Saturday, 28 June 2025 »  Login
in

Dr. Zakir Naik and Sri Ravi Shankar

Welcome to the largest Hyderabadi forum on earth! Start discussions about anything from cool eat-outs and value gyms to terrorism, seek help, plan outings, make friends, and generally have fun!

Moderator: The Moderator Team

by samai » Fri Mar 17, 2006 10:55 am

CtrlAltDel wrote:its not a part of the original upanishads..i have provided the list too...

and even swami vivekananda is skeptical of its origin! dont say he belonged to RSS!

and as further food for thot, dont u know that even Buddha was declared an "avtar" of Vishnu, when Buddhism became a popular movement in ancient time? this is just a beginning to appropriate mohammad as a hindu god and i am surprised to see that u to want that to happen!

and whats the basis for your belief? "Zakir Said So...." :lol:




No I trust the Allopanishad more than Zakir :lol: :lol:



Whats next in the line of denial , If Dr Zakir quotes from Gita tomorrow probaly you are gonna deny Gita as whatever it is supposed to be..pathetic strategy...just becuase some one quotes from your stuff , you try to associate it with the quoter, I believe he quoted from so many other upanishad etc.. what do you have to say about them ,like the one where he quote dthat beef eating is allowed in Hinduism...and what do you have to say about VHP denying Ramayana... :?: :?: :roll: :roll:
samai
Registered User
 

by CtrlAltDel » Fri Mar 17, 2006 11:09 am

zakir is trying to prove that Allopanishad is part of ancient indian texts like the vedas. if u go thru the list of upanishads i posted, there is no mention of that thing!



and i also posted that Gita is not "gitopadesh" or a part of Upanishads...didnt u read that?



and abt beef eating, yes, it was prevalent in vedic times, but cow became sacred much much later..



abt VHP denying tulsidas's ramayana, is it surprising?
wtf? i no longer care if my posts hurt yr feelings :roll:
Love me or hate me, u cant ignore me :D
User avatar
CtrlAltDel
God!
God!
 
Posts: 14824
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2002 5:02 pm
Location: by the Workshop

by Mayavi Morpheus » Fri Mar 17, 2006 11:48 am

CtrlAltDel wrote:and i also posted that Gita is not "gitopadesh" or a part of Upanishads...didnt u read that?




Bhagavadgita *is* called 'Gitopadesh' i.e., Gita Upadesh = Revelation of Gita. I hope you meant to say "Gitopanishad" i.e., Gita Upanishad.
May the Fries be with you!
User avatar
Mayavi Morpheus
Level 2 Lord
Level 2 Lord
 
Posts: 3201
Joined: Fri May 30, 2003 7:42 am
Location: 30° 27' North ; 91° 08' West

by CtrlAltDel » Fri Mar 17, 2006 12:14 pm

Mayavi Morpheus wrote:
CtrlAltDel wrote:and i also posted that Gita is not "gitopadesh" or a part of Upanishads...didnt u read that?


Bhagavadgita *is* called 'Gitopadesh' i.e., Gita Upadesh = Revelation of Gita. I hope you meant to say "Gitopanishad" i.e., Gita Upanishad.
damn...yes....its Gitopanishad i am talking abt!
wtf? i no longer care if my posts hurt yr feelings :roll:
Love me or hate me, u cant ignore me :D
User avatar
CtrlAltDel
God!
God!
 
Posts: 14824
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2002 5:02 pm
Location: by the Workshop

by jquader » Fri Mar 17, 2006 2:25 pm

(courtesy http://www.irf.net )



1. Islaam is the oldest religion
Hinduism is not the oldest of all the religions. It is Islaam which is the first and the oldest of all religions. People have a misconception that Islam is 1400 years old and that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is the founder of this religion. Islam existed since time immemorial, ever since man first set foot on this earth. Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was not the founder of Islam. He was the last and final Messenger of Almighty God.


