No one's faith can be questioned but passing off faith as fact can

No one's faith can be questioned, but passing off faith as fact can.
[This is in reply to Rocking, who commented of Muneerudeen's blog MISCONCEPTIONS - REPLY TO VENUGOPAL on Sat Jan 13 at 8.25.10 pm.]
Dear Rocking,

1. First and foremost, I would like to make clear that I am not questioning the faith of Muslims or anyone’s faith whatsoever. Faith can move mountains. No one can question another’s faith for the simple reason that is a very personal matter. But trying to pass off faith as fact can certainly be questioned.

2. What I said was “God is not rotating the earth like you and I rotate a top.” Everything is consciousness, but it is only man who is conscious that he is conscious. We and the top are separate because the top is not conscious of itself whereas we are. God on the other hand is nothing other than consciousness. Therefore God and his creation are not separate.

3. The drama of creation presents itself before us due to the pulsating nature of consciousness. It is this nature of consciousness that manifests in duality, which is the basis on which consciousness experiences variety. (The explanation of this calls for the explanation of intricate science, which is spoken of in the Vedas.)

4. What we call God is the essential power of consciousness that we are. We realize that power when we wake up it. This awakening is what spirituality is all about – waking up to the power that we really are.
5. Issac Newton’s theory about a thing remaining in a state until and unless a force acts upon it is what we observe in our material world. The material world is only the solidified state of consciousness.
6. Do you remember Newton’s theory that matter can neither be created nor destroyed? There is no place for a creator God in this theory, is there?

7. In Islamic reasoning there is a simple answer to everything – Allah did it, Allah created it, Allah said it, only Allah knows etc. Since Islam believes the Creator-created separation, I ask, who created Allah? Or is this a taboo question?

8. Is a Muslim required to remember Allah with every breath of his? This is great. But what does it mean ‘to remember’ Does it not mean that Allah should be in our consciousness every moment? If you really do it, a moment will come when your consciousness becomes Allah. And such a person would say, Ane Al Haq, or Aham Brahmasmi – I am God.

9. The power Sufi saints have is because they are highly spiritual. The disconnect with Sufis is the major cause of problems in Islam. Many Muslims do not consider the Sufis to be Muslims at all.

10. Allah’s tradition of choosing a man and appointing him as a messenger is fine. But the claim that the tradition ended with Mohammad is inexplicable, except that it is written in the Quran.
11. What you mention about Mohammad sitting in the Nabavi mosque suggests, to me, that Mohammad was meditating and in the trance lost consciousness of his surroundings. However I am not able to imagine the pose he was in when you talk of ‘lap on lap’. In meditation, particularly if accompanied by pranayama, you sweat profusely. I do not know why Mohammad gained weight and his face became red. Do you?

12. You say Mohammad did not know how to read and write. For self realization neither is required. Mohammad certainly knew many things about the Jews - from them he borrowed at least the idea of circumcision and skull cap.

13. It appears that Mohammad had relapses on his spiritual path, which alone helps to reconcile many contradictory verses in the Quran. (One verse says that if you kill one man you have killed mankind and another verses says ‘slay them’.)
9:14:50 PM
Posted By Venu Gopal Comments (1) Uncategorized

Comments

RADHAKRISHNAN.C Tuesday, January 16, 2007 9:20:03 PM
Great article by you really appreciate your effort in enlightening the brethern who think other wise and chose the wrong path.To guide them is a great service to humanity.But for the people who are so convincedthat their path is the path.they have to trod the path.and achieve whatever is their destinations.Neither you nor me can guide them.since they have already chosen thir path.

Roger Tuesday, January 16, 2007 9:41:46 PM

Dear Venugopal, what if there is no God, or consciousness, beyond this life?

K.Venugopal Tuesday, January 16, 2007 10:02:43 PM
Dear Radhakrishnan, I have no intention of moving anyone from their path. Since NDTV offers the platform and internet the medium, I am only thinking aloud. I am sensitive to others feelings, but I take it for granted that those who blog here are somewhat mature and see all this as just an open discussion of even subjects taboo elsewhere. Which is why I think we must cherish the freedom of the internet.

