HEARD OF HIM.” Have you checked
the records of the Al Azhar university in Cairo and with
the editors of the Atlantic Monthly, or did you speak with
your neighbors or use the Yahoo search engine to locate
Nasr Abou Zaid???!!! Or perhaps the Yahoo person search
functions conked since there was a typo in Zaid (you have
typed "Zeid") since you assumed that he may have
a Yahoo ID!! Also, please let me know who were those
“lot of people”.
You also wrote “This was Hindus have come up with a
thing known as TEJO MALI which they say, that Taj Mahal
was a Temple by the name Tejo Mali. And Muslims made it a
Tomb and now they wanna fight for it. If you read it for
the first time you will feel that they are saying the
truth. Then somebody found out that it is a big lie, and a
joke, but they distorted so many minds.” What you have
quoted above is a classic example of a delusional mind of
a Hindu fundamentalist whose psyche has been hijacked by
religious fervor. This is equivalent to a delusional
Muslim fundamentalist claiming that there was never an
Ayodyha Temple (Ram temple) before Babri Masjid, and King
Babur broke ground to build the Babri Masjid from its
foundations. Let us not become pawns of history bestowed
upon us due to invaders and foreign powers. Let us learn
from the good things every human culture can offer to us
from around the world. Is a Muslim superior to a Hindu
because he worship’s one God; that is besides the point.
What is more important is how good a human s/he is, in
terms of love, kindness, and compassion.
Finally, you have not answered my question #7 to the
point: Was the Koran the word of God verbatim and was not
the creation of humans as implied by the Atlantic Monthly
article; and like Abraham if a man in the 20th century
hears a voice from the sky that he should sacrifice his
son to show his love to the voice (assuming the man thinks
it is God speaking to him) that he should go ahead and
just do that. Assuming the man does sacrifice his Son and
to his dismay does not find a lamb slaughtered instead,
should he be let go by the rule of law since it was God
who commanded him to do that.
Eagerly waiting for your X.2 series of replies.
-EH
Zahid
Message #382
3.2
EH, there is a difference, when i say Miracles. These
Miracles, which are performed by them, all those i
mentioned, is more of Physical things. Like there is a
person whom i know, he can bend a spoon, if he looks at
it. He calls it some form of Exercise. Similarly, there
are persons, who say that they cast out devils and those
things, by taking all those names, but who really knows
whether they do it. These things have a lot of debate
going on. But who knows what is the truth.
Do, you believe in Ghosts and those sort of things ? I
never used to, but after i read some Historical book,
about the things like ghost. I will cite you an instance
of some Princess of some where in England. She was killed
in her fort. But before she was, she ran the whole of the
steps, before she reached a door, and banged it several
times to open it, but nobody did, and she was murdered.
Some people who now also visit that Palace, sometimes see
a girl running and banging a door before dissapearing. And
what is strange is that somebody by chance took a
Photograph of her, and it was transparent. That book is
quite famos, but as such i dont remeber its Title or
Author. So, there are things like this, where we get to
see, Miracles (or whatever you say happening).
We have 3 dimensions, maybe there are some other form of
Life which has more than 3 dimension physically, maybe
something, which can traverse in time also. Who knows. We
have some limited form of Knowledge on whose basis we
comment. Why cant there exist such a Think as Angel.
As far as Freewiil is concerned, i said, He sets up a
situation and then he gives us a chance, it is upto us
what we decide. IF that is not the thing, then there is no
criteria, to judge the right and the wrong. He might give
us a tempting situation, but it is us who have to decide.
I will have to check, if god says he is omniscient.
EH, i wonder, if you can give me your thinking on these
Questions.
1) When Islam was Peaking, the Pagans came to Prophet and
told him, that they will make him King, if he can put
their gods along with Allah, but he rejected. Why ?
2) When Islam became dominant, then also, the Prophet
never became a King and took some money from others. He
earned his living, till he died. Sometimes he had to go,
with half stomach. Why he did not make himself a king ?
Message #383
5.2
Well, Thats a wonderful peice of lecture there. I do
agree, with what you said. But as i say, dont judge Islam
by Muslims.
As far as Quran is concerned, there is just one Quran, no
versions exist and none will come till eternity. But there
are different translations. The initial translations of
the Quran in different language were made by Non-Muslims
and particularly Christian Missionaries. So, for their own
benifit they changed the wordings according to their wish.
And they did it so perfect, like in the first reading you
will never find that its wrong. Still people like
Freethinkers follow them.