2. For religion to be pure and authentic, it should not have interpolations, changes and revisions in its scriptures revealed from God
For any religion to be pure and authentic, its scriptures should not contain any interpolation, addition, deletion or revision. Moreover the religion’s source of inspiration and direction should be Almighty God. The Qur’an is the only religious scripture on the face of the earth which has been maintained it its original form. All the other religious scriptures, of all the other religions have interpolations, additions, deletions or revisions. The Qur’an has been in the memory of a multitude of people, intact in its original form ever since its revelation, and now there are hundreds of thousands of people who have preserved it in their memory. Moreover, if you compare the copies made by Caliph Uthman from the original Qur’an which is yet present in the museum in Tashkent and in Koptaki museum in Turkey, they are the same as the ones we possess today.
Allaah (swt) promises in the Qur’an, in Surah Al Hijr, chapter 15 verse 9

3. A religion is best, if it has the solutions to the problems of mankind
For a religion to be considered the best, it should have the solution to all the problems of mankind. It should be the religion of truth, and should be applicable to all ages. Islam is the only religion which has the solution to all the problems of mankind. e.g. the problem of alcoholism, surplus women, rape and molestation, robbery, racism, casteism, etc.
Islaam is the religion of truth, and its laws and solutions are applicable to all the ages. The Qur’an is the only religious book on the face of the earth, which has maintained its purity and authenticity proving itself to be the word of God in all the ages. i.e. previously, when it was the age of miracles, literature and poetry and in present times when it is the age of science and technology. Moreover, Islam is not a man-made religion, but a religion revealed and inspired by Almighty God. It is the only religion acceptable in His Sight.


and for those who think the oldest religion is supposed to be the best or the latest is the best so heres somethin more

The oldest religion need not be the purest and the most authentic religion

A religion cannot be claimed to be most pure and authentic, only on the criterion that it is the oldest. It is similar to a person saying that the water he has kept in an open glass, in his house, outside the refrigerator, for three months is purer than the water which has just been collected in a clean glass, immediately after it has been purified.



The latest religion need not be the purest and the most authentic religion

On the other hand a religion cannot be claimed to be the purest or authentic, only on the criterion that the religion is new or the latest. A bottle of distilled water which is sealed, packed and kept in the refrigerator for three months is much purer than a bottle of water freshly collected from the sea.






mmm... abt the allopanishads dint have time to go thru more links
whn u make a mistake, don't luk bk at it long. Tk da reason of the thing into ur mind n thn look 4wrd. Mistakes r lessons of wisdom.
da past cant be changed but da future is yet in your power.
User avatar
jquader
Registered User
 
Posts: 236
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2005 10:07 pm

by CtrlAltDel » Fri Mar 17, 2006 5:22 pm

u are only quoting zakir's opinions. if u and he believe in Adam and Eve, good for u...but with all due respects, why shud the rest of us believe that?



there sre some quotes here recently that pointed out the hindu version of "creation". how can anyone say this is wrong that is right....



basing one's arguements on some abstract concept wont hold water in any debate.
wtf? i no longer care if my posts hurt yr feelings :roll:
Love me or hate me, u cant ignore me :D
User avatar
CtrlAltDel
God!
God!
 
Posts: 14824
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2002 5:02 pm
Location: by the Workshop

by Mayavi Morpheus » Fri Mar 17, 2006 9:27 pm

lol... I can't stop laughing at the contradictions in her quotes.



Point 1: Islam is the Oldest religion

Contradiction: Oldest religion is not the best religion.



Point 2: Islam existed every since man first set foot in this world

Contradiction: The whole purified and fresh water thingy.



Point 3: Any religious text is pure and authentic if it has not been altered over the years.

Contradiction: Islam is pure because quran was never written down for a 100 years after it was revealed. Memory is better/authentic than what is written down.

A little about the last point: Many muslims say that Islams USP is that Quran, once it was written, was never edited. But the same people turn around and say that written texts are easy to alter but what stayed in memory cannot be altered.
May the Fries be with you!
User avatar
Mayavi Morpheus
Level 2 Lord
Level 2 Lord
 
Posts: 3201
Joined: Fri May 30, 2003 7:42 am
Location: 30° 27' North ; 91° 08' West

by jquader » Sat Mar 18, 2006 3:33 pm

i guess this arguement is useless whn others r so rigid on the points that they believe in without any credible proof

if u were a person to look for truth and do a research upon it then u will not show this sarcastic attitude which in no way helps u or me... its upto u to chose ur own path i cant force u to accept my way of thinkin when its beyond ur mind's comprehension... may god help u!
whn u make a mistake, don't luk bk at it long. Tk da reason of the thing into ur mind n thn look 4wrd. Mistakes r lessons of wisdom.
da past cant be changed but da future is yet in your power.
User avatar
jquader
Registered User
 
