28 Sep 12
Curiously enough, the respect is also mutual. Although I will not give a complete quote, this long and frankly difficult to read link is a discussion about the notion of the Eternal Imam, which sets out the claim that
an innumerable number of Imams have been present on earth through a myriad of Cycles and Periods ... But underlying the plurality and multiplicity of the historical Imams is a single Light or Reality – the “Eternal Imam”:
Among other things it goes on to say
One of the ancient spiritual texts in which we find the waliyah of the Eternal Imam is the Bhagavad Gita – meaning the “Song of God”. In this text, the Eternal Imam appears as Shri Krishna – who is revered by Vaishnavite Hindus as the avatara of Shri Vishnu.http://ismailignosis.com/
In short, just as AC Bhaktivedanta Swami Prubhupada claims that the Qu'ran reflects the Hindu teachings, so do Islamic teachers cite Hindu teachings in support of their own. Mutual respect - as it ought to be. Dasa's response is awaited with pleasurable anticipation.
By the way Proper Knob, I have lost a whole evening reading this stuff when I might finally have mastered the French Defence. I am not sure it was a great exchange. 🙁
29 Sep 12
Originally posted by finnegana sac-exchange can turn out to be a correct tactic at times.
Curiously enough, the respect is also mutual. Although I will not give a complete quote, this long and frankly difficult to read link is a discussion about the notion of the Eternal Imam, which sets out the claim that [quote]an innumerable number of Imams have been present on earth through a myriad of Cycles and Periods ... But underlying the plurality an ...[text shortened]... en I might finally have mastered the French Defence. I am not sure it was a great exchange. 🙁
29 Sep 12
Originally posted by finneganBut there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction. And many will follow their destructive ways, because of whom the way of truth will be blasphemed. By covetousness they will exploit you with deceptive words...But these... speak evil of the things they do not understand.
Curiously enough, the respect is also mutual. Although I will not give a complete quote, this long and frankly difficult to read link is a discussion about the notion of the Eternal Imam, which sets out the claim that [quote]an innumerable number of Imams have been present on earth through a myriad of Cycles and Periods ... But underlying the plurality an ...[text shortened]... en I might finally have mastered the French Defence. I am not sure it was a great exchange. 🙁
(2 Peter 2:1-3,12 NKJV)
29 Sep 12
Originally posted by finneganBy the way Proper Knob, I have lost a whole evening reading this stuff when I might finally have mastered the French Defence.
Curiously enough, the respect is also mutual. Although I will not give a complete quote, this long and frankly difficult to read link is a discussion about the notion of the Eternal Imam, which sets out the claim that [quote]an innumerable number of Imams have been present on earth through a myriad of Cycles and Periods ... But underlying the plurality an ...[text shortened]... en I might finally have mastered the French Defence. I am not sure it was a great exchange. 🙁
For that i apologise unreservedly. 🙂
I've produced quotes for Dasa concerning AC Bhaktivedanta Swami Prubhupada views on Islam for Dasa a few times now. Each time i've asked him to comment and each time he's point blank ignored them.
30 Sep 12
2 edits
Originally posted by JS357I suppose you are right. Reading my own comment to that affect it sounds terribly arrogant and reflects a definite desire to belittle some of the nastier opinions expressed on the forum. But there is plenty to be interested in with Islamic culture and history.
There are 6 (or is it 7?) explanatory paradigms for why your post will provoke little debate... 😉
I would certainly wish to defend the Rationalist corner against any monotheist religion and Islam is not different in that respect. But one cannot read the Greeks without becoming tied up in their attitudes to their gods, Homer makes no sense otherwise, and one cannot read - say - a decent biography of Alexander the Great without becoming aware that their system made plenty of sense to them and had many virtues. One cannot read (a decent adult edition of ) the Arabian Nights without becoming slowly enchanted by the incessant expressions of commitment to Allah, not least the fatalist acceptance that what Allah has slowly written cannot be altered. One cannot read a decent biography of the Prophet Mohammed or history of those times without suddenly getting the point of his absolute normality and starting to smile at his behaviour and that of his followers. When he vanishes off to stay for days on end on the roof of his house because that is the only place where he can escape the pressure from his many wives, then by all means this is a misogynist tale on one level but it is also hilariously human and his misogyny is often heavily criticised by his assertive wives. Then he pulls out a new Revelation to settle matters, as is his wont, and the wives mutter dark sarcasm, while the reader can only laugh with pleasure. One smiles to at his irritation that his followers studiously write down every utterance he makes, because they cannot distinguish between a genuine Revelation and an everyday remark of a human, which he always reminds them he is, and he is recorded as rightly worrying about them turning everything into scripture. And slowly it dawns that not all of Islam is about scripture. Much of it is about wishing to emulate the prophet, and of course that inevitably can work out a bit strangely given the very particular setting in which he lived and the very different world we occuupy. But it is only the mindless zealot who cannot distinguish between what is scripture and what is tradition.
