a muslim specialist of hindouism

[Riverwolf]

Haha wow I don't know of any better perversion of Vedanta than that.

Why is that? Do you have a grudge against Islam?

A thousand years of Muslims spitting on Hindus as being the lowest of the low of infidels and persecuting them as invaders and rulers in India been easily sweeped aside and insulted by this Genius.

Excuse me?

I'm not a genius: that requires an I.Q. of at least 150.

Not to mention, I haven't intended to sweep aside anything, and in terms of doing that, nothing I could do compares to what Sri Ramakrishna did when he practiced Islam for a few days and found that it was as valid a path to God as Hindu ones. All I was doing was clarifying through a comparison that, while it may not be 100% accurate, may help understanding.

Really? where?

Svetasvatara Upanishad 1:3, translated by Swami Tyagisananda:

Practicing the method of meditation, they realized that Being who is the God of religion, the Self philosophy and the Energy of science; who exists as the self-luminous power in everyone; who is the source of the intellect, emotions and will; who is one without a second; who presides over all the causes enumerated above, beginning with time and ending with the individual soul; and who had been incomprehensible because of the limitations of their own intellect.

I shall also point out that the translation by Swami Nikhilananda uses "non-dual" instead, but while the wording is different, the idea remains the same.

 

[nameless]

And just as the Qur'an describes Allah as "One without a second", so is Brahman described in the Upanishads as "One without a second."

By this it means there is no god besides ourselves.

1.Prajnanam Brahma - "Consciousness is Brahman" (Aitareya Upanishad 3.3 of the Rig Veda)
2.Ayam Atma Brahma - "This Self (Atman) is Brahman" (Mandukya Upanishad 1.2 of the Atharva Veda)
3.Tat Tvam Asi - "Thou art That" (Chandogya Upanishad 6.8.7 of the Sama Veda)
4.Aham Brahmasmi - "I am Brahman" (Brhadaranyaka Upanishad 1.4.10 of the Yajur Veda)

I hope islam too means the same (that we are allah - Anl Huq).

 

[alishan]

Brahman
-Brahma -
Shiva
Vishnu
Mitra
varuna

and this name would you have the equivalent among the 99 name of Allah in Islam

thanks

 

[alishan]

in veda is it wrotten that God Brahma is incarnate in everything?

which date begins the belief that Brahma incarnate in everything like avatar , men, moon, sun...

 

[EddyM]

Why is that? Do you have a grudge against Islam?

I try to be nice to everyone in general... It takes you to bite me first before I even start biting at all.

Islamic invasion of the Indian subcontinent and the treatment of natives by them is comparable to the recent Holocaust and the treatment of Jews by the Nazis. Rape, torture and humiliation.

It wasnt even about Muslims trying to educate on what they held to be true.

Not to mention, I haven't intended to sweep aside anything

Two concepts may seem similar but it does not mean they infact refer to the same and exact entity.

For example, many Hindus believe that God can incarnate and descend onto Earth in the human form and has had done so.

Christians and (most) Hindus believe that

- God can and has incarnated in the form of a human
- a similar understanding both employ is that the "word" became the "flesh"
- that in the incarnation there are two separate qualities, the Divine/Godly and the human
- this incarnation is a more personal and intimate connection with God / a more completeness in the worship of God
- that the incarnation has a purpose, to cause a change in humanity, propagation of righteousness, revival of religion etc
- some humans witnessing the incarnation and realizing the Divinity of the incarnation

yet the question remains is, is Christ and Krishna the same? the answer is no. Christ was who he was. And so is the case with Krishna.

at the end of the day Jesus Christ and Krishna are NOT the same. They are two entirely different individuals. The two wholes that are Jesus and Krishna still are different. Krishna does not refer to the Jesus figure in anyway whatsoever the least and vice versa.

This applies with what you are doing as well. Allah =/= as Brahman/Ishvara/Bhagavan/Paramatma, even if you try and elaborate on the understanding of the two and how they are similar.

Allah is genderless. Whereas Lord Vishnu is male.:yes:

Lord Vishnu has a form in the Heaven, His form in unlike anything in the created world. So that means His masculinity exceeds that of the most virile and well endowed men and his form is more attractive than any male in this world. Which of course is depressing for many aggressive males who want to go around doing every woman.:areyoucra


Allah is "beyond" these things, free from the evils they ascribe to Him and thus Al-Islam has got no "filthy idolatry" of this sort.

On the otherhand when pious and pure Muslimah women who wears the burka. During the middle of the night, her husband is beside her on the bed, and she lies unsatisfied and clutches her pillow tightly...

it is my Father who is the One who... :hearts:

 

[A-ManESL]

I hope islam too means the same (that we are allah - Anl Huq).