K.Venugopal Tuesday, January 16, 2007 10:47:04 PM

Dear Roger,

Whatever we deny, we cannot deny that we exist, can we? Now we have to track the thought and ask, "What do I mean when I say "I". The thought process could go: Not my shirt. Not my hands, for I say 'my hands'. I only possess it, but it is not I. Something keeps saying 'my'. Who says it? Who is the conscious one? Of course, I am the conscious one. Who am I?

What if there is no God, or consciousness, beyond this life? What I possess becomes irrelevant to me as time goes on and when everything becomes totally irrelevant to me, that moment is called death. But I remain. For I am consciousness. I never die nor am I born. I only go to sleep and awaken with dreams and to fulfil those dreams, I embody again. Again and again, till one day I awaken to the dream TAT TVAM ASI and I go to sleep for the last time to awaken finally without dreams and on that day I achieve my liberation. On that day I am that. AHAM BRAHMASMI.

Rocking Tuesday, January 16, 2007 10:42:31 PM
Venu I give up.There is no point in arguing any more. neither you can understand my point of view nor i can understand your point of view.So let us agree to disagree.

Roger Tuesday, January 16, 2007 11:08:45 PM
"Cogito ergo sum". Your premise is that conscousness is independant of, and exists beyond, one's physical being. It may be so. But it could easily be that death is the end of consciousness too. There is no continuum, it is the end. There is no re awakening. Perhaps life is not divinely ordained, but merely a chance occurrence, and a function of evoltion thereafter. Perhaps there is no meaning or purpose to life. All creatures, sentient or otherwise, are born, procreate, and die. There is nothing beyond that.

MUNEERUDEEN Wednesday, January 17, 2007 1:02:36 AM
Iread the first two paragraphs and I knew this could only be the work of our great Hindu Mystic Yoga Exponent - Shri k Venugopal.NOW let me read the rest and comment !

MUNEERUDEEN Wednesday, January 17, 2007 1:16:05 AM
I think I have to create another blog to reply to you-since I do not want to reply by EMAIL -since we AGREED TO DISAGREE !I also do not want to hog all the space reserved for comments especially since my detailed comments dont get posted ! SO WATCH FOR MY BLOG IN REPLY !

MUNEERUDEEN Wednesday, January 17, 2007 1:16:25 AM
I think I have to create another blog to reply to you-since I do not want to reply by EMAIL -since we AGREED TO DISAGREE !

MUNEERUDEEN Wednesday, January 17, 2007 1:27:13 AM
VenujiWE once again Cross paths ! Agreed YOU spent 10 years reading and researching the RSS Doctrine and the Vedas- BUT to put Issac Newton above Allah OR your own Brahma is absurd to the point of your even asking who created Brahma ?And if you say it is consiousness that creates Brahma and moves mountains - THEN in todays world with the millions of SUFIs and Yogis -the Himalayas should be in Japan and the Fuji in Alaska ! Dont be absurd Venu - trying to Brainwash the readers with your VENU VEDA !

MUNEERUDEEN Wednesday, January 17, 2007 1:31:22 AM
Venu !Sometimes I wonder if you are even sure that you are contracting yourself. You agree that there is NO Allah BUT Brahma is there.You say there is not ONE life BUT many and so many deaths !How many times does the GOD in you die ??? Aham Brahmasmi ? Whats after that I AM BRAHMA -Not HUMAN NOT BEAST NOT ANIMAL NOT INANE OBJECT ! BRAHMA- WHO ???

K.Venugopal Wednesday, January 17, 2007 10:02:09 PM
Dear Rocking, Please do not take our blogs as arguments or attempts to convert or even convince others. Having the opportunity, we simply express ourselves. If we can understand what the other is trying to say, fine. Otherwise, we leave it at that. Life goes on, does it not? Anything more than this becomes activism. I'm not onto activism.

K.Venugopal Wednesday, January 17, 2007 10:08:09 PM
Roger, What you say may be right, perhaps. Our attempts to know should not unsettle us. Possibilities are more important than certainties. It is the awe of the fact that is more important than the fact. Knower, knowing and the knowledge. Let us reach the realm of oneness where there is nothing except the dance - the dance of joy!