Posts: 236
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2005 10:07 pm

Seek ... "The Master Of The Time"!

by HH » Sat Mar 18, 2006 5:36 pm

Seek :arrow: "The Master Of The Time"! ... - Don't Hang On To 1400 Years Ago ... To 2000 Years Ago ... Or More
Build Heaven & Earth Links!
User avatar
HH
Level 1 Deity
Level 1 Deity
 
Posts: 6245
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2004 8:40 am

Re: Seek ... "The Master Of The Time"!

by sp » Sat Mar 18, 2006 7:51 pm

HH wrote:Seek :arrow: "The Master Of The Time"! ... - Don't Hang On To 1400 Years Ago ... To 2000 Years Ago ... Or More




or 5000 years Ago? you didn't mention that number to keep yourself on the safe side and to not commit blasphemy against THE religion. Your intention could well have been all numbers above 1400 (except 5000) should not be hung onto. If this was your intention, you are very well safe. 1400 and 2000 are explicitly mentioned in your post. This will cause the blood pressures to rise (of you know whom) and I am really very happy about it.



yes I am trying not to let go of this 5000 years ago stuff but I don't know at some time point or other I am succumbing to the "appeal" of --well--you know what, i don't need to elaborate on that. And also 1400 seems a little modern than 5000 and in the realm of spirituality it has become very trendy too.



Please excuse my bipolar tendencies
sp
Registered User
 

Re: Seek ... "The Master Of The Time"!

by HH » Sun Mar 19, 2006 8:59 am

sp wrote:
HH wrote:... ... Or More*****


or 5000***** years Ago? ...


***** Includes Pre-Historic / Stone-Age Petriods, Too! ... :wink: - Knowledge Of Yore Doesn't Help Living Now ... It Requires "Now" Knowledge : Changing With Time ... SO NO ESCAPE - [b] Seek "The Master Of The Time"!
Build Heaven & Earth Links!
User avatar
HH
Level 1 Deity
Level 1 Deity
 
Posts: 6245
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2004 8:40 am

Re: Seek ... "The Master Of The Time"!

by sp » Sun Mar 19, 2006 9:31 am

HH wrote:
sp wrote:
or 5000***** years Ago? ...


***** Includes Pre-Historic / Stone-Age Petriods, Too! ... :wink:




Please don't call the era of dawn of Hinduism Pre Historic and Stone age. I already have a low self image. I have said this numerous times here.



Please don't attach the 'time' tags. I am trying not to quit and you in no way are helping my cause.



you need to learn a thing or two from the real Hindus here.
sp
Registered User
 

"seek pursue" true happiness in life!

by HH » Sun Mar 19, 2006 10:02 am

sp wrote:...
Please don't attach the 'time' tags*****. I am trying not to quit^^^^^...




Exactly, "sp"! ... "Time Fixations" Should Yield ... "seek pursue" true happiness in life! ... You Master The Time You Live In!
Build Heaven & Earth Links!
User avatar
HH
Level 1 Deity
Level 1 Deity
 
Posts: 6245
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2004 8:40 am

Re: "seek pursue" true happiness in life!

by sp » Mon Mar 20, 2006 5:07 am

HH wrote:
sp wrote:...
Please don't attach the 'time' tags*****. I am trying not to quit^^^^^...


Exactly, "sp"! ... "Time Fixations" Should Yield ... "seek pursue" true happiness in life! ... You Master The Time You Live In!






Are you saying that if I choose to be a Hindu I am being neanderthal? If I have to master the age I live in, it in no way means that I should quit being a Hindu. Hey 5000 is not all that old.
sp
Registered User
 

by Logical HP » Mon Mar 20, 2006 10:26 am

jquader wrote:(courtesy http://www.irf.net )

1. Islaam is the oldest religion
Hinduism is not the oldest of all the religions. It is Islaam which is the first and the oldest of all religions. People have a misconception that Islam is 1400 years old and that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is the founder of this religion. Islam existed since time immemorial, ever since man first set foot on this earth. Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was not the founder of Islam. He was the last and final Messenger of Almighty God.


