Dr. Zakir Naik in saying that Hindus range from believing in multitudes of gods to just one god is not untrue. But he has failed to inform his audience that there are Hindus who go beyond believing that there is only one God to believing that the whole of existence is one. This goes beyond the duality believed in by many schools of Hinduism and also Islam. The duality being the eternal separation between the creator and the created. While it is sacrilegious in Islam to link Allah and his creation, the Advaita thought, where the creator and the created are one, has a pervasive influence in Hinduism even among the dualists.
======================
Dr. Zakir Naik has been grossly unfair to his audience in not introducing the non-dual concept while speaking of Hinduism. Saying that the Vedas teach, just like the Quran, that there is only one God, is misleading. The Vedas teach the oneness of existence. Some Sufi schools also talk of the oneness of existence. But Dr. Zakir Naik would not be able to talk about the oneness of existence. That would be straying into the ground of Shirk. Therefore I would say, to be fair to yourself, do not quote Dr. Zakir Naik if you wish to understand Hinduism in all its implications. The writings of some Sufis would be a truer reflection of the most sublime teachings of Hinduism.
===================
Hinduism, unlike Islam, is really a conglomeration of religions. It has many scriptures, systems, philosophies, social mores and what not, some of which seem contradictory one to the other. This is not surprising because Hinduism, under whatever name, has been in existence for thousands of years and is considered the oldest religious tradition in the world. However, the greatest accomplishment of the Hindu ethos is its discovery of the Advaitic or non-dual vision. It is this non-dual vision that has once again been picked up in modern times and is both influencing traditional Hinduism as well as religions outside the Hindu fold. Unless the Advaitic vision of Hinduism is considered in any discussion of Hinduism, a failure to understand the dynamics of Hinduism would result.
=====================
In the semantics of language, that there is only one God is believed in by many Hindus. But there is probably not a single Hindu who believes that this one God is separate from him or her. Hinduism is largely seen as an idol-worshipping religion but Hinduism is also probably the only religion that has a teaching wherein idol worshiping has no place and this teaching is called Advaita or the non-dual teaching. When we, the subject, have something that is not "we", than that becomes the object in relation to us. Idol-worshiping is about worshiping the "not-we". That is, idol worshiping is about worshiping objects. In Advaita, there is no separation into "we" and "not we" - both are one. Therefore Advaita is a non-idol-worshiping religion. Dr. Zakir Naik is a great scholar, a good and sincere man. He surely knows this truth about Hinduism. But why has he not told his audience this?
=========================
My Dear Brother Rehan, Advaita or non-duality is part of the Hindu scriptures. Dr. Zakir Naik has only come up to the point that Hindus believe that everything is God, like the trees, rivers, mountains, animals etc, without having explained to his audience that Advaita is not about separate entities, call them whatever, but is about the oneness of all existence. Obviously Dr. Zakir Naik was not revealing everything that he learned about Hinduism. In this he has short-charged his audience.
==================
My Dear Rehan, When you call upon me to check in my scriptures about proofs, you have touched the point I wish to make. The proofs that you have derived from Hindu scriptures are based on your believe in One God. Hindus have gone beyond that and therefore they can see plainly that what their scriptures are talking about is the oneness of all existence. This is different from believing in One God. In counting God and coming up with a number, whether 1 or 330 million, we are only making God an object (idol worship). God can never be reduced to a mere object, except for the purpose of evolution in our understanding of God. God is life itself and therefore all existence. Unless this is understood, Muslims will continue to talk about One God as the ultimate truth, not realising that they are still in the stage of duality, which stage Hinduism has transcended (but not destroyed because Hinduism believes that dualism is a stepping stone to the ultimate non-duality).