K.Venugopal Wednesday, January 17, 2007 11:31:53 PM
Dear Muneerka, I have not put Issac Newton above Allah. When another blogger quoted Newton’s law, I only quoted another of his law. For you the question “Who created Allah or Brahma” (incidentally I did not use the word Brahma but Brahman, which is a different concept) is impossible. But if questions can be formulated, then at some level they are valid. Islam teaches that man is the eternal slave and Allah the eternal master. The slave cannot know the master except follow his instructions.

K.Venugopal Wednesday, January 17, 2007 11:32:46 PM
Hinduism teaches that man is eternally divine and the source of our divinity is Brahman, whose nature is Sat Chit Anand – Eternal Joyous Consciousness, which is a pulsating force. At the periods of its pulsation creation and destruction occurs in the form of involution and evolution. Those who have understood this have expressed the drama of creation and destruction variously. This has come down to us as the corpus of Hindu scriptures and history and philosophy. Islam does not consider these things. It talks about intermediary beings but nothing is elaborated. Creation is a word that is in wide usage and it is difficult to escape its usage. But it would be more correct to say that there is a continuous change of form of the same force of consciousness in different intensities. Therefore, properly speaking, there is no creation at all. But since we at our human level of conscious perceive difference more than unity, the word creation is a useful word, but only that.

K.Venugopal Wednesday, January 17, 2007 11:35:29 PM
‘Faith moves mountains’ is a proverb. A dose of it is healthy. But too much of it makes us dogmatic. We have to get to the reality. We have to wake up from our lesser consciousness. I did not say anywhere there is no Allah. I have only been maintaining that we are Allah are not separate but one and disagreeing with you on the nature of Allah.There are many lives so that we can evolve to the destiny of our consciousness – to become Allah. Islam teaches that there is only one lifetime and then eternal paradise or barbeque. Well, as far as beliefs go, we have the choice. But the truth? Who knows? I do not claim that anything I said is the Truth. I only can say that I have expressed my understanding of matters as of now. Tomorrow it may be different. Who knows? But I have not intendedly lied anywhere.

MUNEERUDEEN Friday, January 19, 2007 2:26:21 AM
I HAVE GIVEN A DETAILED 13 POINT REPLY TO THE 13 POINTS RAISED BY VENUGOPAL. LET OUR BLOGGERS READ BOTH AND MAKE UP THEIR OWN MIND ! NO PRESSURE-ONLY READING PLEASURE ! SO GO ON FOLKS ! ENJOY THE READ AND POST YOUR COMMENTS ! BOUQUETS AND BRISKBATS-WELCOME !!!

Swami Vivekananda - The Prince of Awakened India

Home Categories Members Blogs
Home / Blogs
Friday, January 12, 2007
Swami Vivekananda - The Prince of Awakened India
Swami Vivekananda brought to international focus the spiritual content of India's ancient religions. Swamiji's speeches at the World Parliament of Religions were a turning point in the history of religions and the brightest began to see religion as a journey to discover the divine in us rather than an aggrandisement of identities. He began the Vedantic revolution in the modern age and his work has begun bearing fruit on a wider scale when the world, on the brink of clash of civilisations, is beginning to see the value of Hinduism’s vision of inclusiveness rather than exclusiveness. To Swami Vivekananda shall the world refer to more and more as it seeks the light to tread upon the path towards the familyhood of all mankind – Vasudeva Kuttumbakam.

Swami Vivekananda - the Prince of Awakened India!
6:54:10 PM
Posted By Venu Gopal Comments (0) Uncategorized

Dr.Manmohan Singh misleading the nation

Thursday, December 28, 2006
Dr. Manmohan Singh misleading the nation
Dr. Manmohan Singh, in proclaiming that Muslims must have the first claim on resources for development, is misleading the nation by suggesting that Governmental economic endeavours can be community specific. When members of both minority and majority communities live cheek by jowl in almost all regions of India (except maybe ethnically cleansed Kashmir Valley), how is the Government going to isolate the majority community and reach development resources only to the minority community? The truth is that economic development, by way of investment in infrastructure or production projects can only be region specific. Unless of course Dr. Manmohan Singh meant that he is going to take from development resources and line the pockets of individual members of the Muslim community.

