A controversial question paper

Recently in the southern part of the southernmost state of India, Kerala, in the heartland of probably Asia's most powerful Christian community, a Christian Professor's wrist was chopped off by members of a radical Muslim organization because he set a question in a college exam that was offensive to Muslims. The exam paper was for graduate economic students and the subject was the local language Malayalam. The question had asked the students to properly punctuate four lines of a drama sequence. The lines were actually taken from a book of a somewhat acclaimed writer, himself a Muslim. The original question was popped to God by a character simply called madcap. But in the lines set by the Professor, this character was renamed Mohammad. The God-Mohammad dialogue went like this:

Mohammad: Oh Creator, Oh Creator [Malayalee Muslims often call God this way].
God: Yes, you pesky dog? [the actual Malayalam phrase alludes to a *****'s son].
Mohammad: If I cut a fish, how many pieces of fish would I have?
God: You dog, how many times have I told you that you would have three pieces?

When the somewhat well-known Muslim writer who was also a Communist leader wrote the same thing, except he did not call the character Mohammad but simply madcap, there was no controversy at all. But in this instance, there was an instant uproar in the minority Muslim community when the students went home and showed the question paper. The Kerala government (a communist one) acted fast to seek to diffuse the situation by immediately asking the college to suspend the Professor, which they promptly did. The Christian community largely condemned the professor for his insensitive question paper and concluded him to be an idiot. Meanwhile, a particular Muslim organization bayed for the Professor's blood and the Professor went into hiding. Sensing the mood, the police had to arrest the Professor without delay and used the rather immoral technique of picking up the professor's son and torturing him. News of this naturally made the professor surface and surrender before the police. The fellow was in lock-up and the case went to the court. Meanwhile he was given bail and on a Sunday morning was returning from Church with his wife and sister (who was a nun) in a vehicle. The vehicle was waylaid by about 10-15 men in another vehicle, who stepped out and in a macabre display of Shariat resolution, chopped the professor's right wrist, the very one with which he presumably set the question paper. He was rushed to hospital and was in serious condition due to blood loss. They managed to save his life and also sew back his palms. It is now almost a month and he is still in hospital.

This is the first time that such a Taliban like action has been carried out in India. Many here would say that this is a stray incident and it would seem so. But actually this is only the climax, maybe the first of many future climaxes, unless nipped in the bud. The build up and occasional display of Muslim organizational prowess is causing disquiet even among normally politically-correct quarters. Something further on the same lines may trigger a backlash, God forbid.

Non-Muslims, how do you explain the existence of the Quran/sincerity of the Prophet?

Originally Posted by Tyrion
What I want to know is, as nonbelievers, how do you explain Muhammad, and the Quran? If you claim it to be his word, why is that? What motives were there? What about all the signs that point to his sincerity? I’m really interested in your responses, and my intention here really is to learn. I apologize in advance if this question has already been tackled in the past, and I hope my post was clear.

I would place Mohammad in the lineage of spiritual masters who discovered themselves and thereby discovered the ultimate truth or God. I would take his starting point in this quest for self-discovery as his meditations in the mountains of Hira. As he discovered his higher self, he started expressing it when he came out of his meditation. His subsequent meditations and expressions resulted in the Quran over a period of time. To say that the Quran is the word of God is not wrong at all because a man's higher consciousness and its expressions touch the ultimate truths of existence.

"If you have two loaves of bread, sell one to buy hyacinths, for they will feed your soul." Mohammad

Abraham - a man of faith

I don't know if it is appropriate to say this here but I have very negative feelings about Abraham as the man who destroyed the idol that his own father worshipped. Did he have to establish his faith by destroying another's faith?

It seems to be a way in human progress. Looking at Vedanta specifically the Archarya's tend to refute the predecessor in order to assert their own teachings. That subtlety may go unnoticed by many devotees of course as the point is that they are attracted to the new teaching and are reassured that they need not look back to their ancestors (in Abraham's case).

One thing which strikes me, reading the Quran is that the problem with the Pagan Arabs was their lack of understanding, they took the Idol as God rather than seeing it as being a mere reflection or image or form of God which Sananata Dharma is more clear on.

I think it all comes down to having your mind clearly focused, if you are told other's are wrong, you can knuckle down in your choosen faith.

This isn't exactly how the story goes. He didn't destroy the idol that his father personally worshiped; his father was an idol merchant and it was the idols that were for sale that he destroyed. It cost his father in profits, but these idols were worshiped by no one yet. So it was not the direct disrespect to his father that would have occurred if he destroyed his father's personal idol.