Absolute hogwash. Going by this logic, all religions are equally old as all are ways to attain the right path. But then, religion and the existence of God are not the same thing. Islam as a religion came into existence only during the life of Prophet Mohammed and it is the youngest among the major religions among the world.


jquader, quoting irf.net wrote:2. For religion to be pure and authentic, it should not have interpolations, changes and revisions in its scriptures revealed from God
For any religion to be pure and authentic, its scriptures should not contain any interpolation, addition, deletion or revision. Moreover the religion’s source of inspiration and direction should be Almighty God. The Qur’an is the only religious scripture on the face of the earth which has been maintained it its original form. All the other religious scriptures, of all the other religions have interpolations, additions, deletions or revisions. The Qur’an has been in the memory of a multitude of people, intact in its original form ever since its revelation, and now there are hundreds of thousands of people who have preserved it in their memory. Moreover, if you compare the copies made by Caliph Uthman from the original Qur’an which is yet present in the museum in Tashkent and in Koptaki museum in Turkey, they are the same as the ones we possess today.
Allaah (swt) promises in the Qur’an, in Surah Al Hijr, chapter 15 verse 9


Again, I somehow don't confirm to the view that the Quran has been in the same form that it was "revealed" to mankind. Infact, I have reservations on the technicalities of the term "revealing" itself as human intervention automatically negates perfection in the process. And in no way is it true that each existing copy of the Quran has been handwritten by God himself. By the way, how can God, who is formless have a hand or a mouth to "reveal" the Quran to mankind?

jquader, quoting irf.net wrote:3. A religion is best, if it has the solutions to the problems of mankind
For a religion to be considered the best, it should have the solution to all the problems of mankind. It should be the religion of truth, and should be applicable to all ages. Islam is the only religion which has the solution to all the problems of mankind. e.g. the problem of alcoholism, surplus women, rape and molestation, robbery, racism, casteism, etc.


I also have reservations about the concept of one religion being better than the other. According to hindu scriptures, there are 9 different ways for a soul to attain salvation. And a person has to take up a way that he finds in sync with his personality to achieve his goal. Nowhere is it said that one way is better than the other.

jquader, quoting irf.net wrote:Islaam is the religion of truth, and its laws and solutions are applicable to all the ages.


Does Dr.Naik mean to say that other religions are religions of falsehood?

jquader, quoting irf.net wrote:The Qur’an is the only religious book on the face of the earth, which has maintained its purity and authenticity proving itself to be the word of God in all the ages. i.e. previously, when it was the age of miracles, literature and poetry and in present times when it is the age of science and technology. Moreover, Islam is not a man-made religion, but a religion revealed and inspired by Almighty God. It is the only religion acceptable in His Sight.


I've already addressed this above.

jquader, quoting irf.net wrote: The oldest religion need not be the purest and the most authentic religion

A religion cannot be claimed to be most pure and authentic, only on the criterion that it is the oldest. It is similar to a person saying that the water he has kept in an open glass, in his house, outside the refrigerator, for three months is purer than the water which has just been collected in a clean glass, immediately after it has been purified.



The latest religion need not be the purest and the most authentic religion

On the other hand a religion cannot be claimed to be the purest or authentic, only on the criterion that the religion is new or the latest. A bottle of distilled water which is sealed, packed and kept in the refrigerator for three months is much purer than a bottle of water freshly collected from the sea.




No religion can be pure as they're all man-made. And its not just with Islam that I have this argument. I've had numerous debates with ISKCON functionaries on their claim that their interpretation of the Gita is authentic as God revealed it to Prabhupada himself.
In un foro nella terra, viva un hobbit
User avatar
Logical HP
Level 1 Lord
Level 1 Lord
 
Posts: 2527
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2003 4:28 am
Location: Omnipresent

"seek pursue" true happiness in life!

by HH » Mon Mar 20, 2006 10:53 am

sp wrote:...
... Hindu***** ... 5000*****




Time & Other Tags ... Have To Go ... You Are one ... You Have To Be one With The ONE! ... Through The Master Who Knows / Is With The ONE ... Seek! - Be Happy Enlighten Life! ... "special person" / "sp"! ... :) :D
Build Heaven & Earth Links!
User avatar
HH
Level 1 Deity
Level 1 Deity
 
