God, Religion and Spirituality

Re: # 9, khuram,

Thanks for providing me the link. Yes, I agree that my opinion is similar to Epicureanism barring few things. Father of a friend of mine used to tell about Indian sages Kanada and Charvaka whose thoughts also resemble Epicureanism. These two sages were never revered by the believers of that time and perhaps charvaka was even put to death as punishment. Even Buddhism and Jainism which were later considered to have originated from these thoughts, do not approve of these sages.

Take your time for the reply. This much from me for the time being.

Samar

@ Samar

I am quite busy right now, so shall write reply to your questions later on. For the moment, I can share the link of Epicureanism in Wikipedia. I am sorry. Actually I just had misspelled this term in previous post. Check the following link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicureanism

Here I should add that your line of thinking may not tally with the abstinence from ordinary pleasures part of this philosophy.

Regards!

Re: # 7,

Ref : # 6

Excuse me Khurram saheb, your last para skipped my attention while writing the post. You have given the meaning of `Epicurienism` in your post and I am satisfied with it.

Regards.

Samar

Re: # 6, khurram saheb,

Thank you for taking keen interest in my article, my posts and my thinking process in general.

Before commenting on your post I should know a few things beforehand.

1) Can belief be taken as truth?

2) Who is spiritual, one who thinks about and tries to search the creator or one who believes that the the creator is Allah or God and than tries to communicate with it.

3) Are you suggesting that those who don`t believe in spirits, soul and God are not spirituals?

Hope you will respond to these questions so that I can think over it and put forward my views on spirituality again.

By the way what is `Epicurienism`? I did not find its mention in Wikipedia. Dictionary meaning may be something like living luxuriously or frivolously. If that is what you think of me than I can understand what belief can lead to.

Samar

@ Samar1982

Thanks for further elaboration of your points. I am thinking that you are over-expanding the scope of `spirituality` by including in it science and mathematics as well. These things do generate internal satisfaction but as a matter of fact, `spirituality` should have primary concern with belief in soul. For example Pathagoras was a spiritualist not because he was a mathematician. He had firm belief in the existence of soul (which you don`t have). For Pathagoras, rational pondering and the number system of mathematics were the tools that could purify individual`s soul and could help it in its unification with Divine soul.

Your line of thinking actually resembles with the philosophy of Epicurienism. In this philosophy, the highest goal of humans is to get internal satisfation through the acquisition of knowledge of every sort.

@ PM,

Thanks for the appreciation.

Regards!

Re: # khuram saheb,

Perhaps you have very convincingly elaborated what I wanted to say in my article. I wish to add a few more of my thoughts.

1) Spirituality is the search for answers as to a. Who I am? b. What happens to me when I die? Will I live forever or, if not, where will I go after death? c. Who created me and the universe? d. Why I/it was created? Etc. Etc. Spirituality is the root (mother) of all other branches (disciplines) of knowledge including science, maths, religion, literature etc. As knowledge is nothing but accumulation of memory (through/of feeling and consciousness) had not man been given memory the universe would not have existed. Because ultimately the question is: Who would know?

2) As stated above religion is a branch of spirituality and though starts with searching answers to questions as enumerated above (i.e. itself implying to be spiritual), in fact concerns with society, organization, politics, power and authority. Ultimately it relates to who rules over the masses. This is evident in the fact that religion had to accommodate many kings and powerful generals who got away with behaving as they found suitable for themselves. Also, many great personalities have been recognized today as belonging to the religion even though what they thought, said and how they lived suggest otherwise.

3) God, as I have said in the article itself, is a beautiful imagination. I have nothing to say about it/him further.

Lastly, I have to add that the difference between what you have suggested as spirituality is some kind of belief (`Spirituality is a belief that individual`s soul can...`,`...as it is believed, only if individual`s soul is pure...`) whereas I think of it as something wider and encompassing thinking, acquiring knowledge of all kinds, intense feeling of beauty, pain etc. etc. That way writing poetry, appreciating mathematics can be treated as spirituality. Frankly I have doubts about the concept of soul and its communication with something eternal.

Samar

Good stuff, khuram! Thanks for sharing.

Spirituality is a belief that individual`s soul can directly communicate, or even can unite with Divine soul. It is possible, as it is believed, only if individual`s soul is pure and strong. Purification and strenght of soul is sought through various spiritual exercises like Muraqbas, Riazats etc. In addition, material social life is also avoided. Its main difference with religion is that aim of religion is usually to bring and maintain harmony and uniformity of social system. Religion strongly dislikes deviance from social norms, religious traditions, Divine told beliefs and various religious customs and rituals. In this way, religion unites people into the shape of large societies whose members think and act in uniform styles. Religion prefers sustainability, continuity and perpetuality of such a uniform society to individual`s freedom and choice. Spirituality, on the other side, prefers individual to even an organized social system. Aim of spirituality is to give strength to individual`s soul. Spiritual people often use to live in jungles where they perform various spiritual exercises. It is however not complete anti-social. More precisely, spirituality recognizes that social system can function even in absence of external religious worships, customs and rituals; and that individuals can establish relationship with Divine without even following the external commands of religion, provided that individuals possess strong souls. Religion wants to establish a uniform pattern society which must be based on the teachings and directions of a central Divine told autority. Spirituality, on the other hand, wants to establish such a society where individuals may seek guidance from the voices of their own purified souls. Here, individuals may differ from other individuals in their thinking and actions because of the absence of any central authority. But a peaceful sociey is still possible because religion doesn`t tolerate diversity whereas spirituality can love diversity.

Regards!

#1#teshah,
Thank you, so much, sir, for your interact. I had started thinking that my write-up might perhaps be completely ignored.

In fact, you seem to endorse what I had tried to convey in my interact, i.e. uselessness and hopelessness of religions. We despised pagans for worshiping (physical) images and then formed our own images in our minds which were then thought of being desecrated and destroyed by so-called and so thought of infidels. In some way or the other, this has been done by all religions. So, what is the point in following some organized religion at all?

Here arises the question of words and their meanings. May be, God gave some divine message to the Paigamber. But when he told it to some ordinary human being he understood it as per his capacity and with his prejudices of love, submission etc. etc. And when after some years this human being scripted the message the meaning must have distorted further. Then there are other interpreters. Suppose even he understood and scripted the God`s message correctly but how can we believe that it went on further without distortion.

Many religions, including Islam, does not approve of the presence of anyone/anything between God and his creation. Then forget Mullahs, how even religion or the book should come in-between.

All this is indeed mind boggling. So, ordinary people must start thinking rationally and propagate reason to such extent that mind boggling strength of `Zalooman Jahoolan` may be countered.

Samar

A rather simplistic attempt at categorising human grouping on the basis of faith or belief. At rational level it is alright but when we go into obscurantism, bigotry and fanaticism engendered by different belief systems we see man as `Zalooman Jahoolan` (unjust and foolish) in the words of Qurani Allah.

Just see Islam. Pre-Islamic Arab society was too religious (Mazhab zaddah) but those who converted to Islam (Mohammedan one) called them `Jahiliya`, `Mushrikeen`, etc.. Some of them who later converted to Islam, came to be called `Munafiqeen`, all professing faith in God. Then there are some religions, like Buddism, which don`t believe in God at all.

It is in fact difficult even to define and categorize the plethora of religions what to talk of doing so in respect of human thought over the centuries. It is all mind-boggling to say the least.