This is continuing the discussion from "To Think About Heaven."
Written on Facebook wall by Liyana Tassim:
ah, u remember that controversy about whether or not the Koran was created or uncreated?
1) the prophet did not ask for the Koran to be made into a book, he is a prophet why did he not ask for it to be made into a book?
2) the Koran was collected by the Sahabah and certain versions which Umar Al Khattab did not like was burnt.
Btw, the Bedouins are not all Muslims, they are considered the lowest of the low, and its kind of an insult for someone like you calling them low when in their society they are already considered low
I wonder why you're always ethnocentric, empirical thought has its problems are already countered by post modernists, one of which is although you disagree with evolutionist thought what you're very much associated with, the idea that organized religion especially monotheistic religions are at the top of the food chain, I dislike such a presumption, after all aren't polytheistic religions part and parcel of organized religion?
In addition matrilineal as well as female Gods and Goddesses of polytheistic religions, such as making the female as a High God are many in different cultures and societies, to mistake that they do not have a right to religion is very insulting. Its so la di da to be accusing mass organized religions which on the one hand are already making small polytheistic religions anyway but adding you to that is just making it even extra ethnocentric. The whole point of some societies creating religion is that it provided a social aspect to it, what you're presenting, the need to be atheistic is in line with evolutionist thought, Sigmund Freud had talked about this in Totems and Taboo and I've talked about this as well, Freud argued that being atheistic is the highest of the high, with monotheistic thought second and polytheistic thought and religion as primitive and lowly. What makes you think that simple societies are in essence actually 'simple'? And that your modern thought is above polytheism? IN addition to that is the multiplicity in which religion manifests itself,
The problem here is you're disallowing people of ALL religions, regardless whether they're polytheistic, animistic, monotheistic and in addition Godless religions such as Buddhism from having A religion in particular. I myself am not an atheist but neither am I a Muslim, but I do know for one thing, to accuse hotentot almighty and chucking in the bin monotheistic religions who have insulted animism and polytheism and philosophical religion as one, is a pretty chauvinistic attempt. Here, here let me point this out to you, religion is a belief in the supernatural, therefore whatever belief in the supernatural including say Buddhism, what is intangible IS religion. To think of tribal peoples and summing them up as primitive and backward is rather insulting, I believe that even the Penan have something to tell us, the Bedouin are a nomadic tribe, some of them have followed their older religions are what one would say 'half' Muslims. Some of them who have settled in Saudi Arabia is ofcourse 'fully' Muslim, whatever Islam means.
Not all organized religions believe in the idea of Heaven
although there has been 'corruptions' from the original ideas proposed by Siddhartha for example Mahayana Buddhism (Greater Cycle - does not mean that it is the better Buddhism haa) however, Theravada BUddhism with its strongly strict scriptural interpretations are more in line with the idea of attaining Nirvana. Thats the part where I found what you said as insulting and chauvinistic, the part when you said 'organized religion', Nirvana is not heaven, the idea of attaining NIrvana is to simply blow out, organized religions are not as simple as you think, there are sociological and anthropological reasons as to why people have religion in the first place, it is after all the root of all technology, science, art and culture, it is not necessarily a completely bad thing. There are several religions that have also amalgamated the idea of Buddhism and traditional religion such as totemism, this also includes Shintoism, to say that ALL organized religion is USELESS is a very as I said, narrow minded conception.
Oh yes, before I end it, I gave some thought to the idea of heaven, you see religions evolve, they continuously from time to time adapt and change according to what the demands of the then contemporary times are. For example, today, Catholicism has already chucked massive bits of heaven out of the window, the problem with Islam is that they have hooked on to orthodox and traditionalist interpretations of Islam, remember certain factions of Islam have thrived during the 15th century and they have claimed that the Koran is 'created'. And I see nothing wrong for a Muslim to not believe in heaven, as I said your conception of religion is pretty narrow, and whoever said jihadists make sense in the first place? Try reading Clifford Geertz when he compares to Islamic societies, to depend on people like Gellner as a source of Islamic thought I think is very one handed. I don't care if you insult Islam, by all means trample on it, but that's because I am part of it, but if you start insulting other religions such as polytheism, animism and philosophical religions and lump it together with monotheism, dear you know nothing about and stick with your monotheistic toys
1) the prophet did not ask for the Koran to be made into a book, he is a prophet why did he not ask for it to be made into a book?
