Justice In the Afterlife

[cacian]

Is there such a thing as getting justice in the afterlife when life does not give it you?
People who are wrongly judged done in life could expect a payback time in the afterlife.
Is that a fair statement?

[YesNo]

I think there is an afterlife, based on near and shared death experiences, and there is probably reincarnation although I know of less evidence for it. Regarding justice, I think that is something we can only give to others during our incarnations in space-time.

Once in an afterlife, some eternal dimension perhaps shared by energy, I don't see what difference it makes. There shouldn't be any need for payback at that point, but who knows?

[E.A Rumfield]

Why do you ask these questions, incessantly, that nobody can answer? I would say no. You die and that is the justice.

[cacian]

QUOTE=YesNo;1180612]I think there is an afterlife, based on near and shared death experiences, and there is probably reincarnation although I know of less evidence for it. Regarding justice, I think that is something we can only give to others during our incarnations in space-time.
Hi YesNo. How do you mean something during incarnation in space time.


Once in an afterlife, some eternal dimension perhaps shared by energy, I don't see what difference it makes. There shouldn't be any need for payback at that point, but who knows?

I guess this is where prayers come in. A lot of people use them because they believe prayers are an alternative to some kind of relief.
Talking to god and wishing things is almost like an afterlife relief.

Oh YesNo I was meaning to ask you.
Did you write your signature up or is that a quote?
I can't work out what it means haha.


Why do you ask these questions, incessantly, that nobody can answer? You see what you have just asked me I can't answer for you.
I would say no.You die and that is the justice.
But I can add something to this.
You die yes sure there is no other way. end of cycle end of. Life goes on in anther life. There is no reason why one would not die to carry on in a different world like a right of passage to die is to go to another life and so on and so on like an upgrade. I much like the idea myself.
Justice is definitely not death that I am sure of it.

[Paulclem]

Why do you ask these questions, incessantly, that nobody can answer? I would say no. You die and that is the justice.

I thought you said no-one could answer them?

[YesNo]

Hi YesNo. How do you mean something during incarnation in space time.

I do believe in reincarnation, but I don't have any specific religious tradition to promote here. Incarnation would be consciousness getting a body. By body I mean some living individual of some species. It doesn't have to be Homo sapiens. That body can be thought of also as having inertial mass, that is, you can move it within space-time.




I guess this is where prayers come in. A lot of people use them because they believe prayers are an alternative to some kind of relief.
Talking to god and wishing things is almost like an afterlife relief.

I think language has its origin in consciousness outside of space-time. It helps explain how we can understand each other. So, I would agree.



Oh YesNo I was meaning to ask you.
Did you write your signature up or is that a quote?
I can't work out what it means haha.

I didn't write it. It is two quotes that seem to me to be related. One is the E=mc2 formula that Einstein wrote in a different way in 1905 and the other is a famous line from a upanishad. Both are simple statements saying this is that. Einstein says, energy (E) can be converted to mass (m). The "Thou" is one's self and the "that" is the Self. I was also thinking of putting "God is love" there as well since it is another simple equivalence statement that might be unexpected.

[E.A Rumfield]

I thought you said no-one could answer them?

That wasn't an answer just my humble opinion sprung from our most basic human observations.

[cafolini]

That wasn't an answer just my humble opinion sprung from our most basic human observations.

The thing that's terrifying is reincarnation. Could be a mosquito.

[BienvenuJDC]

You really haven't asked the question very well. Justice for what? Who is getting justice? I guess we must first answer the question, "What is just?"

[cafolini]

You really haven't asked the question very well. Justice for what? Who is getting justice? I guess we must first answer the question, "What is just?"

Definitely, that's the fundamental question that must be answered first. But there is no way to answer it without knowing too much.

[cacian]

I do believe in reincarnation, but I don't have any specific religious tradition to promote here. Incarnation would be consciousness getting a body. By body I mean some living individual of some species. It doesn't have to be Homo sapiens. That body can be thought of also as having inertial mass, that is, you can move it within space-time.


Hi YesNo that is interesting. You must be very read of the Upanishad I do not know anything about the Hindu religion

I think language has its origin in consciousness outside of space-time. It helps explain how we can understand each other. So, I would agree.



I didn't write it. It is two quotes that seem to me to be related. One is the E=mc2 formula that Einstein wrote in a different way in 1905 and the other is a famous line from a upanishad. Both are simple statements saying this is that. Einstein says, energy (E) can be converted to mass (m). The "Thou" is one's self and the "that" is the Self. I was also thinking of putting "God is love" there as well since it is another simple equivalence statement that might be unexpected.




Hi YesNo is the Upanishad suggesting that one is art?
Sorry if this not right.
I was also wondering what the C2 is in the formula.


You really haven't asked the question very well. Justice for what? Who is getting justice? I guess we must first answer the question, "What is just?"
Well 'just' means is turning something that has gone wrong to right. If it is too cold you get a warm coat and if it is too hot you go to the sea for a spot of swim and if you are hungry you eat. That is doing something justice.
If one is in your way you asked to move nicely and if they don't you aske them and if they still don't then you remove them the best you know without causing much damage to you or them. That is justice. Justice is all about keeping clean.

Definitely, that's the fundamental question that must be answered first. But there is no way to answer it without knowing too much.
Is it? I was sure the fundamental question was 'why'.

[Paulclem]

The thing that's terrifying is reincarnation. Could be a mosquito.

It is, though it's a better option than an eternity in hell, as the situation will eventually change.


That wasn't an answer just my humble opinion sprung from our most basic human observations.

Just jesting.

[BienvenuJDC]

Well 'just' means is turning something that has gone wrong to right. If it is too cold you get a warm coat and if it is too hot you go to the sea for a spot of swim and if you are hungry you eat. That is doing something justice.
If one is in your way you asked to move nicely and if they don't you aske them and if they still don't then you remove them the best you know without causing much damage to you or them. That is justice. Justice is all about keeping clean.


Actually, I think that this better applies:

just - adjective \ˈjəst\ acting or being in conformity with what is morally upright or good

[cacian]

Actually, I think that this better applies:

just - adjective \ˈjəst\ acting or being in conformity with what is morally upright or good

It depends what you call morality. Upright can be uptight and good can be bad.
Moral codes are just another indention to create tension.

[BienvenuJDC]

I disagree, and that is why this question cannot be answered in such a discussion. Good can never be bad. However, one's perceived good (which isn't good at all) can be bad. Defining what is truly good, just, and moral is not subjective at all, but to some, they don't want to accept it.


It depends what you call morality. Upright can uptight and good can be bad.
Moral codes are just another invention to create tension.

[hillwalker]

I don't believe there can be 'justice' after death since there is no supreme being keeping tally of who's been good and who hasn't in some kind of ledger. It's an impossibility and is probably a wishful 'myth' created by Man in his arrogance that we all have some purpose in the universe beyond our mortal remit.

Similarly 'life after death' is merely man's way of softening the blow that when we die we cease to exist. The only consolation is that when you die time also ceases to exist since it's a human concept - so that final nanosecond of awareness can continue existing into infinity. Our final sensation or memory becomes everlasting - if it's a happy memory that's 'heaven' - if it's a bad one that's 'hell'.

Thereagain no one ever died and came back to tell us what it's like so I could be wrong.

H

[Paulclem]

I don't believe there can be 'justice' after death since there is no supreme being keeping tally of who's been good and who hasn't in some kind of ledger. It's an impossibility and is probably a wishful 'myth' created by Man in his arrogance that we all have some purpose in the universe beyond our mortal remit.

Similarly 'life after death' is merely man's way of softening the blow that when we die we cease to exist. The only consolation is that when you die time also ceases to exist since it's a human concept - so that final nanosecond of awareness can continue existing into infinity. Our final sensation or memory becomes everlasting - if it's a happy memory that's 'heaven' - if it's a bad one that's 'hell'.

Thereagain no one ever died and came back to tell us what it's like so I could be wrong.

H

Your idea seems to fall between the two positions often discussed here and for at least 2 millennia, that of annihilation - often argued by the scientifically minded - and that of the eternalists argued by the theistically minded.

Your idea also reminds me of the poem Ode to a Grecian Urn. It still seems a kind of eternalism though.

[cacian]

I feel that the idea of death does not stop there because death would be futile if we just ceased to exist upon death.
We would live forever on earth if death ends there. There is a cylce to life unbroken and so there is a cycle to us.
A cycle an eternal pattern that does not interrupt sotp or ends and so I see death as part of the pattern which means it only is a short halt before something else that we do not know about happens.
What would be the point of death if we then ends as it ends. If we go by nature it has a cycle of seasons. Winter ends then spring then summer. Just because is no longer does not mean it won't return.

I do not believe in reacarnation. I believe that life is in stages. One dies and then gets to the second stage then a third and so on like an upgrade. It is like sifting humans through a sieve to get changed to better and better till they achieve a different even better state of life.
Juts like a mobile upgrade it gets better with time technology here. We are no different to this upgrade process.
That is my interpretation of life.

