Which religion offers the right path to God?

[Gharib]

Well, the article you posted is different to the ideas that I have been presented with through Hinduism. I'd be interested in knowing where the author got his information from. It would be strange if he just decided to lie about things.

i can try and find something. i will post a link or what ever i find here. would that be ok?

 

[Madhuri]

i can try and find something. i will post a link or what ever i find here. would that be ok?

Sure, that would be great

 

[K.Venugopal]

What about Krishnamurti's idea that "Truth is a pathless land" and there are no paths to god. Any truth to that?

That would be something that would dawn upon us after we've walked a bit down a path to make the spiritual journey - if we are perspicacious, that is. K was one helluva perspicacious person.

 

[K.Venugopal]

just to make a note in some cases i may not be able to give answers. for example if i am asked to comment on a verse or hadith. i will try to ge relevant souces but cannot promise everything.

Dear eselam, I see that you are a marathon runner and I may not be able to catch up with you. With foot-soldiers of indomitable spirit like you, Allah’s Army sure looks invincible. But then I am not fighting Allah’s army. Proof is that you are my friend.

You can’t compare faith with roads just as you can’t compare Allah to rome. No one is comparable to Allah he is Al Wahid (The Unique) and Al Ahad (The One). Rome doesn’t care how you get there, it doesn’t reward you for getting there either.

Do not get too literal when examples are quoted. Though comparisons are odious (as Jiddu Krishnamurthi used to say) we often cannot do without it.

Now I know that quoting the quran as proof to non muslims doesn’t work, but here’s a verse for you anyway:

I am not prejudiced against the Quran. But often the logic with which its verses are presented by Muslims tend to be questionable.

[3:19] The only religion approved by GOD is "Submission."……

I’m sure you know how companies work, the boss controls everything and everything must be done his way otherwise there is no salary at the end of the month. Same principle, Allah has sent his “way” (the quran) to us and if we want a reward at the end all we have to do is follow his rules, just like those of the company.

There you go, comparing the boss of my company with Allah!

Then you have a contradiction with yourself as to what is really real.

1. If you were going to argue that all men are gods, then what’s the purpose of life?

The purpose of life is to enjoy life.

2. If you are going to argue the second point, then how can god have human qualities. He (they) would be equal to all other men, thus we are back to the first point, either all men are gods or there is only one god about whom our knowledge is limited to what he has told us about himself. In this case Allah. He is the only One and Unique.

God may not have human qualities (except when He decides to descend and have some fun among humans) but humans have God-qualities (or divine qualities).

3. If we do the third point, then what do you mean by nature. What are you referring to?

Does that include all things in existence even men, being divine?

By nature I mean everything that has not been corrupted by man by his fragmented mind.

4. If we do the last one, then how did everything come to be in such a perfect order without a god who looks after all that exists and maintains it. Why do we even exist?

Ever wondered how God himself is in perfect order?

Here’s an example regarding this last one, the question is “Does Allah exist”: The same question was asked, by an atheist, of Imam Abu Hanifa and he replied, "Forget it! At the moment, I am busy thinking about this ship. People tell me there is a big ship, it contains different goods on board. There is no one to steer it, no one maintaining it. Yet, this ship keeps going back and forth; it even traverses big waves on the oceans; it stops at the locations that it is supposed to stop at; it continues in the direction that it is supposed to head. This ship has no captain and no one planning its trips." The atheist who posed the question interrupted and exclaimed, "What kind of strange and silly thought is this? How can any intelligent person think that some thing like this can occur?" Imam Abu Hanifa said, "I feel sorry about your state! You cannot imagine one ship running without some one looking after its affairs. Yet you think that for this whole world, which runs exactly and precisely, there is no one who looks after it, and no one owns it." Hearing the reply, the atheist was left speechless but he found out more about Al Haqq (The Truth) and proclaimed Islam.

The poor Imam, living in the Middle Ages, did not know about auto-pilot.

But what would be the meaning of life in this case and how do we know that? And seeing that god is in the idol as well as man, then why is man worshiping the part of god that is in the idol, instead of the idol worshiping the divine that is in man? isn't man more supperior to the idol because he created it? Does god give an order that this should be done?

Just as beauty is in the beholder, the beholder sees the divine in the idol. If man does not behold, would Allah exist? And about idols worshiping man, its creator – idol worshippers would tell you that’s what is being done all the time prayers offered to the idols are granted.

See we are back at the first point, all men are gods (divine). How has this reasoning that men are gods come to be considered an option or even a possibility? Is it because men are more superior, more complete than the other creatures on earth that we must be divine or is something else the starting point of this claim? I’ve never quite understood this about hinduism. And is it only humans that are divine or all living and non living things in existence?