Posts: 6245
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2004 8:40 am

Re: "seek pursue" true happiness in life!

by parinda » Mon Mar 20, 2006 11:44 am

HH wrote:
sp wrote:...
... Hindu***** ... 5000*****


Time & Other Tags ... Have To Go ... You Are one ... You Have To Be one With The ONE! ... Through The Master Who Knows / Is With The ONE ... Seek! - Be Happy Enlighten Life! ... "special person" / "sp"! ... :) :D




HH I think you should speak more on these forums, all this stuff going on here really makes one sick , you have a very subtle way of saying things and yet you say it all...
parinda
Registered User
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2006 7:46 am

Religion(s) Divide People ... Spiritualism Unites Them ...

by HH » Mon Mar 20, 2006 4:30 pm

parinda wrote:
HH I think you should speak***** more ... you have a very subtle way of saying things and yet you say it all *****...





Thank You, "parinda"! ... Religion(s) Divide People ... Spiritualism Unites Them ... Saints / Murshids Of This Great Nation Have Bear Living / Loving Testimony To This!
Build Heaven & Earth Links!
User avatar
HH
Level 1 Deity
Level 1 Deity
 
Posts: 6245
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2004 8:40 am

by CtrlAltDel » Wed Mar 22, 2006 5:08 pm

jquader wrote:i guess this arguement is useless whn others r so rigid on the points that they believe in without any credible proof
dont u think that stmt describes u too? :)
to prove what is said in the qoran, u are quoting quran itself...how do u expect non-muslims to accept at face value what qoran says? u say its the truth and can quote verses...but i can quote a different set of verses from, say the Gita, and claim that to be the ultimate truth.
jquader wrote:if u were a person to look for truth and do a research upon it then u will not show this sarcastic attitude which in no way helps u or me... its upto u to chose ur own path i cant force u to accept my way of thinkin when its beyond ur mind's comprehension... may god help u!
the 'truth' you are talking about is subjective. a person cannot claim that his or her "truth" is truer than another person's "truth".



religion and any such related thing is purely an abstract matter of belief. if anyone is taking it so seriously, they shud make it their career, like this zakir guy.
wtf? i no longer care if my posts hurt yr feelings :roll:
Love me or hate me, u cant ignore me :D
User avatar
CtrlAltDel
God!
God!
 
Posts: 14824
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2002 5:02 pm
Location: by the Workshop

Dr Zakir vs Sri Sri Ravishankar

by roomygiggly » Tue Apr 04, 2006 9:04 pm

1. Can some one kindly let an ordinary person like me know what is the basis of Dr Zakir's claim that he is a student of comparitive religion? This is not to belittle him, but to know what is the process and procedure for one to reach that stage. Since I have been seeing and hearing him on TV channels, i am eager to know if he studied the sanskrit, did he study the Hindu Religion with some guru and if so who was that etc...so also other studies he has done.



2. I am eager to know the demarkation line that makes an expression only and expression and a blasphemy expression.





thanks
roomygiggly
Registered User
 

Dr Zakir vs Sri Sri Ravishankar

by roomygiggly » Sun Apr 09, 2006 3:10 pm

I wonder if any one visiting this site to read on this topic anymore. However i have been trying to read as many sites as possible on this topic and so i felt that i should write in here.



I came to know that Dr Zakaria is about 40 yrs old, is an MBBS and a student of comparitive religion. I am yet to know what is this ' student' of comparitive religion since from what ever i have learned, he had neither studied any comparitive religion with the help of any teacher. This is so important since, the explanation one gives is on the basis of ones understanding which one developes over a period of time after studying, thinking on this, contemplating, discussing, debating etc with the teachers and people from same group .



I think Dr Zakaria would have learned a bit of sanskrit - sorry to say ' a bit' since i have no information on this. but if one really needs to claim that one has studied - unless otherwise one gets the knowledge by some inexplicable reason- then one also need to study the sanskrit to climb the ladder to claim a scholar of that subject.



Also, I wonder if Dr Zakaria has read- i am sure he would have read- a great thinker like Jiddu Krishna moorthy. JK as he is called was never a theologician and wanted people to have an open mind, an inquisitive mind and have an urge for learning.