Some versions of the story say the idols destroyed were those in a temple whose worshippers had gone for a feast. When they returned and saw all the idols destroyed except the biggest one, Abraham said it was the biggest idol that destroyed all the other idols! The story continues that the worshippers, including Abraham's father, handed over Abraham to the King, who put him into the fire. Abraham came out of the fire unhurt. The intolerance of Abraham still comes through, though, and here I stand corrected, he did not destroy the personal idol that his father worshipped. Since he did not get burnt in the fire, I suppose God pardoned him or maybe God never thought he did anything wrong in the first place. Anyway, I am not grudging the preeminent position of respect Abraham has among the followers of three major religions of the world. Maybe the respect is largely because he relished destroying idols.

The story I just read about this does say Abraham blamed it on the biggest idol in his father's shop but, it also included Hanan, Abraham's oldest brother. When the King learned that the brother knew of Abraham's existence(Abraham was supposed to have been killed in infancy due to prophesy), the brother was thrown in to the fires with Abraham.

The fires were so hot that Hanan burst into flames and Abraham was left to walk through it unharmed. The king commanded Abraham to come out but he refused until the king denounced idol worship.

If I am permitted to say so, I really wonder what it is about God that so disturbs Him about idol worship. It does appear it is all about loyalty. If you notice that it is tin pot dictators who most require loyalty, you would not want to associate such a word with God. Strange that Abraham, who proved that he had the power to survive fire, used the circumstance as blackmail to get the King to denounce idol worship. Please pardon me for my position. I am not using this forum to denigrate the greatness of Abraham in any way. I am simply not able to understand this 'enmity' towards idol worship. If you or anyone else feels offended by my position, I shall delete this post. With best wishes.

Hi K.V

Personal understanding is there is a subtlety easily mistaken. God does not communicate any disturbance of Idol worship, God is not disturbed as such as God is omnisicence. The error is to mistake Him or His creation as an Idol. Taking an Idol as divine is grave error also. When they returned from the feat they were angry at the destruction of the Idols. This anger arises from false understanding because the highest truth is that man has no rights at all over anything, everything that exists, that is taken and is given is by God Himself.

To expect an idol-worshipper not to be angry when his idols are destroyed is simply going against basic human nature. Everybody needs his or her sacred space - how can it be violated? Idol worship occurs, one way or the other, when man is still at the dualistic stage. Only those who have attained the non-dual vision can do away with idol worship. And, ironically, a person of non-dual vision would never need to destroy an idol because when he sees all existence as one, he would see everything, including an idol, as an expression of the oneness. Saying that man has no right over anything is true for the non-dualist for the simple reason that a non-dualist does not suffer any sense of want and therefore he does not require a right over anything. But he also understands that in the absence of the capacity to see all space as sacred, men would require clearly defined sacred spaces if he is to grow to his spiritual potential.

The story I heard was that Abraham's father owned an idol shop, and left him in charge one day. Abraham took a stick and broke all the idols except the biggest one, and put the stick in it's hand. His father came home angry, and Abraham said the big idol did it, and pointed to the stick. His father said: "Don't be ridicilous, idols can't do anything." Abraham replied: "That's right father, idols can't do anything."

Idols can't do anything just as, say, a car or a computer cannot, by itself, do anything. What an idol, car or computer can do depends on how you programme them or, in the case of the idol with its esoteric science, the energy that has been transferred to it. Again, in the case of the car or computer, unless we have the capacity to drive it or operate it, it would be 'dead' for us. Similarly, in the case of those not well-versed with the science of worship of idols (apart from the qualified priests in this case) can only be passive beneficiaries and for those who do not understand idol worship at all, the idol remains a piece of stone - maybe only worth its antique value. Therefore the accusation that idols cannot do anything and thus they have to be destroyed would be the refrain of only those not sufficiently educated to the possibilities of man's genius.

Quran 9:5 - kill the kafirs

I think Dr. Zakir Naik, when seeking to put the text of verse 9:5 in proper context, has not put it in complete context. The verse says forgive only those who “repent and establish regular prayers”. Which is to say, those who follow Islam. So the thrust of the verse is very clear – kill the infidels, kill those who do not follow Islam. No amount of “contexting” will hide this fact.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7p7IOJHTSM&feature=related

How to become a Muslim

Originally Posted by zainabhaseen
when a person accepts Islam ..its because of the ultimate fact that he has developed a strong belief that there is only one God (Allah)...and that Muhammad S.A.W. is the messenger of Allah...he says ashadu anna because of the fact and because of the belief he has in Allah and his book. the reason why he say shahadah is because he is becoming a witness to his own statement.

