|
Dear Rashid
There you go again off
topic. A dialogue or discussion is based on one party putting forward some
information (could be opinions or facts) and the other party questioning
those based on reasoning or countering with facts of their own. And
there is usually some points we accept outright,
some points that we seek more clarification, and some we reject on the
basis of reasoning. Many of the points are decided as a result of back and
forth exchange of information that is a learning experience for both
parties. I see none of that in this discussion with you.
A discussion cannot
be carried on when what you write has very little to do with what I said in
the first place.
Here are point by point
examples,
Your allusion to
"the universe with countless trillions of heavenly bodies spinning in
an orbit" could be one big illusion -- what Hindus have for 5,000
years called maya and what scientists are
now beginning to acknowledge with the aid of Einstein's Theory of
Relativity.
Partly true and partly wong because,
- if
the heavenly bodies are an illusion, then the earth is an illusion too
(since it is one of the bodies within this universe), and you and I are
therefore illusions as well.
Taking such an approach
gets us nowhere. If your very existence and opinions are then an illusion
too, this discussion is not taking place. So we can safely discard this
notion. If you believe everything is an illusion, reality stops to exist
for you.
- Since atoms are composed
of 99.999999999999% empty space, yes it is really an illusion. Yet
there is a definite design so that this illusion is intended since:
in the vast spectrum of light, from radio waves a
few kilometres wavelength to gamma rays with
wavelengths in millionths of centimetres, visible
light is a very tiny slice. Yet the sun is designed to emit this
light, in this tiny interval, and our eyes designed to react to this - so
we can see. Same with sound frequencies. Too much fits here for this to be
a coincidence.
Don't forget that we've
slugged it out over the same argument on Writers Forum a few years ago.
Even then you gave the impression that your beliefs were facts.
What makes you think they
are not? Give me evidence to prove that. Whether I prove or disprove my
side, you have to prove your point that I don't have the facts. How are you
going to do that?
I maintain that if anyone tells you
what God has planned out for you, that person is lying.
Not if the information is
not an opinion, if the information is really from the Creator. Does not
mean that it has to be given to me personally. It just has to have
proof of divine authenticity.
The important thing is
that we have to reach conclusion of divine existence. Look at the trillions
of stars in pillarless orbits and tell me with a
straight face that this is all coincidence.
If you tell me that God
wants me to do this, that and the other, I will say you are telling me what
everyone else tells everyone else -- culturally, historically, religiously,
and traditionally.
If it is my opinion, then
yes. I am the first to admit that if it is my opinion it is most probably
wrong. If it is your opinion it is most probably wrong too. And
since you have given you opinions and nothing else, you are most probably
wrong.
The point I am making is
that you're propagating the Big Lie, because you yourself have not
experienced anything new or different from what we all know as well.
How do you know that?
Suppose there is a very good reason for us not to experience certain things
- does it make it a lie?
Just because you do not
see the Creator does it mean the Creator does not exist? That would be
faulty reasoning. Because if we used that reasoning, you cannot see
your own brain, so does that mean you do not have a brain? Of course not.
Can you give me one
definite proof, after looking at the stars, that there is definitely not a
Designer? If you cannot, then your statement that I am propagating a big
lie is in itself a lie. Perhaps you should say 'may' be propagating a Big
Lie - it would be closer to the truth.
Some people simply
refuse to buy the Big Lie (and you probably call them al-Kafirun), whereas many people find it fashionable to
become colourful parrots of The Big Lie (and you
probably call them al-Ulema).
The Ulema
are the biggest culprits that deny the awesomeness of the Creator of a
trillion galaxies by associating powerless idols like Muhammad, Jesus and
Mary. What share did any of these insignificant creatures have in the
creation of the universe? Absolutely nil, and their idolization is a farce
and a lie by the Ulema and organized religion that
is busy making money. If that is what you mean, you are absolutely
correct.
Finally, if you know, as
you claim, "that with a close-minded attitude one remains hopelessly
trapped in wasteful discussions with no hope of any real progress,"
why then are you wasting your time in this discussion by pretending to be a
true intellectual?
I am probably wasting my
time with you, but you are not the only, central figure on this forum. I
never claimed to be an intellectual. Most intellectuals are on the
other extreme of the Ulema, one having no basis
for belief in God while the other has no basis for not-believing in God. To
me both deny truth, reality and common sense and have the same degree of
arrogance. In truth they are not intellectuals but wannabees
who have failed miserably because they are not humble. Humility is a
prerequisite to learning, an open mind is a
prerequisite to salvation.
I would like to
appreciate your honesty and integrity in seeing what another person is
saying.
I am trying to see what
you are saying, but the only point I am making is that if you look at the
design of the universe and the atom, the sun, the moon and many other
things you will reach no other conclusion in honesty that there is a
designer - because the only other alternative is coincidence and their are
limits to coincidences. If the chances of something happening are as
infinitesimal as an unabridged dictionary resulting from an explosion in a
printing factory, then every sensible person has to re-evaluate. You on the
other hand are bringing in the Ulema, the Big
Lie, culture, history, tradition and Einstein's theory which have nothing
to do with what I am saying. Are you really trying to discuss, find,
counter or are you trying to just unload years of built up frustration with
religion?
If that is what you
consider as a lack of honesty and integrity on my part, you have not given
a convincing argument.
Feroz
|