Do you know what Anl Huq means?

 

[nameless]

Do you know what Anl Huq means?

to best of my knowledge Anl Huq means, 'im that (or god)'

 

[A-ManESL]

to best of my knowledge Anl Huq means, 'im that (or god)'

I think Haq means "Truth" and Ana is "I am". In effect, the phrase means "I am the Truth". Truth is one of the 99 names of God in Islamic tradition, so you are correct in that sense.

Regards

 

[Riverwolf]

I try to be nice to everyone in general... It takes you to bite me first before I even start biting at all.

Islamic invasion of the Indian subcontinent and the treatment of natives by them is comparable to the recent Holocaust and the treatment of Jews by the Nazis. Rape, torture and humiliation.

It wasnt even about Muslims trying to educate on what they held to be true.

Let's see, and who else did that? Oh, yeah. AMERICANS!

Sins of the fathers do not carry to the sons.

Two concepts may seem similar but it does not mean they infact refer to the same and exact entity.

For example, many Hindus believe that God can incarnate and descend onto Earth in the human form and has had done so.

Christians and (most) Hindus believe that

- God can and has incarnated in the form of a human
- a similar understanding both employ is that the "word" became the "flesh"
- that in the incarnation there are two separate qualities, the Divine/Godly and the human
- this incarnation is a more personal and intimate connection with God / a more completeness in the worship of God
- that the incarnation has a purpose, to cause a change in humanity, propagation of righteousness, revival of religion etc
- some humans witnessing the incarnation and realizing the Divinity of the incarnation

yet the question remains is, is Christ and Krishna the same? the answer is no. Christ was who he was. And so is the case with Krishna.

I'm aware that Christ and Krishna are two separate figures, thank you.

This applies with what you are doing as well. Allah =/= as Brahman/Ishvara/Bhagavan/Paramatma, even if you try and elaborate on the understanding of the two and how they are similar.

I'm aware of their differences, and I did point out the most important one of all: "Allah" is a dualist monotheistic concept, whereas "Bhagavan" doesn't have to be. (Though, I do think Sufis see Allah in a more panentheistic light, but I'm not sure).

That doesn't mean I can't bridge the gaps to help understanding, which is all I was doing.

Allah is genderless. Whereas Lord Vishnu is male.:yes:

Allah is simply the Arabic word for "God", and isn't just used by Muslims, but by Arabic-speaking Christians. The Sanskrit equivalent would be "Bhagavan", not any of the specific Gods like Vishnu. Bhagavan can refer to Vishnu, Lakshmi, Siva, Krishna, Kali, or any other deity regardless of any specified gender.

Lord Vishnu has a form in the Heaven, His form in unlike anything in the created world. So that means His masculinity exceeds that of the most virile and well endowed men and his form is more attractive than any male in this world. Which of course is depressing for many aggressive males who want to go around doing every woman.:areyoucra

I'm not a Vaishnavite, just FYI. I'm more of a Pantheistic Shaivite, and I see Siva more as Brahman itself. I don't believe in literal deities.

 

[nameless]

I think Haq means "Truth" and Ana is "I am". In effect, the phrase means "I am the Truth". Truth is one of the 99 names of God in Islamic tradition, so you are correct in that sense.

Regards

you might be knowing the story of mansoor, he was stoned to death for he said 'anl haq', whats so wrong with this term?

 

[ppɐʇɹnɯ]

I try to be nice to everyone in general... It takes you to bite me first before I even start biting at all.

Islamic invasion of the Indian subcontinent and the treatment of natives by them is comparable to the recent Holocaust and the treatment of Jews by the Nazis. Rape, torture and humiliation.

This is true. And comparble to the Christian Roman invasions of many smaller nations, obliterating their traditional deities. Similar to the Spanish Christian invasion of the New World.

By resarch I've done, more than 200 million Hindus perished during the Islamic occupation of India. And possibly 100 million during the British invasion.

 

[A-ManESL]

you might be knowing the story of mansoor, he was stoned to death for he said 'anl haq', whats so wrong with this term?

Yes, I know the story of Mansoor Hallaj. What he meant by saying "Ana-ul-Haq" is related to the Sufi concept of fanaa (annihilation) and not with pantheism.

Regards

 

[nameless]

What he meant by saying "Ana-ul-Haq" is related to the Sufi concept of fanaa (annihilation) and not with pantheism.

Regards

so for what reason exactly he was stoned to death? is fanaa forbidden in islam?