[Volya]

It depends what you call morality. Upright can be uptight and good can be bad.
Moral codes are just another indention to create tension.

You should try checking out a dictionary sometime cacian.

[Jack of Hearts]

No. There's no 'made up thing' in the other 'made up thing.'









J

[cacian]

You should try checking out a dictionary sometime cacian.

Volya I have. I do it all the time.
Language is not a dictionary. Thinking is a language that goes beyond a fixed word and a fixed meaning.
One has to be otherwise we will all stagnate and end up thinking and doing the same.
Progress is to go beyond what a dictionary sets out to order.
Do not forget a dictionary has been set up by a group of people like you and me. It is the book that decides how you should speak. The same goes to the bible. It tells christian waht to believe. In this sense a dictionary and a bible is exactly the same.
A dictionary manipulates language thus control thinking.
When it comes to writing and poetry one should experiment with diffirent meanings and words. New ways of thinking are born through new ways of writing. There is no doubt in that. One must for the sake of creativity.
So the question is: Isn't it important to manipulate in order to extrapilute?

Anyway back to topic is there justice in the afterlife?
Is life just here and so no need to seek out just in an afterlife.

[YesNo]

Hi YesNo is the Upanishad suggesting that one is art?
Sorry if this not right.
I was also wondering what the C2 is in the formula.

The C2 is C squared. C represents the speed of light. Take the value of the speed of light and multiply it by itself. There are units involved also. On the E (energy) side, the unit is joules. On the mc^2 side, the units are kilograms (mass), meters and seconds (c).

The "Thou art that" is an older way of saying "You are that".

[hillwalker]

cacian - sometimes I despair when I read your posts.
Don't make increasingly outlandish excuses for your lack of language skills, please.
It's fine if you have taken it upon yourself to create a new language that no one else can understand. Just don't clog up these threads with your gobbledegook and pretend you're making profound statements.

H

[E.A Rumfield]

I disagree, and that is why this question cannot be answered in such a discussion. Good can never be bad. However, one's perceived good (which isn't good at all) can be bad. Defining what is truly good, just, and moral is not subjective at all, but to some, they don't want to accept it.

Good and bad are man made ideas. There is no such thing. No person has ever been completely good or completely bad and further more who has the right to say what is good or bad? Some states and countries execute people in the name of justice. Isn't that just as bad? "Good" people often do "bad" things because it is in fact very difficult to be a human being.


I don't believe there can be 'justice' after death since there is no supreme being keeping tally of who's been good and who hasn't in some kind of ledger. It's an impossibility and is probably a wishful 'myth' created by Man in his arrogance that we all have some purpose in the universe beyond our mortal remit.

Similarly 'life after death' is merely man's way of softening the blow that when we die we cease to exist. The only consolation is that when you die time also ceases to exist since it's a human concept - so that final nanosecond of awareness can continue existing into infinity. Our final sensation or memory becomes everlasting - if it's a happy memory that's 'heaven' - if it's a bad one that's 'hell'.

Thereagain no one ever died and came back to tell us what it's like so I could be wrong.

H

That has become a popular idea especially with those interested in psychedelic drugs and with the more we learn of our own brains. Consciousness is a strange thing. Think about this, a rock exists this certain rock. It is unique. Save any unforeseen actions this rock will always look the same, weight the same, have the same density be made of the same elements etc etc. This rock has an identity just like we do. Everyday we wake up and like that rock we know who we are. We have a fixed perception of time but the rock is free in its existence. Like the rock we are also finite, we both will soon break down and become something else. Now would that rock exist without something to perceive it?

When you think about it everything in this solar system has been around for infinity. All the materials ave been recycled. When a star dies its destruction gives birth to a new star. With death comes life. The raw materials that compose our bodies and highly advanced brains made up something else completely unrelated on this Earth.

[cacian]

The C2 is C squared. C represents the speed of light. Take the value of the speed of light and multiply it by itself. There are units involved also. On the E (energy) side, the unit is joules. On the mc^2 side, the units are kilograms (mass), meters and seconds (c).

The "Thou art that" is an older way of saying "You are that".

Hi YesNo. Thank you for the post.
I have now been wondering why I would need to double the speed of life. Oops the speed of light.
Joules is an interesting word.
About the quote I thought art as in ART. Haha I got it confused.

[Paulclem]

Good and bad are man made ideas. There is no such thing. No person has ever been completely good or completely bad and further more who has the right to say what is good or bad? Some states and countries execute people in the name of justice. Isn't that just as bad? "Good" people often do "bad" things because it is in fact very difficult to be a human being.

I agree that there is a tendency to label good bad - often translated into evil, and that you do not find wholly good or wholly evil people. This may be because of our need to polarise and simplify in order to accommodate ideas. It is no help really in dealing with people, but the good/bad/evil mythis constantly perpetuated in stories, but more particularly the media.

We get the image of US marines - for example - I'm not picking on Marines or the US, but the example comes to mind - categorising a perceived enemy as the bad guys. It is understandable, if someone is trying to kill you, but the wider implications for the perception of the bad guys is that they are all bad/evil. The other thing of course is that marine may or may not say that - we only have this common conception of them doing so - but the effect is for us to categorise them in that way too. Also if it is true that marines categorise their enemy as bad guys, are they really in a position to judge the metaphysical qualities imposed in a way that has relevance to wider society? Marines - like any soldiers - are a society's enforcers, and you need a particular kind of person who is able to make such a judgement and be prepared to kill them.

I disagree that we can't categorise what actually constitutes good and bad in specific instances. I think the law does a good job of that, though I take your point about judicial murder/ capital punishment.

[cacian]

cacian - sometimes I despair when I read your posts.
Don't make increasingly outlandish excuses for your lack of language skills, please.
It's fine if you have taken it upon yourself to create a new language that no one else can understand. Just don't clog up these threads with your gobbledegook and pretend you're making profound statements.

H
Hillwalker I try to not to excuse myself as much as I wish to interest myself with new ideas I deem worthy of discussion.
My language skills I feel are up to a level I am more then happy with at the moment. I speak five languages that I taught myself. I think I must at least give myself the credit for taking interest in learning to speak a variety of languages without too much help from others telling me to or not.


Good and bad are man made ideas. There is no such thing. No person has ever been completely good or completely bad and further more who has the right to say what is good or bad? Some states and countries execute people in the name of justice. Isn't that just as bad? "Good" people often do "bad" things because it is in fact very difficult to be a human being.

Hi E.A I personally think it is easier to be a human being then an animal but maybe that is a different topic.
Justice is just as a result of a lack of it. Humans lack tact and therein lies the problem.

[E.A Rumfield]

I agree that there is a tendency to label good bad - often translated into evil, and that you do not find wholly good or wholly evil people. This may be because of our need to polarise and simplify in order to accommodate ideas. It is no help really in dealing with people, but the good/bad/evil mythis constantly perpetuated in stories, but more particularly the media.

We get the image of US marines - for example - I'm not picking on Marines or the US, but the example comes to mind - categorising a perceived enemy as the bad guys. It is understandable, if someone is trying to kill you, but the wider implications for the perception of the bad guys is that they are all bad/evil. The other thing of course is that marine may or may not say that - we only have this common conception of them doing so - but the effect is for us to categorise them in that way too. Also if it is true that marines categorise their enemy as bad guys, are they really in a position to judge the metaphysical qualities imposed in a way that has relevance to wider society? Marines - like any soldiers - are a society's enforcers, and you need a particular kind of person who is able to make such a judgement and be prepared to kill them.

I disagree that we can't categorise what actually constitutes good and bad in specific instances. I think the law does a good job of that, though I take your point about judicial murder/ capital punishment.

Carl Jung believed that their were 16 separate personality types. None are inherently good or bad. Certain types are apt to see other types as noble or evil. And we cannot categorize good or evil simply because what makes one person worthy to rule a judgment over some else? We are all human beings. We are all capable of beautiful and terrible things. We often commit unspeakable acts not out of malice but out of indifference. Hitler thought he was doing a service for the world in his own deluded mind. The world is full of Hitlers from dictators to gas station attendants. Big scale to the small scale and they are a statement of our society as a whole. The things they do are things that are inside each and every one of us. These are things that are in the air, in the water. The world is also full of Aldous Huxley type truth seekers and those people speak equally for our society. Most people fall somewhere in the middle but nobody has ever been an "angel" or a "demon". As for the Marines they may have natural enemies but like Nietzsche good is strong bad is weak. Think about that.

[QUOTE=cacian;1181717]Hi E.A I personally think it is easier to be a human being then an animal but maybe that is a different topic.
/QUOTE]

Congrats on missing the point. It is hard to be alive. We all go into decisions thinking that they are the right ones, that we are doing good for ourselves and or others but usually we are just a little off.

