What is Mankind?

[planet earth]

Well I thought maybe before giving various definitions to God, why don't why search for defintions of ourselves.

What is mankind, what do you think of ourselves, I think knowing ourselves better will lead us to reality and truth.

In my point of view, mankind, was what he was just as he was delivered. Meaning; helpless and needy so needy for someone to care for him, and would desperately search for his mum to feed him, in order to live.

Mankind, is the baby who dares not shout against his mum, but always knows how much he needs her in his life.

I hope you share your thoughts with me.

[Shield&Sword]

Mankind for me is not a pro-version of monkey (or a kangaroo after the last mapping of kangaroo's genom).
Ultimately i gave a look at the book (didnt read it all, must print it first) "islam between east and west" by Ali Ezetbegovic (former prisedent of Bosnia-Herzegovina during the genocide by serbia)
(you can find it at http://www.amazon.com/Islam-Between-East-Alija-Izetbegovic/dp/0892590572).
Any way it's not a book about islam as teachings, its a book about ideologies, religion and materialism. He talked like a philosopher and tried to explain "humanity" between soul and material.
One of his thoughts about "Human" is that he is not from this world, he doesnt belong to this world, he can live but part of him refuse this world and feel strange, there is a part of human that hate negative things and try to make laws in order to stop bad things (human behaviour). If "Man" was developed entirly in this nature, controled totaly by nature and driven to his present shape and thoughts then he will totaly be melt in nature, "man" wont hate anything in nature, he cant have any problem with what others do, every thing on this earth will be good for him, "like other animals", "man" will be like a piece of paste in hands of a baker. But man does see some things as bad and negative and should not be done, this part of him wont be the material part (which if it is the only part of man, and it was developed by nature then it will be totaly immersed in nature like other animanls, even if he got brain to make new things and make life easier), it will be the part from outside of this world (not E.T. things) a part that is not controled by nature but to control nature, to control material.
Civilization is Material, Culture is spiritual. If man didnt begin to think of religion and about his existence here there wont be Culture, thoughts... there will be only civilization like ants...
My point is mankind is a being made of materila and spirit, better word to describe mankind with these 2 word is "Humanity". The effect of both we can see on civlization and culture.

Great book try to read it (perhaps some find it difficult a little bit), it make alot of noise when it was first published.
Got it in arabic also.

[planet earth]

Shield & Sword

Yes, I guess what you've quoted is totally right, but don't you think that sometimes mankind give themselves more than what they deserve?

Allah, honored mankind, then mankind forgets, and refuses God?

[Shield&Sword]

but nowadays i think mankind are giving them selvese less than they deserve.
Some ideologies go down with mankind to the level of animals, and insist of it.
I see that non believing in God (thinkers and philosophers) is a result of long searching for him that ended in desperation. No one can claim that he at 13 or 18 years... (the age when a person become adult and begin to think in logical way) discovered that God does not exist. People who talked so profoundly about existence of God were all in a middle of searching, thinking, asking themselves, for so long years. The part that ask these questions is the spiritual part not the grey cells of brian.

Man is so proud of his inventions he think that he is the strongest. But all what we can see is misery, sadness, killing, raping, drugs, suicide, devorce, prostitution. All these things are syndromes of ill soul.

[planet earth]

In a very precise definition from the Quran

Mankind was once in a time nothing mentioned. And we are created from a clot, tested by seeing and hearing.

Allah dedicates a whole chapter to explain what mankind is, and where he comes from

In a contemplative reading to the verse tested by seeing and hearing. It was the first time for me to realize that the senses of seeing and hearing are a test. They are a responsibilty.

[MattG]

For me it's simple. I don't try to explain the past with any religious text, it's all too ambiguous.

I'm not irreligious, I'm not agnostic, I'm not atheist. I simply am. I'm a drop of water in the great sea of mankind. If there is a God I imagine that he or she had a purpose in creating me though I'll be damned if I know exactly what it might be.

[skasian]

Mankind are spirits contained in a fragile body made of dust made by God in the image of Himself. Theres no coincidence that our skins pH is the same as dust in the ground. Other than our physical properties, its our spirit that counts towards being a mankind, as after we die, our physical bodies no longer serve us being a mankind.
Mankind are sons and daughters of God even though some belong to the Kingdom of God while some doesnt. We are the subjects in His Kingdom as He is our Heavenly Father and Lord.

[blazeofglory]

Man is a queer creature and trying to define man we keep on confusing us. From a biological lens man is a two footed animal the way the horse is four footed.

What else do we know more than this?

[skasian]

Think. You get endless possibilities.

[blazeofglory]

Defining mankind is as difficult as scaling Mt. Everest when you are a mole.

Do not try to seek the matrix that delineates the truth about it.