Interestingly that is what even the Hindu Vedanta tells - to seek knowledge. If you are not satisfied with the result of your contemplation, then go on and on with that until you get satisfaction - which - not by believing, but by your ability to understand.



Knowlege has a very important role in Hinduism and at the same time one is advised not to be a prisoner of the knowledge...on the otherhand one need to understand...one need to contemplate.



There is no problem if Dr Zakir feels that Islam is at a higher level. There is no reason for any one to complain that Dr Zakir is capable of praying the God - without having any form and name- { Allah is a name ...which we forget...and as a matter of fact, there is nothing that is not having a name / form ----except a few words ..}



When i have discussed with my muslim friends, i used to enquire to them what thoughs are there in their mind when they pray as they pray to god with out a form....and almost without exception, they told me that mostly their mind will on some issue or other ...and they themselves cannot have a blank mind.



And people who have been practising meditation - even muslims and non muslims have been able to bring back their mind to prayer...but to prayer...not to a formless god.



One thing Dr Zakaria need to tell his own people is that the word ' blasphemy' should be removed from their thinking. Allow people to think, challenge, question, ...let us find answers to their question in a civilised way. If one does not agree to what is stated in some scriptures, let one have the freedom to disagree and the one who agrees , let him or her use - their knowledge- not ak 47 and grenades etc -



If the all powerful God wanted every one to be his slaves, he could have done that. After all God is more powerful than the Shaithan..then why God need to put us poor humanbeings in between the Shaitan and Him and make suffer? What happiness does he derive by the suffering of the humanbeings? and after all these sufferings on ONE DAY WHAT IS CALLED JUDGEMENT DAY- one is going to be thrown ETERNALLY to either heaven or hell ?



Let us learn more, debate more, discuss more...in a civilised way.



as some one the otherday said



MUSLIMS OR ISLAM IS NOT A TERRORIST RELIGION...

BUT SADLY MANY PEOPLE WHO CLAIM TO FOLLOW THIS RELIGION HAS NO VALUE FOR HUMAN LIFE



and the real reason for this is



THE THEOLOGICIANS who condition the mind of poor followers..



so it is also very important for the community to tell these followers that

it is not the religion that is terrorist..

it is some of those teachers..



and Dr Zakaria could do a lot for betterment of this nice world
roomygiggly
Registered User
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 8:52 pm

religion and my thoughts about them

by black » Sun Apr 16, 2006 12:38 am

hey guys n gals,

gone through all ur mails. they are really interesting and looks like u've gone a great length to prove your points. with all due respect to both the relegions i want to put forth someof my own thoughts

No i am not well read about quran or the vedas..but i want to make a point (guess this is democracy)

1. HINDUISM is a relegion of the people of plenty was conceived in the plains of india where people had plenty of natural resources

2. so the relegion is more ritual oriented and philosophical to keep people buzy and avoid destructive forces from breeding.

3. ISLAM is a relegion conceived in the harshness of the deserts where survival was everything

4. so the rules are so much disciplinary and rigid, as these alone could ensure survival.

5. so u see both only ensure future exsistance of human race



so fighting over them and shedding blood only degrades their whole purpose of existance...

well these are solely my opinions u people can differ and blame me of simplfying things..

but simple things r easier to live with



bye

black as ever
black
Registered User
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2006 12:47 am

Hinduism and ....

by roomygiggly » Thu Apr 27, 2006 7:43 am

sir,

while what u have written abt religon of plenty etc could be right or wrong, the point that we discuss is not about the condition. I do not think any one will be against a decipline, rules etc as long as it is not against DHARMA - you will not do something of which the impact is not to your liking if the same thing is done by some one to u...except in case of duty.



there is a lot to study and what one prefer is for Dr Zakir and us all, study before we venture into the the projections that one is better than the other. what Hindus wish is co existance , let every one who is born to the parentage of people belonging to the different religion continue to be the same ..except that every one can study any religion, do what ever they feel like except it does not trangress on others..

and what we feel is the problem that whether we like it or not, there are people who are bent upon saving us from this " sinful life" just because i am born to a different relgion and then killing etc..
roomygiggly
Registered User
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 8:52 pm

by SPW » Fri May 12, 2006 9:01 pm

Unless and until you look at the scriptures of a religion, you can never be correct in what you say. It also helps you in understanding what and where your priorities lie and you can be confident of confronting people who are going to "SAVE YOU" from a "sinful life that you lead".