In making such proclamations, Dr. Manmohan Singh is donning the mantle of Mohammad Ali Jinnah.

11:02:22 AM
Posted By Venu Gopal Comments (2) Politics
Comments
Peeyush Verma Thursday, December 28, 2006 1:00:20 PM
It certainly redicule the nation. Pacification has become the major platform of the politicians. National intrest has become meaningless. In the case of reservation all political parties played to their tune. Only GOD knows who are the ultimate beneficiaries. The question is, how long these politician will remain our saviour.
das kapital Thursday, December 28, 2006 3:44:08 PM
ethnically cleansed Kashmir valley and GUJARAT! except these 2 states people live cheek by jowl!

Gandhi and the task on hand

[My e-mail in Haindava Keralam yahoo community.] I do not know why we are criticizing Gandhi. What relevance has he today, unless you agree to his philosophy and wish to implement it in today's world? As members of a Hindu forum, we have to recognize our greatest challenge, take stock of our strengths and overcome our weaknesses. I think our greatest challenge is the Islamic mindset, which, having once truncated our country, is plotting again on the same lines. One thing we can openly do in public forums is to demolish the base upon which Islam stands - that it alone is the true religion, that Allah is the only true God and that Quran is God's last word and all other religions and scriptures are outdated. We can demolish these assumptions of the Muslims by understanding our Advaitic vision, awakening to it and spreading its light. The very light of Advaita would banish the darkness of Islam. Our greatest weakness is that we seem to loose focus. It is better we consider these things rather than seek mere academic discussion on Gandhi and all that. This is my humble opinion.

Win-win for car owners and passengers

Thursday, December 14, 2006 Comment on blog WIN-WIN for car-owners as well as passengers This is a brilliant suggestion. Practical problems would include the slowing down of traffic due to cars often stopping to pick up and leave passengers. I suggest the fare should only be that of bus-fare. Also, only car-owners should be allowed this picking up. Employee-drivers would seek to make a fast buck and hence there would be competition on the roads. 8:28:03 PM Posted By Venu Gopal Comments (2) Uncategorized Comments govind Thursday, December 14, 2006 9:04:55 PM May we have link to original blog to comment on yours please ? K.Venugopal Thursday, December 14, 2006 11:42:43 PM The original blog was posted on Thursday Dec 14 at 3.07.30 PM.

Thursday, December 14, 2006
WIN-WIN for car-owners as well as passengers
In Delhi , daily I drive my Maruti 800 from Karol Bagh to ITO and find so many passengers standing to go on same route but I feel hesitant to give them lift in my car as
* daily it's not possible
* who knows one of them will snatch my keys and run away with my car
*passengers also feel why I am offering the lift ?
So an interesting situation develops daily :--
*my car is going empty but 3-4 persons can easily sit
* these 3-4 persons go uncomfortably in crowded buses / undisciplined auto etc
* in Delhi summer or winter when weather is at peak , they can easily enjoy AC of my car. During rains also , your attire remains intact in a car than other public transport .
If I am allowed to charge Rs 10/- each passenger ,
* I shall feel motivated to offer lift to 3-4 persons daily
* my petrol-expenses shall get a sort of reimbursement
* passengers will also feel inclined to take a " paid " journey rather than a free lift.
Initially to make the scheme popular , let Delhi Govt not charge anything. Only on payment of token ONETIME processing fee of Rs 100 /- , let a sticker be issued to me so that passengers may know I am " legally ' allowed to give them lift . Only ( genuine ) car-owners with mobile numbers be given this ticker to avoid misuse. Many Colonies / societies also issue Car-passes these days --let Delhi Govt give power to RWAs to issue such stickers so that responsibility is there.
These are , however , my first thoughts only . Please comment here so that scheme is WIN-WIN for car-owners / passengers alike.
3:07:30 PM
Posted By great india Comments (0) Uncategorized