Are you saying when a person says the shahadah he is becoming a witness to his own statement, which is based on his belief and not on the basis of his being a witness that Allah is the only God and Mohammed is His messenger? This is confusing, please clarify.

Listen carefully Venugopal:you are twisting my words but i have already told you that a Muslims belief is based on the fact that there is only one God and his messenger MUhammad S.A.W.

You say Muslim belief (religion/faith) is based on the fact that there is only one God and His messenger is Mohammad. My question is, how have you witnessed the fact?

first tell me whats your religion?

Advaita.

and in what do you believe? do u believe in the existence of God?

Please answer my post no. 8. It is concerning the subject of your thread. Meanwhile, I quite do not understand this believe thing. Since God for me is not something that is outside the scope of what I am, I think believing in the existence of God is an unnecessary requirement in my spiritual quest - which is a progressive living in the truth of my being. By spiritual I mean truth as it is, without depending on anything else.

Hinduism - a bunch of contradictory religions?

[quote=themo;2052929] As I said before there are no Hindu sects, there are totally different and contradictory Hindu religions[/quote]

Your observation that "there are no Hindu sects, there are totally different and contradictory Hindu religions" should lead you to wonder how come in spite of having contradictory Hindu religions in its midst (Hinduism means not just the Hindu religions, but also its culture, tradition, heritage, literature etc. that have coalesced into a great inclusive phenomenon called Hinduism in modern times, but earlier on was known as Sanatana Dharma - often referred to as such even now), Hinduism's adherents live peacefully today as an integrated people. Compare this particularly with Islam, which has only one scripture and yet has at least one major schism between the Sunnis and Shias, bloodletting between whom takes place even today. Or compare the avowed hatred that has been maintained between the Jews and Muslims, both of whom claim to belong to one lineage. A dispassionate student of world peace would certainly find in Hinduism an element that has contributed towards its inclusive tendency and I would like to think that element is the vision of Advaita or non-dualism bequeathed by the masters of Hinduism called Rishis. Therefore “contradictory religions” in Hinduism do not add up to wars because all religious expressions have the right to their own sacred space and the recognition of this is the hallmark of Hinduism. So much so that it has been said that whatever is true in Hinduism, its opposite is also true in Hinduism.

"Incarnation of God" according to Allah?

Dear Cordoba, On the face of it, it would appear that Shishya's talking about incarnation of Allah is meaningless. However, I think it is believed by many Muslims that they will see Allah on judgement day (Quran 75:23). If this is true, then it will amount to an incarnation of Allah and Shishya would have a relevant point. Please clarify.

Originally Posted by Cordoba
The rules of the Hereafter are different, as there it is an eternal life

For heaven or hell to be of relevance for humans, the humans need to in some way continue to be themselves in heaven or hell. Otherwise he or she who is enjoying or suffering would not be the same person who lived on earth and deserved the judgement. The rules of heaven/hell may be different but not to the extent that a person is not able to relate the rules of earth and heaven/hell. If he is unable to do so, then who is being rewarded or punished? The Quran clearly tells us the consequences of following/not following Allah's instructions. Therefore certainly a portion of us which makes us aware of ourselves as we were on earth would have to be present in heaven/hell. If we are able to see Allah in heaven, then who has seen Allah but we? Thus, there is no denying the fact that Allah is amenable to incarnate (make Himself seen) at least in heaven. Your contention that the laws of the “hereafter” are different from the laws of “here” should not be an attempt to invalidate logic when considering matters of the “hereafter”.

Also, it cannot be an eternal life in heaven. That which is eternal does not have a beginning or end. The "hereafter" begins only after the "here". So another word has to be coined for that which, though has a beginning, does not have an end!

Apart from the point I made in post no. 16 where I said Allah presenting Himself to be seen by believers in heaven is an example of Allah incarnating, there is also the example of Allah speaking to Moses here on earth. Here too, if Allah has made Himself perceivable by man through man's senses, it also amounts to Allah incarnating Himself. I got a reply that the rules of heaven are different from the rules of earth. Conceded. But can it be denied that both earth and heaven/hell (if they exist) are part of existence? Thus, as I see it, Allah incarnating is a fact that is established in the Quran itself.