All of us have in vain been seeking it and reaching there atop the apex is impossible.

That is why seek refuge in religious, surf through scriptures, converse with saints and look for scientific meaning and the like.

Man is really a mysterious creature.

[skasian]

Defining mankind is indeed difficult because there are infinite descriptions. Therefore, we do know more about ourselves than identifying mankind as two footed animals. For instance, we are a remarkably intelligent species in comparison to any other animal on earth.

[Shield&Sword]

it does not depend on intellegence (it depends on intellegence but not only on it). I mean look at animals, we look at lions and pigs as animals, but when we compare them we dont say they walk on 4 legs, we look at the way they live, we look at lion in good way but we think that pig is much lower than lions, we prefer some animals on others. But they all behaive according to thier nature, they cant change. When we talk about mankind lets not to limit our thoughts (most do that so they dont go deeper and think about existence and other stuff), when we look at prostitute we describe her as pig (here they call here like that), when we talk about pedophile we say "he is worst than animals" but when we talk about honest guy a good man or woman we dont say "sir you are an honest animal, keep it like that". Man when he behaive in a bad way it doesnt make you think he is less intellegent, because intellegence has nothing to do with his behaiviour as good or bad, you describe him using spiritual terms that none of them describe his flesh but somthing inside him, somthing beyond brain cells, you use goodness and badness, honesty, love, respect...
They only creature on this planet that doesnt behaive in one way is human, he can be dominated by his flesh so he will act like animals, search only for satisfying his material needs (and alot of these suicide or live a hell life, most of suicide occure in wealthy and athiest soscieties, where man is only 2 legs "being"), or he can dominate his material needings and soppress them using something not material, something that distinguish him from animals something that make him "human" not "homo sapiens".

[skasian]

it does not depend on intellegence (it depends on intellegence but not only on it). I mean look at animals, we look at lions and pigs as animals, but when we compare them we dont say they walk on 4 legs, we look at the way they live, we look at lion in good way but we think that pig is much lower than lions, we prefer some animals on others. But they all behaive according to thier nature, they cant change. When we talk about mankind lets not to limit our thoughts (most do that so they dont go deeper and think about existence and other stuff), when we look at prostitute we describe her as pig (here they call here like that), when we talk about pedophile we say "he is worst than animals" but when we talk about honest guy a good man or woman we dont say "sir you are an honest animal, keep it like that". Man when he behaive in a bad way it doesnt make you think he is less intellegent, because intellegence has nothing to do with his behaiviour as good or bad, you describe him using spiritual terms that none of them describe his flesh but somthing inside him, somthing beyond brain cells, you use goodness and badness, honesty, love, respect...
They only creature on this planet that doesnt behaive in one way is human, he can be dominated by his flesh so he will act like animals, search only for satisfying his material needs (and alot of these suicide or live a hell life, most of suicide occure in wealthy and athiest soscieties, where man is only 2 legs "being"), or he can dominate his material needings and soppress them using something not material, something that distinguish him from animals something that make him "human" not "homo sapiens".

May I please comment that I never remarked that intelligence is the only component that distinguish human from animals. Please read my previous post carefully, it is clear that I have just given an example (the word "for instance" suggests this) I was commenting on this example as I way of pointing out to blazeofglory that there are endless possibilities in describing mankind.

[blazeofglory]

Man is not different from any other animals except for that he has invented God, heaven, hell and other un-scalable heights.

Man is just like a dog or cat and plant, all rooted to the planet.

In fact man is an evolved or refined form of the planet,of the rock, the rivers and the like.

Man is the expression of nature. the animation of nature.

[skasian]

Mankind is a being that is mostly defined by its mental state, ability of abstract thinking, appreciation of culture/tradition, emotional state and spiritual state.

[planet earth]

Mankind:

Mankind is a combination of water and sand, water stands for transparency and transcendence while sand stands for earth and materialism. The problem of mankind is that he is called in Arabic "Insan" meaning forgetful. This forgetfulness resulted in that we forget we are made of two elements. Mankind is either busy nourishing the element of earth forgetting the spirit that is unfortunately imprisioned because it does not get its food. It is easier to feed the earth element, because it is seen. The soul on the other hand cannot be seen and therefore we forget to nourish it and give it its needs. We give our souls the wrong nourishment. Just as we cannot fill the tank of a car with strawberry juice, we cannot give the soul materialism, it does not accept. The soul transcends while the body descends. Even in death, the body is buried where it belongs and the soul rises where it belongs. the body feels gravity but the soul feels attraction. In between attraction and gravity the human being conflicts and welldone to those who have managed to transcend not to descend.