=========================
The idea of worshiping a God presupposes that the God is separate from you. The belief that God is separate from us is natural at the beginning of our religious journey. However, all Muslims up to the end of the journey believe that God is separate from them. Many Hindus too not only believe that God is separate from them, but also believe that God takes many forms and hence there are many "Gods" and in various forms. The Advaitic (non-dual) teachings of the Hindus say that all existence is one and the separation is only apparent but not true - that is, the separation is due to ignorance. There is only the "is-ness" of life. So any one who is involved in worship of God, whether of one God or innumerable Gods, is objectifying God and his worship is idol worship. When God becomes the subject, then idol worship ends and we awaken to the truth of our perfection and the perfection of our circumstances. Hinduism does not call man sinner or slave but divine.
=====================
"Hindu gods and their sexual lewdness" is acceptable to a Hindu if his approach to religion is based on faith. His faith leads him to believe that it was all for a purpose, best known only to the gods. Maybe as ironic as Muslims accepting Mohammad as the perfect model for mankind despite Mohammad's many marriages and at least one to a pre-puberty girl. Muslims justify it saying it was all for a larger cause, just as Hindus justify their gods lewdness simply as games the gods play. In fact, Islam and a large part of Hinduism are alike because they worship God as an outsider, whether 1 God or many Gods. What is different is Advaita or non-dualism that posits that all existence is one and therefore we are the God we worship. Thus Advaita is the only religion (teaching) that does not call for idol worship. Islam, which is against idol worship, did not evolve to become free of idol worship. Only the Sufis have attempted a break-through.
=================
What do you mean by God?
==================
I asked the question for the simple reason that in Islam's concept of God the question of believing (and obeying) Him is the be all and end all of religion. In Advaita, the most sublime of Hindu teachings, the call is to discover our true nature, which is one with all existence. It goes beyond believe, which is required only if God is separate from us. Therefore Muslims believe in God, named Allah, and many Hindus also believe in God, named after their idols. In Advaita God has no name - it is simply the "is-ness" of existence.Anyway, I request you to tell me what you mean by God, so that I might try to clarify the matter step by step.
==================
Dear Rehan, The title of this thread, "The Concept of God in Hinduism and Islam" itself contains a flaw in the sense that Hinduism has more than one concept of God. Polytheism is just one of the concepts that Hindus hold. They also hold the concepts of monotheism, monism etc. Moreover, you started this thread by quoting Dr. Zakir Naik. I took up the thread to point out that Dr. Naik's contention that the Vedas call for believe in One God is misplaced, because the Vedas' acme teaching is Advaita or the oneness of existence.As a Hindu, I have multiple choices as to what to believe or even to not believe anything at all. As far as belief is concerned, no Hindu believes that only one path is correct and all others are wrong. Many Hindus eventually take up one of the great many meditative processes indicated in Hinduism and seek to discover God in the depths of their own consciousness.
As far as my personal beliefs are concerned, I believe that we and our circumstances are perfect, have always been perfect and will ever be perfect. This is because we are God. And by God I mean nothing other than Life. Yes, our life is what we are and not the form that our life has taken up. Life takes up forms in a game of hide-and-seek it plays, where it loses itself and tries to re-discover itself.
I hope all readers of my comments will note that I am not trying to say that Islam is wrong and Advaita alone is right. I am only trying to point out that there are many paths available to man to believe/realize God and it is his individual choice which path he chooses. All paths eventually would lead to the truth as all rivers eventually lead to the ocean.
====================
I am glad that you will never say that the teachings of Vedas are wrong. I hope one day you will understand that the Vedas go beyond the teaching of one God to the teaching of oneness of existence. You and I may not be now experiencing the oneness because our consciousness is limited within our forms. But as our consciousness becomes more and more subtle through meditation, we shall know that we are the formless and we shall say as a great Sufi said, "Ana al Haque".