[Paulclem]

Carl Jung believed that their were 16 separate personality types. None are inherently good or bad. Certain types are apt to see other types as noble or evil. And we cannot categorize good or evil simply because what makes one person worthy to rule a judgment over some else? We are all human beings. We are all capable of beautiful and terrible things. We often commit unspeakable acts not out of malice but out of indifference. Hitler thought he was doing a service for the world in his own deluded mind. The world is full of Hitlers from dictators to gas station attendants. Big scale to the small scale and they are a statement of our society as a whole. The things they do are things that are inside each and every one of us. These are things that are in the air, in the water. The world is also full of Aldous Huxley type truth seekers and those people speak equally for our society. Most people fall somewhere in the middle but nobody has ever been an "angel" or a "demon". As for the Marines they may have natural enemies but like Nietzsche good is strong bad is weak. Think about that.

I don't adhere to the western pesychological models; I think they are inadequate in describing the mind. It's like those descriptions of people you get with star signs - far too general to be of any use. I think experience of people really shows the vast diversity of characters, and the closest matches I can usually make is that they remind me a little of this person or that person.

You seem down on society - sure there might be potential Hitlers, but there are also potential saints, as well as real ones. I agree that there might be an atmosphere generated in an area where there is a prevailing attitude. My wife and I experienced this in the former Yugoslavia before the war there. We were only passing through, but it felt very hostile. There was certainly a previling aggression. I think that can be generated and engineered to an extent by politicians and, perhapsmore importantly now, the media. I have to say where I am, i am mainly heartened by people. I don't think society is going down the pan - far from it.

As for Nietzsche, I think the adoption of his philosophy by the right has really done for it. The idea of a superman transcending ordinary convention is irrelevant, as we are finding here in the UK with recent scandals involving a dead celebrity and a mass of paedophilia. The Nazis tried the strong arm stuff and lasted a decade. I really don't concur with the good - strong, bad - weak idea either. Anyone can be strong in a strong position - like the Nazis tried to be, but real strength is demonstrated when those in a weak/ inferior position survive or triumph or are successful.

[DanteExplorer]

Dante would say yes.

[cafolini]

[QUOTE=E.A Rumfield;1181825]Carl Jung believed that their were 16 separate personality types. None are inherently good or bad. Certain types are apt to see other types as noble or evil. And we cannot categorize good or evil simply because what makes one person worthy to rule a judgment over some else? We are all human beings. We are all capable of beautiful and terrible things. We often commit unspeakable acts not out of malice but out of indifference. Hitler thought he was doing a service for the world in his own deluded mind. The world is full of Hitlers from dictators to gas station attendants. Big scale to the small scale and they are a statement of our society as a whole. The things they do are things that are inside each and every one of us. These are things that are in the air, in the water. The world is also full of Aldous Huxley type truth seekers and those people speak equally for our society. Most people fall somewhere in the middle but nobody has ever been an "angel" or a "demon". As for the Marines they may have natural enemies but like Nietzsche good is strong bad is weak. Think about that.
/QUOTE]

I don't agree at all with Carl Jung overall. In particular, he cannot sell very well his idea of the collective. But everything else you are saying makes a lot of sense. And people better take heed.
Nietzsche reveals the idiocy. Never proposed it.

[cacian]

I don't agree there are 16 personalities Carl Jung must check up at the next psychology clinic for a lesson in the human mind anatomy.

[E.A Rumfield]

Even if he wasn't one hundred percent right it makes sense. No one has ever been born that wasn't born before.

[Paulclem]

The idea of Karma which goes along with reincarnation suggests a kind of justice that acts not through some external judge, but is part of a natural process.

[Cioran]

Justice in the afterlife? See Ivan Karamazov on the suffering of children, in the chapter of the Brothers Karamazov just before the Grand Inquisitor chapter. As Ivan correctly points out, there can be no justice in the afterlife, even if it were not mythical (which it is). If the afterlife is NOT mythical, Ivan "returns the ticket," and wants no part of the afterlife or God's plan.

[caddy_caddy]

No, in the afterlife we might find people whom we don't expect to be with us there, wether in Heaven or Hell. It's all an act of Mercy not justice.

[YALASH]

Various aspects of juctice from point of view of Holy Quran.

Peace be on you.

Part A
“ Allah bears witness that there is no God but He – and (also do) the angels and those possessed of knowledge – Maintainer of justice; there is no God but He, the Mighty, the Wise.” (3:19)

Juctice starts in this world: “Verily, We sent Our Messengers with manifest Signs and sent down with them the Books and the Balance that people may act with justice………” (57:26 partly)


“And We shall set up sacles of justice for the Day of Resurrection so that no soul will be wronged in aught. And even if it were the weight ofa grain of mustard seed, We would bring it forth. And sufficiect are We as reconers.” (21:48)

“And the earth will shine with the light ofher Lord, and the Book will be laid (open before them), and the Prophets and the witnesses will be bought, and judgment will be given between them with justice, and they will not be wronged.” (39:70)

“And thou wilt see the angels going round the Throne, glorifying their Lord with (His) praise. And it will be judged between them with justice. And it will be said: ‘All praise belongs to allha, the Lord of the worlds.’ (39:76)

Reference: alislam.org/quran


Part B
Justice in Hereafter can be understood in the light of following points.

1) Soul is a station of relation between God and human. It is throne of grandeur of God. It has unique relation with physical body. Soul has special connection with conscience. That connection links to brain. The brain system turns it into visible manifestations. According to Holy Quran, soul does not come from outside but during the progress of growth of fetus inside the womb, it is subtly produced within. Thus soul is a creation, according to Islam.


Soul is not wasted after birth, it passes through continous stages. Soul needs physical body for its manifestation. When physical body becomes incapable for soul, it leaves it. Physical ‘death’ is separation of soul from physical body.


2) God has made universe for benefit of human and his limited life span is not the aim. Human is made to achieve unlimited progress, which continues after the end of physical life.
“Did you think that We created you without purpose, and that you would not be brought back to us? – Exalted then be Allah, the True King. There is no God but He, the Lord of gracious throne.” (23:116-117)


Life-after is the continuity of this life in physical world. In this world, rewards are given to those who do struggle with zeal to achieve something. Likewise, when person uses wisdom, thinking and fear of God and reaches at truth and reality, their souls become able to get higher stations. These stations become fully manifested in the life-after.


3) Like physical evolution, life-after goes through evolution too.


4) Those whom the angels cause to die while they are wronging their souls. Then will they offer submission, (saying), ‘We used not to do any evil.’ Nay, surely, Allah knows well what you used to do. ---- So enter the gates of Hell, to abide therein. Evil indeed is the abode of the proud. (16:29,30)

Those whom the angels cause to die while they are pure. They say: Peace be unto you! Enter Heaven because of what you used to do. (16:33)


5)Allah says: “Then He causes him to die and assigns a grave to him.” (80:22)…. The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) said: A grave can be a garden of Heaven or pit of Hell. ( Tirmizi) ……. As, not every person who dies, is placed in a grave; some of the bodies are burnt, eaten by animals or drowned. Therfore word ‘grave’ here means the place where soul is placed.


6) In the Hereafter, rewards and chastisement will be the reflection of deeds done in this world. These will be realities of kind-of-physical and spiritual but not of this world.


7) “And no soul knows what joy of the eyes is kept hidden for them, as a reward for their good works.” (32:18)….The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) said: Bounties of Heaven are such that eyes have not seen them, ears have not heard about them and heart (mind) of person cannot imagine them. ( Ibn e Majah).


8) Deeds done in this world will be brought forward in Hereafter in certain form:
“And every human’s works have We fastenend to his neck; and on the Day of Resurrection We shall bring out for him a book which he will find wide open. -- ‘Read thy book. Suffcient is thy own soul this day as recknor against thee.’ ” (17:14,15).


9) Virtue is the name of using senses with righteouness. But when they are misused, they become sin. Seven senses will be used to feel chastisement: (15:45). The correct use of these senses in this world will earn reward in Hereafter.Hell is like a correctional facility. Paradise is permanent.


10) Human are made by God to imbibe or copy His holy attributes at human level (2:139). God say that His mercy encompasses everything. In light of this, Hell is not permanent. Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) said: A time would come when there would be no one in Hell and air would move its doors.

Human makes chastisement for him or her by doing bad deeds and by destroying their spiritual powers, which would render them uable to absorb mercy of God.

Mercy of God will cure them and after the treatment they would be sent to Paradise and purpose of making human would be fulfilled i.e. all of them would get mercy of God.


Reference: alislamDOTorg/books/ (Book number 4 by second Holy Khalifah)


Part 3

== Human is very weak. One should seek God’s cover in Hereafter.

== More than justice is commanded: “ Verily, Allah enjoins justice, and the doing of good to others; and giving like kindred; and forbids indecency, and manifest evil, and wrongful transgression. He admonished you that you may take heed.” (16:91)

[cafolini]

Various aspects of juctice from point of view of Holy Quran.