If you are still wondering, why would God choose not to appear in this life, i'll mention for you a story which happened long time a go between Allah and the famous prophet of Allah, Moses.

[143] When Musa came to the place appointed by Us, and his Lord addressed him, he said: "O my Lord! show (Thyself) to me, that I may look upon Thee." Allah said: "By no means canst thou see Me (direct); but look upon the mount; if it abide in its place, then shalt thou see Me." When his Lord manifested His glory on the Mount, He made it as dust, and Musa fell down in a swoon. When he recovered his senses he said: "Glory be to Thee! to Thee I turn in repentance, and I am the first to believe." (Quran 7:143)

Moses didn't know that God is so great that we can't handle seeing him with our current limited senses.

In this Quranic verse, it is clear that Allah spoke to Moses. Only, Moses was in no position to see Allah. In another time and another place a disciple of God (Krishna) wanted to see Him. It was only after the disciple (Arjuna) was given the boon of 'cosmic vision' that he was able to see Krishna. In the Quran it says that Moses heard Allah on earth and in the hereafter believers can also see Allah. Incarnation is all about Allah/Krishna creating the conditions so that man can perceive Him. Why should Allah be restricted to creating the conditions only in heaven? Does it say in the Quran that Allah would not be able to create the conditions on earth? The Hindu scriptures mention the creation of such conditions on earth itself so that God can be perceived. Since earth and heaven are all part of existence, incarnation is a reality according to both the Quran and Hindu scriptures.

May you explain the meaning of "incarnation" or how do you define incarnation so I may not misunderstand your point.

Incarnation, simply put, is the appearance of God, in whatever form (or formless), in the midst of human activities and involving in human activities. That is, God becomes a participant (not merely an observer) in the drama of human life.

Contradicting to your points, I don't think that seeing God on the day of judgement refer to the incarnation in anyway. It is more likely that God appears to the believers rather than incarnating himself to be seen.

God “appearing” and God “incarnating” are synonyms.

For example, say that you want to meet somebody and he is in the house and you are waiting outside. Suddenly, he came out. would you say that he incarnate himself, or would you say that he appeared or came out. For the second part which is about God's talk to Moses, I don't see how that relate to incarnation. for example, let's say that you make a phone call, would you say that the somebody you called incarnate himself or he just he use his voice to speak to you.

We are used to use the word “incarnate” only vis-à-vis God and therefore it is not said of a person simply coming out of his house or making a phone call.

That's unreasonable stretch to the meaning of incarnation.

I was not unreasonably stretching the meaning of incarnation – I was only implying the possibilities of the word.

Finally, for the part about the heaven, hell and earth. Don't you think that life and death is a part of existence. Even though they have different world and rules.

Yes, everything is a part of existence, including God. If you say God is not part of existence, you are only saying He does not exist!

Islam reject the idea that Jesus, Krishna, etc are God incarnation.

Muslims reject the idea that Jesus, Krishna etc are God's incarnation because Islam teaches that God does not incarnate. Or so it would seem. Actually, Islam clearly says that God has appeared before humans and will appear again in the future. While Islam appears to have underplayed God's appearances, Hinduism has highlighted such appearances and Hindu scriptures have unfolded extensive biographies of God's appearances, calling it incarnation. Quran has mentioned the appearances only in passing. Hindu scriptures have made His appearances their mainstay.

Quran and comparison

Throughout the Quran, the superlative word of comparison is used to describe Allah, beginning by saying "Allah the most beneficent, most merciful". These are qualities of humans also. It is the law of comparison that all comparisons must be between things or qualities of the same kind. Further, the pronoun He is used in reference to Allah. There is no escape from the fact that one way or the other Allah is linked to his creation. While some religions acknowledge this link by celebrating the anthropomorphizing of Allah or God, Islam at one level denies it for fear of committing “shirk”.

Transcending idol worship

When we posit that God is outside us, as the Abrahamic religions do (particularly Islam), then God becomes an object to us, the subject. We then represent God in various ways, with solid objects (like the murthis in Hindu worship), sound (the word Allah used in Islamic worship) etc. When the experience of oneness occurs (as spoken of in Advaita), the subject-object dichotomy evaporates and idol worship becomes redundant. Till then idol worship in whatever form is vital. Islam, which has foreclosed evolution in spiritual matters with its dogmatic stand on the Quran, is destined to remain an idol worshiping religion. Hinduism, which does not bind us to any text but encourages us to seek the spirit behind the texts, permits us to transcend idol worship.

