Question from Badlun..

[Badlun]

have you looked in to any other religions which you may find more agreeable?? I didn't ask you about Islam. I don't know why your idea of religion or morality is limited to Islam especially if you have such disagreeable impression of it.
Have you tried looking in to other religions??

Yes. I have done some courses on Comparative study of Religions formally and have studied all major religions and religious or spiritual ways of life including Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Shintoism, Confucianism, Bahiaism, Taoism, Hinduism, Sikhism, Babism, Jainism, Zoroastrianism and Paganism.

I discuss Islam because my life goal is to do some thing for Pashtuns. As Pashtuns are Muslims so my priority areas are related to Islam and Islamism.

Personally I like Sufi Islam only. If I have to choose any other religion for me that will be Buddhism as Osho was highly inspired from Buddhism. I also like the colorful way of life of Hindus as compared to the boring monotheism of Islam or evangelical Christianity. I also like Catholicism. My approach is eclectic and I take good things from anywhere. I don't believe that truth lies only in one religion.

[Badlun]

Well sex outside of the appropriate framework can be argued as being a form of "corruption, contamination, dishonesty etc."


Are you familiar with the evolution of morality?

Yes sexuality and morality are interlinked. Social behavior do influence morality but as morality is a construct and culturally relative, one sexual behavior may be moral in one society but not in the other. Having a boy friend in the West is a norm, a right conduct but in the Muslim society it may be a fatal act and a form of dishonesty or corruption as you have dubbed it.

Now for changing morality , you have to change the cultural values. Modern education and exposure to modern society may change moral values. The same Pashtuns in a village may not look at a girl, but in city they may sit on the bench of a university or may be touching each other. I believe that morality is a science but only to the universal values otherwise it is relative.

I know a lot about evolution of morality. Even animals have some kind of morality like altruism. Religion did not bring the moral concepts. There was morality before religion. And there is now irreligious morality. Ethics is a branch of Philosophy also not only of religion. there is an innate basis for human morality and we do not need religion exclusively for morality. An atheist can be moral and a clergyman can be immoral. Human brain has been biologically prepared by natural selection to engage in moral judgment.

[AgriculturalJake]

Yes sexuality and morality are interlinked. Social behavior do influence morality but as morality is a construct and culturally relative, one sexual behavior may be moral in one society but not in the other. Having a boy friend in the West is a norm, a right conduct but in the Muslim society it may be a fatal act and a form of dishonesty or corruption as you have dubbed it.

Now for changing morality , you have to change the cultural values. Modern education and exposure to modern society may change moral values. The same Pashtuns in a village may not look at a girl, but in city they may sit on the bench of a university or may be touching each other. I believe that morality is a science but only to the universal values otherwise it is relative.

I know a lot about evolution of morality. Even animals have some kind of morality like altruism. Religion did not bring the moral concepts. There was morality before religion. And there is now irreligious morality. Ethics is a branch of Philosophy also not only of religion. there is an innate basis for human morality and we do not need religion exclusively for morality. An atheist can be moral and a clergyman can be immoral. Human brain has been biologically prepared by natural selection to engage in moral judgment.

Is having dual paternity of being a safi and a shinwari on a higher moral plane interlinked too?
http://www.pashtunforums.com/showthr...808#post758808

Is Shinwari and Safi dual paternity natural selection and progress forward in evolution?

[Brown Skinned Savage]

@ Badlin you tend to zigzag between topics so I'm going to ignore the stuff you write that's pretty much irrelevant. But the reality is Religion is a consequence of evolution; which suggests that Religious Morality is fashioned around how Evolution has structured our Tendencies an Habits.

This is why Religious Morality about sexuality is superior and more accurately models what would be proper moral conduct therefore more correct than Secular Liberal ideas. Which is why, Correct Sexual Morality goes beyond consent; in fact just leaving Morality at only consent is a lower standard and insufficient to meet the complex nature of human beings.

This is why the type of Teachings prescribed by Osho are in Conflict with What would be a healthy balance for Human Beings and are in conflict with how our Evolution had developed us, and thereby are harmful and destructive.

Once we understand Evolution and how it influenced and developed Modern Humans then the Ambiguity about Morality and Sexuality becomes Minimzed and we can have a clear idea of what is Morally correct; which is more consistent with Religious Morality than secular liberalism

[Badlun]

[QUOTE=Brown Skinned Savage;759379]@ Badlin you tend to zigzag between topics so I'm going to ignore the stuff you write that's pretty much irrelevant. But the reality is Religion is a consequence of evolution; which suggests that Religious Morality is fashioned around how Evolution has structured our Tendencies an Habits.

