Masood - absurdities needing clarification

Submitted by the Grand Infidel of Kaffiristan (Australia), Nov 22, 2008 at 22:12

Masood replies:
"Mr. Buddhist... Keith is right to say that he was born muslim (Submitting to Creater of everything alive or materialistic by all scriptures relating people of all times)"

Again sir, you jump to conclusions afterthrowing round red herrings. Did I ever once say I was a Buddhist? So why try and pigeonhole me as one? It almost seems like you're trying to use the term in a derogatory tfashion.

"YES,... Every kid is born in true nature( submission) of God. I simplify this. Have you ever observed the lamb of a sheep , ...........blah, blah, irrelevant clap trap, blah, blah.... statement of the obvious as though it is some incredible revelation............. Definitly, this all guideline is already present in his brain chip. And all this information is ultimately good for his survival."

Oh, I thought it might have dawned on you what Keith was up to - as it certainly has to me. You are both using the word 'muslim' which I gather is an arabic word the root of which means 'to submit' - and then twisting it so that it takes on its general sense in English - which means a Mohammedan or a person who follows the Islamic belief system.

So, saying a baby is muslim in that narrow sense would be correct - it follows natural cycles, breathes air, cries when it's upset , poops its diapers, smiles etc - so in a sense it is 'submitting' to what it needs to do to survive.

But of course no one can say then that the baby is a capital 'M' Muslim , which is the wordgame you were trying to play for some strange reason . i.e. little 'm' muslim is just a generic term. The baby is a submitter to life.

" So, KIETH took birth as true human ...."

as distinct from what - a false human?

Please, your point needs some clarification.

".......( never heard him sayiny SHAHADAH when he took birth but it was present already in his tiny structure )..."

what are you talking about? the SHAHADAH was present already in his tiny structure? That's an absolutely crazy assertion.

".......then he took philosophies or belief according to circumstances around him. And finally after observing God Almighty truth he accepted submission to God again....."

no, he just accepted another philosophy. If God is Truth , Kieth will eventually realise that Islam is just a fabric of conditioned beliefs for unawakened minds to cling to. He might just find them comforting at this present stage of his progression. Believing that, he might therefore think they are right for everyone else too. These beliefs will be discarded at the right time. Beliefs limit the comprehension of reality.

"....So what about DEVIL PHILOSOPHY or belief ? Any belief which we accept under devil enticement is DEVIL BELIEF. It is devil desire to put humans on that path inwhich he makes us to believe that we are going to find ultimate peace but that path goes against GOD."

OK, what would 'Any belief which we accept under devil enticement' be? Can you give an example? Would that include sleeping with 9 year old girls for example? Would it include destruction of property and harm to persons because I didn't like some cartoons people drew maybe? Would that be the Devil making me do that - or Allah? If I thought it would give me peace to be one of the people who picked up rocks to stone to death a woman because someone said she slept with someone she was not married to - would that be the Devil enticing me? Or would it be 'Allah's' will?

"........Under Buddhism ( keeping true guideline on one side from true Creater which we may fully benifited under His submission )....""

What does this sentence mean?

"........Under Buddhism.........we may get happiness but not ultimate happiness and I CAN PROVE IT."

What you have said is that a Buddhist can be happy but not have ultimate happiness? How can you possibly PROVE that statement? It is absolutely ridiculous to make that assertion. Where does happiness lie if NOT in your own consciousness? The goal of Buddhism is to merge with supreme bliss and the source of consciousness itself. You're not 'happy' with that? You've got something better in mind?

A side point which must be reiterated (now that you've done the absurd by creating a competition in the happiness stakes), - I've seen far happier and more content and wiser Buddhists than I have Muslims.

"ISLAM, out of all scripture related religions, as with last and complete guideline practically helpful for leading happiest and perfact life. And my personal life is example of this truth. I followed Mohammad life in few aspects practically and I got extraordinary results."

So I guess then that Bahai doesn't make more sense to you . It does to me - not that I am a Bahai.. Why are Bahai's persecuted (only in the Islamic world)? What's the problem?

".....I am the happiest person enjoying life by trying to follow Mohammad life practically..."

You are the happiest that you remember yourself to be. In truth , you were probably the happiest when you were a young child , free of concepts and the conditioned mind, life and soul could flow freely . Your head wasn't full of the garbage it is now.You've forgotten that state - and accepted a poor substitute in its place.

"......One more thing, I have never been confused about Islam...."

Good. Have you ever looked at anything else? Is your conviction just the result of strenuously clinging to what is known, comfortable and familiar and finding the world a little scary, a little unsure?

"...........From where I started I found truth in Islam not just in philosophy but practically too because Mohammad promised that anyone who follows him not only finds happiness in this life but also be forgiven on Doom's day to enjoy eternal life."

Christ promised that . Why do you insist that Mohammed was 'it' ? Why limit 'God's communication to what was concocted by a 7th century Arab warlord and those who came after him?

If I was going to follow a spiritual teacher - I'd be looking at the direction he pointed his followers in. If it wasn't to discover the kingdom of God within (i.e. the world of Soul or Higher consciousness) - then I'd automatically give it the flick.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".