His extraordinay success as a political leader is not primarily a religious phenomenon at all. It is a related aspect of his life which is not to be negated by spurious appeals to a pacifist philosophy which has never characterised Christians, Jews not any other religious community. If Alexander the Great, or Caeser, or Napoleon are to be acclaimed for their achievements, then why not Mohammed and his generals? And alongside this must be placed his development of a rule of law, including laws for war, which were a major advance for civilization. The Roman Empire claimed to be ruled by law but in reality of course it was ruled by tyranny through emperors with absolute power, enforced in the most barbaric fashion. The Roman Empire was a rule by terror. While the Islamic rulers rapidly developed comparable behaviour, that was always in conflict with the guidance of Mohammed.
It is silly to complain that Islam is "mediaeval." It was arguably earlier than that and Christianity is certainly earlier, not to mention the age of the Jewish teachings and its Old Testament teachings. Anyone here want to rely on Leviticus for moral guidance?
Does Islam require a modern Reformation, as some argue? It has had other reformations so why not another. The most recent, I think, reflects the harsh conflict of the oppressed populations in most muslim countries (not all) with modernity, and is to be set alongside the comparable authoritarian, fundamentalist movements in the Christian and Jewish religions. It is not, in other words, intrinsic to Islam to be violent, oppressive, or "mediaeval." This is, rather, a common feature of similar movements in all the major religions and reflects the politics of our age. There is nothing peacable and enlightened in Hindu nationalism in India for example. Oh and by the way, Buddhists do not escape this either but space is short. (Interesting stuff has been written by and about the Kyoto school of philosophers concerning the role of Buddhists in Japanese fascism).
My own view as an atheist is that there are plenty of grounds for respecting the major relgions and not least Islam. The requirement in our age is to establish common human values that allow adequate respect for different communities and their faiths and there is no religion, including Islam, that cannot discover in their own traditions a version of the Golden Rule as a basis to work from.
In exchange, I retain my requirement that Rationalism has its place, is capable of universal respect and cannot be set aside in the interests of any dogma. Unless maybe, you can identify in any scripture a way to prevent the human race falling victim to viral epidemics or environmental destruction together with a more elegant solution to Fermat's Last Theorem than the one we have found. And while I think it is not reasonable to allege that religions have been the cause of war and obscurantism, nor is it reasonable to deny that religions have been used to that end throughout history. The alternative is a counsel of despair, since I do not think religion is going away any time soon so we had better learn a more respectful way to develop a sustainable social life on a sustainable planet.
But do I think there is a God? No. Totally convinced that there is not. Not even an agnostic.
30 Sep 12
1 edit
Originally posted by finneganso many words and not a little pretentious claptrap, the bottom line is fear and
I suppose you are right. Reading my own comment to that affect it sounds terribly arrogant and reflects a definite desire to belittle some of the nastier opinions expressed on the forum. But there is plenty to be interested in with Islamic culture and history.
I would certainly wish to defend the Rationalist corner against any monotheist religion and Is ogether with a more elegant solution to Fermat's Last Theorem than the one we have found. .
insecurity over beliefs, that is why people become emotive when challenged, that is the
problem with Islam.
Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex...It takes a touch of
genius - and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction (Albert Einstein)
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou have a point. Simpler just to say that Dasa is pushing racist hate speech on this forum and you appear to find that acceptable as it conforms to your own attitude towards Islam. I'd justify that but hey, too many words.
so many words and not a little pretentious claptrap, the bottom line is fear and
insecurity over beliefs, that is why people become emotive when challenged, that is the
problem with Islam.
Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex...It takes a touch of
genius - and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction (Albert Einstein)
30 Sep 12
I have no problem when it comes to the vast majority of Muslims who--thankfully--reject the violent teachings and commands within the Quran. It's the Orthodox, radical Muslims that are the problem.
And the reason they are made the subjects of news programs across the world on a daily basis is because the news programs focus mainly on tragedy and shocking stories--and the radical Muslims provide fodder for those stories regular and often.
Sorry, but you don't see Christians and Hindus beheading people and suicide bombing innocent bystanders at busy intersections, so, Christians and Hindus don't get the news coverage.
30 Sep 12
Originally posted by sumydidRight - the Christians are dropping laser-guided smart bombs on buildings and conducting drone assassinations. Those Muslims are amateurs!