This is why Religious Morality about sexuality is superior and more accurately model what would be proper moral conduct therefore more correct than Secular Liberal ideas. Which is why, Correct Sexual Morality goes beyond consent; in fact just leaving Morality at only consent is a lower standard and insufficient to meet the complex nature of human beings.

This is why the type of Teachings prescribed by Osho are in Conflict with What would be a healthy balance for Human Beings and are in conflict with how our Evolution had developed us, and thereby are harmful and destructive.

Once we understand Evolution and how it influenced and developed Modern Humans then the Ambiguity about Morality and Sexuality becomes Minimzed and we can have a clear idea of what is Morally correct; which is more consistent with Religious Morality than secular liberalism[/QUOTEIf religion is the product of evolution then it is a human phenomena not divine and then how can we explain the role of a God,prophet,holy books etc?

[Brown Skinned Savage]

[MENTION=1034]Badlun[/MENTION]

Depends, if we take the hypothesis that God exists as a fact, then we can conclude that evolution is simply tanazalah and ta'rarafah. Just like Sufi Masters such as Shaikh Al-Akbar Ibn 'Arabi wrote about in Al-Futuh Al-Makkiyyah. So we can say the whole arc of life is navigated by the interplay of the Sifat Qudsiyyah in the kuhan. Thus Prophets are an expected consequences of the stages that nature undergoes in this process.

But if we reject the hypothesis of Divine Power. The concept of evolutionary basis for morality still works, and all these Prophets and sages were especially gifted individuals that had keen insight in respects to how humans developed their drives and tendencies in nature.

It works either way.

[Badlun]

[QUOTE=Brown Skinned Savage;759387][MENTION=1034]Badlun[/MENTION]

Depends, if we take the hypothesis that God exists as a fact, then we can conclude that evolution is simply tanazalah and ta'rarafah. Just like Sufi Masters such as Shaikh Al-Akbar Ibn 'Arabi wrote about in Al-Futuh Al-Makkiyyah. So we can say the whole arc of life is navigated by the interplay of the Sifat Qudsiyyah in the kuhan. Thus Prophets are an expected consequences of the stages that nature undergoes in this process.

But if we reject the hypothesis of Divine Power. The concept of evolutionary basis for morality still works, and all these Prophets and sages were especially gifted individuals that had keen insight in respects to how humans developed their drives and tendencies in nature.

It works either way.[/QUOTE
In your first option why then prophet could not come in the last 1400 years as it is expected. Also God here is part of the process of evolution not a creator as in religious sense and not an entity apart.

In the second option why prophets are usually not educated,literate,philosopher,scientist or scholars? They just depends on revelation from God.

[Brown Skinned Savage]

Who's to say they weren't? All we know about Muhammad(saw) was that he could not read. He was known for his intellect. Even in ancient times not all brilliant men of learning could read.

[DaZahroJaam.]

You haven't explained to me your own set of moral beliefs. Your own idea of what is right or wrong. How do you intend on "doing something" for the rest of the Pashtuns out there??
The biggest conflict that you seem to come across with your nameless system of beliefs is questioned is the matter of promiscuity. Of all the religions that you claim you have studied, not one allows the sort of freedom that you are after except for that osho guy who is known to be a cult leader. A leader of a cult where people were brainwashed. How you came across his wisdom before adopting it is beyond me but you were probably in search or something that no other sane person would preach to others.
You claim that the Quran is not 100% the word of God as Muslims believe it to be. I am not a very religious person and I am sorry to break it to you but you are not a prophet. You don't get to declare that especially when you don't have a system of moral beliefs that does simply specify wrong as wrong and right as right. Not the one that osho preaches.
Earlier you said that a religion which you define as a moral belief; does not concern the economy, political system or philosophy of a nation.
History has taught us of the nature of politics and the importance of coexisting. We can't force our personal beliefs on others which is why the idea of mixing religion with politics has proved its self a bad one. But how do you go on about suggesting that the concept of right and wrong does not apply to the economy or philosophy of a state?? Do you know what economy and philosophy are?? What right and wrong is?? That a society should not go for a collective method of worshipping a system of belief is understanding but then you fail at this system as an individual too. You claimed in one of the other threads that what a person chooses to consume should have nothing to do with religion.
So what does have to do with religion?? Buddhism is about discipline. How do you practice discipline in life??
You don't want your moral beliefs coming in your way of thought, you don't want it coming in your way of sex life, you don't want it coming in your way of the fundamental laws of living or politics.. When, where and how do you practice this unique religion or system of moral beliefs of yours??
This is not about Islam or religion. I want to know how an individual who doesn't have the slightest clue on as to what is right, claims to know exactly and with so much conviction of what is wrong.