2) the Koran was collected by the Sahabah and certain versions which Umar Al Khattab did not like was burnt.
Btw, the Bedouins are not all Muslims, they are considered the lowest of the low, and its kind of an insult for someone like you calling them low when in their society they are already considered low
I wonder why you're always ethnocentric, empirical thought has its problems are already countered by post modernists, one of which is although you disagree with evolutionist thought what you're very much associated with, the idea that organized religion especially monotheistic religions are at the top of the food chain, I dislike such a presumption, after all aren't polytheistic religions part and parcel of organized religion?
In addition matrilineal as well as female Gods and Goddesses of polytheistic religions, such as making the female as a High God are many in different cultures and societies, to mistake that they do not have a right to religion is very insulting. Its so la di da to be accusing mass organized religions which on the one hand are already making small polytheistic religions anyway but adding you to that is just making it even extra ethnocentric. The whole point of some societies creating religion is that it provided a social aspect to it, what you're presenting, the need to be atheistic is in line with evolutionist thought, Sigmund Freud had talked about this in Totems and Taboo and I've talked about this as well, Freud argued that being atheistic is the highest of the high, with monotheistic thought second and polytheistic thought and religion as primitive and lowly. What makes you think that simple societies are in essence actually 'simple'? And that your modern thought is above polytheism? IN addition to that is the multiplicity in which religion manifests itself,
The problem here is you're disallowing people of ALL religions, regardless whether they're polytheistic, animistic, monotheistic and in addition Godless religions such as Buddhism from having A religion in particular. I myself am not an atheist but neither am I a Muslim, but I do know for one thing, to accuse hotentot almighty and chucking in the bin monotheistic religions who have insulted animism and polytheism and philosophical religion as one, is a pretty chauvinistic attempt. Here, here let me point this out to you, religion is a belief in the supernatural, therefore whatever belief in the supernatural including say Buddhism, what is intangible IS religion. To think of tribal peoples and summing them up as primitive and backward is rather insulting, I believe that even the Penan have something to tell us, the Bedouin are a nomadic tribe, some of them have followed their older religions are what one would say 'half' Muslims. Some of them who have settled in Saudi Arabia is ofcourse 'fully' Muslim, whatever Islam means.
Not all organized religions believe in the idea of Heaven
although there has been 'corruptions' from the original ideas proposed by Siddhartha for example Mahayana Buddhism (Greater Cycle - does not mean that it is the better Buddhism haa) however, Theravada BUddhism with its strongly strict scriptural interpretations are more in line with the idea of attaining Nirvana. Thats the part where I found what you said as insulting and chauvinistic, the part when you said 'organized religion', Nirvana is not heaven, the idea of attaining NIrvana is to simply blow out, organized religions are not as simple as you think, there are sociological and anthropological reasons as to why people have religion in the first place, it is after all the root of all technology, science, art and culture, it is not necessarily a completely bad thing. There are several religions that have also amalgamated the idea of Buddhism and traditional religion such as totemism, this also includes Shintoism, to say that ALL organized religion is USELESS is a very as I said, narrow minded conception.
