Allah talks about caste?

[Vrindavana Das]

I had decided that I will not respond to your mindless babble. However, it is for your own sake that I am reverting.

Please understand carefully what I say.

Excuse me brother,please do not abuse Allah by comparing Him with krishna.

God is one. You too agree to this.

Hindus call Him Krishna. Muslims call Him Allah. Therefore Allah and Krishna are same.

Allah says in the Glorious Quran:

Surah 112. Al-Ikhlas
1. Say: He is Allah, the One!
2. Allah, the eternally Besought of all!
3. He begetteth not nor was begotten.
4. And there is none comparable unto Him.

Krishna ,by no means,stands to this test of theology,not even a whit,leave alone competing with Allah Almighty in divinity.Verily,there is no God but God Himself.

That Krishna, by no means, stands to this test of theology, is a foolish assumption.

Krishna declares in the Bhagavad Gita:

BG 10.3: He who knows Me as the unborn, as the beginningless, as the Supreme Lord of all the worlds — he only, undeluded among men, is freed from all sins.

BG 10.8: I am the source of all spiritual and material worlds. Everything emanates from Me. The wise who perfectly know this engage in My devotional service and worship Me with all their hearts.

BG 10.20: I am the Supersoul, O Arjuna, seated in the hearts of all living entities. I am the beginning, the middle and the end of all beings.

BG 10.42: But what need is there, Arjuna, for all this detailed knowledge? With a single fragment of Myself I pervade and support this entire universe.

There is a scripture Brahma Samhita. There Lord Brahma, engineer of the universe declares:

Krishna who is known as Govinda is the Supreme Personality of Godhead.
He has an eternal blissful spiritual body. He is the origin of all.
He has no other origin and He is the prime cause of all causes.

You can find it here: Brahma Samhita - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There are many more scriptures and many more great personalities who confirm that Krishna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

(I intend not to criticize your religion,but brother,was'nt krishna the same person who hindus themselves call as a 'butter-purlioner',wasn't he the same person who would watch women bathing secretly, , .....,how can he be regarded as Allah! didn't krishna have wives and didn't he have a human form?-

If your 5 year old son steals butter from your home or from your neighbour's, will you all feel happy or will you call him a thief? It is to give pleasure to His parents and neighbouring Gopis, that Krishna would steal butter from their homes.

Later, Krishna had 16,108 wives. He expanded into 16,108 Krishnas and stayed independently with all 16,108 wives in different palaces. No human can do this.

The Gita mentions an anecdote from Krishna's Adolescent life that is is plainly Erotic.It is known that while a group of young women called gopis are bathing naked in river yamuna,Krishna flees with their clothes thereby leaving them with no option but to come out completely naked.when the gopis come out of the water,concealing their private parts with their hands,krishna told them that they had offended the river god and that they must offer salutations to him by raising their hands and that then only could they take back their clothes.So Krishna decieved him and watched them shamlessly in their virgin state.

How can anyone dare to attribute such qualities to Almighty God.That is ridiculous!)Can such things as theft and shamelessness be atributed to Allah?ASTAGFIRULLAH!(I seek forgiveness from Allah on mine as well as your behalf,brother!May Allah help you to understand him if you wish to,Amen!)
Indeed what our ancestors have invented against God is shameless.Allah does not ordain shamelessness but righteousness!

Do you know that Krishna was a 7 year old boy when He stole the clothes of the Gopis? The Gopis, they were only 5-6 years old? If you had a 7 year old son, would you call him him to be erotic, shameless etc. on taking the clothes of 5-6 year old girls?

Also, Krishna stole the garments of the gopis, while they were taking bath. This is very confidential. Actually the gopis wanted Krsna. They prayed to Katyayani-devi, goddess Katyayani, because He was attractive to all the girls of His age, so they wanted Krsna as husband. So, superficially, Krsna was of the same age, and how He could be husband for all the gopis? But He accepted. Because the gopis wanted to become wives of Krsna, therefore Krsna accepted their proposal. In order to show them the mercy, He stole the garments, because a husband can take away the covering of wife's bodily garment. Nobody (else) can touch it. So that is the purpose, but people do not know.