[Badlun]

You haven't explained to me your own set of moral beliefs. Your own idea of what is right or wrong. How do you intend on "doing something" for the rest of the Pashtuns out there??
The biggest conflict that you seem to come across with your nameless system of beliefs is questioned is the matter of promiscuity. Of all the religions that you claim you have studied, not one allows the sort of freedom that you are after except for that osho guy who is known to be a cult leader. A leader of a cult where people were brainwashed. How you came across his wisdom before adopting it is beyond me but you were probably in search or something that no other sane person would preach to others.
You claim that the Quran is not 100% the word of God as Muslims believe it to be. I am not a very religious person and I am sorry to break it to you but you are not a prophet. You don't get to declare that especially when you don't have a system of moral beliefs that does simply specify wrong as wrong and right as right. Not the one that osho preaches.
Earlier you said that a religion which you define as a moral belief; does not concern the economy, political system or philosophy of a nation.
History has taught us of the nature of politics and the importance of coexisting. We can't force our personal beliefs on others which is why the idea of mixing religion with politics has proved its self a bad one. But how do you go on about suggesting that the concept of right and wrong does not apply to the economy or philosophy of a state?? Do you know what economy and philosophy are?? What right and wrong is?? That a society should not go for a collective method of worshipping a system of belief is understanding but then you fail at this system as an individual too. You claimed in one of the other threads that what a person chooses to consume should have nothing to do with religion.
So what does have to do with religion?? Buddhism is about discipline. How do you practice discipline in life??
You don't want your moral beliefs coming in your way of thought, you don't want it coming in your way of sex life, you don't want it coming in your way of the fundamental laws of living or politics.. When, where and how do you practice this unique religion or system of moral beliefs of yours??
This is not about Islam or religion. I want to know how an individual who doesn't have the slightest clue on as to what is right, claims to know exactly and with so much conviction of what is wrong.

Thanks for your thought provoking post. I am always ready to learn and share.
My own set of moral values is based on Consequential-ism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consequentialism

Consequentialism is the class of normative ethical theories holding that the consequences of one's conduct are the ultimate basis for any judgment about the rightness or wrongness of that conduct. Thus, from a consequentialist standpoint, a morally right act (or omission from acting) is one that will produce a good outcome, or consequence. In an extreme form, the idea of consequentialism is commonly encapsulated in the English saying, "the ends justify the means"
Mizzoni, John. Ethics: The Basics. John Wiley & Sons. p. 104.

I am against promiscuity. I believe in sex with love and passion, not just a physical animal act. If you read Osho you will find him to be the most anti-sex guru but he is against taboos and for him sex is a part not the whole.

I believe that ethics has a role in everything as we know medical ethics, professional ethics etc. But secularism separates religion from politics in the sense that a religious person may not run a political institution, rather a politician should do politics while a clergyman should be in charge of the religious stuff. It does not mean that a politician will always not be an upright man while a religious person will be always a good person. Ethics is required everywhere but religion is the the only guarantee of being ethical.

Religion do have a role but this role is limited only to beliefs in supernatural phenomena, worship and morality. Morality can be based on religion but also on philosophy and other disciplines. the best way is democracy where a parliament guarantees what is legal and what is illegal. then the state determines and promulgate the laws. An educationist or a clergyman can preach or educate about morality but its implementation is the function of the state not an individual or a group.

Quran is creature or direct words of the creator is even a controversy among Muslim scholars. however the practical value of Quran is that it is good if it has injunctions about honesty, truth, helping others, taking care of parents etc and it must be amended when it says that one man is equal to two women, polygamy, beating wives, cutting into pieces of non Muslims etc.

Discipline in life may come from your belief in God, holy books, fear of death , hell etc or from law, rules, regulations, fines, punishments, police, your own conscience etc. I consider law more practical and real for discipline than just religious injunctions. the religious societies like Somalia are less disciplined as compared to the Western less religious societies where rule of law is supreme.

[Badlun]

Who's to say they weren't? All we know about Muhammad(saw) was that he could not read. He was known for his intellect. Even in ancient times not all brilliant men of learning could read.