All Islamic Scholars, hold Abdullah Yusuf Ali's
Translation to be the Best one, and you can see that as to
what is written. FT gives one version of that verse, i
have two more versions of that verse. One of which is in
Jehovah's Witnesses Book. To see how well they are
programmed, you should sometime attend their meetings.
Ethicalhumanist
Messaage #392
3.3
I am an empiricist, and for me “knowledge is the fruit
of sensory experience (visual, auditory, tactual,
olfactory, and in the palate)”. You argue that miracles,
magic, angels, and such things exist based on what you
have read about others seeing it or experiencing it –
and this for you is not even a vicarious or second hand
experience because it is purely the power of the language
and the printer matter which moves you to believe in such
phenomena. In fact, I do not question your profound
beliefs in such matter since your psyche – including
mine – still carries the remnants of the primitive
man’s psyche. And this primitive man believed in all
sorts of things fairies, dragons, monsters, God (s), earth
being balanced on the snake’s head (Hindu mythology),
etc. I would argue that 10,000 or 20,000 years from now
this primitive psyche would be reformed as more and more
people (the collective unconscious of mankind) starts to
move away from metaphysics to empirical science.
In this context, I would like to quote Carl Jung (Swiss
Psychiatrist) who did a lot of research in occult,
alchemy, magic, and parapsychology.
“The first is the autonomy of unconscious psychic
contents. During states of semi-somnambulism or
preoccupation, such autonomous elements may assume
control, producing “automatisms” of various sorts:
hallucinatory visions, sensations, or voices (which may be
interpreted as of spirits), automatic movements, writings,
etc….”
Since you say that you believe in ghosts and angels
(“Why cant there exist such a Think as Angel”) I would
suggest that you experience one (see or feel or perhaps
hear one before you concluding that angels exist. However,
I should warn you that the 20th century doctors are not
very kind to people who experience such phenomenon since
they diagnose such conditions as schizophrenia (a neurotic
condition where voices in the head talk to people), and
treat them with suitable therapeutic interventions, which
I will not expand upon since it is in the realm of mental
health.
The mind and body combined can result in enormous will
power. The Chinese call this CHI (the life force). For
example, Tibetian monks can survive in sub-zero
temperatures in the Himalayas by visualizing hot tubes and
meditating on them – and thus altering their
physiological process and develop heat in their body to
fight cold. Professor Nayak from the University of
Mangalore (India) has demonstrated that tongue piercing,
walking on nails or hot coal, or pulling a vehicle with
hooks pierced in the body can be performed without the
help of the Gods (as claimed by the Hindu God men). It is
a combination of practice, concentration, and the release
of hormones which enable men to do that.
You also asked me the following two
questions:
“1) When Islam was Peaking, the Pagans came to Prophet
and told him, that they will make him King, if he can put
their gods along with Allah, but he rejected. Why ?
2) When Islam became dominant, then also, the Prophet
never became a King and took some money from others. He
earned his living, till he died. Sometimes he had to go,
with half stomach. Why he did not make himself a king ?”
Assuming that the above story is true, I would say it is
due to the vision and will power a man has for the future.
I can quote you similar examples. Despite the expansion of
the Roman empire Julius Caesar was a believer in the
senate and Rome as a republic. He rejected the idea of him
becoming a King and refused the crown.
Even if the British had offered Gandhi the post of Viceroy
for India he would have never accepted it. His goal was
for total independence from Britain and was not interested
in titles and positions. He went past the “half-stomach
mark” and almost came to dying on a couple of occasions
when he went on a “fast on to death” to stop
Hindu-Muslim communal violence. On the same lines Muhammad
Ali Jinnah was offered the post of Prime Minister of
United India if he were to drop the idea of a Muslim state
(Pakistan). But he refused it since he was vision was for
a separate Muslim state carved out of India.
At a personal level I had opportunities to pursue my
career in a theocratic state (Saudi Arabia). But I chose
not to despite the quick riches which could be made since
as a secular humanist I was not willing to sacrifice my
values to quick riches; nor do I want my wife who is an
athlete, a swimmer, and a physician to be governed by
medieval laws and to be clothed in a suffocating robe. And
I am happy that I was successful in my struggle in my
early years to stick with my vision, although I had to do
physical labor, and fulfill my goals of higher education
in the US – and lead a life which is inspired by love
and guided by knowledge (to quote Russell).
On freewill you said "I will have to check, if god
says he is omniscient" -- so are you in direct
communication with God?? Would like to know from you how
you accomplish this since I want to practice it myself.
