Banner Advertiser

Tuesday, November 27, 2007

[vinnomot] Re: Why do we need a God? Mr Pal?

Mr Ullah,
 God has various meaning and hypothesis beyond actual existence or non-existence. You can look at God from various angles--philosophy ( absolute truth), social science (self organization), study of self (spiritualism), social evolution (Memetic theory), micro-economic model ( spiritualism as basic need and God/religion as product to meet the need ).
 
Let start from a social evolution theory--I wrote a short note on it last year
[You can see some other articles on same on my ebook: http://www.vinnomot.com/BiplabPal/home.htm]
Basically an ensemble of society will evolve from polytheism to monotheism to atheism-atheism does not necessarily mean  only no God. In analytical philosophy it means lack of absolute truth. In that sense communists were not atheist-they believed in historical materialism as absolute truth. Atheism also does not mean lack of spiritualism (study of self). Spiritualism does not need a God or absolute truth or religion.
 
Question is why such evolution will happen-I have explained that in
as matter of emerging force of self organization of the society. Even today, despite electronic media is behind the social integration, God stands out as much superior force of integration because of cultural legacy. But as the media will be all pervasive and single most important factor in social integration, political power of 'God' will decrease proportionally. But God will rule spiritual domain for sometimes-let me explain this aspect of spiritual God.
 
A human being can be viewed as chaotic system-unless one place enough boundary around him/her, he/she does not function as a productive system. That is --we all follow certain sets of disciplined functions to keep ourselves focused and a utility machine in the society.Much of these disciplined functions are cultural inheritance-which can be ethnic, religious, political etc. Through these sets of disciplined functions, we bond ourselves with the society and matter around us.
 
But this chain of commands of marriage, family, society, job etc. also hold our conscience/thoughts to hostage-these sets of cannons force a contraction and pressure on our thought process and you feel as if your mind has been imprisoned by your wife, kids, parents, society, political parties etc. So your mind seeks freedom from this material bondage and this process of liberation can unfold in various synthesis in human beings-most common of which is the complete submission of the self ( ego and very presence of yourself) to a ' God' ( existence of absolute truth). This is the central message of Quran and Gita. To the atheists, this synthesis can be quest for more material (empirical) truth to liberate himself/herself. No matter what-one must develop a conflict within himself/herself for progression of his mind through a synthesis of ideas. A synthesis needs a conflict between thesis (liberation) and anti-thesis (cannons) in your mind. Dr Radhakrishnan and Jiddu Krishnamurty spoke at length on the synthesis of spiritual mind.
 
Question is: why most of the people seek liberation through God and not through empirical truth?  Answer is very simple--it is a lot easier process-does not require much background-mentally more enjoyable as well. Seeking liberation through knowledge is called Gaan Yoga in Hinduism and liberation through submission to God is called Vakti Yoga. Indeed in Gita, Arjun asked this question to Krishna--if knowledge can lead to salvation why do you need submission to God? Krishna answered in the same way-most of the people don't have background to set a quest for knowledge-so for them submission to God serves better purpose.
 
However, poor people's love for spiritual God has been exploited throughout and is still being exploited even today all over the world. And it all happened because common people can not distinguish between" political God" and "spiritual God". This is darker side of blind submission without any rationality.
 
But that is another story in another day.
 
Biplab 
 


Enayet Ullah <enayet_2000@yahoo.com> wrote:

Though I am not reading all the emails due to personal
constraints; but I am intrigued about Mr Pal's claim
for religious punditry.

Dr Pal, I know you have the answer:
- Out of 5 billions world habitats, 95% of the world
population believe in some form of God. Despite, we
all know religion cause so much conflict & bloodshed
on this planet, why do we need a God or Vogobhan or
Allah?

- Taking the fact, all God is evil, and then we
created a faboulus doctrine called 'Communism' (or
Socialism'). I am sure secular India was happy to be
friendly with socialist Soviet Union. Marxists are
still savvy in West Bengal. Why socialism (communism)
collapsed, anyway?