M.F. Hussain and the Danish cartoonists

Tuesday, December 12, 2006 M.F.Hussain and the Danish cartoonists Artistic freedom should mean both the artist's freedom (everybody and anybody can be considered to be an artist) and the freedom to produce artistic works without any bar whatsoever. (Here again, everybody and anybody’s work can be considered an artistic work, for beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.) So does artistic freedom mean freedom to anybody and everybody to do anything and everything he or she pleases? Absolutely not. We should classify people and activities that cause violence as being unfit for freedom and put them behind bars till they sober down. (Or hang them if they are incorrigible.) The question is, has M.F. Hussain caused violence? He has not. Nor had the Danish cartoonists. Whatever violence followed or is threatened is due to psychological reasons. This we must distinguish from physical violence caused directly by the artist or his work. My contention is that psychological violence is the result of a spiritual lack and the cause cannot be anywhere else other than in the perpetrators of the violence itself, not in an artist or his art. [I intended to post this as comment on Jumbo Jumbo’s blog on the subject but could not. Is NDTV purposely fouling things up because Jumbo Jumbo is an unabashed Hindutvavadi?} 9:00:05 PM Posted By Venu Gopal Comments (0) Uncategorized Comments amused Tuesday, December 12, 2006 9:27:54 PM Its simple. Its an accepted norm that nobody should play with the sentiments of religion. But in India, there is double standard for this. If something offensive against Hinduism is commited its seen as the Intellectual or individual freedome choice. If the same is done on other religions, its seen as Heinous crime and from intellectuals to Politicians stand first in criticizing it, taking credit of banning it first in the whole world. jumbo_jumbo Wednesday, December 13, 2006 11:33:27 PM dear venu bhaithanx for your compliment. i am proud to be communal if that means standing up for my religion and my culturewhat was hussain's intentions behind the paintings? what would have gone wroong had he clothed sita. why the muslim and christian paintings are shown as fully clothed, while only the hindu paintings are portrayed in a vulgar mannerhindus look upon sita as a goddess and hanuman as a divine being. we have tolerated this thing for too long now K.Venugopal Friday, December 15, 2006 9:39:35 AM Dear Amused, You are right. It is the double standards that is the biggest threat to freedom. We have to first expose the secular brigade who practise double standards. If M.F. Hussain's nude Sita is artistic freedom, then so are the Satanic Verses and the Danish cartoons. We can't have selective freedom. Dear Jumbo Jumbo, I agree with you that the sacred should not be tampered with. Still, we should always allow the broadening of perspectives. This has always been the Hindu tradition - whatever can be argued to be true, its opposite too can be argued to be true. However, I would not be able to morally defend M.F. Hussain if I am not able to similarly defend Salman Rushdie and the Danish cartoonists. We are losing our freedom because of secular hypocrisy. kknath Friday, December 15, 2006 11:20:54 PM artistic freedom does not mean that you con do any thing, just like freedom of expression does not mean you can say any thing or for that matter the journalist can write what-ever he pleases. a moral responsibility is attached to all things that you do more if you are a public figure ie. you have recognition in public.there is some limitation imposed by the Govt. in all fields which have public domain or where public unrest is expected.that is the reason why the Satanic versus was banned. if this is correct then the paintings of mf hussain who has hurt the feelings of the majority population by repeatedly doing the same inspite the protests and (threats about his well being are extreme and deserve condemnation) acts not involving him physically has to follow suite in the same logic.its only here in india that you can play with the religious sentiments of the majority and still get away with it scot free. why this differentiation when the minority like christians and muslims are not on the same footing.let our jouranlist friends also understand that there actions are under scnnaer of the public.

Mahatma Gandhi

[My comment in Haindava Keralam yahoogroup. Dear Dr. S. Sharma, You are talking of the destruction of Congress Party of India as being essential in order to eradicate Gandhian mentality. You must be joking because the Congress of today has nothing to do with Gandhian mentality. The problem with the Congress is that it is given to Muslim appeasement and corruption. Mahatma Gandhi however believed in and lived certain ideals which were very much ahead of his time, though he was inspired by ancient teachings. If John Stuart Mills talks of fighting for what one wants, Vedanta talks of getting rid of the wants itself, what to say of fighting. Krishna may have advised Arjuna to fight, but remember it was a fight against adharma, not for measly wants. That way, Gandhiji too fought, did he not? He could have quietly continued his practice in South Africa and returned to India a very rich man and led a comfortable retired life. But he took up a fight on Dharmic lines. K.Venugopal