--------------------------
Meditation is the art of experiencing silence or stillness of mind. There are many techniques to achieve this. The simplest method prescribed by Hinduism is to utter a word non-stop. Silence is the source of all sound and language. What we learn through language is second-hand. When we reach the realm of silence, we would have direct knowledge of the ultimate and such knowledge would not be subject to the limitations of language. It is in the realms of silence that the knowledge of the oneness of existence arises. It goes beyond believing, expecting, hoping etc.
==========================
Dear Brother, If you are not well-versed with Hinduism, you will be surprised that there are sects within Hinduism that use s e x as a means to attain spiritual goals. And there are temples itself where explicit sexual scenes are shown. Hinduism is not a one-hat-fits-all-heads type of religion. I personally know of an Ashram (place of spiritual activities) where its inmates, men and women, have free s e x. This is a very respectable Ashram set in the midst of a conservative society. On the other hand, there are Gurus (spiritual teachers) who do not look at women, except their family members and they may even marry. And such gurus may have a large number of women devotees. Then, there are sects where its priests do not wear any cloths and go naked in public and yet they are life-long celibates. There are sects whose activities are so bizarre that mainstream Hindus are often shocked to hear of them - but as is the Hindu tradition of live-and-let-live, they shrug it off and continue their own way. One Guru has even authored, many thousands of years ago, what is considered even now as the greatest book on s e x ever written - the Kama Sutra.
It is truly said of Hinduism, "What is held true in Hinduism, the opposite is also held true in Hinduism."
-------------------------
[I think the deletion of my post due to one word is surprising, particularly when the phrase "Hinduism revolves around sexuality" is acceptable. I am posting the post again, blanking out the one word, so that the phrase "Hinduism revolves around sexuality" is put in proper context.]
Dear Brother, If you are not well-versed with Hinduism, you will be surprised that there are sects within Hinduism that use *** as a means to attain spiritual goals. And there are temples itself where explicit sexual scenes are shown. Hinduism is not a one-hat-fits-all-heads type of religion. I personally know of an Ashram (place of spiritual activities) where its inmates, men and women, have free ***. This is a very respectable Ashram set in the midst of a conservative society. On the other hand, there are Gurus (spiritual teachers) who do not look at women, except their family members and they may even marry. And such gurus may have a large number of women devotees. Then, there are sects where its priests do not wear any cloths and go naked in public and yet they are life-long celibates. There are sects whose activities are so bizarre that mainstream Hindus are often shocked to hear of them - but as is the Hindu tradition of live-and-let-live, they shrug it off and continue their own way. One Guru has even authored, many thousands of years ago, what is considered even now as the greatest book on *** ever written - the Kama Sutra. It is truly said of Hinduism, "What is held true in Hinduism, the opposite is also held true in Hinduism."
======================
I think what has misled Dr. Zakir Naik to conclude that the Hindu scriptures state that there is only one God is the usage of the word "He" to describe that which is being described. Muslims know that the usage of the word "He" in the Quran to denote Allah is not tantamount to stating that Allah is a male. The Vedas, which proclaim the oneness of existence, also declare that existence is not an inert substance but life itself. And since that life is nothing other than the life we have but unlimited by form, that formless life which pervades all existence and is existence, is called Brahman in Vedas and it is denoted by "He". The Vedas do not teach that there is only one God, separate from the rest of existence. Such an interpretation is given provisionally by the dualistic schools of Hinduism to sustain idol worship, which is very beneficial in the evolution of a seeker to reach the level of non-dualism and discover himself. However, Dr. Zakir Naik asserts that the Vedas teach there is only one God because Islam does not permit going beyond dualism. I again request you to look into the teachings of great Sufi masters to understand what non-dualism is.
==================
[My post was deleted because I used a certain word. But the same word was used in another form to describe Hinduism. The second time the same post was deleted, though I did not use the word, without so much as a "by-your-leave". I am posting the same post totally omiting the word but using the word in another form, which is apparently allowed. I hope you will publish my post this time.]
