Religious Freedom from Hindu perspective

[Subramanian]

i am sure you never read my views about Zakir naik but any way its common sense

par aapne toh mera koi jawaab hi ni dee.

---------- Post added at 02:11 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:09 AM ----------

i am sure you never read my views about Zakir naik but any way its common sense

But i certainly believe Halaal meat is bad for health as the meat's blood is frozen in the animal and the bad neurons figure in the meat whereas jhatka prevents that.

 

[BelligerentPacifist]

I am not sure you got my point.
...
we do not promise heaven to any hindu. God if any must be thankful.
we do not condemn non-hindus to hell. Satan, if any must be thankful for this too.
...

I gather you're already aware of it, but may I make some clarifications in case you weren't:
. We as Muslims do not condemn non-Muslims to Hell either, neither do we claim we're saved from it.
. We do not even call ourselves believers. I'm sure you'd have heard the word mu2min, pronounced momin in much of the subcontinent. That means believer, among other shades of meaning such as at peace or closer to Jewish or Christian doctrine, 'saved'. It's a step higher from being a Muslim - an acceptor (the more popular 'submitter' is the stronger meaning and one I like to avoid). There's Mumins among non-Muslims too, and certainly among the Jews and Christians and the Sabians (which most think are the Zoroastrians and some think the Hindus).
. People who live naturally and the message did not reach them or reached them in a distorted, unpalatable form as nowadays, don't bear an equal responsibility for not accepting it. We do not make assumptions about them, only God knows people's hearts.

When you say this:

there is the idea that they are going to be rewarded for belief in the religion
...
we do not see heaven and hell as permanent residences. the logic being that, however good you are, your good actions can only be finite. finite actions can produce only finite results. hence the stay in heaven or hell can only be finite.

Ah but we differ slightly but very significant from how you see us. Hell might be earned (or it's degrees or your time in it), Heaven is never. Heaven will be a gift by the mercy of God. The trick is being generally good, and being conscious of God, and He'll overlook our bad deeds and write off the punishment. However, if you don't have what's called a 'qalb saleem' or 'sound heart' oppression has set in your nature and that's bad news! (Just to link up to the previous points, our inability to see peoples' hearts might be why we can't really make judgments about who's going where.)
However, there is upward motion in the afterlife, but no downward motion. Once you've burnt off the bad deeds, you could be pardoned and moved to Heaven. That will be infinite and no problem can touch you ever again.

Thank you for your time.

 

[Raja.Pakistani]

sorry double post because of slow connection of broadband

 

[Raja.Pakistani]

par aapne toh mera koi jawaab hi ni dee.

But i certainly believe Halaal meat is bad for health as the meat's blood is frozen in the animal and the bad neurons figure in the meat whereas jhatka prevents that.

Konsa jawab yaar k jaat aur rajpout ki chandi , sona ha? muje smauj nhi aya kia matlab ha iss baat ka

Provide me any scientific evidence which say that halal meat is not good for health. I think halal meat is more fresh because the blood is actually able to drain properly from the animal

---------- Post added at 03:10 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:10 AM ----------

Abrahamic religions give you doctrines, whereas Dharmic religions give you guidelines.

Islam is also a way of life

My religion doesn't prohibit me from any of the customs that Muslims or Christians follow, but to convert to that religion would be akin to giving up my ability to fish and eat the same thing everyday. In my way, I can eat whatever I want, or whatever leads to my discovery of the "truth". If someone likes a particular kind of fish so much that they willingly convert, it is up to them. But what people are/should be against are the forced conversions for demographic/political gains.

Dude i am not saying peoples should give up their religion and my point of conversion into other faiths was just to negate the claim of acceptance of different religion by Hinduism and saying that they all lead towards same destination . According to me all conflicting ideas of different religions cannot be true. I don't mind if a Hindu claim that he is following true religion of Hinduism and his view of God or Hindu way of life is correct ones but its weird if he claim that his believe in many Gods is correct and valid as well as claim of Muslim who believe in one God and has totally different views. similarly a Muslim can claim that he is Muslim because he consider Islam as true religion and believe in one God but he cannot say that believe of Hindu in many Gods and in incarnation is also true.

Hindus believe everyone's religion is valid, while you simply let us be even if we follow an "invalid" religion. Tolerance and education may prevent you from acting against non-believers, but at the back of your mind, you will always consider them inferior. This is not meant to be a criticism of your beliefs, just something to think about.

