The Role of Mystics, Artists and Scientists in Human Evolution

Re: # 49 thanks for the note. BUddhist works, developed during the time of Kanishka, and the earlier body of work done under samkhya school of Kapila (think there was a reference to this earlier here) do state these things with some clarity. If I could even the Bhagavat Gita (if you read the one with commentary by Shakara) says similar things to what you said in #46. The point is not to read them as religious texts for they are far from that. Indeed the low way, of Hinayana and the later Mahayana schools were precisely this.

I will dig up some references fo you on this and post them.

Re: # 47

I have written extensively on what you call ``fukked up menatlity``. This menatlity is real and it has its basis in the colonial occupation of our lands. There was a concerted effort on part of our colonial masters to create a mindset or a class of people who would think like ``them``. As a matter of fact ``thinking like them`` was only a stated objective. The real objective was to create a set of people who would not ``question them``.

People have been moving enmass from place to place since millenia and changed and influenced the local culture everywhere. For example, when Muslims came to India, they exerted an influence on local culture too. But that influence was that of amalgamation and fusion which transformed into a uniquely distinct culture in sub-continent. The British cultural influence in sub-cintinent is a different matter altogether. It was an inflence of exclusion, aparthied, and subjugation. The phrase ``Indians and dogs not allowed`` written on sign boards all over India says it all.

As a result we have generation after generation of class of people who are suffering from acute inferiority complex. That is what happens when inferiority complex is institutionalized through an education system.

Immitating their masters these people ``question`` the norms and taboos of their society. Thinking that they are legends in their own mind, they have no criteria to judge their own selves that there is a hell lot difference between ``questioning` and insulting. The former (i.e. questioning) is done when you have a desire in your heart to change something for better; but later (i.e. insulting) is done to express ones own inferiority complex.

The evidence of this phenomenon is abundant on this forum. The more ``pro-Western`` (they call themselves modernists to hide their vassalage) one is, the more insulting and abusive he is. This is wages of the sins of our fathers. It will take a hell lot of an effort to disinfect them from what ails them.

dear drsohail, when you say ``On the journey of human evolution we are gradually evolving from religious communities and theocratic states to secular communities and humanistic states where all citizens will enjoy equal rights and privileges.`` I wonder what it is you are implying? All your notion of secular humanisms, nd indeed the whole paragraph from which this is quoted indicates that you want to suggest something but are afraid to say it. The many truths, personal truths etc are concepts which are the antithesis of most mono-beliefs. Are you arguing your case against organised monotheism?

You seem to have left all dangling in mid-air gasping and clutching for whatever seems to be floating by. Was this the general idea here? If so you have suceeded beyond your wildest imagination, if not then perhaps you could go beyond these ideas, and carry out the closure of your ideas i.e take them to their logical end.

---

...

---

Thanks for your kind thoughts toward me. I quoted from David Hume because I have read some of his works. You did not give any reference to any relevant publication (that you quoted from) of any subcontinental author which I could acquire and read. The knowledge in the West is systematized and preserved. It`s so easy to obtain a book by any western author.

Moreover, knowledge is knowledge whether it`s from the East or the West.

I respect your sentiments. Be well,

Mohammad Gill

Re: # 45
dear urstruly... it is intersting that although you consider my articles sloppy you still read

them and have not given up. maybe one day i might not disappoint you. are you a patient

man?. i am glad other readers enjoy my articles more than you do. maybe they are more

forgiving my articles are just my humble views about life and philosophy and human

psychology. creative writings are like that....impressionistic....they are intended to generate

a dialogue. for me mystics challenge rather than become part of the `religious

establishment`. in my opinion there are three groups

religious...traditional

spiritual...mystic...that challenge religious traditions from inside

secular/atheistic...that challenge religions from outside

if my views were `religious` i would not be encouraging genuine dialogue..