Look eselam, if you understand the phrase “essence and expressions”, you will understand this basic teaching of Hinduism. Everything has an essence, which essence is the same as every other essence. And the expressions of the essence are innumerable, which gives us our multiverse. Further, the link between essence and expressions brings up the theory of involution and evolution. This theory was brilliantly exposited by Aurobindo, a modern day mystic.

 

[TheKnight]

Path to God means a way to know Him, to discover Him truly. Perhaps it is God's desire that we should seek Him and that we should want to Know Him.

Hmm. I think that if God wants us to know it, He wants it as our second priority. Our first should be making this world a better place for Him.

This is seen in the story of Abraham where he is sitting outside of His tent, and God comes to visit Abraham. As God is visiting, 3 visitors approach from a distance and Abraham, leaving God, runs out to meet them and show them hospitality.

From this I believe it is obvious that God prefer we help our fellow man than sit around trying to reach holy heights (in what could be seen as escapism). After all, we have an eternity to know God. He put us here and allows suffering here for a specific reason.

If one wishes to know God, then one should become like God in showing kindness.

 

[K.Venugopal]

Yes I can tell you what is meant by the word “worship”. Have you ever heard of the word Ibadah? Ibadah means “All acts of worship. Any permissible action performed with the intention to obey Allah.”

That’s the way you or the Quran puts it. I would put worship as all action performed with the intention of being in harmony with existence (Allah). So if I worship my little idol of Krishna, who should have an objection? Certainly not Allah, because it is with the intention of being in oneness (harmony) with Him that I am worshipping my little idol of Krishna. You would say Allah has stated He disapproves it in the Quran. I say that the Quran was not, is not and will not be the only way through which Allah speaks. He speaks also through my little idol of Krishna.

So using the hadith, having sex in the way that islam permits falls under the definition of Ibadah. It is an act of worship towards Allah, because it is done with the intention to obey Allah (the way he says it).

If sex can be worship, why not idol worship? And “sex can be worship” theory is not there in the Quran. It was Mohammad’s view of the matter as quoted in a hadith. Mohammad, being an abjectly versatile man, would have elsewhere also condoned idol-worship. With Mohammad you never know, for he was a man for all seasons. (He was somewhat like Krishna, though not that sophisticated.) After all, did he not kiss the idol (blackstone) in Mecca? This was disapproved by his closest lieutenants but they were forced to follow suit as his intentions were clear. It is probable that a hadith condoning idol-worship was extant somewhere before puritan mullahs following him destroyed it. The world of hadiths are as mystical as they come, arbitrarily classified in hierarchies as they are.

everything a muslim does in his daily life is considered ibadah (worship) if it is done in the way that Allah permits. And no one was or will be better at doing things with the intention to obey Allah than Muhamed (saws), thus Allah says:
“Indeed in the Messenger of Allah you have a good example to follow....(Qur'an 33:21).
And by this very verse, following Muhamed (saws) in the proper way or doing things the way he did, is also considered Ibadah towards Allah, because following Muhamed (saws) is something that, one could say, is liked by Allah or infact is a command to do so. But it is not Muhamed (saws) nor his actions that we are worshiping. Doing what he did is worshiping Allah. Everything Muhamed (saws) did was to please Allah.

Why do you always say “saws” after Mohammad’s name?

as for “Therefore to consider someone’s worship of an idol as not worship at all is unfair.” I’m hopping the above explanation gives you an idea as to why muslims think this. But just incase if it doesn’t I will elaborate here. The worship which muslims do, is in no way the same as the hindus form of worship in the idols. As I understand, Hinduism doesn’t worship the idol itself, but the divinity that is in the idol. Now muslims do not believe that man or any living creature is divine.

Yeah, I have understood that only too well. And it has had it own consequences. Making being slaves of Allah the ideal of Islam. Those who believe they are divine seek to discover their divinity and not become slaves of anyone.

Allah is a being that is unlike any thing we can imagine, if we try to imagine Allah, then he is the exact opposite of what we would imagine. For example Allah is Al Basir (the seer of all), now the nature of man leads to think that Allah has 2 eyes at the front of his head above the nose. But infact that is how his creation looks like, not Allah. Therefore Allah is the exact opposite ,of which we have no idea what or how that opposite looks like or functions.

And therefore to describe Allah so that man would understand, all sorts of human qualities are used to describe Allah. This is not dissimilar to the use of idols in Hinduism to describe God.

and concerning idol worshiping, in the quran Allah (swt) says:
4:48 VERILY, God does not forgive the ascribing of divinity to aught beside Him, although He forgives any lesser sin unto whomever He wills: for he who ascribes divinity to aught beside God has indeed contrived an awesome sin.

