Miracles, THE ULTIMATE CHALLENGE

[suanni]

If we were born flawless what would be the point of our journey in life?

We were born with flaws for a reason, to grow, to address our flaws.

There is only one flawless and that is the Creator by whatever name your religion calls the Creator.

Education is necessary for mankind, without it we would still be living in caves.

[samabudhi]

Originally Posted by suanni

Education is necessary for mankind, without it we would still be living in caves.

What are you saying?

[bananabrain]

Originally Posted by samabudhi

There is no such thing as free will.

whoa! back up there, sparky. there are two things going on here. one is mohsin's "i can prove all this is correct" - which you are never going to accept. however, if you are going to make statements like this i think we are entitled to know on what basis - other than what essentially amounts to faith - you are prepared to back them up.

Originally Posted by suanni

If we were born flawless what would be the point of our journey in life? We were born with flaws for a reason, to grow, to address our flaws.

i think you have to consider the relationship between "flaws" and the ability to change ourselves. for a start, to eat is an instinct, so it's not actually a terribly good example of free will - we are born with certain instincts (to suck, for example) without which we have nothing to build on. infant development is not much of a basis on which to argue over freewill or its alternative. i think the argument probably needs to take place on the "gun to your head" argument. someone puts a gun to your head and says "i'm going to shoot [insert name of loved-one] dead - or i can shoot you. i don't care. choose." you do not have the option to fight - you're tied up or whatever. now, you can argue that you're coerced and that you have no free-will, but actually you do. you can always refuse. of course, you get shot, but you are nonetheless exercising free-will. the point is, unless your entire brain function (and arguably this would have to include all subconscious brain activity) is directly controlled by an external power, you *still have free will*. this is NOT the same as saying you have freedom of ACTION. freedom of action is inevitably constrained by the freedom of action of others and therefore this is determined by trade-offs between these constraints.

the point is that either way, you cannot disprove the influence of a Divine agency on your will. by the very nature of this influence, it is both explicit, in that you know what "The Rules" say and you act upon this - and tacit, in that if the Divine acts in a hidden fashion, there is no way you can get it to show up on the radar you have available in the absence of heavenly voices, miracles, smiting, plagues and so on. even so, all of those can nonetheless be explained away by other means. nonetheless, even the knowledge of what you consider to be the Divine Will does not actually *force* you to comply with it by your knowledge of it alone - you must exercise your own will to act in compliance. therefore, it is possible to rebel against this Authority - and this is the basis of free-will AND sin. without free-will, it cannot be said that sin (as a non-compliance with Divine Command) exists without recourse to theologicial devices such as "original sin" and salvation (which are not jewish). and, furthermore, if free-will exists, it cannot be negated without negating the possibility of "repentance" (by which i mean the exercise of your free-will to decide that you will change in order to comply with the Divine Will), which is why this is called "teshuvah", or "turning around" in judaism. without the possibility to act in this way, how can it be argued that one has the option to fulfil the Divine Will? thus it was that the sages argued that although G!D Hardened pharaoh's heart, pharaoh could nonetheless have exercised his free-will to save his country and himself from tragedy. as it was, he did not; but it was his choice to act or not to act in accordance with the Divine Will.

b'shalom

bananabrain

[samabudhi]

Originally Posted by bananabrain

whoa! back up there, sparky. there are two things going on here. one is mohsin's "i can prove all this is correct" - which you are never going to accept. however, if you are going to make statements like this i think we are entitled to know on what basis - other than what essentially amounts to faith - you are prepared to back them up.

Yeah. Noone likes the idea of fate.
Another thread perhaps?

[bananabrain]

go ahead! put it in "belief and spirituality" and quote my post above...

b'shalom

bananabrain

[Avinash]

Originally Posted by kkawohl

Andrew,

I agree with most of your posting...but "messengers" and "mystics", IMHO, are the same. If a mystic gains spiritual insight, he has a message to deliver. If a messenger's text can not be questioned then that so-called messenger has misinterpreted his own message.

Namaste,
Kurt

Namaskar Kurt,

All carrots are red, but not all red things are carrots. The "special messengers" I refer to are those that are especially made up in certain religions to create the dogma that everything in the text is coming "directly from God". Religious writings do contain some scriptures that were given by mystics and you may call such mystics "messengers" if you like, but I was referring to the fantasized messengers in certain religions.

Andrew

[suanni]

Originally Posted by samabudhi

What are you saying?

