Banner Advertiser

Saturday, February 4, 2012

Re: [mukto-mona] How to follow religions correctly



I agree with Dr. Das, there is no point in trying to push rationality into people that are too much inside their cocoon of religion. But I believe a lot of people who identify themselves in terms of religions are actually not too religious; they are amenable to improve and come out into the world of liberated minds.
 
I also think that people who found new incarnations of God in humans like Ramkrishna are as stupid as people who found messengers of God many centuries back. However, I am willing to tolerate the idiocies of religions as long as they do not translate into hatred and injustice. In that respect, the followers of Ramkrishna and Buddha are better than the followers of the abrahamic religions. Although the contemporary Christians are a lot more moderate, less into their religious enclosure, and do talk about peace on earth (as opposed to peace for the Christians).
 
Sukhamaya Bain 

From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, February 3, 2012 12:09 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] How to follow religions correctly

 
When someone says, his religion is 'perfect for me', I would spare him from criticism and would also not take his judgement as final on any issue for any reason.  Buddha used to say, "Judge everything, even if I said it."  Seeing what the Buddhists have done to Buddha by making him a God, it is easy to see what followers of other religions have done to their preachers.  For example, the Ramakrishna Mission has invented a new heaven called Ramakrishna Loke reserved for the deceased members of the mission.  A few decades ago, they demanded to the Government of India that they be treated as a minority religion separate from Hinduism. The children of Abraham are not as audacious.  They did not forget their root so soon.
On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 9:55 AM, Sukhamaya Bain <subain1@yahoo.com> wrote:
 
So, there was no response to my question from any other Muslim but Mr. Q. A. Rahman. The question was, "is it enough for a civilized world to treat the slaves fairly, to consider freeing a slave to be good deed, and to provide some rewards for freeing a slave?" It would have been refreshing to hear from genuinely religious Muslims something like "the reality of the sixth century did not allow Mohammad or Islam to abolish slavery, but their way of treating slaves was very progressive at that time; over a period of 1400 years we could certainly extrapolate that progress to the point of abolishing slavery in the 20th century."
 
That would have been honest and rational, while showing a lot of respect for Mohammad and Islam. However, I am disappointed that we did not have such honest and rational Muslims in this forum. Of course, that rationality would have made Mohammad and Islam inadequate for our time and for the future.
 
The problem I see with the average Muslims is that they have been too much in the irrational territory from their very childhood. I actually feel sorry for them; it must be very difficult to develop rational thinking while growing up in an environment of praying five times a day.
 
While I criticize the stupidities of the Hindu caste system and the way they used to treat women, one thing I like about the contemporary educated Hindus is that most of them eat beef, and most of them do not mind if one calls Krishna a characterless womanizer.
 
If one looks at eating beef by the Hindus and eating pork by the Muslims, eating beef by a Hindu can be reasonably argued to be a bigger sin than eating pork by a Muslim. Muslims do not eat pork because Mohammad called it dirty; Hindus do not eat beef because bull was the carrier of the high god Shiva; thus, like a god.
 
If one looks at the fundamentals of the two religions, Krishna is supposed to be more revered by the Hindus than how much reverence Muslims are to show Mohammad. According to Hinduism, Krishna is God in the form of a human; he is not just a messenger of God. Thus, insulting him would be no joke according to the fundamentals of Hinduism. But the Hindus do it anyway; no one gets death threats for doing it. To me, that is a sign that Hindus are progressing faster toward a rational Human identity.
 
In any case, I suppose, I should not expect much rationalism from seriously religious people.
 
So long for now,
 
Sukhamaya Bain
 
From: Sukhamaya Bain <subain1@yahoo.com>
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2012 10:12 AM

Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] How to follow religions correctly

 
Mr. A. Q. Rahman thinks that his religion is perfect is spite of the fact that it does not abolish or condemn slavery.
 
Now let me ask the same question to everyone who identifies himself/herself as a Muslim: is it enough for a civilized world to treat the slaves fairly, to consider freeing a slave to be good deed, and to provide some rewards for freeing a slave?
 
Hopefully, I will comment more on the subject after hearing from some other Muslims.
 
Sukhamaya Bain

 
From: qar <qrahman@netscape.net>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, January 27, 2012 11:20 AM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] How to follow religions correctly
 
.......................
QAR quotes SB: But do not claim it to be perfect, as you should be able to see from this particular example.
>>And QAR comments: So far my religion has been "Perfect" for me. ........................
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Sukhamaya Bain <subain1@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Fri, Jan 27, 2012 7:30 am
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] How to follow religions correctly
 
I had already read these two verses, and a few more, in the Koran, and commented that "the religion asks its followers to treat slaves with fairness, and considers freeing a slave to be a good deed." Mr. Q. A. Rahman said the same thing below, diluting it in a full page of gibberish.
 
Let me comment here on Mr. Mustafizur Rahman's statement also. He wrote "Rewards for freeing a slave are numerous in Hadith." Let me just trust that he read the Hadith and knows this for a fact.
 
Having agreed with both the Rahmans, let me ask them; is it adequate for a civilized world to treat the slaves fairly, to consider freeing a slave to be good deed, and to provide some rewards for freeing a slave?
 
To me, there is no such thing as "treating a slave fairly." Once you brand someone as a slave, you are already too unfair to him/her. Reward and praise for freeing a slave is not enough for a decent world; we needed abolition of slavery. Today slavery is prohibited in all the respectable societies and countries of the world. As the human civilization progresses, I have no doubt, more and more of the unfairness and injustices will be gone from the world.
 
As for religions, the bottom line is, if an honest reading of your religious books allows you to respect the religion, please do so. But do not claim it to be perfect, as you should be able to see from this particular example.
 
Sukhamaya Bain
 
 ******************************************************
 

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
               -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190
.














__._,_.___


****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration: 
Call For Articles:

http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68

http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585

****************************************************

VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/

****************************************************

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
               -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190



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

__,_._,___