As for Black, Islam wasn't "made" for people living in the harshness of a desert. It was made for people to lead a life of purity and honesty.



Destructive breeding in Hinduism is prevalent as it is with "Extremist" Muslims who get printed in BOLD letters in newspapers.



Coming to Humanism, you will be "human" as long as you practice your what your religion preaches. Not the crap what people interpret and say to others.
User avatar
SPW
Registered User
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 5:48 pm
Location: Saath Gumbad se 5 kilometer

Re: Dr. Zakir Naik and Sri Ravi Shankar

by First Fugitive » Sun May 14, 2006 11:26 pm

I sugest you ti first of all understand the Topic of that conference and then you could be able to post something sensible....









WTF??? HP wrote:Jquader quoted this on the hinduism faqs thread and I thought answering this there would have lead the discussion astray. So here it is.

jquader wrote:In an inter-religious dialogue between Sri Sri Ravishankar, Founder of the Art of Living, and Dr. Zakir Naik, Founder of Islamic Research Foundation, on the topic, "God in Hinduism and Islam", held at Bangalore, the Islamic scholar has said that Islam believes that "everything is God's" whereas Hinduism says "everything is God".


I would like to question the wisdom of holding such a debate in public when tempers are running so high all around? Shouldn't comparing religions be better left to the theologists and their research data? Clearly, this debate had been given zero rational thought before being organised. And from the sound of it, this seems to be a forum where the desired result was showing either of the religions as one-up on the other. Disgusting.

jquader wrote:Condemning idolatry, he has said that God according to all religions is almighty and formless and so worshipping idols is wrong. He would not agree with Sri Sri Ravishankar that an idol is a symbol of divinity.


The issue is not who or what is being worshipped. Its a question of faith. And faith being such a subjective issue, we cannot generalise it in one sentence. All this statement does is foster ill-feelings among spiritually semi-literate or illiterate people, who form a thumping majority in today's world.

jquader wrote:Dr. Zakir Naik has claimed, "At a higher level of consciousness, you do not need an image. Islam believes in a formless God. So I think we have reached the higher level of consciousness".


I really didn't know Dr.Zakir Naik was the author of the Quran Shareef. Or is he trying to say that it was a collective effort of all muslims? Who is the "we" he's referring to as having reached a higher level of consciousness? I'd like to meet this person. If you really have reached a higher level of consciousness, Mr. Naik, you would not be discussing such topics with confrontationist attitudes.

jquader wrote:To his charge that Sri Sri Ravishankar's knowledge of Islam was not authentic, the latter has confessed, "I may not have read many books as Dr. Zakir Naik has."


All I can say is that my knowledge of Islam may not be as much as Dr.Naik's but my faith in God and his works is anyday higher than his.
First Fugitive
Registered User
 
Posts: 19
Joined: Sun May 14, 2006 9:41 pm

PreviousNext      

Return to The Hyderabadi Planet!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron
ADVERTISEMENT
SHOUTBOX!
{{todo.name}}
{{todo.date}}
[
]
{{ todo.summary }}... expand »
{{ todo.text }} « collapse
First  |  Prev  |   1   2  3  {{current_page-1}}  {{current_page}}  {{current_page+1}}  {{last_page-2}}  {{last_page-1}}  {{last_page}}   |  Next  |  Last
{{todos[0].name}}

{{todos[0].text}}

ADVERTISEMENT
This page was tagged for
zakir nair vs sri sri ravisankar deabte not find anywhere
allopanishad fake
shrishriravishankar Vs zakir naik
2006 january Zakir Naik held inter religion dialogue with sri sri ravi shankar
dr zakir naik vs shri shri ravi shankar conversation in written form
Follow fullhyd.com on
Copyright © 2023 LRR Technologies (Hyderabad) Pvt Ltd. All rights reserved. fullhyd and fullhyderabad are registered trademarks of LRR Technologies (Hyderabad) Pvt Ltd. The textual, graphic, audio and audiovisual material in this site is protected by copyright law. You may not copy, distribute or use this material except as necessary for your personal, non-commercial use. Any trademarks are the properties of their respective owners.