Therefore Krsna-lila has to be heard from a realized soul, or this portion should be avoided. Otherwise we shall misunderstand that Krsna took away the garments, and He was very much fallen, woman-hunter, like that. Not that. He is Supreme Lord. He fulfills the desire of every devotee. So Krsna had no business to see the gopis naked, but because they wanted to become wife, so He fulfilled their desire. A token, "Yes, I am your husband, I have taken your garment. Now you take your garment and go home.''

That is why I say you do not know and still you have formed a baseless bias. You are only making your own way for going to hell by such mindless nonsense and blasphemy of Supreme Lord - Krishna!

So please do not abuse Allah by comparing him to Krishna.AS Allah says,"There is nothing like unto him"

Krishna says the same thing. There is no one like Him:

BG 7.7: O conqueror of wealth, there is no truth superior to Me. Everything rests upon Me, as pearls are strung on a thread.

BG 7.8: O son of Kuntī, I am the taste of water, the light of the sun and the moon, the syllable oḿ in the Vedic mantras; I am the sound in ether and ability in man.

BG 7.9: I am the original fragrance of the earth, and I am the heat in fire. I am the life of all that lives, and I am the penances of all ascetics.

BG 7.10: O son of Pṛthā, know that I am the original seed of all existences, the intelligence of the intelligent, and the prowess of all powerful men.

BG 7.11: I am the strength of the strong, devoid of passion and desire. I am sex life which is not contrary to religious principles, O lord of the Bhāratas [Arjuna].

You know it is very easy to claim divinity.Thousands of men have in the past have done so and only Allah knows how many would do the same.The truth is that we are not powerful enough even to imagine Allah(ie Almighty God).We muslims do not claim Allah to have a specific form.We have not seen Allah but as Allah has promised in the Quran that He would definitely reveal His Countenance to us In case we are admitted to paradise after the day of judgement.On that day ,Allah says that people would crave to see His Blessed Face,Alhamdullilah.

Krishna lifted Govardhana hill, for 7 consecutive days and nights, on His left hand's small finger when He was seven and half years old boy. No human can do this. Thus, there is no claim of divinity. Krishna IS divine. Krishna IS Supreme Personality of Godhead.

You say Allah does not have a form. Then you say people would crave to see His blessed face! I do not understand.

Is Krishna one and only________YES
Is He Absolute and Eternal_____YES
Is He incomparable___________YES
Is Krishna ALLAH?____________YES

What I believe is that Allah has been sending messengers right from the outset to guide us.God's messengers came with a clear sign-some people chose to follow them whereas some refused pointblank.There are also some people who fabricated the message of God and changed its meaning for petty gains.Now the possibility is that Some of the text in the vedas could be the word of God.that's why some verses do liken to those in the Quran and are logical.(Infact if you study the authentic teachings of the Vedas,prophet Jesus and Moses and Muhammad ,peace be upon them all,their basics are strikingly similar----ie.the fundamental truth is the same--God is One,Set no parteners unto Him!We believe that The Bible(old and new tetaments) too is a word of God but it has been fabricated over time. Allah did not intend to preserve those books for they were meant for those people to whom it was revealed and for that time.But the Final Testament-The Quran,was sent for the whole of mankind.Therefore,in the Quran, Allah has promised that he himself would preserve the Quran till the Judgement day and there you see-If u compare the Quran today with the Quran revealed 1400 yrs ago that is preserved at a museum,you would'nt find even the least difference of even a single word!Moreover,we believe that Allah can never make even a single mistake,that's why you find not even a single contradiction or misinformation in the Quran.Had this Quran been written or even fabricated by a humanbeing,would'nt we find countless errors in it?

Bhagavad Gita was spoken 5000 years ago. All the verses are still as-it-is! No one has been able to change even a single verse to date. Many have given their own interpretations, but no one has been able to change even a single word of the verses. Vedas are timeless.