Waiting to hear a piece of your wisdom.




--- S A Hannan wrote:

> Dear members and respected Mr Pal,
> Assalamu Alaikum.I will respond only a few core
> points of the letter below of Mr.Pal.
>
> I think Mr Pal has not fully appreciated Dr,
> Radhakrihnan.When Dr.Radhakrisnan says "a person's
> religion is never static--his realization changes
> with time--his spiritual growth can only happen if
> he allows himself to question the doctrines and
> canons around him",he did not mean abusive attack of
> Taslima and Rushdie type, he only meant academic
> questioning.
>
> We should admit that abusive attack on religion will
> create social turmoil and states should not allow
> this to happen.
>
> 2.I do not know who is sincere and who is insincere
> in the recent movement in West Bengal, who is
> politically motivated and who is not.But I honestly
> feel that Mr. Pal and some others fail to recognize
> the deep hurt of the Muslims in this regard.
>
> It is somewhat natural that in this age of democracy
> and high politicization of life, people who want to
> enhance them politically will always take advantage
> of popular anger or sentiment.
>
> Shah Abdul Hannan
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Dr Biplab Pal
> To: S A Hannan ; banglarnari@yahoogroups.com ;
> vinnomot@yahoogroups.com ; khabor@yahoogroups.com ;
> editor@satrong.org
> Cc: sahitya@yahoogroups.com ;
> calcutta@yahoogroups.com ; Mehul ; MukoChinta ;
> Mukto-Mona ; Banglar Nari
> Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2007 11:58 PM
> Subject: Re: [banglarnari] Re: Now Indian
> politicians want ban on "right to criticism of
> religion"
>
>
> Mr Hannan,
> Postmortem of Kolkata episode exposed that all 73
> arrested for vandalism are local goons and have been
> convicted before not for once but for multiple
> crimes in the past. No way they are devout Muslim or
> pious people-simply criminals. It is difficult for
> me to understand how a true spiritual person can get
> 'hurt' if his faith is challenged since he is
> looking for truth and truth only. As per Sarvapalli
> Radhakrishnan, one of our greatest philosopher on
> religion, a person's religion is never static--his
> realization changes with time--his spiritual growth
> can only happen if he allows himself to question the
> doctrines and canons around him. This has been the
> basic principle of spiritualism in Sufism, Upanishad
> and all Sahajia cults of Bengals which dominate
> landscape of Bangladesh and West Bengal even today.
> These people don't get hurt-they don't care that
> much for religion as they do for their daily one
> square meal a day. It is only people like you and
> the elites who are well fed and hungry for political
> power speak about spurious religious feeling to
> exploit it for political gain.
>
> Indeed Calcutta incident proves it beyond any
> doubt. Idris Ali, the leader of minority forum who
> called this hartal against Taslima did it solely to
> increase his political power among Muslims. He was a
> leader of minority cell of Congress. Immediately
> after the riot, he spoke before media stating that
> he has no clue how the youths took to vandalism when
> it was meant for peaceful demonstration. After two
> days, police traced all of his cell phone calls and
> proved beyond doubt that he instigated the youths
> for violence. He lied to the core and now has been
> exposed thoroughly by Calcutta police. CBI is
> suspecting that he even might be involved with
> Pakistani ISI . Now suspended from Congress, he is
> serving in Jail on 23 counts of offense for creating
> riot, beating police and communal tension. Does
> anybody think Idris Ali was religiously hurt?
> Bullshit. He is just another criminal and liar. Will
> Mr Hanan admit him as 'good Muslim because he took
> to the street for 'ISLAM''?
>
> Worst part is the role played by CPM supremo Biman
> Bose. Without investigating, he assumed that Muslims
> are 'HURT' and therefore dictated Taslima's
> expulsion. Truth is-most of the demonstrators were
> Urdu speaking and for sure they will not be able to
> name a single book by Taslima. However, CPM is a
> democratic party and most of their leaders differed