Is Allah a jealous God?

41:47 In Him alone is vested the knowledge of when the Last Hour will come. And no fruit bursts forth from its calyx, and no female ever conceives, nor ever gives birth, save with His knowledge. And so, on the Day when He shall call out to them, “Where, now, are those [alleged] partners of Mine?” - they will [surely] answer, “We confess unto Thee that none of us can bear witness [to anyone’s having a share in Thy divinity]!”

This is a very beautiful verse. But I think He meant this only for Muslims. As I am not a Muslim, He would forgive me worshipping my little idol of Krishna. The moral of the thing is, if you are going to be a Muslim, you better be a thorough Muslim – Allah is a hard taskmaster. If any Muslim feels this is too touch, he is welcome to follow Krishna. Krishna is too jovial a person to want to make puppets of anyone.

So us as muslims do not consider idol worshiping as worship due to such an act being the biggest sin there is. wich is ascribing partners to him.

And Muslims have done just that in calling some people as “friends of Allah”. And Mohammad eventually became Allah’s partner when Allah said, speaking ill of Mohammad is speaking ill of Me!

 

[K.Venugopal]

i wanted to ask K.Venugopla about something related to hinduism, but will ask you instead and any hindu member can answer.

does hindiusm predict a prophet that has still not come? his name being Kalki Avatar. i have found something interesting about this that i would like to know what hindu followers feel/think about it.

The first thing that has to be understood about Hinduism is that nothing stated anywhere in Hinduism is applicable in exact meaning to the whole of Hinduism. Often the same truth is presented differently to suit the different levels of practitioners who would approach the scriptures. The only exception is the idea of the oneness of existence, which permeates the whole of Hinduism, even among those who are strictly non-dualists.

Having said this, Kalki avtaar is connected to Vaishnavism - a specific school of Hinduism. This avatar of Hinduism is awaited. It was said thousands of years ago that he would come in a horse brandishing a sword. Maybe the words horse and sword was used as they could be easily understood by the people of that time. We would have to apply the symbolism to determine how in our imagination he would come. But the whole principle of avatars is based on the promise by God that when evil so preponderates that man would become helpless, God would take birth to protect the good and destroy the evil. Though it is believed that Kaliki avtaar would be the 10th and last avatar, there are other schools of Hinduism who do not put a limit on the number of avatars.

About this Avatar having already manifested as Mohammad – if this is the Islamic belief, well and good. However, for Hindus at large, this avatar is awaited.

 

[K.Venugopal]

What I feel is summed up in both the Rig Veda and Guru Granth Sahib.
Basically, I don't believe that religion is a case of true or false, but I believe every religion is 'right', and all religions offer the right path to God - it all depends on what you are attracted to. Religion is not a one-size-fits-all. Some people are more interested in ascesticism, others are more interested in being homemakers, others are more interested in actions to helping humanity, others prefer a life worship.

All religions are human attempts at connecting to, and explaining, the Ultimate Source, whatever one calls it (I'm not after a debate about Buddhism and Jainism here) - and living morally. Since all theistic religions believe that God is indescribable, how can God be described, His existence penned, His Will explained? How can God be confined to just -one- religion? It makes no sense to me to believe that God, the Creator of the world, would bring his (successful) messengers into only one area.

Isn't it interesting how religions that are near to one another tend to have similar things in common? For example, Judaism, Christianity and Islam are all monotheistic religions and exclusive in their view of God, and (mainstream anyway) don't believe in reincarnation. In the East, Hinduism, Sikhism, Buddhism and Jainism all have dharma and reincarnation, and an inclusive view of religions. Religions in Europe were polytheistic prior to Christianization, the Romans and Greeks had very personal human gods. Why would this be? Because these religions are close to one another, and things are borrowed from each other.

In my view, it's a case of the blind men and the elephant. Each one touches only one part, and they compare notes to what they felt, and their views are different from one anothers, because none of them have the whole explanation of the elephant. It's the same with my view of God. Many colours, but the same spectrum. All religions have aspects of Truth, and all religions have aspects of falsehood and man-made traditions in them, they have all made one aspect less important and made another more important.

No religion is ultimately 'pure' nor 'superior' to another one, because all religions were revealed by mankind, and mankind has been responsible for spreading and raising them, as well as coming up with new philosophies such as "is blood transfusion allowed?", for example.


Just my $0.02 on this one.