Peace be on you.

Part A
“ Allah bears witness that there is no God but He – and (also do) the angels and those possessed of knowledge – Maintainer of justice; there is no God but He, the Mighty, the Wise.” (3:19)

Juctice starts in this world: “Verily, We sent Our Messengers with manifest Signs and sent down with them the Books and the Balance that people may act with justice………” (57:26 partly)


“And We shall set up sacles of justice for the Day of Resurrection so that no soul will be wronged in aught. And even if it were the weight ofa grain of mustard seed, We would bring it forth. And sufficiect are We as reconers.” (21:48)

“And the earth will shine with the light ofher Lord, and the Book will be laid (open before them), and the Prophets and the witnesses will be bought, and judgment will be given between them with justice, and they will not be wronged.” (39:70)

“And thou wilt see the angels going round the Throne, glorifying their Lord with (His) praise. And it will be judged between them with justice. And it will be said: ‘All praise belongs to allha, the Lord of the worlds.’ (39:76)

Reference: alislam.org/quran


Part B
Justice in Hereafter can be understood in the light of following points.

1) Soul is a station of relation between God and human. It is throne of grandeur of God. It has unique relation with physical body. Soul has special connection with conscience. That connection links to brain. The brain system turns it into visible manifestations. According to Holy Quran, soul does not come from outside but during the progress of growth of fetus inside the womb, it is subtly produced within. Thus soul is a creation, according to Islam.


Soul is not wasted after birth, it passes through continous stages. Soul needs physical body for its manifestation. When physical body becomes incapable for soul, it leaves it. Physical ‘death’ is separation of soul from physical body.


2) God has made universe for benefit of human and his limited life span is not the aim. Human is made to achieve unlimited progress, which continues after the end of physical life.
“Did you think that We created you without purpose, and that you would not be brought back to us? – Exalted then be Allah, the True King. There is no God but He, the Lord of gracious throne.” (23:116-117)


Life-after is the continuity of this life in physical world. In this world, rewards are given to those who do struggle with zeal to achieve something. Likewise, when person uses wisdom, thinking and fear of God and reaches at truth and reality, their souls become able to get higher stations. These stations become fully manifested in the life-after.


3) Like physical evolution, life-after goes through evolution too.


4) Those whom the angels cause to die while they are wronging their souls. Then will they offer submission, (saying), ‘We used not to do any evil.’ Nay, surely, Allah knows well what you used to do. ---- So enter the gates of Hell, to abide therein. Evil indeed is the abode of the proud. (16:29,30)

Those whom the angels cause to die while they are pure. They say: Peace be unto you! Enter Heaven because of what you used to do. (16:33)


5)Allah says: “Then He causes him to die and assigns a grave to him.” (80:22)…. The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) said: A grave can be a garden of Heaven or pit of Hell. ( Tirmizi) ……. As, not every person who dies, is placed in a grave; some of the bodies are burnt, eaten by animals or drowned. Therfore word ‘grave’ here means the place where soul is placed.


6) In the Hereafter, rewards and chastisement will be the reflection of deeds done in this world. These will be realities of kind-of-physical and spiritual but not of this world.


7) “And no soul knows what joy of the eyes is kept hidden for them, as a reward for their good works.” (32:18)….The Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) said: Bounties of Heaven are such that eyes have not seen them, ears have not heard about them and heart (mind) of person cannot imagine them. ( Ibn e Majah).


8) Deeds done in this world will be brought forward in Hereafter in certain form:
“And every human’s works have We fastenend to his neck; and on the Day of Resurrection We shall bring out for him a book which he will find wide open. -- ‘Read thy book. Suffcient is thy own soul this day as recknor against thee.’ ” (17:14,15).


9) Virtue is the name of using senses with righteouness. But when they are misused, they become sin. Seven senses will be used to feel chastisement: (15:45). The correct use of these senses in this world will earn reward in Hereafter.Hell is like a correctional facility. Paradise is permanent.


10) Human are made by God to imbibe or copy His holy attributes at human level (2:139). God say that His mercy encompasses everything. In light of this, Hell is not permanent. Holy Prophet (s.a.w.) said: A time would come when there would be no one in Hell and air would move its doors.

Human makes chastisement for him or her by doing bad deeds and by destroying their spiritual powers, which would render them uable to absorb mercy of God.

Mercy of God will cure them and after the treatment they would be sent to Paradise and purpose of making human would be fulfilled i.e. all of them would get mercy of God.


Reference: alislamDOTorg/books/ (Book number 4 by second Holy Khalifah)


Part 3

== Human is very weak. One should seek God’s cover in Hereafter.

== More than justice is commanded: “ Verily, Allah enjoins justice, and the doing of good to others; and giving like kindred; and forbids indecency, and manifest evil, and wrongful transgression. He admonished you that you may take heed.” (16:91)

It is only natural that Mohammed would copy the Roman Catholics to gain hegemony and liberation from the west in the 8th century until the fall in the 15th century.
Melaka has its hands on the neck of Venice. ~ Portuguese sailor arriving in Melaka at the height of the Islamic Empire.

[caddy_caddy]

Nevermind , we would all stand in front of God one day . And you 'll see by yourself who is Muhammad.

[cafolini]

Nevermind , we would all stand in front of God one day . And you 'll see by yourself who is Muhammad.

I don't think I'll have to wait until I can no longer see to see what every Aristocratic Arab already knows and has known since the eight century. Both the Roman Catholics and the Muslins have been finished for keeps. Throughout the centuries, they simply weakened each other, as it was naturally to happen. Your nevermind is well taken.

[Cioran]

No, in the afterlife we might find people whom we don't expect to be with us there, wether in Heaven or Hell. It's all an act of Mercy not justice.

What afterlife?

[Cioran]

Everyone fights so hard against this idea of personal extinction at death. Why? It happens every night when you go to sleep. In non-dream sleep you are personally extinct. But you wake up. The difference between non-dream sleep and death is just that in the case of death, you don't wake up.

But who cares? Are you troubled or fearful or anything while in deep, non-dream sleep? No, you are not, because if you were, then you would not be in deep, non-dream sleep.

When you die you will be in deep, non-dream sleep but nothing about it will trouble you. If something about it troubled you, then you would not be dead.

Mark Twain said something to the effect that he had been dead for billions of years before he was born, and this fact had not inconvenienced him in the least.

[Cioran]

Various aspects of juctice from point of view of Holy Quran.

Peace be on you.

Thanks, you too.

Do you have any evidence for the existence of this Allah fellow?

A lot of people do a lot of odious things in his name. Why's that? Is Allah odious?

[caddy_caddy]

I don't think I'll have to wait until I can no longer see to see what every Aristocratic Arab already knows and has known since the eight century. Both the Roman Catholics and the Muslins have been finished for keeps. Throughout the centuries, they simply weakened each other, as it was naturally to happen. Your nevermind is well taken.
If u cannot wait to know the truth, u should look for the truth by yourself .
well, not everyone has the courage to be Oedipus and ending gauging his own eyes.
I really don't like Muslims who try to preach for Islam .You're highly educated people, all literate. ;have right to choose and decide for your self; knowledge is accessible to everyone nowadays. As u read on Greek and Roman and everyone else and try to know about them , u can try to know the truth about us. If u don't want u're free.

[caddy_caddy]

What afterlife?

Don't bother yourself with it.

Do you have any evidence for the existence of this Allah fellow?

A lot of people do a lot of odious things in his name. Why's that? Is Allah odious?[/



Have u read Dr. Faustus by that genuis Christopher Marlow?

Marlow gave me the answer to your question

God replied to your question by saying : it's within you , can't you see ?
I always wondered what God means by these words and" how it's within us "
When I read Dr. Faustus I understood " how it's within us "
Every man wants to be a god. This is the main motive that is behind all his actions.
He's longing to be the very thing he rejects its existence.
Man is longing to gain all the qualities of a deity and he doesn't know that. Look around you and see .Man wants to be omniscent, omnipotent, gain immortality, have a power over the whole things around him and so on.
It's really within us , can't you see ?

[cafolini]

Don't bother yourself with it.

Do you have any evidence for the existence of this Allah fellow?

A lot of people do a lot of odious things in his name. Why's that? Is Allah odious?[/



Have u read Dr. Faustus by that genuis Christopher Marlow?

Marlow gave me the answer to your question

God replied to your question by saying : it's within you , can't you see ?
I always wondered what God means by these words and" how it's within us "
When I read Dr. Faustus I understood " how it's within us "
Every man wants to be a god. This is the main motive that is behind all his actions.
He's longing to be the very thing he rejects its existence.
Man is longing to gain all the qualities of a deity and he doesn't know that. Look around you and see .Man wants to be omniscent, omnipotent, gain immortality, have a power over the whole things around him and so on.
It's really within us , can't you see ?