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/hinduism-dir/97720-idol-worship.html#post2005766

Why does Islam forbid Yoga?

Quote:
Originally Posted by zenzero
Whatever they may say but they themselves practice *HATH YOGA*.All the poses during *namaz* are all hath yoga postures.

All life is Yoga. Islam has a paranoia streak.

Shiv Linga

what is Shivalinga? and
since how long /old it is in centre stages of majority of HINDU TEMPLES ?

Shivlinga symbolizes the generative principle of existence and is fused with Parvatiyoni, symbolizing the reproductive principle of existence - together, they symbolize the dual cohabitation within existence that manifests the multiplicity of life’s expressions.

thanks , is it represent reproductive organ of Shiva ? ,


I think it would be misleading if we restrict the symbol of Shivling to the reproductive organ of Shiva as in the reproductive organ of man. Everything that comes to us through the medium of language is but an attempt by the best of humans to have fellow-humans grasp principles that are beyond comprehension so long as we are in the dual mode. It would at best give us the direction towards which we may tread till finally we reach the realm of non-duality where symbols become redundant and we are one with existence. Therefore words have to be used as stepping stones to the truth and are not truths in themselves.

Islam, fastest growing?

Wrin
Muslims 1/4 of World Population: US Survey
We Are Muslims http://weare-muslims.blogspot.com
Our Ask http://ourask.blogspot.com
Join in ‘We Are Muslims’ http://www.orkut.com/Main#Community?rl=cpn&cmm=94298332
Muslims make up around one fourth of the world’s population and are mostly concentrated in Asia, according to a new study by an American fact tank that provides information on issues, attitudes and trends shaping America and the world through public opinion polling. “There are 1.57 billion Muslims of all ages living in the world today,” the Pew Research Center concluded in its study, “Mapping the Global Muslim Population: A Report on the Size and Distribution of the World's Muslim Population.”
It found that Muslims make up 23 percent of the world’s 6.8 billion people, the sweeping majority of them Sunnis.
“Of the total Muslim population, 10-13% are Shiite Muslims and 87-90% are Sunni Muslims.”
According to the study, based on data from 232 countries and territories, Asia is home to nearly 20 percent of the global Muslim population.
Size, Distribution of World's Muslims (Document). More>> http://islami-news.blogspot.com

Venu
This is no doubt a cause for Muslims to be proud and happy. But it must also be acknowledged that Christianity still continues to have the largest number of followers. Recently, the same folks who conducted the pew survey said that 76% of Church-goers in USA have acknowledged Hindu influences in their belief system. It appears that the most influential religious personalities in the world are Jesus, Mohammad, Buddha and Krishna. It is unlikely any single person’s influence will be supplanted by any other person. All will continue influencing mankind, sometimes in contradiction but mostly as complementary forces for the spiritualization of mankind.

The world an illusion?

Venu
The declaration that the world is an illusion is only a pointing out by realized souls the human potential. The world we live in is very much a reality but if we go deep into the matter we would realize that the world is as it is only because we are as we are. Do we have any option to change the world? The masters say that we can change the world (at least with regard to our own experience) if we change ourselves. And by “changing ourselves” is meant increasing the depth of our consciousness. The masters go to the extent of saying that all existence is consciousness and the consciousness that we humans have has the potential to evolve into the total consciousness of all existence. So the illusion thing is simply a labeling of our experiences at the less conscious level as we go deeper into the world of consciousness. To call our experiences at whatever level as illusion is not to invalidate such experiences, but to goad us to see what we have seen, more comprehensively. The dream world, if we go deep into it, may be more real than our awakened world approached shallowly. The whole call is to see and see deeply till we elevate ourselves to the level of a Seer or Rishi.

The Gita

Krishna tries to teach us in the Gita that He is everything and we are Him.

Allah and idol worship

Venu:
Dear Mr. Juzair, Thanks for writing to me directly. First of all let me tell you that I am not arguing or questioning what Allah is. I definitely accept He could be beyond any of our conception. But what about man? He has his limits and he necessarily has to bring the ultimate to his level of understanding. He has to restrict himself in the realm of sound and words. The masters say that the realm of silence is the highest but only few can reach that level in any generation. Therefore if we say that Allah is outside us, he remains an object to our subject. Worship of an object, whatever the nature of the object, is idol worship. When worship ends and the worshipper recognizes himself as the worshiped, the object of worship no longer exists and only the subject exists, thus ending idol worship or any worship. This freedom from worship is conceived of only in the vision of Advaita or non-duality.