-EH
Message # 392
4.3
Zahid: I would first like to respond to
your quotations from Bertrand Russell’s book. Let me
requote what you wrote in your post:
“I have read, a lot of papers by Atheists, and
agnostics. I was reading, sometime back, a Paper by
Bertrand Russel, (i think God and Religion was the name),
where he describes, how people out of fear made god. I do
not completely agree with his viewpoints, but what i want
to emphasize here is that i also read such papers. But
isnt he the person, who praised the Islamic Civilization.
Here is what he said:
******
Bertrand Russel in ‘History of Western Philosophy,’
London, 1948, p. 419.
"Our use of phrase 'The Dark ages' to cover the
period from 699 to 1,000 marks our undue concentration on
Western Europe...
"From India to Spain, the brilliant civilization of
Islam flourished. What was lost to christendom at this
time was not lost to civilization, but quite the
contrary...
"To us it seems that West-European civilization is
civilization, but this is a narrow view."
********* ”
End of quote authored by Zahid
I also have a copy of Bertrand Russell’s book A History
of Western Philosophy (published by Simon and schuster).
And now let me start my response. He has devoted a chapter
titled ‘Chapter X: Mohammedan Culture and Philosophy’.
This chapter runs from pages 419-428. I have carefully
read and re-read this chapter and I do not find anywhere
the following sentence "Our use of phrase 'The Dark
ages' to cover the period from 699 to 1,000 marks our
undue concentration on Western Europe...” verbatim,
which you have quoted above. Russell does praise
Mohammedan culture in two places, which I am quoting
below, but do not completely resemble what you have
quoted.
From Page 427: “Mohammedan civilization in its great
days was admirable in the arts and in many technical ways,
but it showed no capacity for independent speculation in
theoretical matters. Its importance, which must not be
underrrated, is as a transmitter. Between ancient and
modern European civilization, the dark ages intervened.
The Mohammedans and the Byzantines, while lacking the
intellectual energy required for innovation, preserved the
apparatus of civilazation – education, books and learned
liesure*. Both stimulated the West when it emerged from
barbarism—the Mohammedans chiefly in the thirteenth
century, the Byzantines chiefly in the fifteenth. In each
case the stimulus produced new thought better than any
produced by the transmitters—in the one case
scholasticism, in the other the renaissance (which however
had other causes also)”.
*note from EH: mainly refers to the works of Aristotle and
Plato – if not for the translation and preservation of
their works by philosophers such as Al Kindi and Ibn Sina
they may have perished and would have been lost forever
for future civilizations.
“
From page 421-2: “under the early Abbasids the caliphate
attained its greatest splendour. The best known of them is
Harun-al-Rashid (d. 809), who was a comtemporary of
Charlemagne and the Empress Irene, and is known to every
one in legendary form through the Arabian Nights. His
court was a brilliant centre of luxury, poetry, and
learning; his revenue was enormous; his empire stretched
from the Straits of Gibraltar to the Indus. He will was
absolute; he was habitually accompanied by the
executioner, who performed his office at a nod from the
Caliph**. This splendour, however, was short-lived. …
the last Caliph of the Abbasid dynasty was put to death by
the Mongols in 1256, along with 800,000 of the inhabitants
of Baghdad.”
**Note from EH to Zahid: It contradicts your claim of lack
of violence in Islam before the 20th century.
Message #396
Even the portions where Russell has
praised Islam (see my previous post) end in criticism and
contempt. So Zahid, slicing sentences, and quoting them
out of context can turn out to be falsehood, as evidenced
from your post. Continuing with Russell’s book I would
like to quote paragraphs which Zahid has conveniently
ignored because it does not show Islam in good light.
Cont’d: From Bertrand Russell’s A History of Western
Philosophy
From Page 422: “The political and social system of the
Arabs had defects similar to those of the Roman empire,
together with some others. Absolute monarchy combined with
polygamy led, as it usually does, to dynastic wars
whenever a ruler died, ending with the victory of one of
the ruler’s son and the death of all the rest.”**
From Page 419: “The Hegira, with which the Mohammedan
era begins, took place in A.D. 622; Mahomet died ten years
later. Immediately after his death the Arab conquest
began, and the proceeded with extraordinary rapidity. In
the East, Syria was invaded in 634, and completely subdued
within two years, In 637 Persia was invaded; in 650 its
conquest was completed. India was invaded in 664;
Constantinopole was beseiged in in 669 (and again 716-17).
