That is a very good reason for questioning whether Allah can rightfully be perceived as the same as Brahman, I think. The former fears being confused for - well, for most anything, apparently - while the later is beyond such concerns.
Allah is also beyond concern, Allah is not an entity (that would categorically be Shirk and Kafir), that misunderstanding and misrepresentation of Islamic beliefs contradict Tawhid
entirely.
First you've got to think seriously about the notion of an idol and why you would project your emotions onto that merely as a means of intermediary attachment, instead of devoting oneself to Reality itself, which is formless and transcendent of these things?
Kinda like in Tibetan Buddhism and Vajrayana, once you let go of deities, symbols and images, then you are able to face that Light at the end without falling for the illusions that deceive the ego - this can be extrapolated beautifully in several ways.
You're Theravada right? (Again, I ask because I need to know how to convey things the most relevant to your worldview which is obviously different to Islam or even general Vedanta).
Bhakti is a difficult thing for me to understand. It is reasonably similar to the stereotypical Abrahamic practice, which is fairly common among Brazilian Christians. It is odd, in that it fit few people, but there is a cultural expectation that somehow all people "should" fit it.
Ok think about this, Reality is as it is. A symbol/image or idol can never in any shape or form account for the Ultimate Reality itself, which is the very thing sustaining and pervading (in Islamic belief) the Universe we are living in this very moment. The Source that produces and contains all of this, is the most important thing to devote oneself to, not things that are equally as illusory as oneself (our bodies die and decay, just like an idol or image can be smashed and or lost/forgotten - unlike Ultimate Reality).
I sort of understand the appeal of Nirguna Brahma and its contrast to Siguna Brahma. It just isn't important to me, and I do not like to lend it undue significance. Nor do I want to encourage mistaking Allah for it.
This is just your biases, nothing categorically or philosophically meaningful to the definitions. I do love that we're both at the polar opposite side of the spectrum there though, as not only as a Muslim but just as a human being, I view it as the single most important thing there is, period.
That is certainly true. Sometimes. Other times they are indeed worshipping some combination of Devas. Or none at all, as is the case with
@Aupmanyav .
True, well Aupmanyav isn't as far away from what we believe than he thinks he is but semantics and language are always going to be areas of bias around this. However, I am able to retain a discussion about both Islam and Hinduism without mentioning terminology of either religious tradition.
I think both you and Aupmanyav have a lot of learning to do with disassociating Monotheism with Anthropomorphism. Aup at least still can't see the difference between Devas and Brahman when placed over another belief system.
On the other hand, one can't help but notice that Brahman is hardly ever "directly worshipped", if that even makes any sense.
Bingo, one of my points right there. Hindus place importance in symbol/image to worship Brahman/Parabrahman - whether it be Vishnu (and his avatars), Shiva, Shakti etc for emotional attachment to Brahman/Parabrahman. Whereas Islam is the same profound philosophy (emphasized even more strongly) taking the opposite view of any form of symbol/image/idol as being illusion, therefore counterintuitive to worshiping Ultimate Reality.
Are you getting me yet?
Jews, Zoroastrians and Sikhs also understand this very well too.
Indeed. Hinduism is wise.
That is one view, I suppose. I for one think that it overcomplicates things.
Why does it only overcomplicate things when Muslims have diverging views, yet wise when Hindus have diverging views?
The quoted portion is two different but related things actually. In that quoted portion, both Hindus and Muslims hold to essential Ultimate Reality but hold very different views about the value in using intermediaries of any kind.