Original verses in the Quran

Dear De Aquiline, Islam may be everything positive that you claim to be, but to consider that Islam alone has the truth would be missing the point. While truth cannot become untruth and vice-versa, truth does not deny that it can be expressed in many ways. Putting a cap on the expression of truth is tantamount to painting truth in a single hue. Truth/life is not mono-chrome - it is multi-coloured.

How many verses in the Quran can you quote that is original and has never been expressed in a different way elsewhere? You may at best quote a few verses. This would mean that the rest of the verses in the Quran are but a different expression of the same truths that have been discovered/revealed before. This would indicate that the discovery/revelation of truth is not reserved for any one book nor do they end at a particular point in history. Otherwise all achievements of mankind since the middle ages would not have occurred. (I am sure you would not deny that man has added to his corpus of knowledge since the time of Mohammad.)

Sufism in Islam

If you cleave the heart of one drop of water, A hundred pure oceans emerges from it.

Fantastic. Only the Sufis can come up with sayings of such deep insight.

Bro Venugopal, we need to seek God Bro, we have got no choice, if we want to live and die in a peaceful state....And one says " They ask thee about the Soul, Soul is the command (amr) of the Lord thy God".Take it easy bro

Are you afraid of God?

I have read in a book that if you are praying think the God is looking at you and if not looking at you He is listening to you.I did that and with fear and respect I couldn't continue cause my legs were trembling, Imagine you are facing your Creator, I just trembled like a leaf man.

But shouldn't God be evoking love rather than fear?

Mohammad, the Guru

In the Hindu parlance, we can say that Mohammad was a Guru. He meditated in the caves, discovered God within himself and expressed that discovery in the imagery of his times. However, he never taught meditation as the path to self-discovery and his imagery got trapped in the Jewish prophetic tradition and hence God became an external phenomenon in Islam also. Only the Sufis sought to discover God within.

Living in our own light

Advaita only says not two. It doesn't exactly say one. Because there is no one at that stage to do any counting. Logically, only one is possible after a negation of two. But the one of Advaita means undifferentiated. Differentiation starts at two. But one also has a shade of differentiation, because it is countable. What is countable (singly or in groups) is an object. Advaita is about the subject. When we reach the state of the subject (as opposed to being among the objects), we have become the totality or Brahman and are no longer fragmented. Which again does not mean annihilation of objects per se, but only to us, who have become Brahman. Henceforth, instead of living on borrowed light, we live in our own light.

=======================

Is it truer to describe Truth as "is-ness" rather than "one-ness"?

Forms and formless are one

What we call God is nothing other than life. The whole of existence is nothing other than life or God in various forms. There is no difference between formless God and God in various forms. The idea of God having created forms is not true in the sense that God is separate from his creation. The formless becomes the forms, changes forms, and becomes formless again.

=======================

Logically understanding that there is no separation between us and all of existence would cause a radical shift in our living and our living, as life is, would become divine. Then praying, devotion, meditating, cultivating the heart, loving etc. would be the very qualities of our being.

=======================

Logical understanding and any mind-based reasoning lead to nothing, especially not to any radical shift. There can be no conviction about any product of the thinking process including unity because thinking process can yield only hypothesises and there is always the other voice in the mind who knows that the opposite of a hypothesis may also be true. You know it very well from your experience.
Stubborn insistence on using the mind or tricky claim that mind is neither good nor bad are covers for addiction to the mind of beginners who are still trapped in the mind. Once they experience for the first time no-mind (manage to overcome their fear of meditation), they taste from a different quality of realization and manage to abandon the reliance on logic. As long as they do not overcome that fear of meditation and no-mind, they are just playing with a useless primitive toy and cannot understand that even if you tell them so hundred times.
Self realization is not the same as any other realization, it is just a confusion of language as we use the same word "realization" in both of them. Self realization has nothing to do with mind and understanding.
This is extremely important! It makes all the basic difference

A brilliant exposition. I congratulate you. But when you say, "Logical understanding and any mind-based reasoning lead to nothing, especially not to any radical shift", the very fact that in communicating we need the logic of language proves that logic leads us and could be used to lead us beyond logic. Otherwise how do we go beyond logic into the realms of intuition?

==========================