I would have to be an idiot to want to be God. And apart from a percentagewise few exceptions I don't think the market for idiots is that big. God be with you in your prayers, not in you. Case closed.

[caddy_caddy]

I would have to be an idiot to want to be God. And apart from a percentagewise few exceptions I don't think the market for idiots is that big. God be with you in your prayers, not in you. Case closed.
Man is not an idiot. Man's brain is the miracle of all miracles. But he is so " proud " to confess the truth.
Pride is his tragic flaw and nothing else my dear.
And the case is not closed . This is not you who decides. Review the threads here and u'll see that the case has been opened since long time ago and will be open forever.

[YesNo]

Do you have any evidence for the existence of this Allah fellow?

A lot of people do a lot of odious things in his name. Why's that? Is Allah odious?

I'm not a Muslim, but belief in Allah sounds more reasonable to me than belief in that pseudo-scientific Many Worlds fantasy that we discussed in a separate thread.

Also, when it comes to doing things that are odious, it takes atheism to pull that off properly. Just search for the Cambodian Khmer Rouge as one example. Hmm. To use your logic, does that make atheism odious?

[cacian]

I would have to be an idiot to want to be God. And apart from a percentagewise few exceptions I don't think the market for idiots is that big. God be with you in your prayers, not in you. Case closed.

I would have to agree with you about not wanting to be god. Apart from that life should be good.

[cacian]

I'm not a Muslim, but belief in Allah sounds more reasonable to me than belief in that pseudo-scientific Many Worlds fantasy that we discussed in a separate thread.

Also, when it comes to doing things that are odious, it takes atheism to pull that off properly. Just search for the Cambodian Khmer Rouge as one example. Hmm. To use your logic, does that make atheism odious?

I think 'odious' is a man made thing. People do odious things. It is only natural after that to try and transfer it to others not present. Atheism is as a result of feeling nothing. That is not odious that is just a fact of people being different or indifferent shall I say.
Having said that odious is not in all of us and that is something well worth talking about.

[Paulclem]

Cafolini raises some interesting points with his post, being as culture bound as anyone with a religious background. His background - or worldview - is scepticism based upon science. What science still does not answer, and cannot prove, just as religions cannot prove, is that there isn't an afterlife or God. By their own scientific criteria of the scientific method, it can neither be proved or disproved, as there is nothing to measure.

The claim is, of course, that we are purely biological beings whose consciousness and origins can be adequately explained by science. In fact science is very far from being able to ascertain what consciousness is.

The point is that there are a significant number of people in the world who still hold belief in life after death, reincarnation and God. Despite cafolini's habit of closing - or rather attempting to close - arguments with his "case closed" type pronouncements, the fact remains that he and others will still have to deal with, discuss and interact with people who have some kind of belief. This still applies whether he believes or doesn't believe, whether it is true or not.

If he doesn't then he risks becoming as intolerant as it is claimed religious people are.

[cafolini]

Cafolini raises some interesting points with his post, being as culture bound as anyone with a religious background. His background - or worldview - is scepticism based upon science. What science still does not answer, and cannot prove, just as religions cannot prove, is that there isn't an afterlife or God. By their own scientific criteria of the scientific method, it can neither be proved or disproved, as there is nothing to measure.

The claim is, of course, that we are purely biological beings whose consciousness and origins can be adequately explained by science. In fact science is very far from being able to ascertain what consciousness is.

The point is that there are a significant number of people in the world who still hold belief in life after death, reincarnation and God. Despite cafolini's habit of closing - or rather attempting to close - arguments with his "case closed" type pronouncements, the fact remains that he and others will still have to deal with, discuss and interact with people who have some kind of belief. This still applies whether he believes or doesn't believe, whether it is true or not.

If he doesn't then he risks becoming as intolerant as it is claimed religious people are.

Don't mess with Budha.

[Delta40]

Don't mess with Budha.

Lol Well I would because he has a GSOH.

[Paulclem]

Don't mess with Budha.

:biggrin5:

There's no arguing with this bloke. Coffee/ beer instead? You should come down to the bar in the Cold Ale thread. We never argue there either.

[Paulclem]

Lol Well I would because he has a GSOH.

:biggrin5:

[Cioran]

Don't bother yourself with it.

Do you have any evidence for the existence of this Allah fellow?

A lot of people do a lot of odious things in his name. Why's that? Is Allah odious?[/



Have u read Dr. Faustus by that genuis Christopher Marlow?

Marlow gave me the answer to your question

God replied to your question by saying : it's within you , can't you see ?
I always wondered what God means by these words and" how it's within us "
When I read Dr. Faustus I understood " how it's within us "
Every man wants to be a god. This is the main motive that is behind all his actions.
He's longing to be the very thing he rejects its existence.
Man is longing to gain all the qualities of a deity and he doesn't know that. Look around you and see .Man wants to be omniscent, omnipotent, gain immortality, have a power over the whole things around him and so on.
It's really within us , can't you see ?

Actually, I don't want to be any of those things, and even if I did, it's not possible to be any of those things. So a single counterexample destroys your claim.

But, even if it were true that everyone wanted to be omniscient, omnipotent and gain immortality, it doesn't change the fact that none of these things are possible, and it doesn't change the fact that you don't possess a particle of evidence that any such entity (God) exists, now do you?

[Cioran]

I'm not a Muslim, but belief in Allah sounds more reasonable to me than belief in that pseudo-scientific Many Worlds fantasy that we discussed in a separate thread.

Also, when it comes to doing things that are odious, it takes atheism to pull that off properly. Just search for the Cambodian Khmer Rouge as one example. Hmm. To use your logic, does that make atheism odious?

Ha, ha, ha! Pseudo-scientific? You never did read any of the science and philosophy of science papers that I linked, which are positively imbued with the Many Worlds, did you? Moreover, in that thread, you made foolish and false arguments misrepresenting what the Many Worlds actually said. And you never corrected your false claims despite the many corrections given by me, and others, as well as the many links to the Many Worlds that I gave you, which, had you read them, would have disabused you of your wrong interpretations of this particular meta-theory.

As to the Khmer Rouge, according to people like you, all atheists are odious. OK. So some tiny minority of atheists do odious things. But we should expect that religious folk like you, given your monumental morality, would NEVER do terrible things. But, history is replete with odious actions by thiests; not only done despite their idiot God belief, but specifically in the name of it. Can you deny this?

Well, judging by your confused and disingenuous responses in the MW thread, sure you can!

Finally, I don't indict all Muslims for the actions of a terrible few. Quite the contrary. I think the vast majority of Muslims are fine people. I simply asked the Allah apologist how it is that some very prominent Islamists seem to believe that Allah instructs them to, for instance, cut people's heads off and fly planes into buildings?

The point is, are they wrong? Maybe Allah DOES want people to behead other people and fly planes into buildings. If true, this would mean that the vast majority of peace-loving Muslims have got it wrong, and are going to hell when they die because they are peace-loving.

The question is, since peace-loving Muslims disagree with violence-espousing Muslims, how does one determine which view of Allah is correct? And the answer is: there is no way to do so, because Allah is a fantasy and anyone can project their own internal desires onto this mythical character in any way that he or she desires. The God of Jesus is a fantasy too, of course.

[Cioran]

Oops! Here we go again, for YesNo, from Space.com. You never responded to my original link on this -- why not? (http://www.space.com/18811-multiple-universes-5-theories.html)

[YALASH]

Thanks, you too.

Do you have any evidence for the existence of this Allah fellow?

A lot of people do a lot of odious things in his name. Why's that? Is Allah odious?



Existence of God
Peace be on everyone.

Part 1
1) Since ancient, when no modern means of communication existed and people did not know about other places and others’ thoughts, there have been always existed an idea of supeme being at each place simultaneously. Lots of people could not have the idea of God unless they were told by God. (e.g. Aborigine ancient tribes of Austarlia)

2) It is not correct to think that initial human worshiped forces of nature out of fear. Fear of things does not make anyone to fall prostrate to worship, such fear makes one to run away.

3) The people who never spoke little lies in wordly matters, when they bear witness about God, their testimony cannot be denied. Trustworthy truthful people of high morals and character exists in all nations. Blesseds trustworthy of India (Ramchander and Krishan), trustworthy of Iran (Zoroaster), trustworthy of Egypt (Moses), trustworthy of Nazareth (Jesus), trustworthy of Panjab (Guru Nanak), chief of all trustworthies (Muhammad) and his ardent devotee (Promised Messiah Mahdi and Successors / Khulafa in this era) bore / bear witness about God.

4) Human nature dislike certain acts because of awe of Some Power. Compass-loke faculty of distinguishing between good and evil is planted by Someone.

5) Systematic, well designed, harmozied universe is not developed by itself.

6) Each creatue is evolved with appropriate powers and limbs. Human need to think and write so has appropriate brain fingers. Cat do not need to write, its paws are good for hunt.