It means Islam is the product of the intellect of Muhammamd not the consequence of the revelations from God?

[DaZahroJaam.]

Thanks for your thought provoking post. I am always ready to learn and share.
My own set of moral values is based on Consequential-ism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consequentialism

Consequentialism is the class of normative ethical theories holding that the consequences of one's conduct are the ultimate basis for any judgment about the rightness or wrongness of that conduct. Thus, from a consequentialist standpoint, a morally right act (or omission from acting) is one that will produce a good outcome, or consequence. In an extreme form, the idea of consequentialism is commonly encapsulated in the English saying, "the ends justify the means"
Mizzoni, John. Ethics: The Basics. John Wiley & Sons. p. 104.

I am against promiscuity. I believe in sex with love and passion, not just a physical animal act. If you read Osho you will find him to be the most anti-sex guru but he is against taboos and for him sex is a part not the whole.

I believe that ethics has a role in everything as we know medical ethics, professional ethics etc. But secularism separates religion from politics in the sense that a religious person may not run a political institution, rather a politician should do politics while a clergyman should be in charge of the religious stuff. It does not mean that a politician will always not be an upright man while a religious person will be always a good person. Ethics is required everywhere but religion is the the only guarantee of being ethical.

Religion do have a role but this role is limited only to beliefs in supernatural phenomena, worship and morality. Morality can be based on religion but also on philosophy and other disciplines. the best way is democracy where a parliament guarantees what is legal and what is illegal. then the state determines and promulgate the laws. An educationist or a clergyman can preach or educate about morality but its implementation is the function of the state not an individual or a group.

Quran is creature or direct words of the creator is even a controversy among Muslim scholars. however the practical value of Quran is that it is good if it has injunctions about honesty, truth, helping others, taking care of parents etc and it must be amended when it says that one man is equal to two women, polygamy, beating wives, cutting into pieces of non Muslims etc.

Discipline in life may come from your belief in God, holy books, fear of death , hell etc or from law, rules, regulations, fines, punishments, police, your own conscience etc. I consider law more practical and real for discipline than just religious injunctions. the religious societies like Somalia are less disciplined as compared to the Western less religious societies where rule of law is supreme.

when you are questioned about your religious beliefs, you do two things.
you start bashing islam and then you talk about how islam is not as forgiving or liberating with it comes to sexuality. to any other person out there that might suggest that you really dislike islam. to me ( and it took me a while to get to this conclusion) it suggests that you don't know much about any other religion to go around about dissecting it. because what i have noticed with you is that your problem is not with the idea of religion but when it comes to being told not to do something that you really want to do. and in your list of interests, there lays only one or two subjects of this sort.
a religion of any sort is a system of beliefs that set apart right from wrong. the fundamentals of all religions are based on the same notions of right and wrong.
in PRACTICE, a good muslim, buddhist or hindu, is a just person and just people come up with laws that are fair to everyone. in PRACTICE a corrupted person of any of these belief will come up with their own idea of what their religion has taught them. they will not be honest to their religion anymore than they are about the rules or laws they set up for themselves or others.
there is no sane or honest person on earth who doesn't apply their concept of moral beliefs to the process of law making. so when you say that politics or economy has nothing to do with religion, you are wrong. you believe this because this comes from your very under developed system of beliefs/religion.
i am not here to know about osho's beliefs or what other muslims are thinking out there, i questioned you. i asked you. i didn't ask you to explain islam to me. why does your definition of your religion begin with your criticism of islam?
there is a big huge gap and question mark where your religion should be. i am not here to mock you or taunt you for not being a good muslim or a muslim only. you may know what the problem is, you don't have a solution. with that, you are just another confused pashtun out there. that is not helping anyone. at the most, you will have people toss themselves at the same well of confusion that you are drowning yourself in. that is not helping pashtuns. you can't go around, telling people what they believe in wrong until you find something that you are in peace with yourself.i would like for you to have a well developed definition for your religion and i believe you can begin to form that right after you drop the habit of picking faults in islam for a while. shift your focus on studying other religions or just sitting down somewhere quite for a while, jotting down what it is that you believe in and why you believe in it. then, come back and compare those points to other religions out there and see if they fit..
it's so much easier, satisfying and inspiring when you hear someone talk about something that they really and truley believe in. you can see the beauty of this belief whether it's a religious or spiritual one in the amount of peace and freedom that it brings to that individual. a person could be holding a rock in front of you and you will see the beauty of their worship in the way they speak of this rock and the path of goodness that this rock has brought them on to. to me, that is the right kind of religion. it can be islam, buddhism, hindusim or christianity. if it makes you honest, pure and kind, it's the right kind of religion.