I have no problem when it comes to the vast majority of Muslims who--thankfully--reject the violent teachings and commands within the Quran. It's the Orthodox, radical Muslims that are the problem.
And the reason they are made the subjects of news programs across the world on a daily basis is because the news programs focus mainly on tragedy and shocking ...[text shortened]... cent bystanders at busy intersections, so, Christians and Hindus don't get the news coverage.
30 Sep 12
Originally posted by SwissGambitYou are blaming the West's war on terror, on Christians specifically?
Right - the Christians are dropping laser-guided smart bombs on buildings and conducting drone assassinations. Those Muslims are amateurs!
Talk about the unholy mother lode of generalizations.... sheesh.
That was hardly worthy of a response other than to at least let you personally know that it is extremely misguided to the point of being laughable.
Just in case there is anyone else around here who doesn't know: The United States government does not make decisions based upon the teachings of Christ, and anyone who would seriously suggest otherwise is quite obviously either ill-informed, untrustworthy, completely ignorant, or needs their head checked.
30 Sep 12
1 edit
Originally posted by sumydidI see. When the West does it, we separate the religion from the actions of the people. When the Middle East does it, we smear the religion using the actions of the people.
You are blaming the West's war on terror, on Christians specifically?
Talk about the unholy mother lode of generalizations.... sheesh.
That was hardly worthy of a response other than to at least let you personally know that it is extremely misguided to the point of being laughable.
Just in case there is anyone else around here who doesn't know: Th ...[text shortened]... bviously either ill-informed, untrustworthy, completely ignorant, or needs their head checked.
You must have missed the GW Bush years. The guy thought he was carrying out God's will via foreign policy!
Yeah, it's laughable, alright - the way Christians portray themselves as innocent when they are guilty of supporting and creating policy that is every bit as violent and brutal as anything 'radical Islam' ever invented.
Remove the log from thine own eye!
30 Sep 12
2 edits
Originally posted by SwissGambitNope. Not the case.
I see. When the West does it, we separate the religion from the actions of the people. When the Middle East does it, we smear the religion using the actions of the people.
Are you making things up again? I could be wrong but I have yet to EVER hear someone say the Middle East has "done" anything at all. You might be able to find a few out of context examples with the whole internet at your disposal but generally speaking, NO ONE blames the Middle East or Middle Easterners for anything.
The only person I am aware of that has made the huge generalization as to blame those of a specific religion for the actions of a country's government, is you just now when you blamed Christians for what the governments of the US, England, Australia, France, Germany, and Canada have done.
30 Sep 12
Originally posted by sumydidThat's true - so far, 3 sovereign Middle Eastern nations have been overthrown with a 4th on tap. I should probably use a more common term for "them" - Jihadists, Terrorists, Muslims, Radical Islamists, Islamo-fascists, or any of the others you hear in our media.
Nope. Not the case.
Are you making things up again? I could be wrong but I have yet to EVER hear someone say the Middle East has "done" anything at all. You might be able to find a few out of context examples with the whole internet at your disposal but generally speaking, NO ONE blames the Middle East or Middle Easterners for anything.
The only per ...[text shortened]... or what the governments of the US, England, Australia, France, Germany, and Canada have done.
Originally posted by finneganReally? as far as i can discern I have provided reasons for every single assertion,
You have a point. Simpler just to say that Dasa is pushing racist hate speech on this forum and you appear to find that acceptable as it conforms to your own attitude towards Islam. I'd justify that but hey, too many words.
perhaps if you made reference to the reasons rather than to your mortal enemy Dasa
your references to rationality might not appear so thin and crispy. Yes your posts are
verbose, lengthy and could be more simply expressed, but its rather a gift of the poet
to be able to extract the essence of thought and present it so that it may be understood
universally than the forte of academic 🙂
30 Sep 12
2 edits
Originally posted by RJHindsThis post is for finnegan [excuse the error]
But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction. And many will follow their destructive ways, because of whom the way of truth will be blasphemed. By covetousness they will ex ...[text shortened]... e words...But these... speak evil of the things they do not understand.
(2 Peter 2:1-3,12 NKJV)
Prubhupada is a pure devotee of God and no one knows the mind of the pure devotee because he is on the trancendental platform - and whilst his body is in this world - his consciousness is NOT because it is always in the spiritual consciousness.
He ws a master diplomat.
Being a master diplomat he would never expose the problems with other religions as I do.......but he would always give encouragement when possible to those religions that believed in God.
However I am not a pure devotee and am not playing the diplomatic game here..............so I can speak frankly as I always do.
Please tell the forum - the difference between true religion and false religion? {give some example of what would make a religion false or true.}
I have asked the forum this question before and not one person could answer the question.
I may take a day or so to get back to this post as I am busy.