The westward movement was not quite so sudden, Egypt was
conquered by 642., Cartharage not until 697. Spain, except
for a small corner in the north-west, was acquired in
711-12. Westward expansion (except in Sicily and Southern
Italy) was brought to a standstill by the defeat of the
Mohammedans at the battle of Tours in 732. Just one
hundred years after the death of the prophet”.**
From Page 421: “The first dynasty, that of the Umayyads,
which lasted till 750, was founded by men whose acceptance
of Mahomet was purely political, and it remained always
opposed to the more fanatical among the faithful. The
Arabs, although they conquered a great part of the world
in the name of a new religion, were not a very religious
race; the motive of their conquests was plunder and wealth
rather than religion. It was only in virtue of their lack
of fanatisicm that a handful of warriors were able to
govern, without much difficulty, vast populations of
higher civilization and alien religion.**
**Note from EH to Zahid: It contradicts your claim of lack
of violence in Islam before the 20th century.
So Zahid, I am not sure how is that you quote certain
lines of Russell’s book totally out of context, and,
then, believe it. But ignore, other parts, which I have
quoted which talks about violence, mayhems, invasions,
“intolerance” (all beginning in the seventh
century!!), well before the 20th century where you claim
Islam – due its leaders – became intolerant.
Since a discussion has come about that you suspect others
as liars, I am willing to photocopy the chapter on
Mohammedan culture in Russell’s book and mail it to you.
Or, if you are in Bombay, the British Council library is
sure to have a copy of Russell’s A History of Western
Civilization.
I will come back to the rest of your material in your
response (5.2) in later posts.
Until then happy reading of veracious material,
EH
Zahid
Message #401
6.2
Religious Millitants as i said dont follow the religion.
As far as my religion is concerned, it dosent teach so.
So, if u r talking of things like Islamic Militants, Thats
not true. Take a look at http://www.oocities.org/~itmr/terrorism.htm
which shows the Terrorism in Us, who causes it :) and what
Msuslims do in america, you can have a look at http://channelone.com/news/special/islam/
. (Source IMTR Daily).
Why dont you have a look at the stats of Saudi Crime, you
will find its Negligible . If that is what that law does,
than whats the harm. Please note that there they dont
execute anybody. They do look in for proofs, and
witnesses. Do you think Adultery is a right thing. Well
then here i disagree. This is what finally causes increase
in Lust, and a lot of rapists are because of this initial
freedom. You can well throw light on the political
theories.
Message #402
7.1
Dear EH, that was the time, when people were too
sentimental, after the prophet died. So, when those false
prophet arrived, they used to gain material things, and
people used to believe them. That was the time, when
Hadhrat Abu Bakr, warned them, and they did not listen, so
he had to go and with Voilence bring those false Prophets
to senses.
As for that Egyptian is concerned, i checked out with the
group who is active in that field, and they said they have
not heard of him. I do not just base my things from the
net. And as far as search quesry is concerned, i was a web
programmer, so i know quite well, how to find strings. I
did not serch on it.
Finally to your main point, the answers of Authenticity of
Quran, can be found from my Homapage in Quran Section, the
link is http://www.oocities.org/WestHollywood/Park/6443/Quran/index.html
. Please read the first 5 articles over there.
ZTG
Message #421
3.4
Well, this type of things are quoted a lot by sceintific
people, but as of today, even sceintific people doubt
about their theories.
Lot of people have experienced, things, which make them
believe about ghosts. Iniyially Sceintists, used to ignore
this thory completely. But later, when some incidents
forced them, they started making theories. Like one
theory, i read real long back, suggested, that Ghost
Theories can be explained with the help of very low
frequesncy sound wave trapped inside buildings.
Maybe you can also have a look at this site http://www.reverb.com/1996/96oct/ghost.htm
Somebody had sent me a link, long time back, have a look
at it http://www.nwighosts.com/FAQs/photographing/michelle.jpg
(Note thats a fake image :) )
Great people, and sceintists are always sceptic, about
everything in nature. I remeber of a story of Richard
Feynman, in an article "A Visit With Uri
Geller", he goes into the experiment with the
pre-conceived notion that Geller was a trickster. This may
be acceptable if it is not allowed to cloud his judgement,
but from the outset it was clear what Feynman's opinion
would be: if Geller was successful, he was a fake; if not,
an incompetent fake.
Lastly, i want to write about Gödel's Incompleteness
Theorem :
*Any logical system is unable to prove all the
mathematical statements that are actually true
*Any system of logic is unable to prove its own logical
consistency.