 

[Rational_Mind]

From my understanding many of the Vedic Scriptures were oral and were later recorded physically. So why was there a restriction placed on only Brahman reading it after it was recorded.

Also when I am told not to use logic in reading scripture then I hold no value on the opinion of the commentator who wrote based on their feelings rather then logical understanding.

Could you also please show me the verse that you refer to which uses the word "represent" to explain how the head is intelligent class, the foot the labour class, etc. Until you give me a reference I would have to assume that it is simply your opinion.

I will now try and begin reading the entire Bhagavad Gita, but it will probably take me a while given that I have to prioritize other scriptures that I feel are more bound by logic.

 

[Rational_Mind]

Do you know that Krishna was a 7 year old boy when He stole the clothes of the Gopis? The Gopis, they were only 5-6 years old? If you had a 7 year old son, would you call him him to be erotic, shameless etc. on taking the clothes of 5-6 year old girls?

Also, Krishna stole the garments of the gopis, while they were taking bath. This is very confidential. Actually the gopis wanted Krsna. They prayed to Katyayani-devi, goddess Katyayani, because He was attractive to all the girls of His age, so they wanted Krsna as husband. So, superficially, Krsna was of the same age, and how He could be husband for all the gopis? But He accepted. Because the gopis wanted to become wives of Krsna, therefore Krsna accepted their proposal. In order to show them the mercy, He stole the garments, because a husband can take away the covering of wife's bodily garment. Nobody (else) can touch it. So that is the purpose, but people do not know.

Therefore Krsna-lila has to be heard from a realized soul, or this portion should be avoided. Otherwise we shall misunderstand that Krsna took away the garments, and He was very much fallen, woman-hunter, like that. Not that. He is Supreme Lord. He fulfills the desire of every devotee. So Krsna had no business to see the gopis naked, but because they wanted to become wife, so He fulfilled their desire. A token, "Yes, I am your husband, I have taken your garment. Now you take your garment and go home.''

That is why I say you do not know and still you have formed a baseless bias. You are only making your own way for going to hell by such mindless nonsense and blasphemy of Supreme Lord - Krishna!

I am sorry but this is no good justification. Here are some of the problems that arise:

1. Can a Hindu man who wants to accept someones desire to marry steal a his girlfriends garmet while she is bathing? Would this be acceptable today?

2. Does not this apparent God know how bad this would appear when others find out. Why not use a more appropriate method that would show clean intent. This seems completely unnecessary method of accepting a proposal.

3. Was God limited to childish behaviour at one point? Is that why we should not question that Gods behaviour?

4. If an apparent God did such I would expect that is how all Hindu should accept proposals by stealing garmets and expect their future wives to come out like that trying to find them. Are you also proposing that since husbands can remove the garmet of their wives we can extend it further to say that nobody should be a shamed of removing the garmets of their wives in public.

5. So he got married at 7 with 5-6 year old girls?

Can you try to see if someone has answered it better.

 

[atanu]

The fact that some groups rose to bloodshed when it is clearly forbidden in the Holy Quran shows how much interpretation either bothered to do. -------
What is most interesting is that Quran sets its standard for interpretation. I have not heard of this in other scriptures. If people do not bother to even follow this standard then how can it be blamed on the Quran.

Yeah. So it seems that followers of Quran (other than you of course) are flawed.

"2.44":　What! do you enjoin men to be good and neglect your own souls while you read the Book; have you then no sense?

 

[Rational_Mind]

Yeah. So it seems that followers of Quran (other than you of course) are flawed.

"2.44":　What! do you enjoin men to be good and neglect your own souls while you read the Book; have you then no sense?

Your point is not very clear. The best I can make of it is that you feel some followers of the Quran are hypocrites. I am sure there are, but not all of them. In fact there are Hadith that speak of the condition of Muslims in the latter days, which has occurred and is even in this state now. But I still don't get the point.