Oh yes, before I end it, I gave some thought to the idea of heaven, you see religions evolve, they continuously from time to time adapt and change according to what the demands of the then contemporary times are. For example, today, Catholicism has already chucked massive bits of heaven out of the window, the problem with Islam is that they have hooked on to orthodox and traditionalist interpretations of Islam, remember certain factions of Islam have thrived during the 15th century and they have claimed that the Koran is 'created'. And I see nothing wrong for a Muslim to not believe in heaven, as I said your conception of religion is pretty narrow, and whoever said jihadists make sense in the first place? Try reading Clifford Geertz when he compares to Islamic societies, to depend on people like Gellner as a source of Islamic thought I think is very one handed. I don't care if you insult Islam, by all means trample on it, but that's because I am part of it, but if you start insulting other religions such as polytheism, animism and philosophical religions and lump it together with monotheism, dear you know nothing about and stick with your monotheistic toys
Reply on Facebook from Jason Biggs
LOL! To everyone, this person has not posted the rest of my arguments replying him, not at all and this was posted today. What does that tell you? He's hiding something. Jason, wherever you are, please post my newer arguments on your facebook INTO YOUR BLOG so everybody can see. Btw as Ive said, you have never produced any philosophy, it has no basis, no strength no nothing, unless you can provide me what your 'philosophy' is in a proper treatise then I can read it, I mean honestly Ive read your blog, I do not see any philosophy in it at all
ReplyDeleteYours sincerely, L.T
Liyana Tassim ooh to add insult to injury may I add one thing, one of my good friends was an empiricit like you and even more nihilistic, sure Nietszche did collapse the belief system only to reorganize it again in his later writings, take that nihilism!btw, read back to your older blog postings, really you dont think that you're superior above religion? Hmm? your front cartoon? Duh. I'm not a Musulman myself but I know an insult when I see one. Read carefully, you said ORGANIZED RELIGION, I can send you blog to a dozen people who can deconstruct it in one minute. Why? I'll give you one example, you said you're an EMPIRICIST, what does empirism mean? To provide materialistic evidence, I'm giving you the evidence, in addition to that you say you don't believe in evolutionist theory and reject it? This is an idiosyncratic response and does not make any sense. Yeah, I think you're narrow minded, why? You attack only Muslims in general, why is that? I don't like Muslims too sometimes and yes I am hurt by them but when I think back that is just like me treating other religions without any respect and providing disdain for their approach. Your philosophy? What is it? explain, I only see scatteredness without any EVIDENCE, wheres your empirirism? And btw, that is a very chauvinistic explanation decrying people not being able to believe in heaven, I myself do not believe in heaven, btw there are several philosophers that can easily point out that FAITH does NOT require materialistic evidence OR explanation, Soren Kirkegaard has talked about this, THE ONLY WAY to EXPERIENCE FAITH is to LEAP. To say religion does not work is chauvinistic, why? Easy, Placebos. Shamans and bomohs have proved this time after time when they can heal the sick, faith is inexplicable. In addition that, Mazhabs can be deconstructed even the Koran, and post modernist a blanket term? HAHAHA thats what they say when they dont understand post modernism, when people are SOO ethnocentric Let me explain something, ethnocentrism means the disregard of other and pointing out that one thing is above other things, and honestly this is what you do. Abortions in Islam is legal especially in Mazhab Syafie, however, the Mazhab Syafie in Brunei defines abortion as illegal in either cases of rape or incest, THAT is a STATE definition NOT a SYAFIE definition. Go back, Islam was one of the first religions that practices family planning AND ABORTIONS, there are several evidences that ATTEST TO THIS.
ReplyDeleteI don't have a problem with Muslims who don't believe in heaven. But I do have a problem with Muslims who support fatwas to kill authors. I have a problem with Muslims who advocate mysogyny. And I have a problem with Muslims who want abortions illegal even in cases of rape and incest. [sic]
---> THIS PARAGRAPH DO YOU SEE THIS? IT SAYS MUSLIMS!!! IT DOES NOT SAY SOME PEOPLE IT SAYS MUSLIMS. Sounds like a heaven imagined by some bedouin tribesmen to me. ----> SEE THIS? THIS IS ETHNOCENTRIC. Bedouins if you need to know are considered one of the lowest ranking tribes, You say you don't make any assumptions of primitive people, THEY ARE CONSIDERED AS PRIMITIVE PEOPLE BY THEIR SOCIETY, NOT ALL OF THEM ARE MUSLIMS.I remember watching a film called 'What Dreams May Come.[1]' It forced me to re-evaluate my thoughts about heaven, and how troublesome and conceptually flawed such a concept is. ----> this, on the other hand, 'flawed concept'. ethnocentric, by the bedouin tribesmen. In addition, the TRIBESMEN, thats why you put a ' ' in TRIBES, because the term is pejorative.You 'ATHEIST DELUSION' link, with your hint of sarcasm, lol, and you say you don't look down on other people and think atheists are at the top of the food chain? WEEE, I don't say I'm smart dear, I'm not. But I know when people are being mean, I can see it, and you, you're being mean.