Education is necessary for the furtherment of mankind. I'm not just talking the education given by the various factions of religion, general education.
If we didn't educate the next generation with what we have learned, the discoveries we made when we lived in caves, we would still be living in caves, minus the wheel etc.

The various religious sectors have sought to educate the people. Okay, their main purpose was to educate so that there were priests and the faithful could read the scriptures but in some countries/ cultures man would not be able to read and write if it had not been for the religious instructions they received.
Schools for all in some nations were not introduced until the 19th Century and it was the religious bodies that taught them the rudiments of literacy.

[suanni]

I hear what you're saying bananabrain, we do have the will to change ourselves and often when we look at ourselves and with the will of G!D we see the flaws within and in doing so we can change ourselves for the better.

[samabudhi]

OK. Just making sure you have nothing against caves or people who live in them.

[kkawohl]

Originally Posted by Avinash

Namaskar Kurt,

All carrots are red, but not all red things are carrots. The "special messengers" I refer to are those that are especially made up in certain religions to create the dogma that everything in the text is coming "directly from God". Religious writings do contain some scriptures that were given by mystics and you may call such mystics "messengers" if you like, but I was referring to the fantasized messengers in certain religions.

Andrew

Namaskar Andrew,

"Hear the best with your ears
and ponder with a bright mind.
Then each man and woman, for his or her self,
select either of the two, the better or the bad mentality.
Awaken to this doctrine of ours
before the great event of choice ushers in".
(Zarathushtra's Gathas: Song 3.2)

A mystic or a messenger gains spiritual insight through spiritual revelation. This insight can be considered from a spirit or from God, whichever one wishes to believe. Often religions are created after the message is relayed. These messages are expanded upon throughout the years. The end results are that people will devote time for spiritual reflection. The goal of the messenger or mystic has been achieved.

When is a mystic like a messenger? How are they like carrots? A carrot is the edible orange root, a plant in the parsley family; yet deceivingly they are sometimes also white-, yellow-, and purple-fleshed.

Namaste,
Kurt

[kkawohl]

Originally Posted by suanni

If we were born flawless what would be the point of our journey in life?

We were born with flaws for a reason, to grow, to address our flaws.

There is only one flawless and that is the Creator by whatever name your religion calls the Creator.

Education is necessary for mankind, without it we would still be living in caves.

Here we are given many examples of the structure of God. Our life on earth is to prepare us for the beauty and rapture of the hereafter. We are here to accumulate experiences of feelings and the beauty of every organism that surrounds us; also the misery, pain and death of the body that demonstrates to us the futility of our physical lives. Our spirit can often control the well-being of our body. With inspiration and blessings from the Spirit of God, our spirit very much like the wind, can carry us through our life's journey and experience the beauty of God's creative powers or we can choose to reject the interaction and muddle through life with no purpose, feeling empty, worthless and lonely. We can resonate despondency and gloom or bloom like the wildflower, bringing joy to many who have contact with us and live our lives with joy and the knowledge that we have a reason for living.

The universe is the encompassment of ALL (matter, energy, space, time) that exists in a physical, material, tangible or intangible, natural or unnatural state in this dimension, Our soul contains the records of our spiritual life within the subconscious and it is composed of consciousness, awareness, thoughts, and emotions. Upon physical death the righteous soul/spirit unites with the Ultimate Supreme Spirit (often called God). Man in the physical sense is often way too vicious to be part of God. Righteous living is a part of the cleansing process of the mind that feeds the spirit that a physical person must go through in order for his soul to be a part of God. Physically we are all atoms, spiritually we are all energy.

Today, over 100 planets are known outside our solar system. There are billions of stars with numerous solar systems. Our knowledge of the universe is in its infancy. Within the last 200 years air travel, the automobile, telephone, radio, television, computer, electricity, etc., came into existence. In recent years, we have learned that 95% of the Universe is made of a type of matter or energy that we cannot see nor understand. The earth, moon, sun, and everything that we can see make up less than one percent of the entire universe. Gravity may ripple across the universe in waves, and certain cosmic rays, atomic particles moving at near light speed, possess an energy far greater than that which can be explained by modern physics.

The spiritual realm is the ultimate destiny where order, reason, logic, rationality and common sense prevails. It is illogical to leave the spiritual existence in order to be in the physical world amongst chaos. The so-called heavens are in the spiritual plane where distance and resistance are no obstacles. A spirit can instantly transpose itself to any other location. Physical beings will never be able to interact with the spiritual although our spirit has the capability to connect with the spiritual realm if all our physical senses are totally subdued.