 

[A-ManESL]

so for what reason exactly he was stoned to death? is fanaa forbidden in islam?

nameless fanaa is as very part of attaining Islam. Your question presupposes that Hallaj was prosecuted since he was against Islam. I hold that those who prosecuted him had no real understanding of Islam and they were doing so out of political and religious intrigues. (See also Hallaj's entry in Encyclopedia of Islam By Juan Eduardo Campo.) In extension I hold that those who think him as being a non-Muslim also have no real understanding of Islam. This passage by Rumi from his book, "Fihi Ma Fihi" may be relevant in understanding Hallaj's point of view.

Rumi was asked the meaning of the following lines:

When love attains its ultimate goal
Desire turns to dislike.

Rumi explained: Dislike is a narrow world compared to friendship. That is why people run from hatred to find friendship. But the world of friendship is itself narrow next to the Source of both friendship and dislike. Friendship and enmity, unbelief and faith—these are all opposites that lead to duality. Yet a world exists where there is no duality but only pure unity, and when we reach that world we are beyond friendship and dislike. There is no room for two in that world.

When we arrive there, we leave duality behind. The world of freedom we loved and struggled for is narrow next to that state where no opposites exist. Therefore, we no longer desire it, and are repulsed by it.

When Mansur al-Hallaj reached his utmost friendship with God, he became his own enemy and gave away his life. He said, “I am God,” meaning, “I have passed away. God alone remains.” This is extreme humility. Your saying, “Thou art God, and I am Your servant,” is arrogance, for you have affirmed your own existence, and created dualism. To say, “He is God,” is still duality, for until “I” exists “He” is impossible. Therefore it was God alone who said, “I am God,” since Mansur had passed away.

If you look carefully Hallaj's approach is one of wahdat, or Unity.

Regards

 

[nameless]

Therefore it was God alone who said, “I am God,”

thanks for the clarification, A-ManESL

so mansur actually claimed he is god by saying 'anl haq', right?
Good to know islam has no problem with the phrase 'i am god' .

 

[A-ManESL]

thanks for the clarification, A-ManESL

so mansur actually claimed he is god by saying 'anl haq', right?

I hope my point that when he uttered Ana-al Haq he meant "mansur is nothing, God is all there is, He is the only Reality" in todays way of speaking is clear.

Regards

 

[nameless]

I hope my point that when he uttered Ana-al Haq he meant "mansur is nothing, God is all there is, He is the only Reality" in todays way of speaking is clear.

Regards

thanks again, so let me conclude ...
it was god (allah, the creator) in a human body who uttered 'im god', correct? and those people stoned the same god.

 

[A-ManESL]

thanks again, so let me conclude ...
it was god (allah, the creator) in a human body who uttered 'im god', correct? and those people stoned the same god.

Your words do seem to indicate that you are using the word God in the strict symbolic sense (as a distinct unit). In reality, this wasnt Hallaj's approach which is based on Unity. When things are contrasted against their opposites only then they acquire any meaning (night has no meaning if there is no day etc). In the Unity approach, there is nothing to contrast for their is only One Reality which encompasses all. Otherwise you are correct.

 

[nameless]

Your words do seem to indicate that you are using the word God in the strict symbolic sense (as a distinct unit). In reality, this wasnt Hallaj's approach which is based on Unity. When things are contrasted against their opposites only then they acquire any meaning (night has no meaning if there is no day etc). In the Unity approach, there is nothing to contrast for their is only One Reality which encompasses all. Otherwise you are correct.

sorry, i was not able to relate this with my question.... be kind to explain. In simple words the question is, did those people stoned the god islam talks about, (y/n)?...

anyway, in that sense (about unity), is there any difference between god and no-god? if there is no difference, why he said only god and no no-god? ....

 

[A-ManESL]

sorry, i was not able to relate this with my question.... be kind to explain. In simple words the question is, did those people stoned the god islam talks about, (y/n)?...

anyway, in that sense (about unity), is there any difference between god and no-god? if there is no difference, why he said only god and no no-god? ....

Tell me what do you mean by God. What does that word convey to you? If you mean an all-powerful deity that is not what Hallaj meant (and not what God in Islam means either).

A simple answer would be that if he had said no-God you would have asked why not say God? If he had said giraffe you would have asked why not camel? The word Truth used was such that in the manner of how people talk: Truth means what is right and correct. If a pantheist starts mixing up all words just because everything is the same, no one will understand him.

That said, the Sufi concept of God is not entirely pantheistic, hence there is a difference between God and everything else. Like all numbers are sums of 1, and 1 is the sum of no number and is independent of others in that sense, similarly all creation is made up of (reflections of the light of) God, and God is independent of all this. Some people refer to this as panentheism. The Reality stretches far beyond this panenetheism though, for the theological plane on which we are discussing these concepts is not properly equipped to handle this question of "what is the meaning of God". The simple point remains "Truth is One, but people know it by many names".

Regards