I've heard of the 'beauty' of these angels. They don't seem to be beautiful to me. Everytime the Quranic version of these angelic sexual servants is mentioned, I actually get turned off. ---> This, there are multiple interpretations of this, Ive said that again and again, just because it was translated by some man does not make it the ONLY VALID TRANSLATION, religion could be metaphorical.And Ive said this again and again, you said ORGANIZED RELIGION, I'm pointing out THIS, in actuality even Buddhism has an idea of heaven, what is heaven anyway? It is undefinable, would one consider Nirvana as heaven? The Vikings considered that heaven was one constant battle that they would win over and over again, Muslims in Japan believe there's sushi in heaven, Muslims in the ME believe there are streams of milk and wine. The meaning is different from place to place from culture to culture. ORGANIZED RELIGION MEANS, ALL RELIGIONS, you get that? Do you, don't you? The term ORGANIZED was first used to explain only monotheistic 'WORLD RELIGIONS' to use organized religion to describe ONLY a monotheistic faith is PEJORATIVE, you get that? THAT is why I pull out polytheism and animism, they are ALSO ORGANIZED RELIGIONS AND THEY ALSO BELIEVE IN HEAVEN. To CRITICIZE Islam alone as being one with heaven is chauvinistic,Let me relate, for the Penan when you die, you go to a heaven that would be like earth with many foods to eat and you do not die and you will not get sick. Actually the Quranic heaven interpretation was borrowed by Christian theologists, how come you're not attacking the originator source of this? The only problem with Islam I see at times is the lack of originality, oh btw, this sentence
Anyway, to say that I think all religions are 'useless' is untrue. I would say a large number of them are dangerous. When I say dangerous, I don't just mean jihad-dangerous. I mean science-hindering dangerous. I mean blind-faith dangerous. Homophobic-dangerous. The reason I talk about Islam is it's one of the fastest growing and biggest religion out there, and it's also one seeming to be permanently stuck in its ancient form. ---> Islam is not the only fastest growing biggest religion, its not, there are 1 billion people in India, and only about 200 million are Muslims, there are 1 billion people in China, and only about 150 million of them are Muslims, okay that said enough, the Iranians practice an amalgamation of Zoroastrianism and Islam, The Sikhs practice an amalgamation of Hinduism and Islam, actually compared to a Christian majority there is no difference between the misogyny of a Muslim versus the misogyny of a contemporary life. To open your clothes as a woman and become a porn star is not liberating, and neither does hiding yourself in a veil, they are two extremes which are both equally misogynistic. In addition to that, in actuality despite the misogyny that you claim, there are more women actually raped,murdered,maimed and have incestuous relationships in NON-MUSLIM countries than MUSLIM countries. If you read Fatima Mernissi you can understand that the power of the Moroccan household is not in the hands of the man, it is in the hands of the woman. On the other hand the worst practiced misogyny goes to India,female infanticide is so common in India it occurs in almost every home, bride burnings, dowry problems, these are cultural problems and they're not Muslim. Female infanticide also occurs the most in China due to the one child policy, the girl child in India also receives no education, less nutrition than male boys. And I'm sorry to point this out but Islam is one of the countries that actually promote science, more and more veil wearing students go to MIT, Muslim feminists spring forth everywhere, doctors, philosophers. The two conjoined twins from Afghanistan are a lawyer and a doctor. You think the West is not misogynistic? Hahaha, see this is where you cannot see, I deal with Islamic/feminist problems everyday, to think that the Western woman is not as oppressed as the Muslim woman is a very chauvinistic idea, for every dollar made by a man in America, a woman receives only half. The misogyny in America is made more worse by women under patriarchal definitions of sexuality, and in addition to the terrorist problem, I'm sorry to say, more people actually die of the American occupations in Iran and Afghanistan than there are terrorists killing people. Just because Muslim terrorists are misguided idiots, and obviously so, makes it even more apparent that you don't take note of the problems in Muslim communities. I don't have a problem with Muslims who don't believe in heaven. But I do have a problem with Muslims who support fatwas to kill authors. I have a problem with Muslims who advocate mysogyny. And I have a problem with Muslims who want abortions illegal even in cases of rape and incest. ---> better a fatwa that can be ignored than state law. According to California state law, and states in the South who are allowed their own legal statutes, ABORTIONS ARE ILLEGAL IN THE CASES OF