> with Biman-after all they are serving the party for
> 40 years for a good reason and they know it too
> well, in long run, these fundamentalists are vote
> base for Congress and not for them. So they don't
> want to risk loyal moderate Hindu supporters
> switching to BJP. After all true leftists are rare
> to find anywhere. So appeasement is the only game
> left in the town.
>
> Muslims leaders of CPM used to be better secular
> minded than their Hindu counterparts in '70s and
> '80s--but they have been gradually removed from the
> party power because they could not gather much
> support among Muslim community.
>
> I have witnessed this gradual deterioration
> sadly. I have seen how Abdul Bari established CP(I)M
> in Murshidabad since 1970s. He was a close friend of
> my father and both once worked for leftist cause in
> Muslim dominated areas of Murshidabad. By 1982-84,
> Bari uncle was a frustrated man--he frequently
> complained how fundamentalist Muslims are rising on
> CPM ranks-and finally he was removed. He died broken
> heart. Today leaders like Muhammad Selim, Abu Sufian
> are the face of minority in CPM--who are at best
> Islamic leftists --a garden variety of Sonar Pathar
> Bati. There are exception like CPM MP Moinul
> Hossain, a young comrade who took ardent task to
> secularize Muslim community in village area by
> writing book and criticizing Islamic texts. But look
> what happened! Last time he lost his seat because
> Congress capitalized his criticism and he was
> portrayed as Murtad. This is true secular character
> of Congress.
>
> Taslima episode was needed to expose secularism of
> India. I am glad finally it has bounced back under
> the pressure of media-voice of people.
>
> Thanks
> Biplab
>
>
>
> S A Hannan wrote:
> Dear members,
>
> Assalamu Alaikum.It is not really the issue that
> religion or religious leaders are afraid of truth,
> the issue is social turmail, common people will
> never accept ugly criticism of religion.It is
> therefore better to restrict freedom in this regard
> (banning attack on religion or indect comment on
> religious personalities or prophets or scriptures).A
> great problem of the modern western civilization is
> its obsession with freedom, worshipping freedom
> whatever social and moral pollution it may create.
>
> Shah Abdul Hannan
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jahed Ahmed
> To: Dr Biplab Pal ; vinnomot@yahoogroups.com ;
> banglarnari@yahoogroups.com ; khabor@yahoogroups.com
> ; editor@satrong.org
> Cc: sahitya@yahoogroups.com ;
> calcutta@yahoogroups.com ; Mehul ; MukoChinta ;
> Mukto-Mona ; Banglar Nari
> Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2007 9:25 PM
> Subject: [banglarnari] Re: Now Indian
> politicians want ban on "right to criticism of
> religion"
>
>
> If religion is all about truth, why are its
> followers so afraid of it's vulnerability toward
> scrutiny, criticism and rational analysis? What kind
> of truth does a religion hold that cannot withstand
> self-appraisal and evaluation? If a single reason is
> to be quoted as to why civilization has advanced
> where it is today, then it's that- great minds had
> never abandoned the practice and analysis of truth.
>
> Jahed Ahmed
>
>
>
>
> Dr Biplab Pal wrote:
>
> http://www.rediff.com/news/2007/nov/24taslima3.htm
>
> "Nobody has a right to criticise religion. I
> am a Muslim but I have no right to criticize Hindus
> or Hindu Gods or Sikhs or Christians. In the Holy
> Quran, there is a verse which says you respect your
> religion and you respect other religions also. Now,
> when she has done this (blasphemous writing), she
> has been turned out of her country. India has given
> her asylum. If she wants to stay in peace and if she
> wants India to be in peace, she must not continue
> with that sort of dialogue," Dr Abdullah added.
>
> Biplab's addition:
> India is a liberal country because Hindu
> reformers like Ram Mohan, Vidyasagar, Vivekanda
> dared to criticize their religion and took to
> moderation
=== message truncated ===



____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

__._,_.___

Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___