 

[Vrindavana Das]

From my understanding many of the Vedic Scriptures were oral and were later recorded physically. So why was there a restriction placed on only Brahman reading it after it was recorded.

That is the problem. You do not know the whole thing and yet you have an opinion, rather than trying to understand. Sorry, but it seems that your point only is to find faults and prove that Vedic civilization was wrong.

Even when Vedic Scriptures were Orally transmitted, they were transmitted from Spiritual master to disciple, in proper authorized succession. Both of whom were qualified Brahmanas (at least)! They could be higher, but the least qualification of Brahmanas was maintained.

Also when I am told not to use logic in reading scripture then I hold no value on the opinion of the commentator who wrote based on their feelings rather then logical understanding.

Who told you you are not to use logic? You are not to misinterpret. Logic is used to understand anything as-it-is. Mindless logic/creativity is used to concoct meanings and arrived at unauthorized interpretations according to level of the person's understanding.

Could you also please show me the verse that you refer to which uses the word "represent" to explain how the head is intelligent class, the foot the labour class, etc. Until you give me a reference I would have to assume that it is simply your opinion.

I had asked you to provide the original verse. If you cannot, you are free to think whatever you like!

I will now try and begin reading the entire Bhagavad Gita, but it will probably take me a while given that I have to prioritize other scriptures that I feel are more bound by logic.

That is your take!

 

[Vrindavana Das]

I am sorry but this is no good justification. Here are some of the problems that arise:

1. Can a Hindu man who wants to accept someones desire to marry steal a his girlfriends garmet while she is bathing? Would this be acceptable today?

2. Does not this apparent God know how bad this would appear when others find out. Why not use a more appropriate method that would show clean intent. This seems completely unnecessary method of accepting a proposal.

3. Was God limited to childish behaviour at one point? Is that why we should not question that Gods behaviour?

4. If an apparent God did such I would expect that is how all Hindu should accept proposals by stealing garmets and expect their future wives to come out like that trying to find them. Are you also proposing that since husbands can remove the garmet of their wives we can extend it further to say that nobody should be a shamed of removing the garmets of their wives in public.

5. So he got married at 7 with 5-6 year old girls?

Can you try to see if someone has answered it better.

Look! Logical interpretation cannot stand in the way of that Absolute Truth. With material conception you cannot enter into the philosophy of Krishna Lila. Krishna is the Supreme Lord – Supreme authority lies only with Him. This material world is just the opposite of that Transcendental World (perverted reflection of the Transcendental World). Do you know that the Supreme Lord Krishna reserves the full right to enjoy the transcendental loving affair with all the souls (chit-shakti)? That procedure is beyond any criticism or beyond our material comprehension, because Krishna is the only enjoyer, all the others are enjoyed.

In this material world, you can find many men and many women. So, you have the right to pass the remark about them. But who can pass any remark about Krishna? What all you see, what all you cannot see, what you can think about, what you cannot think about, all is Krishna. The infinite worlds, all stars and planets…everything is Krishna. Then who are you to find faults with Krishna – The Supreme Personality of Godhead? Today or tomorrow your death is inevitable, so with finite brain you want to grasp the infinite; Supreme Object – that is your fault.

Your sexual conception is putting you in hell – what to do! Why do you think yourself as a competitor of Krishna? There is a Big Gulf between this material world and the transcendental world. That Gulf is not green in colour or not blue in colour, not white, not yellow. But red and only red. I mean, the bloody conception of blood and flesh, which is putting you down forever.

India is the land of spiritual cultivation, those sages, after long deliberation have given us immense treasure of spiritual (transcendental) knowledge, but you are so foolish that you are not ready to accept it (or you have no time to think about it). Do you think that the Supreme Creator is just agitated like you to enjoy some illegal sex with you all? Can you imagine a sex relation with your mother?