Dude the problem is you guys don't see the contradiction here. When you say Islam is valid religion then you imply that teaching of Islam are valid and true then you validate their claim of believe in one God ,prophet of Islam and in their holy scripture then you validate their claim of eating cow which considered scared in Hinduism and then you validate their teaching which forbid you to worship idols and believe in many Gods or associate partners with God. In other words you validate a religion which oppose teaching of your religions I don't think its hard to grasp what i am talking about here.

secondly dude tolerance/respect for a religion is totally different than acceptance or validation of that religion. Most peoples I know are tolerant of me. I do not believe that their tolerance is embracing any of my beliefs or i will be tolerant only when i will embrace some of their beliefs. I don't consider anyone inferior or superior just because they belong to different beliefs .

 

[blooboy]

If you claim of acceptance of different religions and have no doubt on their validity then it don't make sense for you to follow and stick with one. For example you should not mind to start believe in one God Allah and prophet Muhammad(PBUH) and other teaching of Islam because you consider Islam as valid religion but a practising Hindu will never do this and will stick to gita instead of Quran for guidance .

Is it so difficult to comprehend? Hindus can follow Islam BUT the problem is that Islam is very rigid in its views. It acts like a tribe in which you have to follow strict customs and the deserters are killed. Why would a freedom loving Hindu opt for it?

Sufi Islam is very liberal in nature and has got plenty of acceptance in India among Hindus too. Dargahs of Ajmer Shareef, Hazrat Khawaja Nizamuddin Aulia, Haji Ali, Hajratbal, Kaliyar Sharif are testimony to it.

 

[Subramanian]

Konsa jawab yaar k jaat aur rajpout ki chandi , sona ha? muje smauj nhi aya kia matlab ha iss baat ka

Provide me any scientific evidence which say that halal meat is not good for health. I think halal meat is more fresh because the blood is actually able to drain properly from the animal

---------- Post added at 03:10 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:10 AM ----------


Islam is also a way of life


Dude i am not saying peoples should give up their religion and my point of conversion into other faiths was just to negate the claim of acceptance of different religion by Hinduism and saying that they all lead towards same destination . According to me all conflicting ideas of different religions cannot be true. I don't mind if a Hindu claim that he is following true religion of Hinduism and his view of God or Hindu way of life is correct ones but its weird if he claim that his believe in many Gods is correct and valid as well as claim of Muslim who believe in one God and has totally different views. similarly a Muslim can claim that he is Muslim because he consider Islam as true religion and believe in one God but he cannot say that believe of Hindu in many Gods and in incarnation is also true.


Dude the problem is you guys don't see the contradiction here. When you say Islam is valid religion then you imply that teaching of Islam are valid and true then you validate their claim of believe in one God ,prophet of Islam and in their holy scripture then you validate their claim of eating cow which considered scared in Hinduism and then you validate their teaching which forbid you to worship idols and believe in many Gods or associate partners with God. In other words you validate a religion which oppose teaching of your religions I don't think its hard to grasp what i am talking about here.

secondly dude tolerance/respect for a religion is totally different than acceptance or validation of that religion. Most peoples I know are tolerant of me. I do not believe that their tolerance is embracing any of my beliefs or i will be tolerant only when i will embrace some of their beliefs. I don't consider anyone inferior or superior just because they belong to different beliefs .

acceptance of validation of any religion or idea or belief may happen,may not happen.

In fact u can go onto say that Hindus are not so overtly religious or zealous that they dont take their religion so seriously.

Issue with Halal meat is the animal knows he/she is going to die and because of that his blood freezes and he is scared,the body starts getting anxious and ready for death and whatever blood you remove is not complete and the blood is still frozen in the veins with neuro toxins.

This is why it becomes unhealthy.

 

[Speaker]

Islam is also a way of life

That could be the case, but my point was that you are still told what is right and what is wrong. We don't have a laundry list of do's and don'ts from our religion; it is more cultural.

Dude i am not saying peoples should give up their religion and my point of conversion into other faiths was just to negate the claim of acceptance of different religion by Hinduism and saying that they all lead towards same destination . According to me all conflicting ideas of different religions cannot be true. I don't mind if a Hindu claim that he is following true religion of Hinduism and his view of God or Hindu way of life is correct ones but its weird if he claim that his believe in many Gods is correct and valid as well as claim of Muslim who believe in one God and has totally different views. similarly a Muslim can claim that he is Muslim because he consider Islam as true religion and believe in one God but he cannot say that believe of Hindu in many Gods and in incarnation is also true.

Dude the problem is you guys don't see the contradiction here. When you say Islam is valid religion then you imply that teaching of Islam are valid and true then you validate their claim of believe in one God ,prophet of Islam and in their holy scripture then you validate their claim of eating cow which considered scared in Hinduism and then you validate their teaching which forbid you to worship idols and believe in many Gods or associate partners with God. In other words you validate a religion which oppose teaching of your religions I don't think its hard to grasp what i am talking about here.

secondly dude tolerance/respect for a religion is totally different than acceptance or validation of that religion. Most peoples I know are tolerant of me. I do not believe that their tolerance is embracing any of my beliefs or i will be tolerant only when i will embrace some of their beliefs. I don't consider anyone inferior or superior just because they belong to different beliefs .