[NikolaiI]

Mankind:

Mankind is a combination of water and sand, water stands for transparency and transcendence while sand stands for earth and materialism. The problem of mankind is that he is called in Arabic "Insan" meaning forgetful. This forgetfulness resulted in that we forget we are made of two elements. Mankind is either busy nourishing the element of earth forgetting the spirit that is unfortunately imprisioned because it does not get its food. It is easier to feed the earth element, because it is seen. The soul on the other hand cannot be seen and therefore we forget to nourish it and give it its needs. We give our souls the wrong nourishment. Just as we cannot fill the tank of a car with strawberry juice, we cannot give the soul materialism, it does not accept. The soul transcends while the body descends. Even in death, the body is buried where it belongs and the soul rises where it belongs. the body feels gravity but the soul feels attraction. In between attraction and gravity the human being conflicts and welldone to those who have managed to transcend not to descend.

Humankind is like God, and is like the animals. Humankind runs astray when individuals try to become God. People amass wealth and it hurts everyone. People kill for products or wealth, or a number of other illusions. Individuals do this because they have completely forgotten their position and relationship with the Supreme Lord, who is the source of everything, the localized Supreme Soul, and also the impersonal Brahman which is the substance of the material existence. God is foreign to us, and he can only be revealed through devotional service, that is, a service and attitude of submission and love. It is not that life does not exist without God, it is just that without God, we have no idea of what we should be doing. We have no idea that we should become like our Source, because we have never asked the question of what we are, or who God is. Or more likely, we have simply decided one thing because it seemed correcet, and never took in new information which might change our minds, and we never realized that we could be wrong.

I'm sure I have said things you agree with just as you have said things I agree with. I sincerely believe that all this life, and everything beyond, is a product, a part and a parcel of the Supreme Lord, call you Him OM, Krishna, Allah, Yahweh, Buddha, or Christ. Thus I don't think is illogical to believe that God is real.

I think that Christ and Muhammed were both preachers of God-consciousness and therefore to follow them will lead to God. Still there are indeed other teachers, even other saints and prophets, that are well worth studying. In fact if you study different saints in the Christian religion, you will find many shades and variations on the act of devotion and prayer, and of theology. I don't think that Jews will not return to God, or that Hindus, Moslims, Christians or Buddhists will. I don't make any statement about them, although what I feel for everyone is hope. Of course everyone is on their own path, and they create positive as well as negative effects.

[skasian]

Mankind is beautiful in physical form where it is created within the depth of nature.
Mankind is a free spirit that does not like to be stopped by a barrier but willing to stop to help others.
Mankind is a cruel, heartless arrow that may penetrate another when blinded by preventable rage.
Mankind is a fragile being that is born to be loved and born to love.
Mankind is the most intricate being that cannot be unveiled beyond the physical layer.

[blazeofglory]

Mankind is beautiful in physical form where it is created within the depth of nature.
Mankind is a free spirit that does not like to be stopped by a barrier but willing to stop to help others.
Mankind is a cruel, heartless arrow that may penetrate another when blinded by preventable rage.
Mankind is a fragile being that is born to be loved and born to love.
Mankind is the most intricate being that cannot be unveiled beyond the physical layer.

You have made a wonderful philosophical account of mankind and and mankind rises over and above these philosophical dimensions. You can not cage mankind in your beautiful philosophical words or accounts.

Mankind is just mankind and nothing else, not this or that.

[skasian]

You have made a wonderful philosophical account of mankind and and mankind rises over and above these philosophical dimensions. You can not cage mankind in your beautiful philosophical words or accounts.

Mankind is just mankind and nothing else, not this or that.

I have depicted only five of infinite natures of mankind. Is this caging when I have only suggested a few of my thoughts about mankind?

[blazeofglory]

I have depicted only five of infinite natures of mankind. Is this caging when I have only suggested a few of my thoughts about mankind?

Caging means mankind goes above all these things. Of course man goes above these attributes.

[skasian]

Yes I know the definition of caging, and I wouldnt be inane to an extent that I would allow the meaning of mankind to be restricted into some of my thoughts.

[blazeofglory]

What is mankind is a questiohn we never can answer

[skasian]

One straight answer you mean?
Defining mankind as I said before is infinite, therefore answering to the question what is mankind is not a never but an infinite.

[blazeofglory]

One straight answer you mean?
Defining mankind as I said before is infinite, therefore answering to the question what is mankind is not a never but an infinite.

Skasian, we do not infinity except by word. How can you define or confine mankind by infinity.

[skasian]

Defining mankind has endless possibilities, therefore there are infinite possibilities in defining it.

[blazeofglory]

Defining mankind has endless possibilities, therefore there are infinite possibilities in defining it.

Yet all infinite possibilities led to an infinite number of questions and all ended up with failing answering the basic question whether God exists or not. And your Christian God in particular.