Those Gopikas are all para-prakriti (internal potency) – simultaneously different and non-different from Him – Supreme Lord Sri Krishna. If you look into the Vedanta theory, you can find ‘shakti-shaktimattor abheda’. This means that energy and energetic are non-different from each other. Energy cannot stand separately. Without the energetic, there is no meaning to energy. Vastra-haran-lila; (stealing of clothes) this is very very upper level lila which implies that without complete submission, you cannot get Krishna. Conjugal love affair is the highest mellow (enjoyment) of all mellows, at the same time, very very rare. If you reserve your right to protect your body’s secrecy – that is also not possible for you, because Krishna is omnipresent. What Krishna cannot see? You cannot hide yourself.

Everything is by Krishna, everything is for Krishna, everything is of Krishna – all the divisions and classification of case-ending implies that Supreme Lord Krishna. If you have genuine inquiry, then you must come in line – perceptual line, you must take shelter of a Spiritual Master. Then you can develop divya gyana gradually (transcendental knowledge) and sight gradually to find what is what. At that time of vastra-haran lila, Sree Krishna was only a 7 year old child and those Gopis – they only 5 or 6 years old. Now think out – try to understand your civilization! At the time of Govardhana lila, Sree Krishna was only 7 years and six months.

If you say - "this person is my father", then will say, I am not ready to accept it. What evidence is there? Who knows? It can be only your false belief. Only if your mother solemnly say that he is your father, then and only then you can believe otherwise not. Similarly, you have to depend upon Spiritual Master (realized souls) to unveil the truth. Your personal efforts are all futile efforts, nothing else. We can get our name enlisted in the book of a sweeper or in the book of a leather-man – this much we can do with our material knowledge and material education.

 

[Rational_Mind]

Look! Logical interpretation cannot stand in the way of that Absolute Truth. With material conception you cannot enter into the philosophy of Krishna Lila. Krishna is the Supreme Lord – Supreme authority lies only with Him. This material world is just the opposite of that Transcendental World (perverted reflection of the Transcendental World). Do you know that the Supreme Lord Krishna reserves the full right to enjoy the transcendental loving affair with all the souls (chit-shakti)? That procedure is beyond any criticism or beyond our material comprehension, because Krishna is the only enjoyer, all the others are enjoyed.

In this material world, you can find many men and many women. So, you have the right to pass the remark about them. But who can pass any remark about Krishna? What all you see, what all you cannot see, what you can think about, what you cannot think about, all is Krishna. The infinite worlds, all stars and planets…everything is Krishna. Then who are you to find faults with Krishna – The Supreme Personality of Godhead? Today or tomorrow your death is inevitable, so with finite brain you want to grasp the infinite; Supreme Object – that is your fault.

Your sexual conception is putting you in hell – what to do! Why do you think yourself as a competitor of Krishna? There is a Big Gulf between this material world and the transcendental world. That Gulf is not green in colour or not blue in colour, not white, not yellow. But red and only red. I mean, the bloody conception of blood and flesh, which is putting you down forever.

India is the land of spiritual cultivation, those sages, after long deliberation have given us immense treasure of spiritual (transcendental) knowledge, but you are so foolish that you are not ready to accept it (or you have no time to think about it). Do you think that the Supreme Creator is just agitated like you to enjoy some illegal sex with you all? Can you imagine a sex relation with your mother?

Those Gopikas are all para-prakriti (internal potency) – simultaneously different and non-different from Him – Supreme Lord Sri Krishna. If you look into the Vedanta theory, you can find ‘shakti-shaktimattor abheda’. This means that energy and energetic are non-different from each other. Energy cannot stand separately. Without the energetic, there is no meaning to energy. Vastra-haran-lila; (stealing of clothes) this is very very upper level lila which implies that without complete submission, you cannot get Krishna. Conjugal love affair is the highest mellow (enjoyment) of all mellows, at the same time, very very rare. If you reserve your right to protect your body’s secrecy – that is also not possible for you, because Krishna is omnipresent. What Krishna cannot see? You cannot hide yourself.