Dear Brother, If you are not well-versed with Hinduism, you will be surprised that there are sects within Hinduism that use sexuality as a means to attain spiritual goals. And there are temples itself where explicit sexual scenes are shown. Hinduism is not a one-hat-fits-all-heads type of religion. I personally know of an Ashram (place of spiritual activities) where its inmates, men and women, have free sexuality. This is a very respectable Ashram set in the midst of a conservative society. On the other hand, there are Gurus (spiritual teachers) who do not look at women, except their family members and they may even marry. And such gurus may have a large number of women devotees. Then, there are sects where its priests do not wear any cloths and go naked in public and yet they are life-long celibates. There are sects whose activities are so bizarre that mainstream Hindus are often shocked to hear of them - but as is the Hindu tradition of live-and-let-live, they shrug it off and continue their own way. One Guru has even authored, many thousands of years ago, what is considered even now as the greatest book on sexuality ever written - the Kama Sutra.
=======================
But how do you know that Allah has sealed my heart, ears and eyes? Are you coming to such a conclusion just because I am debating with you?
=======================
Those are they whose hearts, ears, and eyes Allah has sealed up, and they take no heed. This is Verse from Quran
But why are you quoting the Quran against me? How do you know that Allah would include me in the list of "they" when my only crime is to engage you in a debate? And that too not on Islam but on certain aspects of Hinduism.
====================
I have read scriptures of Hinduism as well as of other religions. What you seem to insist is that only the interpretation of Hindu scriptures given by Dr. Zakir Naik is correct. For example Na Tasya Pratima Asti - No likeness of Him exists – has been interpreted by Dr. Zakir Naik as proof that only one God exists. But the Vedic verse is only reiterating that God is formless, which means that God is not separate from existence. All the other verses quoted by Dr. Zakir Naik and his interpretation are similar in nature and proves that he is unable to go beyond the duality of Islam. And what you are saying is that I also should interpret Vedas from a dualistic view. When the Vedas itself has not insisted on such an interpretation, why should I? God has been made separate and worshipped in Hinduism (idol worship) only as a preparation for the highest truth of non-duality. Islam stops from making the crossing from duality to non-duality. However, the Sufis have done so.
===================
Hinduism cannot be categorized as a single path religion, like Islam. There are many paths in Hinduism towards divinity and monotheism is just one of them.
==================
If Hinduism does not exist, why did you use the term in the title of your thread?
=================vg
What is there to prove? That Hinduism believes in many paths towards divinity is the most obvious thing about Hinduism, just as belief in One God is the most obvious thing about Islam.
=================
Even if the word Hindu does not exist in Hindu scriptures (it actually does and it denotes not a specific religion but the people who live in what is identified as today's India) today the whole world accepts the existence of Hindus and call their religion Hinduism. How can you deny this?
==================
I think Mansoor Al Hillaj, a Sufi, was onto non-duality when he said "Ana Al Haq". Much of Rumi's writings are Advaitic (non-dual) in nature. Wasn't he also a Sufi?
=================
Dear Rehan, I have not misquoted Mansoor Al Hillaj. Your explanation proves that he (Al Hillaj) meant that he and Allah are one with his proclamations ANA AL-HAQQ (I am the Truth), or subhani (Glory to Me!) and ma fi al-jubba illa Allah (there is nothing in this cloak except Allah). This is precisely the non-dual vision that is considered Shirk by the majority of Muslims.
Al Hillaj also wrote:
I am He whom I love, and He whom I love is I:
We are two spirits dwelling in one body.
If thou seest me, thou seest Him, and if thou seest Him, thou seest us both.
Another Sufi, Ibn Arabi, wrote, "Those who worshipped the calf worshipped nothing except Allah”, thereby sanctioning the idol worship so popular among the Hindus. These are not isolated writings of eccentric Sufis. The whole thrust of Sufism is the wahdatul-wujood or oneness of existence approach,(non-dualism) as opposed to the approach which holds that God and his creation are entirely separate (dualism) prescribed by Islam in general.