-Proven by Kurt Gödel in 1931
In his book(i dont remeber the name) he says, "The
only justification we have is that it has not failed us
yet "
So Science and Mathematics, also need faith
Message #430
4.4
I wonder, what are you trying to prove in the last verse
of yours. Are you trying to Prove to me the Quran, when he
says to muslims :
"Anyone who acts niggardly is miserly only so far as
his own soul is concerned. God is Transcendent
while you are poor. If you should turn away [from the call
of duty and belief], He will replace you with some other
folk who then will not be like you at all! " Quran
47:Verse 38 (Surah Muhammed)
Well yes, maybe he says futher to it
"And if it were Our Will, We would have [destroyed
you (mankind) all, and] made angels to replace you on the
earth. " Quran Surah 43:60
But then there would have been no challenge in life no
fun, right :)
Ethicalhumanist
Message #446
4.3 Addendum
To ZTG: You laid a great emphasis on your fundamentals and
proudly crowed that you were a fundamentalist.
Unfortunately, with people like you the world does not
make progress as vividly described by Russell in his
chapter on Mohammedan culture, where he states that the
Islamic empires of the past kept the orthodoxy
(fundamentalists) out of the scene with regards to the
governance of the empire. I would also like to add the
following from Joseph Campbell’s book Myths to Live By
(Page: 14-15); Bantam Books/1972 edition (11th printing:
1988).
Chapter 1: The Impact of Science on Myth
“One of the most interesting histories of what comes of
rejecting science we may see in Islam, which in the
beginning received, accepted, and even developed the
classical legacy. For some five or six centuries there is
an impressive Islamic record of scientific thought,
experiment, and research, particularly in medicine. But
then, alas! The authority of the general community, the
Sunna, the consensus -- which Mohammed the Prophet had
declared would always be right – cracked down. The word
of God in the Koran was the only source and vehicle of
truth, scientific thought led to “loss of belief in the
origin of the world and in the creator”. And so it was
that, just when the light of Greek learning was beginning
to be carried from Islam to Europe – from Circa 1100
onward – Islamic science and medicine came to a
standstill and went dead; and with that Islam itself went
dead (note from EH: of course, Zahid the savior is busy
reviving it along with his other comrades in arms
elsewhere so that the hallucination of the golden past,
dawns again on mankind). The torch not only of science,
but of history as well, passed on to the Christian West.
And we can thereafter follow the marvelous development in
detail, from the early twelfth century onward, through a
history of bold and brilliant minds, unmatched for their
discoveries in the whole long history of human life”.
If you want to dispute the above statement please get in
touch with the author, Joseph Campbell. Since he is no
more, and a Kafir, and was a non-believer according to
your theories he should be burning in the fires of hell --
you may want to lay a T1 or an ISDN line so that you can
communicate with him when you reach heaven.
In my opinion Francis Bacon (empricism: knowledge is the
fruit of sensory experiences), Descartes (cogit ergo sum/I
think therefore I am), and Voltaire (the last King should
be strangled with the entrails of the last priest*) –
and. of course, not to forget great men such as Avicenna
(Ibn Sina), Averroes (Ibn Rushd), among other brave
thinkers the Arab world laid the foundations for modern
civilization.
*As a humanist, I do not want to see such violence
inflicted in reality.
So Zahid, thanks to Francis Bacon, Descartes, and then to
Borland and Sun that your are able to write stuff in C++
or in Java today. Can you show me one thing invented by
the fundamentalists what is in use today – unless you
have invented something. I am just getting warmed-up with
regards to addressing the vapidity of you presenting the
difficulties in proving or disproving the proof for
axiomatic consistencies (Godel’s Incomplete theorem) to
demonstrate that angels, heaven, hell, and the satan (?)
exist “out there”. I am going to dedicate 15 minutes
every other day – for Yahoo club activities -- to make
you realize that there is heaven on earth.
-EH
Zahid
Message #449
4.3 Addendum
Strange da!! Why dont you have a look at what Science is
according to Quran and Islam. You can have a look at my
homepage.
PS: Zahid is back on reviving track :)
Ethicalhumanist
Message #460
4.4
I hope you got a chance to review my complete answer --
i.e., 4.3, including the addendum. Before you proceed with
your answer, get to the major point -- do not dodge around
the issue of your false quotations of Russell (you remind
me of the character "Artful Dodger" in the book
Oliver Twist.) The ethical way in life is to admit a fuax
pas, rather than act virtuous. And let me also remind you,
that one doesn't be a believer or a
church/mosque/synagogue goer to be a good human with the
highest moral standards(e.g., Abraham Lincoln, Muhammad
Ali Jinnah, Carl Sagan, Albert Einstein, ....), which are
unfortunately are lacking in you.
More than piety or love for your God,which is personal
(and rightfully owned by you), how you live out your life
on this earth sans lies, sans hatred, sans intolerance,
sans plagiarism, is one cut above that.
-EH
|