sincerely sohail

Re: # 46
totally agree with you there, Gill. However, I have a question to you and to the author, and perhaps Urstruly can chipp in here as well (since he is knowlkedgable in some aspects of the answer) (and no it is not a criticism of you, but a general spoon to stir the pot a bit)

``why the heck do we have to resort to quoting from Hume, whitman and others? When a similar body of knowledge, and indeed the exact same thing was said in the lands now called India and Pakistan. The great universities of Taxila produced scholars who said the same thing. The Scholars in kanishka`s court argued about the same things (and he ruled from Purushapura, now peshawar) vast swathes of Northern India and Pakistan. Dont tell me, Islamic thinkers from the sub-continent, didnot say the same thing (or similar things)? The whole article relies on notions developed in the west, when such thinking was available in our very own home lands!``

Are we so fukked up mentally and intellectually that we cannot think beyond the recent stuff we have read? have we become that ignorant of our history and culture?

-dots

P.S Gilli Sahib, please donot take this personally - I like your extremely informative thinkng and articles, and enjoy them remendously. But when I read your #46 this came to me as a side bar, esp your last statement ``Blind faith is risky, to say the least`` was magic.
I could not resist the temptation!

David Hume wrote about divinity and metaphysics as follows:

``If we take in our hand any volume; of divinity or school metaphysics, for instance; let us ask, Does it contain any abstract reasoning concerning quantity or number? No. Does it contain any experimental reasoning, concerning matter of fact and existence? No. Commit it then to flames: for it can contain nothing but sophistry and illusion.``

Blind faith is risky, to say the least.

Mohammad Gill

Some of the basic facts that form the premise of this article are wrong. For example, Saadi Shirazi, Bulleh Shah and Rumi never challenged what you call the ``religious establishment`` and neither of them were ever persecuted or prosecuted for any reason. And I do not see any reason why Blake and Whitmann should be put in the category of mystics in the first place. In addition Blake was never persecuted for any reason; he died peacefully in his bed. Walt whitman on the other hand was actually honored by naming bridge after him during his lifetime.

Dr, Sahib this is sloppy work. I have no problem, with the zeal that you have to prolesytize your religion, but at least try to know what you are preaching first.

Re: # 43

interesting Pov - This ``i think humanity is evolving from the insitutions of religious blind faith to secularism and humanism based on science, psychology and philosophy...i hope we
educate our children with modern knowledge so that they play a leading role in human
evolution...as a humanist i cherish all traditions...religious,,,spiritual and secular,,,of all
cultures...they are goldmines of knowledge and wisdom.. ``

can you pleae expand on this. I do understand that you did try to explain this in the article and in your interracts. But up to a point. Somewhere there in the quote above, the word ``reasn`` is missing. Maybe I am wrong, but shouldn`t that be a factor as well. Also care to comment on the discussion Tahmed32, Wheel o Time (Kaalchakra), and dare I mention the idiot Iron_Mask had from #23 to #38. Interestingly Wheel O Time and others seem to be alluding to what you say in your quote above. That is my interpretation

Re: # 41
dear khurrum....as a secular humanist i respect personal truths of all human beings. as far

as it is a private matter i have no objection. i think religion is an institutionalized version of

truth that is passed on from one generation to another by blind faith. such insitiutionalized

blind faith has hindered human evolution

...mystics challenged it and asked people to rely on their own observations and

experiences rather than on sermons of priests, mullahs, rabbis and pandits

...artists challenged it based on their aesthetic values by creating poems and paintings and

plays which were declared sin by insitituionalized religions

...scientists and philosophers challenged it by rational and logical thinking

so for a personal truth to be accepted by others it has to pass the test of rational and

objective thinking otherwise it remains a personal truth.