Namaste,
Kurt

[bananabrain]

The "special messengers" I refer to are those that are especially made up in certain religions to create the dogma that everything in the text is coming "directly from God". Religious writings do contain some scriptures that were given by mystics and you may call such mystics "messengers" if you like, but I was referring to the fantasized messengers in certain religions.

avinash - do you then demand that all religion submit to the judgement of scientific validation to check that our messengers aren't "fantasised"? because, i can tell you, such a validation is by definition impossible - which is perhaps why some people insist that religion justify itself in these terms. it's the old modernist argument - and people's spiritual lives are the poorer for falling for it. resorting to a metaphor, could you justify art or music scientifically? these all have "rules" of sorts, "texts" and "messengers" - yet we do not know the name of the "artist" who built, say, the reclining buddha or the statues at abu simbel, or who wrote all those "traditional" folk songs.

b'shalom

bananabrain

[Mohsin]

Regards to all, especially samabudhi


Sorry for interruption but I really needed to reply to samabudhi.

You think that simply handing someone a logical argument (not that I agree that your arguments are logical, but the point is that you think they are) is enough to convince them and for them to change their old habits and their mode of life in general. Surely experience has shown you that life is anything this simple. You would do well to investigate psychology, whether it is western or Buddhist, and understand how the brain works.

I make logical statements for a few reasons. Firstly, they can be understood quickly as they are somethings that you can easily argee or disagree, no need to go deeply. Secondly, I like to do it, and thirdly, I can do it.
I have come across some people who are afraid of questioning. They have some doubts, but they say that by bringing them forward, it is assumed as if they are offending their religion. That is not the case with Islam. I heard a talk, the topic was "Increasing the faith in difficult times." The scholor said, if you have doubts or questions, bring them forward. DON'T BE SHY TO ASK WHY. I did that, and for several, if not all, I can give some logic. Accepting, not accepting, your problem.
Continuing on that, I would like to tell you about a Muslim lad(Abdullah) who was earlier a Hindu. His interview was brought forward in a publicly given lecture. He made a comment earlier that he would die but not accept Islam(this was when media was all the time going against Islam). But now, he regrets that. He said that he had some major doubts and questions about his religion, but every time when they were brought forward, there was no answer. He started reading the Bible. He loved it, it made a lot of sence, but then again, he had some questions for which there was no logical answer/statements. Once he came across an artical about the harmony between Islam and science, he became very interested in it and started learning about Islam, and now, he is a great Muslim.
The point is, Islam can support logical arguments even where others cannot. Thus, I can use logic for most of my statements and it works for many people.

Being a Muslim, I imagine, is like living off millet and water for your entire life. It's good for you, but damn if you don't feel like shlerping up a big ol' milkshake now and again. Do you remember The Matrix (1), when Cypher just couldn't take it anymore. What he was involved in made sense, it was good and just, but he couldn't take what he had to go through to achieve it. His primitive mind got the better of him and he turned, to the detriment of others. His directives, his purpose and all the explanations were probably perfect. It was neglecting that he is a human being with all the same needs and fallibilities as everyone else that pushed him over the edge.

I see the same thing happening with Islam.

A simple argument to satisfy your question, Islam's belief in the Afterlife. I can have my milkshakes in the afterlife, in the paradise, if my acts/deeds are good enough, but this is what we are here for, to make our deeds/acts worthy enough to recieve salvation. For people like Cypher, life of this world is everything and the onlything. Also, I have noticed that for some people, Islam has got no or less room for recreation, this is totally wrong. Yes we are not allowed many things, but they are in greater or lesser quantity harmful for us.

[samabudhi]

I make logical statements for a few reasons.

Nothing wrong with logical statements. It's just that they are not everything, unless your logic is flawless (which means no resorting to faith when confused.)

I have come across some people who are afraid of questioning. They have some doubts, but they say that by bringing them forward, it is assumed as if they are offending their religion. That is not the case with Islam.

I don't know if you've heard of Ali G, the English comedian? Not the most politically correct example, but anyway, he chose his acting name, 'Ali', because he knew that people would be more werey of him with a Muslim name and be so caught up in making sure they didn't offend him that they would totally miss out that they were being taken for a ride.
Just a thought.

Continuing on that, I would like to tell you about a Muslim lad(Abdullah) who was earlier a Hindu.