7) Evolution was not blind. It was directed by a Director.

8) Unity of God is established by God Himself through Prophets. After passage of time, corruption in thoughts and deeds come in. Again, Prophets of God are sent for reform. Both kind of Prophets speak against norms of current time, they forecast their vistory, all odds are against them. Eventually they get success. It is the decree of God.

9) Accepatnce of prayers is a direct proof that God exists. True dreams are specimen embedded in every human. Prophets’ revelations are very refined true dreams.

10) When boat is about to sink [or something of that magnitude in life], all curtains and veils are removed and human hearts call God.

=== Further relevant material and discussion at length in online book “Revelation, Rationality Knowledge and Truth” particularly Part 111, by fourth Holy Khalifah of promised Messiah in alislmDOTorg


Part 2
Symptoms of Odious things on the name of God means that it is time for revival in religion. In the case of Islam, Holy Quran and Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h.) fortold many signs of such era (on going time of spiritual weakness) and remedy as coming of reformer with contnunation of his Khilafat. Amidst the general on going decline of Islamic world, subject is of extreme imporatnce; the course passes through persecution and patience. The above mentioned site belongs to promised revival.

Regards.

[cacian]

This brings me to the next question:
Some people talk about feeling the presence of god. Is this something to be taken lightly?

[caddy_caddy]

Actually, I don't want to be any of those things, and even if I did, it's not possible to be any of those things. So a single counterexample destroys your claim.

But, even if it were true that everyone wanted to be omniscient, omnipotent and gain immortality, it doesn't change the fact that none of these things are possible, and it doesn't change the fact that you don't possess a particle of evidence that any such entity (God) exists, now do you?
QUOTE=Cioran;1197019]Actually, I don't want to be any of those things, and even if I did, it's not possible to be any of those things. So a single counterexample destroys your claim.


You speak as though we can understand what is the motive behind everything we do in our life. Isn't you who invented that subconscious and that most of man's actions are motivated by subconscious forces ?
I said man doesn't know that consciously.
But ask your self , why man does not accept his limitations as a man?
Why is he thirsthing for absolute knowledge and power ?
Man has limitations, neverthless if we live for another millions year we will continue on searching and searching , exploring , striving to understand everything and to have a power over eveything.
Why man does so and as you said he cannot be omniscent , omnipotent ?
Why does he want to transcend his limitations as a man and does not accept them ?
Don't you think he wants to be sth other than a man, weak , mortal , doomed to oblivion : a god maybe?
Everything man has invented is a transcendental act over his limitations.
Art , writing , are all form of immortality ; man doesn't like ephemeral things and doesn't want to be ephemeral.
once I wrote a poem defining a poem and all forms or art in general "
She's a morning dew
Born to die in her lust for eternity
She's me and you
Human's revenge against Divinity











But, even if it were true that everyone wanted to be omniscient, omnipotent and gain immortality, it doesn't change the fact that none of these things are possible, and it doesn't change the fact that you don't possess a particle of evidence that any such entity (God) exists, now do you?

First , I would like to tell you if you hate God and you're very repulsive of the very idea don't waste your time. Your heart will block everything .

Now if you open ur heart , read :
The idea of the existence of God is philosophically wrong. Because when you say sth exists that entails many questions : what is the reason of its existence; where does he exist ; when does he exist ?
In Islamic philosophy it's wrong to say" God exists " ; we say God is a neccessary Being :the question of existence is related to human conceptions and things. when u say God exists that implies that God is a thing or a man or a matter , or energy ; it entails that there is a creator for that thing that exists. If we say God exists then there should be a source for its existence. What's the source of God ? Another God ? And what's the source of that source ? another God too ? that would be an endless chain of gods.

Then let's ask ourselves from where the idea of a god come to us ?
Since the dawn of history the idea existed. It just took different forms and shapes .
Do aliens come to us and tell us about it ?
Or as u say it's man 's invention and imagination ?
But we could not imagine sth unless it's before that an idea ; being an idea is a prequisite to imagine anything.
In Islam we say the knowledge of god is innate. When we invented gods we just externalized what we already know innately. The idea exists within us. The fact that it existed in all nations proove that is a premordial image , an archetype in our unconscious in Jungian terms. The God- Father archetype always existed and again from where did it come if it's not sth within us ?

[Cioran]

You speak as though we can understand what is the motive behind everything we do in our life.

Er, no. I think exactly the opposite.



But ask your self , why man does not accept his limitations as a man?

But I do.


Why is he thirsthing for absolute knowledge and power ?

Who's doing that? Not me. It's not possible to obtain those goals, and I don't bother with that which is impossible.

[Cioran]

First , I would like to tell you if you hate God and you're very repulsive of the very idea don't waste your time. Your heart will block everything .


I don't hate God.

It's impossible to hate something that doesn't exist.

[miyako73]

If there is justice in the afterlife, I don't know who will compensate me for the hard life I've lived. How will he or she recompense? Another hard life, a recycled suffering? No Buddha please. He's a sadomasochist. He might ask me if I had an orgasm (enlightenment) every time I cried from too much pain.

[YALASH]

This brings me to the next question:
Some people talk about feeling the presence of god. Is this something to be taken lightly?

Peace be on you. Getting grant of nearness of God is associated with humble responsibilities and results in effects. Here are basic aspects in the light of Holy Quran's teachings.

Nearness of God

Part 1
God is always the nearest
= “And assuredly, We have created human and We know what his (physical) self whispers (to him), and We are nearer to him than (even his) jugular vein.” (Holy Quran, chapter 50: verse 70)


Meeting with God is related to belief in Unity of God and good deeds
= “Say, I am only a man like yourselves; (but) I have received the revelation that your God is only God. So let him who hopes to meet his Lord do good deeds, and let him join no one in the worship of his Lord.” (ch 18: v 111)


Steadfastness by faithful and grant of blessings in both worlds
= “(As for) those who say, Our Lord is Allah, and then remain steadfast, the angels descend on them, (saying): Fear ye not, not grieve; and rejoice in the Garden that you were promised.” ----“ We are your friends in this life and in the Hereafter. Therein you will have all that your souls will desire, and therein you will have all that you will ask for.” ---- “An entertainment from the Most Forgiving, the Merciful.” (ch 41:v31 to 33)

= “And (as far) those who strive in Our path – We will surely guide them in Our ways. And verily Allah is with those who do good deeds.” (ch 29 : v 70)


Part 2
Understanding of Practical effects of nearness of God
The highest spiritual satisfaction for a faithful, sincere and true seeker is to have peace with God which starts from this life.

There are three spiritual stages for a sruggling seeker.
i)- At initial cude stage, the self of a person is very week and cannot stand against low desires and temptations.
ii)- At next stage, the self of the person improves in morals and regrets at misconducts, tries to stand with repentance but sometimes falls.
iii)- Nearness of God comes with Symptoms: Finally, the struggling self gets complete spiritual strength and peace with God is acquired with has symptoms.
At this stage the seeker does good deeds and avoid bad deeds.
The self is fully imersed in truth and false goes away.
A revolution comes in that person.
The heart of such person comes in the hands of God, the person walks under the light of God.

Some of the properties of such faithful are:
= “……These are they in whose hearts Allah has inscribed (true) faith and whom He has stenghthened with inspiration from Himself…..” (Holy Quran ch 58 : v 23)
= “……..Allah has endeared the faith to you and has made it (look) beautiful to your hearts, and He has made disbelief, wickedness and disobedience hateful to you. Such undeed are those who follow the right course.” (49:8)
= “….Truth has come and falsehood has vanished away. Falsehood does indeed vanish away (fast).” (17:82)


How to get such nearness of God
There is a way to get a particular thing. For example, if one wants to get sun-light, one must open the window which is toward the sun.
One cannot get nearness of God with man made logic and philosophy.
To find God, first of all, one has to dedicate one’s life and its faculties for the sake of God. Then one must continue to pray to get His nearness so that one should find God by God.

In this regard, the timely and natural prayer that is taught in first chapter /surah of Holy Quran:
= “In the name of Allah, al-Rahman al-Rahim.” (chapter 1: verse 1) --- [al-Rahim means the Gracious and the One Who grants even prior to human deeds AND al-Rahim means the Repeatedly Merciful and the One Who grants fruits of human efforts] .
= “All praises belongs to Allah, Lord of all worlds.” (v2)
= “al-Rahman al-Rahim.” (v3) --- [al-Rahim means the Gracious and the One Who grants even prior to human deeds AND al-Rahim means the Repeatedly Merciful and the One Who grants fruits of human deeds] .
= “Master of Day of Judgment.” (v4) --- [No one else is master of that Day]
= “The alone do we worship and Thee alone do we implore for help.” (v5) --- [the word ‘we’ signifies that all faculties of human are like a group and the whole of that group prostrates to God. This state is desribed as ‘Islam’]
= “Guide us in the right path.” (v6)
= “ The path of those on whom Thou hast bestowed (Thy) blessings, those who have not incurred (Thy) displeasure, and those, who have not gone astray.” (v7) ---[steadfastness at blessed path is requested]
Amin


These verses are teaching that bounties and blessings of God are granted to those who dedicate and sacrifice all of their selves and get comsumed in the pleasure of God and continue to pray so that they get all possible spiritual bounties, nearness of God and His revelations. With this prayer, they worship through all of their faculties; they stay away for sins and displeasures of God and throw themselves at the threshold of God. Because they look for God with high resolve, they find Him and are granted His pure Understanding. Steadfastness is vital in this path, as indicated in above prayer; it means that such seeker should maintain such faithfuness, which cannot be harmed by any trial.