(I know it's untidy (sorry!) but I've just wrote it all in one go. You'd hate to be in this head, eh? It's all cluttered!)

Congratulations! Great writing. Fit enough to be in the preamble of any book of religion.

 

[K.Venugopal]

appologies for the missunderstanding.
what would you like to change the thread title to?
like i said i wasn't sure if this was what we were discussing.
but now that you said you believe in many paths to god that makes sense.

No need to change thread title. Fine as it is.

 

[K.Venugopal]

Well, the article you posted is different to the ideas that I have been presented with through Hinduism. I'd be interested in knowing where the author got his information from. It would be strange if he just decided to lie about things.

Articles such as these are the work of Dr. Zakir Naik and his institution. Dr. Zakir Naik is a good and sincere person with a prodigious memory. However, he is unable to go beyond the dualistic teaching of Islam and has presumed himself an authority on the Vedas - which is ironic because the essence of the Vedas is non-dual. Therefore he short-charges his audience when talking about Hinduism. Also, recently he upset some sects of Islam when he praised a certain person who is hated by other sects of Islam. Whatever, he is today an Islamic icon.

 

[BruceDLimber]

Greetings, greetings!

\W]hich religion has the right path to God and what is it about that particular religion that makes it true or sets it appart from the rest?

How about virtually ALL of them?!

I quote from the Baha'i scriptures:

"There can be no doubt whatever that the peoples of the world, of whatever race or religion, derive their inspiration from one heavenly Source, and are the subjects of one God. The difference between the ordinances under which they abide should be attributed to the varying requirements and exigencies of the age in which they were revealed. All of them, except a few which are the outcome of human perversity, were ordained of God, and are a reflection of His Will and Purpose. Arise and, armed with the power of faith, shatter to pieces the gods of your vain imaginings, the sowers of dissension amongst you. Cleave unto that which draweth you together and uniteth you."

—(The Proclamation of Baha'u'llah, p. 114;
also Gleanings, CXI, pp. 217-8)
Best!
Bruce

 

[Breathe]

Congratulations! Great writing. Fit enough to be in the preamble of any book of religion.

I'm flattered, thank you!

 

[Metempsychosis]

Articles such as these are the work of Dr. Zakir Naik and his institution. Dr. Zakir Naik is a good and sincere person with a prodigious memory. However, he is unable to go beyond the dualistic teaching of Islam and has presumed himself an authority on the Vedas - which is ironic because the essence of the Vedas is non-dual. Therefore he short-charges his audience when talking about Hinduism. Also, recently he upset some sects of Islam when he praised a certain person who is hated by other sects of Islam. Whatever, he is today an Islamic icon.

Zakir naik is no Rumi.

 

[K.Venugopal]

Zakir naik is no Rumi.

Of course not. Zakir Naik is an academician and Rumi was a mystic.

 

[Zardoz]

you would be right in islam about each particular people having their own path from god. but not nowadays. not since Muhammed (saws) was sent. do jews accept other religions as a possible true path to god?

I can't speak for all Jews, just my own view, as I understood what my Rebbi taught.

All the descendants of Abraham have their own blessing, so I would think that most Jews would consider that Islam was given to Ishmael, Christianity was given to Esau, and Judaism was given to Jacob. Each faith tailored to suit the nature of each People. As such, each faith is a true path for those people. Not so good a path for the others, as that faith would not speak to the soul of those it was not made for.

Of course, there's a whole lot of other peoples who are not of these three peoples, and who have non-Abrahamic faiths. These people also have a place in the Abrahamic faith structure, as in our joint beliefs everyone (and I do mean everyone) is a descendant of Noah and has claim to that Covenant. They can be considered Righteous, just as much as anyone in the three Abrahamic faiths. We Jews speak of the Seven Laws of Noah, but these are not laws like most think of religious laws, as they are not specific topics but rather broad categories of human life. They set a base level for morality, a 'minimum system requirement' for a path to G-d. Any religion or faith which promotes a morality in alignment with Noachide standards is serving G-d and may have been inspired or even revealed by G-d, by their fruit shall we know them.

 

[nameless]

can you please explain this statement, i don't understand what you mean.

everyone is already eternal and complete, but our ego does discrimination and thus the connection with truth is lost. So a truth seeker just need to destroy his ego to become eternal. Eventhough there is no one to recieve our 'submission', it would help to destroy the ego, but one who follows this path is not aware of its mechanism, so it is indirect and inferior. While a meditator would have clear knowledge of what is going on and so can understand mechanism of other faiths too, this is why Hinduism accepts almost all other faiths. It is to be said that Hinduism has better understanding of the essence of other faiths than the people belonging to that faith.

