Similarities between Islam and Hinduism

...limitations of your own time and effort.

Whatever...

But then, what is the source of your religion? Don't use allegory to avoid this direct question.

When did I use any allegory?

"source of religion"?  Can you tell me what religion is if you can?

Without the philosophy of Vedas to say oneness of God, from where else you come to know about this reality? So, for this faith one has to have a reliable source to put his belief untill or unless one is claiming himself to have direct communication from God.

Is it an obligation that one should lay one's belief on someone's writing or someone's saying?  Can't we know God by ourselves?  I did not get your point.

I hope you are not claiming yourself to be one of them.

What do you mean?

What do you mean by forgotten Mohammad? Forgotten by whom?

Forgotten by people.

On the more, who told you there are previous lives? Is this not a anonymous belief?

No one told me that there are previous lives. What do you mean by anonymous belief?

How can you say such a thing, especially all your beliefs are from Vedas? It is definitely a surprising answer for me.

Who told you that my beliefs are from Vedas?

...ignorance of vedic teachings is the root problem in hinduism as only then it leads to what they believe in several deities. Isn't it?

I did not understand.

Though, you may escape anonymity as far as these ideals are of physical significance but what about those which are pure spiritually based?

What do you mean by "pure spiritually based"?

I apologize, my answers are more in the form of questions.  This is because, I am unable to understand what you want.  If you can answer the above, I can be more precise in answering.

Aparichithudu.

Ahmad, I am not at all offended by your questions.  Your comments(questions) are not at all self explanatory considering that people have different views and opinions.  I asked you about religion because I wanted to know your view about religion.  I want to know about your view regarding religion, spirituality etc. so that I can be more precise in my answers which helps both of us even with respect to time.  And if the post were short, I could easily read them and reply promptly.

Aparichithudu.

Ahmad, when did I hair split your questions?  I was asking about what is your view about religion.  Is it a big question? This is because, what I call religion is philosophy which is totally rational.  For us religion is not a blind belief in a book or books or even in someone's divinity or prophethood.  I am totally confused when you say "pure spiritually based" because what would be religion without spirituality.  I was just replying with my own point of view and you are unable to understand.

For example, "What if Mohammad were forgotten just like we don't have the names of 124000 other prophets?  Then what will be the situation of faith in Quran?"  This is a simple straight forward question.  But you are unable to understand it.  So I thought I was not using the correct logic or language while talking to you.

So I am a lot confused kiddo.

If we take one point at a time, it will be profitable and we can understand about both of our religions easily.  I think thats why this topic was started by someone.

Aparichithudu.

Brother Ahmad Joyia, sorry for taking so long to reply.  Now I am done with my project.  I am free on the day of my country's independence.

Regarding your questions, I feel they are quite interesting.  Even your line of reasoning is good though not linear.

"... rationality is not a unique attribute for a truth."

Can I know what are the other attributes of truth according to you?

"... but the most important thing to know is who is behind that rationality? A human mind or a divine origin?"

I do not understand by the way you say, "who is behind that rationality?".  Rationality is a quality of a human being.  Man is said to be a rational being, isn't it?  We cannot base our rationality on other's rationality.  Even if we base it, it is with our own rationality with which we are basing our belief.  And sometimes rationality is dictated by our emotions.  So we have to control our emotions to be perfectly rational.  For this reason, we are asked to meditate.  Now it is upto us to base our belief on meditation or not.  I do not meditate just because Sri Krishna asked me to meditate.  Neither Krishna asks us to believe him blindly nor any Hindu believes him blindly.  We believe him because he has clearly given us the reasons.  He has clearly explained why we should meditate, what is the state of mind, why we feel sometimes happy and sometimes sad, what is the purpose of everything, purpose of life etc.

And even now I would say that it is just an attempt.  If anyone proves rationally that our rationality to be fictitious, I would gladly say that I would love to be rational and I would try to change my belief.  This is so easy for me because my religion asks me to believe in myself than in someone's belief.  If I am wrong I can change myself easily.

But after all this, I would say that what Sri Krishna said was true.  If I am wrong in my statement, let it be.  I believe that Satyameva jayate.  It means "Truth alone triumphs".  So I am not afraid to be wrong.

"A human mind or a divine origin? Therefore, it is in this regard that I always asked for the source of your so called "rational philosophy"."

I would like to say one point here.  We have a different concept of God from the concept you hold.  We do not have a concept of Creation, but we have a concept of Projection.  We do not say that everything is created by God, but we say that everything is God.  There is nothing as a human origin of things or a divine origin of things.

Our philosophy is hard to understand, but it is never allegorical.  You once said that I was allegorical, but I was never ever allegorical.  So when you say "A human mind or a divine origin", the question becomes interesting(though meaningless and childish question).

Even if anything is of a divine origin, it has to come out from a human being.  Then how can we know that it is of a divine origin?  Now the rationality of the mind comes into picture.  Where ever we go, we have to be rational, and we, most of the time, have a conflict with our emotions.

A person may be a good person, but if he speaks out irrationally, then he might be speaking with his emotions or limited experience.  So finally it will be upto us to decide(choose) whether it has to be accepted or rejected.

"I hope you may now get the idea as why this source is so important; simply because human philosophy, how rational it may be, is still a human creation and therefore always remain within the bounds of physical perception."

I think I have atleast attempted to be near to the "source question".  And now what you mean by this "physical perception".  If you are regarding to the five senses, then I would tell that those five senses are limited to the body and not to the mind.

There are different states of mind which we are taught of.  And now modern science is slowly picking up in this field.  They say that at different states of mind different types of brain waves are released by the brain.  And we can do miracles if we can control our mind.  In fact it is reported that even Mohammad meditated in a cave. 

And as Sri Krishna says, science of meditation is the oldest of science(even this statement can be taken as a mere statement without proof, it is upto us to believe it or not, even if this is not true,  it will not effect our quest for truth).  And every human being has a mind, a rational mind, an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent mind.  This is what even the present science says to us without any doubt.

So every human being can know the truth for every soul is potentially divine.

"On the other hand, those religions are at more stronger footing who claim to have a divine knowledge (which ofcouse have to be based upon rational philosophy) with them because the divinity is not bounded by physical limitations. "

Can I know those religions "which claim to have a divine knowledge" which say they are rational?  Because as we have seen what you call "divine knowledge" cannot be proved to be divine in origin.

One more point, even mind does not have physical limitations.

"...people would still be living in darkness."

What darkness do you mean?

"Though, the truth would still be there, but the guidance to recognise it would not have been available."

Here, what truth are you talking about?

"I hope now I have made it nearly one point and that is the source of your guidance (or as you say the rational philosophy) and its authenticity? "

I would still insist that, atleast for me, the source is myself.  I sometimes refer to Swami Vivekananda and Sri Krishna.  And for most of my colleagues, it is Sri Krishna, precisely, Bagavadh Gita.

Aparichithudu.


Edited by The One