Everything is by Krishna, everything is for Krishna, everything is of Krishna – all the divisions and classification of case-ending implies that Supreme Lord Krishna. If you have genuine inquiry, then you must come in line – perceptual line, you must take shelter of a Spiritual Master. Then you can develop divya gyana gradually (transcendental knowledge) and sight gradually to find what is what. At that time of vastra-haran lila, Sree Krishna was only a 7 year old child and those Gopis – they only 5 or 6 years old. Now think out – try to understand your civilization! At the time of Govardhana lila, Sree Krishna was only 7 years and six months.

If you say - "this person is my father", then will say, I am not ready to accept it. What evidence is there? Who knows? It can be only your false belief. Only if your mother solemnly say that he is your father, then and only then you can believe otherwise not. Similarly, you have to depend upon Spiritual Master (realized souls) to unveil the truth. Your personal efforts are all futile efforts, nothing else. We can get our name enlisted in the book of a sweeper or in the book of a leather-man – this much we can do with our material knowledge and material education.

Saying one thing doing the other. You have presented an answer that will only suit yourself and others who hold your view. So really this is not the answer for me or anyone who doesn't already conform to your views.

Regarding the "represents" issue:
Here is me doing your work (opening the verse in Sanskrit) for you:
The Rig Veda in Sanskrit: Rig Veda Book 9: Hymn 96
So now please answer.

 

[Rational_Mind]

That is the problem. You do not know the whole thing and yet you have an opinion, rather than trying to understand. Sorry, but it seems that your point only is to find faults and prove that Vedic civilization was wrong.

Even when Vedic Scriptures were Orally transmitted, they were transmitted from Spiritual master to disciple, in proper authorized succession. Both of whom were qualified Brahmanas (at least)! They could be higher, but the least qualification of Brahmanas was maintained.

I just raised a question. Thanks for your response. You stated earlier that only Brahmas could read and interpret. Could you explain the wisdom behind this practice of distancing the scripture from common folk?

Could you also explain the value of Manusmṛti as it seems to be highly criticized and appears to favour Brahmin, is there a particular reason explained for these cases. Is this a valid scripture in your opinion?

 

[Vrindavana Das]

Saying one thing doing the other. You have presented an answer that will only suit yourself and others who hold your view. So really this is not the answer for me or anyone who doesn't already conform to your views.

Regarding the "represents" issue:
Here is me doing your work (opening the verse in Sanskrit) for you:
The Rig Veda in Sanskrit: Rig Veda Book 9: Hymn 96
So now please answer.

I already told you there are some qualifications needed to understand the scriptures. If you do not understand something, that does not make it incorrect.

As for the verse, you have provided the whole prayer. I do not have the time or inclination to go through the whole thing to provide you a clarification. I want the specific verse. Sorry, but I will not do your work and search the whole prayer for the verse. If you can provide, I will give you the answer.

 

[Vrindavana Das]

One more thing. The verse you are quoting is the 11th verse of Purusha Sukta. Also, it is a part of Yajura Veda.

Consider this topic closed from my end, till you provide the actual verse.

 

[Vrindavana Das]

I just raised a question. Thanks for your response. You stated earlier that only Brahmas could read and interpret. Could you explain the wisdom behind this practice of distancing the scripture from common folk?

Could you also explain the value of Manusmṛti as it seems to be highly criticized and appears to favour Brahmin, is there a particular reason explained for these cases. Is this a valid scripture in your opinion?

The wisdom is same as one needs to be a PHd. in Physics to understand or debate Einstein's theory of relativity. One should reach a particular level to understand higher scriptures.

You are giving me your general opinion on Manusmriti, I think there is no need for me to respond. It is a waste of time.

If you actually have the knowledge and have a genuine doubt, site particular verses, their meaning and then raise your query. I will be happy to answer.

 

[Rational_Mind]

I understand theory of relativity without PhD. I think you present your religion as an exclusive religion. You also have a hard time defending your view point. I only asked you about manu law and never presented my view yet you took offense. This only shows that the only justification is going to be the one you justify yourself with. You have given me a terrible view of Hinduism. This seem like an exclusive club. I hope there are Hindus who can do a better job.