[Brown Skinned Savage]

@ Badlun.

If we take the Sufi Approach; Muhammad was created from the Nur of Allah(swt) projected on the Universe and so his "realization" was just the result of Tanazalah and Ta'arafa that exists due to the Sifat Qudsiyyah.

If you read the Sufi Cosmological book by Shaikh Al Akbar Muhiyuddin Al'Arabi it describes this process. This would mean that evolution of humankind would lead to the appearance of a Prophet who'd reveal the Higher Religion/Path to them in completeness And that Muhammad's intellect was the natural result of the Divine Light created for him before universe began.

So it would actually be both Simultaneously. This is one of the unique and beautiful aspects about Mystical Islam, is that Both Divine Law and Secular concepts can be reconciled harmoniously.

[AgriculturalJake]

It means Islam is the product of the intellect of Muhammamd not the consequence of the revelations from God?

It means Badlun is a product of dual paternity Safi and Shinwari as consequence of rare reproductive event not seen before in history?

http://www.pashtunforums.com/showthr...808#post758808

[Badlun]

when you are questioned about your religious beliefs, you do two things.
you start bashing islam and then you talk about how islam is not as forgiving or liberating with it comes to sexuality. to any other person out there that might suggest that you really dislike islam. to me ( and it took me a while to get to this conclusion) it suggests that you don't know much about any other religion to go around about dissecting it. because what i have noticed with you is that your problem is not with the idea of religion but when it comes to being told not to do something that you really want to do. and in your list of interests, there lays only one or two subjects of this sort.
a religion of any sort is a system of beliefs that set apart right from wrong. the fundamentals of all religions are based on the same notions of right and wrong.
in PRACTICE, a good muslim, buddhist or hindu, is a just person and just people come up with laws that are fair to everyone. in PRACTICE a corrupted person of any of these belief will come up with their own idea of what their religion has taught them. they will not be honest to their religion anymore than they are about the rules or laws they set up for themselves or others.
there is no sane or honest person on earth who doesn't apply their concept of moral beliefs to the process of law making. so when you say that politics or economy has nothing to do with religion, you are wrong. you believe this because this comes from your very under developed system of beliefs/religion.
i am not here to know about osho's beliefs or what other muslims are thinking out there, i questioned you. i asked you. i didn't ask you to explain islam to me. why does your definition of your religion begin with your criticism of islam?
there is a big huge gap and question mark where your religion should be. i am not here to mock you or taunt you for not being a good muslim or a muslim only. you may know what the problem is, you don't have a solution. with that, you are just another confused pashtun out there. that is not helping anyone. at the most, you will have people toss themselves at the same well of confusion that you are drowning yourself in. that is not helping pashtuns. you can't go around, telling people what they believe in wrong until you find something that you are in peace with yourself.i would like for you to have a well developed definition for your religion and i believe you can begin to form that right after you drop the habit of picking faults in islam for a while. shift your focus on studying other religions or just sitting down somewhere quite for a while, jotting down what it is that you believe in and why you believe in it. then, come back and compare those points to other religions out there and see if they fit..
it's so much easier, satisfying and inspiring when you hear someone talk about something that they really and truley believe in. you can see the beauty of this belief whether it's a religious or spiritual one in the amount of peace and freedom that it brings to that individual. a person could be holding a rock in front of you and you will see the beauty of their worship in the way they speak of this rock and the path of goodness that this rock has brought them on to. to me, that is the right kind of religion. it can be islam, buddhism, hindusim or christianity. if it makes you honest, pure and kind, it's the right kind of religion.

I have read your post 3 times and I duly appreciate it. For you religion is mainly morality and I endorse it. Religion tells you wrong and right and it is an important function of the religion. Religion does influence economy, culture, politics etc but ethnically not functionally.

My point of disagreement is that it does not mean a religious person should be a politician. This is secularism. A politician can be religious but not that only religious person can be politician or economist or judge as claimed by Islamists like Taliban or IS. For them a Mullah should be the administrator, politician, caliph and everything.

I also agree that for a good person, it is not necessary that one should be a Muslim, or Hindu or Buddhist. I even go beyond that even an atheist can be a good person. i do not hate islam . I love Sufi Islam but not the Islam of Taliban, Al Qaeda, IS, Tableeghi Jamaat. Ikhwans or others of the kind. Their Islam is not Islam but Islamism.