RAPE AND INCEST, Bill Clinton has signed this, George W. Bush has signed this, and Obama has no time to overturn this. How come you're only attacking fatwas? Fatwas vary, state law doesn't, fatwas sometimes do not influence state law, state law cannot be influenced by anyone. Unless someone is smart enough to pass a bill and fight it. Philosophy you must understand is actually one of the crux arguments that form state laws, philosophies are not mere talking games, but they influence a large part of how people actually live. For example, just because I accept evolution doesn't mean I am a social Darwinist. [sic] ---> i thought you made it clear you don't accept evolution, but it seems you changed your mind and now you do. Why does the Islamic concept of heaven resemble those of oases and palaces? Sounds like a heaven imagined by some bedouin tribesmen to me. [sic]
To assume I think tribesmen as backward and primitive, you must be joking. From that single mention, you think I'm ethnocentric. What a big leap. [sic]
I rest my case. :)
Oh btw, Britain has a group called Muslim Gays Unite. Homophobia actually did not originate in Muslim countries, if you take note of Islamic history the Hijra of the Muslim dynasties in India, was bought by...Muslims! Yeay! Hijras are not Khunsas, they are not born with indeterminate genitalia. In addition to that, in Iran, it is 'halal' for you to marry a transvestite who has gone through a sex change. And according to Turkish history harems are not furnished only with women but also with young boys, as I said, different cultures contextualize homophobia differently. If you read some Suras, there is some mention on this.
Anyway, to say that I think all religions are 'useless' is untrue. I would say a large number of them are dangerous. When I say dangerous, I don't just mean jihad-dangerous. I mean science-hindering dangerous. I mean blind-faith dangerous. Homophobic-dangerous. The reason I talk about Islam is it's one of the fastest growing and biggest religion out there, and it's also one seeming to be permanently stuck in its ancient form. [sic]
As I said, Islam promotes Science, I mean how the hell did they stick a nuclear reactor in Pakistan? By Magic! By Blind faith ofcourse! Blind-faith? That my dear, everyone has blind faith in something, and being blind-faith and truly believing in something is how people make sense of the world. But to say blind faith is dangerous is quite odd, pre-literate tribes have blind faith that the rain will fall if they perform the rain dance. Shamans have blind faith when they heal. And to say Islam as being permanently stuck is a sorry excuse for not actually seeing that there are other Muslims. Oh wait, you just said you didnt have any problems with Muslims? Whats this? Another opposing argument! Btw, Christianity is also one of the fastest growing and biggest religion out there, how come you're not attacking homophobic, boyassgrabbing priests? The Vatican Church has stuck to its decision, NO GAYS! And Catholics number more than Muslims, hmm...
Btw, Salman Rushdies book is so bad and boring unlike his previous other two books, Shame and Midnights Children, he should be hanged for bore-ing us to death. Its like as if he just wants to attempt the outrageous, actually dear there are about a million publications out there that criticize Islam more worst, and Rushdies work was only fictive! But out of those one million only Rushdie was attacked! Why? Because his received the most attention, do you see this? Or dont you? Btw, the Americans burned more books than the Muslims, they burned Harry Potter, To Kill a Mockingbird...and they have more oh yeah before i forget, you attack the virgins thing that is not even manifested in reality, they are after all, easily deconstructed. Ofcourse its mysognystic, but say, how come you dont criticize America's Largest Gangbangs? Its even more misogynistic, in addition to that they depict and extremely sexualized objectification of women, and whats more, its realistic, its reality, its not in some book in some faraway distant waiting for death reality. Its there, right there, and yet, you fail to mention this. Oh btw, what philosophy are you talking about? I dont see any, you merely echo what philosophers have done before you, what philosophy have you? Honestly, Ive read your posts, they have not even one iota of a philosophy in it, merely rantings. Unless you have a solid philosophical treatise, then probably you have a philosophy of your own. My my you must be extremely intelligent to have your own philosophy, other philosophers publish theirs when they turn 40!Oh yeah baru ku ingat, both the writers, Salman Rushdie and the guy who said the Koran was created is still alive. :P As a sociologist you cant actually believe what they think theyre saying as the actual truth, unless you read anthropology books or go down there yourself, actually ideals are far from reality. You know this picture, its a picture of my son, his name is Edward, why is his name Edward? Because there was a writer named Edward Said who wrote several books and one of them was about the Mass Media and Islam, he was not a Muslim, he was a Christian Palestinian refugee who ran to America. See Edward Said , Mass Media and Islam, what you are and what you think you're doing is actually the product of the American media, thats why you think Islam is equatable to this