The concept of religion did not exist till a few thousand years ago, and so there is no mention in our religion of "non-believers" or people who "did not get god's message". Given the inherent freedom given to people to find their own path, we are required to respect all other points of view. What people see as divisions and multiple sects/communities among Hindus, is actually a consequence of that freedom. Buddhism, Sikhism and Jainism are examples of that freedom. Hypothetically, if Prophet Muhammad was born in India and wanted to start the new religion of Islam, he would have had the full freedom to do so. In our mind, these are just people who found different ways to reach the truth, which is a core value of our religion.

Think of it this way - we embrace the process, not the result. As long as the other person has followed his/her process to mold their beliefs, we will find it to be valid, even if it is not the same as our conclusion. It is like a Social sciences exam - our answers may differ, but as long as you didn't cheat to get your answer, I will respect your score.

 

[russellpeters]

I gather you're already aware of it, but may I make some clarifications in case you weren't:
. We as Muslims do not condemn non-Muslims to Hell either, neither do we claim we're saved from it.
. We do not even call ourselves believers. I'm sure you'd have heard the word mu2min, pronounced momin in much of the subcontinent. That means believer, among other shades of meaning such as at peace or closer to Jewish or Christian doctrine, 'saved'. It's a step higher from being a Muslim - an acceptor (the more popular 'submitter' is the stronger meaning and one I like to avoid). There's Mumins among non-Muslims too, and certainly among the Jews and Christians and the Sabians (which most think are the Zoroastrians and some think the Hindus).
. People who live naturally and the message did not reach them or reached them in a distorted, unpalatable form as nowadays, don't bear an equal responsibility for not accepting it. We do not make assumptions about them, only God knows people's hearts.

When you say this:

Ah but we differ slightly but very significant from how you see us. Hell might be earned (or it's degrees or your time in it), Heaven is never. Heaven will be a gift by the mercy of God. The trick is being generally good, and being conscious of God, and He'll overlook our bad deeds and write off the punishment. However, if you don't have what's called a 'qalb saleem' or 'sound heart' oppression has set in your nature and that's bad news! (Just to link up to the previous points, our inability to see peoples' hearts might be why we can't really make judgments about who's going where.)
However, there is upward motion in the afterlife, but no downward motion. Once you've burnt off the bad deeds, you could be pardoned and moved to Heaven. That will be infinite and no problem can touch you ever again.

Thank you for your time.

I am thankful for your response.

Indeed the muslims have a humbler ideological base than the bible waving rednecks. i have literally got people coming to my house to very aggressively "evangelize" .

My idea is that, there are a few points in which the Dharmic and abrahamic approaches differ.

firstly, the Dharmic religions do not give much importance to heaven or other such concepts. the dharmic concept of heaven is that it is finite, that heaven is uneternal, and that the joy in heaven is not endless.

This stems from a basic idea of the dharmic path, that bliss is to be found in ones self. any other 'source' is impermanent, relative, and as all created things finite.

Dharmic paths hold that all actions whether good or bad, produce attachment. and hence all actions irrespective of intent, will ultimately produce suffering. this is because there is an idea of doership, an attachment. and since all things are impermanent, the fruits of good actions also pass away, thus bringing suffering.

the only medicine is the lack of doership, the lack of ego. this is similar to the Sufi idea of 'fanaa'. there is even a higher state of detachment..after one detaches from doership, there is a subtle ego associated with the idea that I have detached...i am a great person. Scriptures dictate even such ego should be destroyed. this concept is amply present in Sufism as 'fanaa-al-fanaa'.

Lastly the person realizes that all of existence, and he/himself, is a form of divineness, since there can be only God. God is absolute. Nothing else can exist outside Him and outside His support. this is the origin of the sentence, "Aham Brahmasmi" , "I am Brahman". 'tat tvam asi' , "Thou art That" and so on....the sufi reflection is "An al Haqq". the upanishadic seer of ancient india would have well related to Mansoors famous statement....

 

[user1]

In the end, We will be judged not by the way we kneel before the God but by the way we treat our fellow beings.

This is a quote from the book 'The Evolution of God'. The author (Robert Wright) starts from the perspective of an atheist and explores the moral order of the humankind through ages. A progressive rise in human morality is the best evidence for the existence of God.

Many ifs and buts here but it does give a convincing indication of a higher moral authority. The book also describes 'Non-Zero Sumness' as the basis of religious tolerance, and a reconciliation between Science and Religion.

A good rebuttal to 'Militant Atheist' B*tches, Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens (Gone to Hell) and Sam Harris.