These sort of stories never hold much ground with me. Firstly, I don't know him from Adam, so his particulars could be anything from 'Used to smoke buckwheat' to 'Is a claustrophobic who was brought up in an igloo.' (I know nothing about him in other words.)
Hindu's aren't exactly the most pious group and they certainly don't have a very clear cut scripture. (Clearly I'm generalising.)
Show me a Buddhist with credentials (very important) and then I'd like to see what happened. In fact, credentials are so important to some Buddhists, that they preserve lineages and only teach to those who prove their piety first. This way, the teachings survive with proper understanding etc etc.

A simple argument to satisfy your question, Islam's belief in the Afterlife. I can have my milkshakes in the afterlife, in the paradise, if my acts/deeds are good enough, but this is what we are here for, to make our deeds/acts worthy enough to recieve salvation.

I sigh whenever I see this argument. It just sounds so much like the fairy tales I was brought up on. In a child's world, this is how things work. You do good, you get reward. For the adults who try to create that rational world for children, life is unfair.
Just think about it. One person, one book and 1400 years. This is what you place your entire life on. I'm sure you always get a kick out of the idea that it's so 'honourable' and 'loyal', but my personal feeling is that those emotions are an illusion. A trap for the ego. You can be loyal to Sadam Hussein. What does it mean? It means you're doing good without having to take responsibility. Sweet deal bru. History speaks for itself.

[Mohsin]

Originally Posted by samabudhi

Nothing wrong with logical statements. It's just that they are not everything, unless your logic is flawless (which means no resorting to faith when confused.)

True, but at many cases, I can point at faith using logic, especially when a point is regarding to things associated to it.

Originally Posted by samabudhi

These sort of stories never hold much ground with me. Firstly, I don't know him from Adam, so his particulars could be anything from 'Used to smoke buckwheat' to 'Is a claustrophobic who was brought up in an igloo.' (I know nothing about him in other words.)

Well, this story was fresh in my mind, and I thought that it was relevent so I mentioned it. You can check it up if you like from this link. http://www.lightuponlight.com/islam/...ownload&cid=61

Originally Posted by samabudhi

I sigh whenever I see this argument. It just sounds so much like the fairy tales I was brought up on. In a child's world, this is how things work. You do good, you get reward. For the adults who try to create that rational world for children, life is unfair.

Afterlife, a belief that comes with Islam. There are many advantages of it, I mentioned some. Again, I can point with logic to hold this belief strong in me. For one thing, I am not an evolutionest. I believe that Adam(P.B.U.H) was the first man on the earth who was sent down to the earth along with Eve(P.B.U.H). They were sent down from heaven/paradise. The Qur'an and the Bible also tells their story. But lets not argue about it over here. One more benefit which comes with the belief of afterlife, a person, no matter how powerful will think twice before doing something wrong. He might think of getting away with it here, but he will be questioned at the day of Judgement. This thought can keep him from doing wrong.

Originally Posted by samabudhi

Just think about it. One person, one book and 1400 years. This is what you place your entire life on. I'm sure you always get a kick out of the idea that it's so 'honourable' and 'loyal', but my personal feeling is that those emotions are an illusion. A trap for the ego. You can be loyal to Sadam Hussein. What does it mean? It means you're doing good without having to take responsibility. Sweet deal bru. History speaks for itself.

Lets rethink what you want me to think. According to me, one person, one book still practical today, several of Hadiths, clear signs from Allah(the Almighty God), and well, Allah(the Almighty God) Himself, always there. For you, it might be an illusion, but for me, something important.
About History speaking for itslef, I want to ask you, why always point at the wrong guys? Saddam did not follow the teachings of Islam, several many points that I can mention. He was not a good Muslim, so why mentioning him? Why not mention those Muslims who were great? Prophet Muhammad(P.B.U.H), the Caliphs, Caliph Umer(R.A) who when in a public gathering mentioned something, and a common woman stated somthing against it. Umer(R.A) decliared that she was right and he was wrong. Salauddin Ayubi, who took back Jerusalem. He showed the best example of tolerance in history. He also sent his personel physicians to help Henry the lion heart when he was there. Also, at that time when the Crusaders were eager on killing Muslims, Salauddin Ayubi used to sent his troops to escort the non-Muslims to several places because they were afraid that the Crusaders might not kill them aswell. Tariq Bin Zayyad, who litteraly burned his boats when he went to take over Spain and he did took it over. History speaks for itself man. But we have been given permission to follow Islam and if our leaders go against it or make us go against it, we can object.