Reference: Understanding from the book “The Philosophy of the Teachings of Islam” by promised Messiah Mahdi. [Online at alislamDOTorg], Section of the book: “ FIRST QUESTION, The Physical, Moral and Spiritual States of Man.”


Part 3
To get nearness of God (according to teachings of Holy Quran)
One has to repent and clear all dues, get determined, be alert and be able to think.

Nearness of God results in:
1- Purity in body and soul.
2- Loving effect in heart.
3- Great improvement in morals and spirituality.
4- Understanding of Holy Attributes of God and ability to have unlimited benefits from them.
5- Progress in knowledge.
6- Imbibing divine attributes at human level.
7- Acceptance of prayers.
8- Meeting (spiritually) with God. [God is unlimited, human is limited. Thus it is not ordinary physical meeting. God descends through His major four attributes as mentioned above in verses of Chapter 1 of Holy Quran. To meet God, human leaves his low-self / matterness and become purer and purer in ascention. For example, Prophets of God (and their among their Companions) are the purest people who follow divine commandments, purify them at most, they understand divine attributes, they give benefit to creation of God, they are consumed in worship and they get guidance from God. [Ref: Recent Friday sermons of 5 th Holy Khalifah has mentioned many recoded narrates of that order in alislamDOTorg] That is to say, they meet God (metaphorically).

Reference: Writings of second Holy Khalifah of promised Messiah Mahdi.

Getting nearness of God is associated with humble responsibilities and results in enlightened and practical effects.

Regards

[cafolini]

Wouldn't that much purity result in too much puree? Can it be done safely?

[caddy_caddy]

My dear Yalash , plz take into consideration that you're in a forums to exchange personal opinions and discuss it. The way you do things give the impression that you're preaching and people usually hate preaching . On the contrary , it creates a bad reaction because they think you're trying to impose things on them .No one here wants to listen to seremons. If we want , you tube if full of seremons on every religion.
On the other hand , I don't think it's a good idea to put the holy words of Allah among people who mock it. Don't u see, some are simply mocking. I notice that u have your own blog. the one who wants to read can go and read ur articles if he's interested. Nevertheless, don't impose things on them.
we here share personal opinions and discuss them simply. so plz take this into consideration although i appreciate ur great effort and good intentions.
Regards

[YALASH]

My dear Yalash , plz take into consideration that you're in a forums to exchange personal opinions and discuss it.

The way you do things give the impression that you're preaching and people usually hate preaching .

On the contrary , it creates a bad reaction because they think you're trying to impose things on them .No one here wants to listen to seremons. If we want , you tube if full of seremons on every religion.

On the other hand , I don't think it's a good idea to put the holy words of Allah among people who mock it. Don't u see, some are simply mocking.


I notice that u have your own blog. the one who wants to read can go and read ur articles if he's interested. Nevertheless, don't impose things on them.

we here share personal opinions and discuss them simply. so plz take this into consideration although i appreciate ur great effort and good intentions.
Regards



Peace be on you. Thanks for your words.
1- I sincerely think since the name of this section of forum is "Religious Texts" thus it can not be objectionable if one furnishes one's answer with Holy Book references of one's choice.


2- After praying, thinking, searching and reading from literature of my choice, I humbly try to write relevant answers with original reference for proper credit, that should not be viewed as preaching. If reader does not agree with me, he or she has full right for that. (Nothing I copy / paste.)


3- Proper credit of books, sites, sections and other media is given (in a manner that does not become a link yet original reference is highlighted) so that if anyone would like to read the point of view in depth, they are welcome. Online things are interantional references.


4- People have their full right to mock or disagree and this humble has right to write answer of choice.


5- When we write here, the format shows at bottom left "make it a blog". Here, one is free to decide if one would like to make it a blog too.


6- I appreciate your words.

Peace be on everyone.

[cacian]

Wouldn't that much purity result in too much puree? Can it be done safely?

Yes it could be if the right gadget is used and it all depends on the consistency of one's puree. In other words it is down to taste.
I guess god is taste in the mouth you either like or not.

[caddy_caddy]

Peace be on you. Thanks for your words.
1- I sincerely think since the name of this section of forum is "Religious Texts" thus it can not be objectionable if one furnishes one's answer with Holy Book references of one's choice.


2- After praying, thinking, searching and reading from literature of my choice, I humbly try to write relevant answers with original reference for proper credit, that should not be viewed as preaching. If reader does not agree with me, he or she has full right for that. (Nothing I copy / paste.)


3- Proper credit of books, sites, sections and other media is given (in a manner that does not become a link yet original reference is highlighted) so that if anyone would like to read the point of view in depth, they are welcome. Online things are interantional references.


4- People have their full right to mock or disagree and this humble has right to write answer of choice.


5- When we write here, the format shows at bottom left "make it a blog". Here, one is free to decide if one would like to make it a blog too.


6- I appreciate your words.

Peace be on everyone.

Yeh , Muslims understand the way u're doing things but here you're addressing non -muslims. You should take your audience into consideration . The first question we should ask ourselves to create a successful dialogue : to whom I am speaking ?
I mean no offence but when you build your argument on sth no one believes in , your whole argument will be irrelevant to them. You're referring to Quran among people who don't believe in the Quran; you cannot expect them to discuss details with you whereas they don't agree on the principle.

Disagreeing in not like mocking !!

They mock because they think the whole thing is non-sense. Mocking me personally is not like mocking the words of God.
That's what I want to say. And that's why I am against using the Quran here not to give anyone a chance to mock it.
Regards

[caddy_caddy]

Er, no. I think exactly the opposite.




But I do.



Who's doing that? Not me. It's not possible to obtain those goals, and I don't bother with that which is impossible.

So we agree on one thing at least


Neither me too :)but we don't acquire knowledge in life through our personal experience only .

We gain it from our experience with others and the outside world too.
If you don't do , others do.

[caddy_caddy]

I don't hate God.

It's impossible to hate something that doesn't exist.
May I ask you sth ?
Why do u think Shakespeare said : to be or not to be this is the question
and he didn't say : to exist or not to exist this is the question ?
What is the difference between " to be " and "to exist" ?

[YesNo]

Ha, ha, ha! Pseudo-scientific? You never did read any of the science and philosophy of science papers that I linked, which are positively imbued with the Many Worlds, did you? Moreover, in that thread, you made foolish and false arguments misrepresenting what the Many Worlds actually said. And you never corrected your false claims despite the many corrections given by me, and others, as well as the many links to the Many Worlds that I gave you, which, had you read them, would have disabused you of your wrong interpretations of this particular meta-theory.

The problem is I did read them. That's how I know they are pseudo-scientific.


As to the Khmer Rouge, according to people like you, all atheists are odious. OK. So some tiny minority of atheists do odious things. But we should expect that religious folk like you, given your monumental morality, would NEVER do terrible things. But, history is replete with odious actions by thiests; not only done despite their idiot God belief, but specifically in the name of it. Can you deny this?

If you want to blame religious people for the odious things some tiny minority of them do, you need to look at what atheists do as well.


Well, judging by your confused and disingenuous responses in the MW thread, sure you can!

I learned a lot from that discussion. I am glad we had that. I stand by my responses there.

Just to be clear, it is not that I don't think there are not other universes than ours. There probably are. If the Big Bang happened once, it probably happened many times. What I don't think is reasonable about the MWI position is the reactionary materialistic determinism that basically contradicts the quantum mechanics it is supposedly trying to "interpret".


Finally, I don't indict all Muslims for the actions of a terrible few. Quite the contrary. I think the vast majority of Muslims are fine people. I simply asked the Allah apologist how it is that some very prominent Islamists seem to believe that Allah instructs them to, for instance, cut people's heads off and fly planes into buildings?

The point is, are they wrong? Maybe Allah DOES want people to behead other people and fly planes into buildings. If true, this would mean that the vast majority of peace-loving Muslims have got it wrong, and are going to hell when they die because they are peace-loving.

