Yes, Jung could not negate religion because he could not think of the existence of God without religion. Most people cannot separate God and religion; it's a foreign idea to them, but – not to me. I know - religion is not created by God. How do I know? Well, if He did, there would have been only one religion, not hundreds. Therefore, when I see hundreds of religions, I immediately ask myself who created all those religions on earth, and I know who did. It's created by the human.
I alluded before, most people need a God, but do not need hundreds of religions. In my view – all those rituals, prayers, worshiping, etc. are introduced by humans, not God. God does not need any of these religious rituals and mumbo-jumbo practices. Therefore, just do the right things, and use the image of God in your own way whenever you need; you will be just fine.
Jiten Roy
--- On Sun, 12/23/12, subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] About communalism and non communalism--please see my writeup as lot peole accuse Islamists of communalism--please circulate
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Sunday, December 23, 2012, 11:58 AM
"-------it can bring psychological solace from grief, emotions, and distresses."---Jiten Roy. I cannot agree more. But are grief, emotions, and distress not major issues in human life? Jung has seen the modern man overwhelmed with all this and that's why he has not negated religion. He has rather has seen religion as a vital necessity. I am not saying that I completely agree with Jung. However, personally I have been doing fine without a God since I realized that I do not need it 45 years ago. I have developed my own defense mechanism with moral and ethical values, ideological and political beliefs, and other branches of knowledge. As I have said before, I have been living happily with and among the believers. I do not get along well with the peddlers of religions and communalists. I never ridicule the believers although I criticize the hypocrats.
From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, December 23, 2012 10:20 AM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] About communalism and non communalism--please see my writeup as lot peole accuse Islamists of communalism--please circulate
"I got the impression that Dr. Roy believes religion to be at the root of all evils. Hope he would confirm it."Dr. Das, you are right, and I agree with you on the subject of religion. Religion was needed in the past to motivate and educate illiterate people to do right things. It helped bringing us to the point where we are today. In the developing phase of humanity, there was no other intention for religion other than bring people in the right path. It's like teachers using various aides in the kindergarten and primary schools to explain various concepts to the student. There is no other way they could do it. But, as students builds up the concept and knowledge bases in higher grades, teachers do not need those silly aides anymore and gradually phase them out, and stop bringing those aides into the classroom. If teachers still bring some of those kindergarten aides in the college or university level classes, students will start laughing at them. Unfortunately, believers in religion never graduated from the kindergarten school. Their mental maturity never occurred. That's because - religion peddlers made sure that they never graduate from kindergarten to exploit them for their personal and political interests. For example, many religions will forbid any changes or modifications to the edicts; they are set in stones. Followers either do it that way or not at all; there is no other way. In my view, such rigidity was introduced to perpetuate personal interests forever. I agree with you, in this day and age, religion has very limited utility. I understand there are some convicts and drug addicts still use religion to come to the right path. There will always be some of those people who will find religion useful. But, the division, hatred, and destruction in life and property, created by religion, in the human society out-way whatever gains it will bring to our lives. So, there is no net-positive for religion; in fact, it's a public nuisance, in my view. Having said all these, I still feel that - some sort of image of God is important to explain many unknowns of our lives; it can bring psychological solace from grief, emotions, and distresses. I hope that - this will clarify my position on the subject. Jiten Roy --- On Fri, 12/21/12, Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com> wrote:
From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] About communalism and non communalism--please see my writeup as lot peole accuse Islamists of communalism--please circulate
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, December 21, 2012, 11:51 PM
I got the impression that Dr. Roy believes religion to be at the root of all evils. Hope he would confirm it. I, however, am less sure about the evil nature of religion. I consider religion was necessary item to unite the primitive society. In today's universe, it is unnecessary. Even when the priests ruled the societies, they knew the emptiness of the concept. One of the Caesars, Caligula, insisted on his statue being placed in the reconstructed Jewish Temple in Jerujalem(Dar-es-Salam in Islamic parlance). His advisers reminded him that the inaccessible room has a statue of God with donkey's ears (vide, e.g., I Claudius - Robert Graves). The High Priest entered it to have a heart full laughter. The Priest knew, had God been just, omnipotent and righteous, he would not have lived with the misbehavior of the religious men. Caligula was thus desisted, as he had no wish to share a room with a donkey.
"Rahman has the spirits of not taking every thing in the holy books literally." Well, he is a wise man by your standard and an avid reader too. Ask him to explain what is Sidrat-ul-Muntaha and why his prophet could not go beyond it during his rendezvous with Allah? On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 8:07 AM, Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote: I can't agree. That Both Roy and Rahman are believers and that there is no fundamental difference between them do not mean that both of them believe in swarga-narak and behest-dojakh respectively. My impression is that Roy does not believe in heaven and hell. I am not sure about Rahman. But what I understand is that belief level of Roy is higher than that of Rahman. I would request Rahman to clarify if I am wrong. I also understand that Rahman has the spirits of not taking every thing in the holy book literally which is important. Sent from my iPhone Only people devoid of common sense would believe, faith brings God. However faith delivers fool's heaven complete with wine and women. It would also deliver a prick that would last for twenty five years. Don't you dare disbelieve it. It is written in 'holy' literature.
On Sat, Dec 22, 2012 at 5:40 AM, Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com> wrote: Rabindra Nath and Einstein could converse on theological points because of their shared faith in God. As for me, I can converse with a believer also because of my faith in God. But, a disbeliever has a little window of opportunity to discuss on theological points with a believer; they can only try to push their own points of view in vain. That was my point. Jiten Roy--- On Thu, 12/20/12, Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] About communalism and non communalism--please see my writeup as lot peole accuse Islamists of communalism--please circulate To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Thursday, December 20, 2012, 10:51 PM Exactly. "Bishwase miloye hari, torke bohudoor. " But All the assertions of Rahaman are not faith-based. If Rabindranath could engage in a dialog with Einstein, you can also do the same with Rahman although you yourself also believe in God, which there is no fundamental difference between you and Rahman. Sent from my iPhone Logical discussion with a believer is impossible. Mr. Rahman believes that he has found the truth, that's his belief. He can't change his mind on the things he believes in. His efforts are always directed to establish those faiths, even they are illogical. First, one has to accept the premise that prophet or Guru has received revelations from God. Those who do not accept that premise cannot converse with those who do. Then there are some people, like Chakraborty and Manab Dharma, who do not know what they believe in. These people will put forth confusing arguments. What are you going to do? It's a crazy world up there. Jiten Roy
From: Kamal Das <kamalctgu@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] About communalism and non communalism--please see my writeup as lot peole accuse Islamists of communalism--please circulate
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, December 20, 2012, 8:47 PM
When direction was changed (Via God's revelation), he started facing towards Mecca. ... Direction was changed when he was praying on a Saturday along with Jews of Medina. Revelation came from God(alter ego of the prophet) facing ridicule from the Jews in the congregation.
Look Mr. Rahman, stop exhibiting your shallowness even on things you claim to be an expert on. Discuss these with someone of your standard, like Chakrabarty, Hannan, Manabdharma etc. I don't love to post anything for you. I have expressed it so many times. Please do me a favor. Read more and bleat less.
|
|
|
|