 

[Vinayaka]

RM, I agree, and I'm a Hindu. Please PM me if you want a more well - rounded take.

 

[Vrindavana Das]

@ Rational Mind,

Your irrational statement - you understand the theory of relativity without PhD., only enforces that you have no genuine desire to understand. Even if you understand without PhD., it can only be very basic understanding. You cannot criticize the theory. Which sadly you have been doing. Nobody can explain to you because you lack the interest and also the background to understand. You want to critically analyze & criticize something you do not have complete understanding of. This is not the way to understand anything.

No offense, but the feeling is genuinely mutual. You have given me a terrible view of the Muslims! Your's is an approach of criticizing & wanting to prove the other's religion wrong. That is all! Exceptions do not prove the rule, is applicable here, I sincerely hope!

Although I am not taking any offense, however, because of the above reasons, I do not want to get into depth of anything with you. You will only criticize and blaspheme, without wanting to understand, like you have done earlier, which is not in your own good interest. Therefore, I am neither inclined to explain nor defending any viewpoint. I am only stating facts. Take it or leave it. More power to you!

 

[Rational_Mind]

I never tried to prove anyone religion wrong. Although you did a terrific job of giving the perception that Hinduism requires blind faith. You keep saying you need to first understand the background. I am sorry but that is not background. What you speak about is called bias. I asked you simply questions that anyone would ask who you when trying to learn your beliefs. The same way people ask me about terrorism and Islam. But, your answers were, please understand my bias and then you will understand. So I did understand. I did not make any accusations just asked questions and criticized. There is nothing wrong with criticizing, I do that with my own beliefs. This ensures that I am not blindly eating something. Every time I asked something you demonstrated extreme bias in explanation.

p.s if you did not critique theory of relativity then you are accepting something illogically. So please understand what is logical and what is rational. If we could not ask questions until we got knowledge of all of the topic then we would never manage to understand anything. To accept the first step I need to ask questions to understand.

 

[atanu]

Your point is not very clear. The best I can make of it is that you feel some followers of the Quran are hypocrites. I am sure there are, but not all of them. In fact there are Hadith that speak of the condition of Muslims in the latter days, which has occurred and is even in this state now. But I still don't get the point.

I just raised a question. Thanks for your response. You stated earlier that only Brahmas could read and interpret. Could you explain the wisdom behind this practice of distancing the scripture from common folk?

Could you also explain the value of Manusmṛti as it seems to be highly criticized and appears to favour Brahmin, is there a particular reason explained for these cases. Is this a valid scripture in your opinion?

My point is very clear. Are you genuinely seeking answers or do you already have an idea and wish to re-inforce that?

 

[Rational_Mind]

RM, I agree, and I'm a Hindu. Please PM me if you want a more well - rounded take.

Thanks, I will be spending more time reading the Baghavad Gita. I will direct my questions to you as they arise. I know there are even Muslims today who do a terrible job answering so I like to be fair and find people who are most reasonable in presenting their views. Thanks again.

 

[Rational_Mind]

My point is very clear. Are you genuinely seeking answers or do you already have an idea and wish to re-inforce that?

I wanted to clear some questions that others raise to see if there is any water. Instead of clarification I got false justification and made me even more confused. I am sorry you expected me to accept everything you say at face value. The same way I questioned the allegations by asking you I also questioned your answer. I know I have to do such as people raise similar allegations against Islam, and I can see why other would do the same with Hinduism. I don't know why you felt I was reinforcing my ideas, I was presenting them where someone asked. I also showed immense respect here, while on the other hand I can say one member here for sure did not show any respect when he came in the Muslim DIR slandering without listening, his views here showed severe hypocrisy (not you). Thanks for trying though.

Sorry if my questions did not appear respectfully asked, I tried my best. I will try to improve further as well. All the best.

 

[atanu]

I don't know why you felt I was reinforcing my ideas, ---

I am asking you directly and that, I believe, is not equal to believing.