The question is, since peace-loving Muslims disagree with violence-espousing Muslims, how does one determine which view of Allah is correct? And the answer is: there is no way to do so, because Allah is a fantasy and anyone can project their own internal desires onto this mythical character in any way that he or she desires. The God of Jesus is a fantasy too, of course.

People have a right to believe in what they want. Regarding atrocities, I could ask the same thing of atheists. Once again, reference the Khmer Rouge or the Chinese Cultural Revolution.

I don't know to what extent the Judeo-Christo-Islamic religions are fantasies or not. I think they actually are reasonable approaches to life. The Many Worlds Interpretation, on the other hand, based on our discussions elsewhere, is a fantasy and, except to better understand quantum mechanics, it is not worth wasting time on.

[cacian]

May I ask you sth ?
Why do u think Shakespeare said : to be or not to be this is the question
and he didn't say : to exist or not to exist this is the question ?
What is the difference between " to be " and "to exist" ?

'To be' is who you are 'to exist' is to be alive or so I believe.

[cafolini]

If people were born directly into the afterlife, then they would be forced to be honest by the lack of the usual and actual BS they are capable of sustaining.

[cacian]

If people were born directly into the afterlife, then they would be forced to be honest by the lack of the usual and actual BS they are capable of sustaining.

And how do you suppose to know the afterlife is about honesty and not something else?

[cafolini]

Although the case is closed, in the interpretations, Cacian often reminds me of the people that wanted Burzinski in jail for having discovered a new cure for cancer that set aside radiation, chemotherapy and surgery.

[cacian]

Although the case is closed, in the interpretations, Cacian often reminds me of the people that wanted Burzinski in jail for having discovered a new cure for cancer that set aside radiation, chemotherapy and surgery.

LOL ouch that would not be a fair say sir. I am a very lenient citizen LOL:lol:

[caddy_caddy]

'To be' is who you are 'to exist' is to be alive or so I believe.
I have exams this week. However. I keep thinking of it.
I'll share with you my intellectual lab when I have time.
To be continued ...

[Ser Nevarc]

I'm not a Muslim, but belief in Allah sounds more reasonable to me than belief in that pseudo-scientific Many Worlds fantasy that we discussed in a separate thread.

Also, when it comes to doing things that are odious, it takes atheism to pull that off properly. Just search for the Cambodian Khmer Rouge as one example. Hmm. To use your logic, does that make atheism odious?

Hey bud, explain how these atrocities were the result of a lack of belief in any deities.

[YesNo]

They lacked deities that should have helped restrain the self-righteous punishment of their neighbors. Their official atheism provided a ground for the self-righteousness which led to the atrocities.

Even with belief in deities, one does not always get unconditional love toward one's neighbors, but it is at least a cultural ideal.

I am aware that the response to this is that people with a dominant religion have committed atrocities. I don't think any of them ever reached the level of the Khmer Rouge or the Cultural Revolution, however, such atrocities seem to me to be a rejection of their dominant religion rather than a result of it. Also the neighborly kindness that is shown between people suffering under atheistic atrocities seem to me to be the result of a natural religious tendency.

[Ser Nevarc]

This is the most absurd thing I've ever read on the boards, YesNo. I'm going to document this.



Their official atheism provided a ground for the self-righteousness which led to the atrocities.

It's astonishing that you would a) attribute the acts of a Cambodian regime to their lack of religious afillitation, and even more ludicrously, b) suggest that atheism promotes self-righteousness.

Let's start with your first point. It is clear that like other ruthless tyrants before, the fascist Khmer faction acted upon a desire for power and (worse) a policy of social engineering. The same s*** we've seen from other bloody tyrants such as the more historically-infamous Adolf Hitler. So before you try to flash out a piece of history to justify your own problem with irreligion, consider the facts. You cannot draw a link between a lack of religion and the horendous acts of the Khmer. But we CAN draw a clear link between the dominance of religion and a few other nasty things, such as the justification for the enslavement of African peoples, wars beyond count, the perpetuation of sexism, the motivtion for holy wars such as the Crusades and the events of Sept. 11, 2001, the subjugation of minorities such as homosexuals and religious/cultural outsiders, burning of witches for political and social convenience, and the overall stifling of rational thought for a healthy chunk of history, especially in Europe.

And now to address your confounding understanding of atheism. Atheism is defined as "the rejection of belief in the existence of deities" by Wikipedia. It entails nothing more than a rejection or abstainment from belief in supernatural beings. And for you to consider that as a precursor or enabler of self-righteousness is, for the lack of a better word, insanity. Explain how an atheist is more self righteous that an Abrahamic follower, who is 100% CERTAIN that they are the most cherished creation of an all-knowing, all-powerful God who created everything ever, and believe that they understand life and death, and that they alone are the inheritors of the earth and all its bounty. Please explain to me how an atheist is more self-righteous than a Christian/Jew/Muslim who by their very religious adherence believe themselves to be the pinnacle of God's creation on the planet. If you want to see self-righteousness, look in a mirror, because right now, I see someone typing out of self-righteousness in promotion of their own convictions by attacking a growing group of dissenting atheists.

In the end, YesNo's arguments are just another classic example of a religiously-inclined petulant assuming a monopoly on morality. Believe it or not, YesNo, there are plenty of responsible, loving, and intelligent people who will tell you that a human being is capable of living a moral life without adherence to religion. Like me. Take your unfounded, sweeping generalizations elsewhere and leave these boards for those who wish to discuss as informed, respectful adults.

[Cioran]

They lacked deities that should have helped restrain the self-righteous punishment of their neighbors. Their official atheism provided a ground for the self-righteousness which led to the atrocities.

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

The entire history of bloody-minded religious belief is committing atrocities in the name of God. Have you ever actually read the Bible? Where Skyboy commands his followers to kill, rape, and enslave disbelievers, or believers in some other deity? By contrast, NOBODY commits atrocities in the name of atheism, or in the name of nihilism for that matter. The Khmer Rouge did not commit atrocities in the name of atheism. They committed atrocities in the hame of their ideology, which means they bore more in common with religious fanatics than with actual humanist/atheists, of whose existence it seems you are blissfully unaware. Are you aware of what's being done in northern Mali right now, in the name of God? Said the man in northern Mali who recently amputated his own brother's hand as punishment for alleged theft: "It's God's law."

That Goddy! Tough love!

Also, there is no "official" atheism, and atheism discourages self-righteousness, whereas religious belief breeds it. You are very confused.

[Cioran]

Life in Northern Mali (http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/24/world/africa/mali-victims-speak-out/index.html?hpt=hp_c1)

There on full display is the unbridled sickness of God belief.

[Paulclem]

The entire history of bloody-minded religious belief is committing atrocities in the name of God.

The struggles in Mali are about power - wars usually are. Religion is used as a rallying point, and it becomes labelled as the point. It is a very superficial view though.

[YesNo]

Have you ever actually read the Bible?

I have not read much of the "Bible", maybe 10%. Usually what I've read are segments people bring to my attention. I assume you mean the Jewish Tanakh and the Christian New Testament. Or do you include the Quran, Vedas or the Dhamapada in that?


Where Skyboy commands his followers to kill, rape, and enslave disbelievers, or believers in some other deity? By contrast, NOBODY commits atrocities in the name of atheism, or in the name of nihilism for that matter. The Khmer Rouge did not commit atrocities in the name of atheism. They committed atrocities in the hame of their ideology, which means they bore more in common with religious fanatics than with actual humanist/atheists, of whose existence it seems you are blissfully unaware. Are you aware of what's being done in northern Mali right now, in the name of God? Said the man in northern Mali who recently amputated his own brother's hand as punishment for alleged theft: "It's God's law."

You are welcome to believe what you like, however, I think the worst thing that happened to atheism was the 20th century. Not only did materialistic determinism get undermined, and I mean really undermined to the point that nonsense like the Many Worlds Interpretation is all that's left to salvage it, but social experiments run by atheists led to the worst atrocities in human history.

[YesNo]

You cannot draw a link between a lack of religion and the horendous acts of the Khmer.

I did draw the link, so apparently I can actually do that.

Atheists look like hypocrites when they blame religious groups for atrocities but try to excuse themselves when their own ideology generates bad behavior. That's my main point.

[Cioran]

The entire history of bloody-minded religious belief is committing atrocities in the name of God.

The struggles in Mali are about power - wars usually are. Religion is used as a rallying point, and it becomes labelled as the point. It is a very superficial view though.

Oh, I agree with this. Religious belief is often used as a pretext for rallying others to a power struggle. This fact by itself does not indict religious belief.

But please note the content of the post to which I was responding. This person claimed that belief in a deity would restrain some group from self-righteously attacking their neighbors. I have no doubt that the psychos in Mali are very sincere in their God belief. But even if they are really just interested in power, it's quite obvious that their sincere God belief hasn't in the least restrained them from imposing a reign of terror, now has it?

[osho]

This is an unknown zone and whether what is lost gets compensated for in the life to come is a sheer small comfort and nothing else.