Anyway, to say that I think all religions are 'useless' is untrue. I would say a large number of them are dangerous. When I say dangerous, I don't just mean jihad-dangerous. I mean science-hindering dangerous. I mea
a large number of religions are dangerous? Jesus please, snuff the misery! Secular wars have killed just as many as religious wars, and religious wars are actually a 'blanket term' to push political agenda
oh yeah despite Islams misogyny it has produced more presidents and prime ministers who are women than the West put together
Pakistan -1
Bangladesh - 2
Indonesia - 1
America - 0
and one more thing, everyones saying you're infantile. I didnt say this, but I wonder why you're hiding under a pseudonym? I mean if you really are as honest as you say you are, look at me Im here, I say it right out, I'm not scared, shouldnt you too show who you are? Berani kerana benar...btw your tauhid lesson caricatures is so limited, a lot of contemporary Muslim philosophers have already rejected this, why are you using tauhid lessons from the 15th century? Shouldnt you be using modern Islamic philosophy rather than simplistic explanations of religion from the madrasah?Ill tell you why some people believe in religion, some people are underprivileged and they die of diseases, children are killed everyday. For them they need the concept of heaven and hell or else no justice can be served and therefore their lives are meaning and futile. I think they should have the right to make their lives more meaningul especially if they are under sieged. Watch Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11, sure he has been criticized, who hasnt, but at least what hes showing depicts a society in conundrum and the breeding ground for terroristsLet me add another simple fact, the Americans did actually support the Taliban by supplying them with munitions to get rid of the Soviet Union, the terrorist problem is in truth not an exclusive Muslim problem but with America always supporting regimes that they think would benefit them the most! In this case, getting rid of the Soviet Union. They actually sent CIA agents to train terrorists, lol, from a country with the banner of freedom, and despite that America also produces the brightest minds in history.I dont think just because I'm older than you I'm smarter than you. I have a sister whose 7 years younger than me and I believe is smarter than me, why? Because she's so fucking wise. I have cousins who are younger than me more intelligent than me, the fact that I throw big words around? Thats funny arent you throwing big words around? I find it easier to use big words because I think in English, I dont know why, but thats the way it is, I find it odd that you get to throw around big words and I should be stuck using simple words, but thats okay :P Show yourself lah brader, and show me your philosophical treatise. Because I don't see any philosophy, I see rantings, although Nietszche wrote like this and he is an empiricist he was at least wise enough to show material evidence, compile your philosophy then send it to me so I would know your philosophy. Remember, EVIDENCE, just as Ive SHOWN YOU evidence.despite Islam hindering Science, dont you notice that there are more Muslim women who go to university and achieve degrees, masters and phds in science and technology? IN addition to that Brunei is an Islamic country, there are more women than men who go on to higher education despite its misogyny, now this is empirical evidence, add to that Indonesia and Malaysia as well as Bangladesh and Pakistan who have a high rate of women who enter higher education. Oh btw, there are several other cultures who actually practice underage marriage, Islamic countries on the contrary (amazingly! despite its prophet doing it first!), marry post menarche not pre menarche, India has the highest rate of pre menarche marriages. And Islam did actually produce a sort of Kama Sutra book, in fact sex in Islam is NOT BAD OR EVIL AT ALL. Sex in islam is revered, what does it say? Memenuhi keperluan isteri secara ZAHIR dan BATIN. Zahir as in sexually, physical economical needs and batin as in emotionally and psychologically. Just because it seems from your caricatures that you were brought up (probably) by people who dont understand intellectual discourse, does not mean the rest of the other Muslims are stupid. Btw your cartoon about the neighbours daughter being a slut, isnt that sexist and misogynistic? So what if she wears a really short skirt? Thats her choice and not yours, and your mother should NOT say anything about her because its none of her business. You say this and this and this, but you're just trying to justify prejudice.