I am surprised that you criticize the Salafis. After all, they are considered the best generations of Muslims by none other than Mohammad himself.
=================
I am He whom I love, and He whom I love is I: We are two spirits dwelling in one body.If thou seest me, thou seest Him, and if thou seest Him, thou seest us both.
Here the He and Him mentioned is Allah. So isn't Al Hillaj saying, I am Allah - there is no separation? This is a non-dual view.
===================
Dear Rehan, I am surprised at your approach. I wonder why you started a thread to talk of the concept of God in Hinduism? All that you have done is to cut and paste Dr. Zakir Naik's views on Hinduism. I had pointed out that Dr. Zakir Naik's views on Hinduism are grossly flawed. But you seem to be insisting that if I read my scriptures, I will see that Dr. Zakir Naik's views are correct. And why do you say I can't understand Sufis? We might as well say that both of us will not understand the other's religion and bring this debate to an end. But in that case you also have to stop talking about Hinduism because you cannot understand Hinduism, to use your logic.
=====================
Read Rules carefully before posting in
http://allahmuhammad.forums-free.com/the-rules-of-non-muslim-corner-t369.html
[And saying so, Rehan deletes many of my posts, but retains the following post by a Muslim:]
Although I am a Muslim I have my own Bhagawadgita, Ramayan, Bible and Torah and I have read them too honestly speaking I totally don't agree with them cause some of them tastes like "Lord of the Rings". Old Testament however looks a bit authentic but after the 5 chapters (the Law of Moses), it looks flat and watery.
[So we have yet another Islamic site where cowards sit defending their faith.]
=====================
Dear Rehan, You have suddenly pulled the rule-book on me. But in what way have I provoked you to do that? You yourself created a non-Muslims section and even here it appears you insist I accept the view you are comfortable with. Even the Quran has many interpretations, then what to say of Hindu scriptures, which actually encourage a variety of interpretations. Your approach is very disappointing.
======================
I like your answers. Verily has it been said that Muslims are a people of the book. Hinduism does not restrict spiritual understanding only to scriptures (You may have heard of the Guru tradition in Hinduism.)You might not have told me specifically to accept your views, but the thrust of your responses appeared just that. Now how can I prove this to you - you have deleted many of my posts. About differing interpretations of the Quran, you have only to take Sunni and Shia views on some subjects to see that it is a case of differing interpretations of the same holy book.
=======================
REHAN
Brother I Think this forum is Newly Launched even i did not impose Common rules on the other section. Sometime back i have done. And still i say have loads of work to do on this forum. I And on deleting ur posts even i deleted my posts, silkworms, & urs also bcz its was looking like chating. Now the rules have been introduced all have to follow the rules. About differing interpretations of the Quran, you have only to take Sunni and Shia views on some subjects to see that it is a case of differing interpretations of the same holy book.[/quote]Actually Shias are not Muslims. You must note that point. Show me the interpretations.Before posting any msg here i would like to tell u read the rues again as its been updated.And make a request in 'TRUST BOOK' its compulsory.
=====================
SILKWORM
Islam is monotheistic religion, which means there is no god but God ans you cannot associate anybody or anysoul with Allah.Shias hve a different view and they "do" associate Ali with Allah which is according to Islamic principles is a shirk, the biggest heinous crime you can commit.I totally agree with Brother Rehan in calling Shias what he called. On the other hand, Muslims are not narrrow minded and do not discriminate between humans but it is Allah's commandment to abolish Idolatory and Paganism and we are just following that - If the Christians, or Jews have changed their scriptures to hook more fish, it's their fault.Allah has commanded all three Abrahamic faiths to abolish Idolatory and Paganism.
[THIS BEING THEIR POSITION, WOULD IT BE ANY WORTH CONTINUING TO TRY HOLDING A DEBATE WITH THEM?]
No comments:
Post a Comment