Even though there are different paths to god, some are not at all effective, and more likely results to increase in ego.

 

[nameless]

Articles such as these are the work of Dr. Zakir Naik and his institution. Dr. Zakir Naik is a good and sincere person with a prodigious memory. However, he is unable to go beyond the dualistic teaching of Islam and has presumed himself an authority on the Vedas - which is ironic because the essence of the Vedas is non-dual. Therefore he short-charges his audience when talking about Hinduism. Also, recently he upset some sects of Islam when he praised a certain person who is hated by other sects of Islam. Whatever, he is today an Islamic icon.

zakir naik is a juvenile, liar and terrorism well wisher. He has his own explanations on vedas and buddhism. He alters vedic texts to develop confusion in ignorant people and also in favor of islam.

An article found in his website

III. PHILOSOPHY OF BUDDHISM IS SELF – CONTRADICTORY: by zakir naik

As mentioned earlier, the main teachings of Buddhism are summarised in the Four Noble Truths:
(i) There is suffering and misery in life.

(ii) The cause of suffering and misery is desire.

(iii) Suffering and misery can be removed by removing desire.

(iv) Desire can be removed by following the Eight Fold Path.


This Philosophy of Buddhism is self-contradictory or self-defeating because the third truth says ‘suffering and misery can be removed by removing desire’ and the fourth truth says that 'desire can be removed by following the Eight Fold Path'.

Now, for any person to follow Buddhism he should first have the desire to follow the Four Noble Truths and the Eight Fold Path. The Third great Noble Truth says that desire should be removed. Once you remove desire, how can we follow the Fourth Noble truth i.e. follow the Eight Fold Path unless we have a desire to follow the Eight Fold Path. In short desire can only be removed by having a desire to follow the Eight Fold Path. If you do not follow the Eight Fold Path, desire cannot be removed. It is self contradicting as well as self-defeating to say that desire will only be removed by continuously having a desire.

 

[K.Venugopal]

An article found in his [Dr. Zakir Naik's website:

III. PHILOSOPHY OF BUDDHISM IS SELF – CONTRADICTORY: by zakir naik

As mentioned earlier, the main teachings of Buddhism are summarised in the Four Noble Truths:
(i) There is suffering and misery in life.
(ii) The cause of suffering and misery is desire.
(iii) Suffering and misery can be removed by removing desire.
(iv) Desire can be removed by following the Eight Fold Path.

This Philosophy of Buddhism is self-contradictory or self-defeating because the third truth says ‘suffering and misery can be removed by removing desire’ and the fourth truth says that 'desire can be removed by following the Eight Fold Path'.

Now, for any person to follow Buddhism he should first have the desire to follow the Four Noble Truths and the Eight Fold Path. The Third great Noble Truth says that desire should be removed. Once you remove desire, how can we follow the Fourth Noble truth i.e. follow the Eight Fold Path unless we have a desire to follow the Eight Fold Path. In short desire can only be removed by having a desire to follow the Eight Fold Path. If you do not follow the Eight Fold Path, desire cannot be removed. It is self contradicting as well as self-defeating to say that desire will only be removed by continuously having a desire.

Zakir Naik, typical of him, has short-circuited logic with his illogic. When Buddha offers a way to get rid of suffering, Zakir Naik says the teaching is invalid because you would require desire to follow the teaching! Does it not strike Zakir Naik that desire would be the one thing in abundance in a fellow who wants to get rid of it?

Buddha stated an absolute truth when he said that suffering can be ended when desire is got rid off. No one need be given a discourse on what suffering is because everyone has experienced it. However, the solution – getting rid of desire, needs elaboration – from explaining what exactly is the desire to be got rid off to how to get rid of it. That is exactly what Buddha has done through his teaching of the Noble Eightfold Path. Once you get through the course and understand it and are ready to put it into practice at all times, you would have begun getting rid of your desires and eventually even the desire to apply the teachings would become redundant because by then the teachings would have become your very nature.

Logic is all about seeing the connection and disconnection between things. Zakir Naik tends to disconnect where a connection is clear and connect where a disconnection is obvious. He famously said, 1 + 1 = 2, therefore Islam is true!

 

[Herr Heinrich]

I would have to say that thee is not one "true" path to god. Every religion is a finger pointing to the Moon. Though the fingers may look different, point at different angles, or not be pointing to the same part of the Moon they are still pointing at the same Moon. It depends which finger works best for you. You can even point your own finger if you want. It still is the same Moon.

 

[steve ritter]

we all came from the same big bang . lets all come together and pray to one god religion is only a belief you either believe it or not the world could be a better and safer place