in a secular humanistic community all citizens are respepected for their personal

truth...whether it is religious, spiritual or secular...it is freedom OF religion

but the laws of the land need to be made on secular and humanistic grounds which also

includes freedom FROM religion so that religious institutions do not gain so much political

power that they penalize and persecute the mystics, artists and sceintists.....for human

growth and evolution we need to cherish questioning and a healthy dialogue. in religious

insitutions there are sermons (monologues) rather than democratic dialogues. Galelio was

persecuted by catholic church and Mansoor killed my Muslim clerics for challenging

traditional blind faith

i respect all people with their personal truth even if it is religious and comes from God and

scriptures and prophets....as far as those religious people respect other people`s truth...i

call those religious people who respect people from other faiths and serve them ... religious

humanists...like martin luther king jr in america...edhi in pakistan...desmund tutu in south

africa...these religious people try to serve their community

but we need to be aware of those religious people who are extremists and want to control

other people by making blashphemy laws and create theocratic states.

as a secular humanist i believe chuch and state....mosque and parliment...synagogue and

constitution...temple and politics need to be kept separate....

in south africa religious humanist desmond tutu and secular humanist nelson mandela

worked together to serve their community against apartheid system and fought for human

rights of all africans.

i think humanity is evolving from the insitutions of religious blind faith to

secularism and humanism based on science, psychology and philosophy...i hope we

educate our children with modern knowledge so that they play a leading role in human

evolution...as a humanist i cherish all traditions...religious,,,spiritual and secular,,,of all

cultures...they are goldmines of knowledge and wisdom..

sincerely sohail

Re: # 23
dear hamidm 2...i am glad you wrote a paragraph commenting about the first line of my

article. i wish you had read the whole article and given your feedback. we all live and learn.

i appreciate honest feedback and try to learn from it even if it makes me uncomfortable.

personal growth or cultural evolution is usually a painful process but i think it is worth

it....mothers know it very well that to have a beautiful baby they have to experience labour

pains.creative people throughout history have been like mothers.giving us gifts of their

babies their creative products whether poems or paintings or plays or philosophies. do you

not agree?..sincerely sohail

ps...my poet uncle arif abdul mateen wrote a couplet in urdu about the creative process

mairaj par hay karb-e-gawara damagh ka

takhleeq ho raha hay sukhanwar kay haan sukhan

``I am of the opinion that blind faith and religion were our past and science, psychology and philosophy are our future as human beings``

drsohail,

I can see that you are critical of religion and faith and advocate science and philosophy. But I am not clear about the nature of your criticism. Can you clarify by answering the following question.

Are you saying that,
A. My subjective truth is better than your subjective truth, OR
B. My truth is objective while your truth is subjective, OR
C. None of the above.

Thanks

Re: # 21
malik sahib..you are very perceptive...i thought philosophers could be considered scientists

as they use rational and analytical approach and come up with objective findings...maybe

next time i will add philosophers in the title as well....sincerely sohail

Re: # 22
dear nasah....hazoor-e-wala....beauty is in the eyes of the beholder....i will cherish the

compliment....especially coming from you....readers like you make the writing

worthwhile....affectionately sohail

Re: # 37
, if I could, I would like to quote the following (this was an aphorism provided by Kapila - from whose school Buddha is supposed to have risen)

Aph. 1.* Well, the complete cessation of pain [which is] of three kinds is the complete end of man.

the three kinds of pain are 1) due to one`s self (ádhyátmika), (2) due to products of the elements (ádhibhautika), and (3) due to supernatural causes (ádhidaivika). The complete end being ``liberation``.

Each one of these is fine. We can do (1) with the greatest of ease. (3) also the same to hell with superstitions, and belief in god (okay pardon me the blasphemy here). It is (2) which is often the problem. This is problem today and the bane - the problem I first rised with Kaalchakra!

Re: # 32

agreed.

tahmed32, that is the struglle we all face in one form or the other everyday of our lives - in almost all spheres of our existence. It is what we eventually do with it, and resolve this struggle dictates our state/condition. And eventually the sum total of our condition in the last years of our lives. In some cases, thisleads to a massive improvement, and hence to human condition in others there is but a small regression. This regression is like a pertubation in the system, and human society recovers, learns and marches forward.