[skasian]

Yet all infinite possibilities led to an infinite number of questions and all ended up with failing answering the basic question whether God exists or not. And your Christian God in particular.

And one of thoes infinite questions may be what?

In a Christian view, mankind can be defined as creations of God that are created to be God's children, companions, servants who will share His eternal love and peace.

[Lust Hogg]

So basically what your saying that is i need a religious lens or set of religious doctrines to help delineate mans purpose. I guess so. It does not surprise me but, by way of inference, i assume that your instrument for dissecting some problems or issue would be religious in character. That's absolutely fine. When individuals attempt to define Man their going to be speaking and confronting some issue relative to some paradigm. So, one would expect a physicist to define Mankind very differently than an anthropologist. Or, an economist compared to an evolutionary Biologist. This fracture in opinion is something to be expected. And for the record, you can not layer so called attributes of an infinite kind onto a finite being, its logically incoherent. A finite being such as us, is defined against that which is infinite. As in having no limitations. Incidentally, not us.

[NikolaiI]

Humankind, just like individuals, will never stop changing - growing. So in this it is impossible to define clearly what humankind is. Or at least, humankind is not a finite.

My own understanding is that we are souls, rather than bodies. Truth has different interpretations in every culture and people, even in each individual; but the search for truth is generally the main goal in life.

[planet earth]

When I first posted this thread, I did not think it would be so philosophical. Maybe because Mankind is defined very well and in entire detail in the Quran in all its phases.

However, now I have a few things to add

First is we fail to define mankind, or have theses huge numbers of interpretations to it, why do we expect to easily define God? Why do we want a clear cut diagram for Him, if we cannot even know into the depths of ourselves? God exists and will remain to exist in a manner that we do not totally comprehend. Mankind is therefore one of the ample evidence of the Existence of its Creator.

Another point is that mankind is unfortunately unkind.

[blazeofglory]

Scriptures can not speak enough of man and we need more theories, philosophies to define life. Part biology, part theology, part science and part religion. Maybe it is a combination of all these or none. It is subject to discovery.

We have yet to discover ourselves.

[planet earth]

But scriptures include this
Scriptures descended to be a guide to life not to alienate them and look for the truth somewhere else. They shorten a long way to knowledge.

I am not quiet sure if you are aware that the first verse in the Quran, the very first verse that descended spoke about two things: Knowledge and mankind. It said

Read

Read in the name of the your Lord who created. Created man from a suspension. Read in the name of your Lord the most Bountiful. who taught by the pen. Taught mankind what they knew not.

Reading these verses gives you insight about what the book to be read "Quran", for this is what is means literally is all about.

Making it a starting point and delving into the seas of science, biology, cosmos, spirituality everything shortens a very long way into discovery.

[skasian]

So basically what your saying that is i need a religious lens or set of religious doctrines to help delineate mans purpose. I guess so. It does not surprise me but, by way of inference, i assume that your instrument for dissecting some problems or issue would be religious in character. That's absolutely fine. When individuals attempt to define Man their going to be speaking and confronting some issue relative to some paradigm. So, one would expect a physicist to define Mankind very differently than an anthropologist. Or, an economist compared to an evolutionary Biologist. This fracture in opinion is something to be expected. And for the record, you can not layer so called attributes of an infinite kind onto a finite being, its logically incoherent. A finite being such as us, is defined against that which is infinite. As in having no limitations. Incidentally, not us.

Determining mans purpose is avaliable to any one. Not necessarily only to the religious. Mans purpose of achieving the best out of everything is one of their purposes, and this idea can be from an atheist.

And yes, I always have had the same view as you, since we are finite beings, there cant be finite descriptions and definitions, and rather is truely infinite.

[skasian]

Scriptures can not speak enough of man and we need more theories, philosophies to define life. Part biology, part theology, part science and part religion. Maybe it is a combination of all these or none. It is subject to discovery.

We have yet to discover ourselves.

Discover in to what aspect? What we are truely made up of in physical mental and spiritual forms? Discovery means uncovering the unnoticed, the truth that is unknown to us yet. The question is, when does the discovery end? There may be no end like the universe, and discovery may continue forever more.

[blazeofglory]

Well I thought maybe before giving various definitions to God, why don't why search for defintions of ourselves.

What is mankind, what do you think of ourselves, I think knowing ourselves better will lead us to reality and truth.

In my point of view, mankind, was what he was just as he was delivered. Meaning; helpless and needy so needy for someone to care for him, and would desperately search for his mum to feed him, in order to live.

Mankind, is the baby who dares not shout against his mum, but always knows how much he needs her in his life.

I hope you share your thoughts with me.

Mankind is above meaning