Non-religious concepts
Most people get a religion after their birth for completely free. Children are taught things by their parents or other people, resources from their environment. They are obviously diverted to a religion. Most religions have a base book or books which is also called divine book of that religion. The followers of those religions believe their books after all.
There are thousands of religions in this world. Check the following link for detailed list on religions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_religions
Different people have different religions. Majors are Christian, Islam etc. The followers think that their religion is the ultimate truth to life. For example, Christians think that their bible is the only true thing in the world, same goes for Quran of Muslims. Same happens for other religions. They claim that their individual books are from the God. For example a muslim (follower of Islam) will think that only Islam and Quran is the truth. Same might think the Christian. All believers of other religions also claim the same thing of their own.
So are all religions true? Christians know that only their bible and the religion is true and all others like Quran and other religions are wrong because one religion comes from God and not all religions are true. Same way thinks Muslims that their book Quran is true and all others false! Respectively other people believe their own religion and deny others.
Let’s dig a little bit deeper. There is only one God. Then one religion that he had created for human being should be the absolute truth.
Is there only one religion in the universe? I think no. And every follower of every religion claims for their God in own ways and says that their book is truth.
Hence neither a religion is true nor its books. God didn’t create religions. He didn’t create divisions on the mankind. All religions are self-claimed and therefore completely false.
It’s a general statement. There are thousands of proofs against every divine book that each is wrong! No book ever came from God! Why don’t give a try? Search with keywords contradictions in quran, contradictions in bible etc using a search engine.
Polytheism
Monotheists, how do you deny polytheism?
1. As you are theist you believe in God. But you didn’t see him all alone. Right?
2. Monotheist people generally would say if there were multiple God/Goddess or deities they’d have ruined the entire world to take the possession. Universe could never run in such harmony!
How do you know that Gods or those heavenly existences would fight each other. Gods are the wisest and prudent ever. They can obviously be in harmony of power!
If you believe monotheism you are admitting polytheism with tacit approval.
Not a conclusion really
- Thousand lies to protect one lie. That’s what religion is! And lie is poison. If you see the destruction/conflicts occurred by religious groups, if you look at the history you’d be astonished!
- Children shouldn’t be taught religions. Teach them the right thing not bogus religions. It doesn’t require mess of religions to understand what right is and what wrong is!
- Stand for mankind not for religion.
- The modern world is adopting Secularism where religions will have no effects on administration or politics. I hope you know how badly affected the civilization is by the religion politics.
- Here is a statistics of beliefs followed by people. People are coming out to light from darkness. The graph shows an improvement.
u should provide more information
ReplyDeleteTell me what kind of information I should provide. It will be highly appreciated.
ReplyDeleteReligion is simply a believe which will help when you are in trouble by something that is not avoidable.
ReplyDeleteJust diggin' with the conclusions...
ReplyDelete1. If you see the destruction/conflicts occurred by religious groups,
if you look at the history you’d be astonished!
True. But who is/are to be blamed for these conficts? The people? The
religion? Or even the God?? It's the people who can't think
rationally/logically and hence produce conflicts among views and
actions. God didn't prescribe any religion which has conflicts.
2. It doesn’t require mess of religions to understand what right is and
what wrong is!
Might be somewhat true. But, people still won't choose to do the right.
They would always run for evil. Then, how would you come up with a way
to establish the right and prevent the wrong? Wait, you don't need to
take time to think about it. Religion already provides these
guidelines...
3. Stand for mankind not for religion.
Religion IS for mankind. It never goes against mankind. It's the
mankind who uses religion for satisfying their selfish needs. The blame
is to be given not to religion, rather to those selfish people.
4. I hope you know how badly affected the civilization is by the
religion politics.
Again, religion is not to be blamed for it, rather the people should
be.
Conclusion from these?
If two people quarrel and kill one-another over the ownership of a car,
is the car to be blamed for the mess or those two people?? Religion is
not a problem. It is people who causes it to appear like a problem...
The other objections mentioned in the post are too easy to refute. Only
some logical analitical ability is needed to do so...
waiting for more on this topic...
ReplyDeletewe need god when we are in trouble. We believe in religion when we need to Neglect people of other religion.
ReplyDeleteWe bribe the god by praying (something like giving TEL(oil)) to get advantages in real life or life after death(!!!).
"we need god when we are in trouble. We believe in religion when we need to Neglect people of other religion."
ReplyDeleteThat's exactly what I was talking about: the people are the selfish one - when they're in trouble, they need god; when they're fine, they just leave him; when they need to neglect people of other religion, they start believing in one. Does any religion teach these???
"We bribe the god by praying (something like giving TEL(oil)) to get advantages in real life or life after death(!!!)."
Yeah - from people's point of view. God is such a fool that he can't even understand that the people (whom He created) are 'bribing' Him to get advantages!!! He doesn't even care if we don't do what He wants us to do. He needn't care whether we get advantages or are deprived of advantages. He just prescribed religion for our own good....
@Sharafat: I don't know how to appreciate your long mail. But thanks for your patience. You mentioned your opinions. I'll mention mine.
ReplyDelete>who is/are to be blamed for these conficts? The people? The religion? Or even the God??
Obviously not the people and not you are responsible for it. The imposters of religions are completely liable for this. They made thousand lies to protect one lie. We inherit religion from our ancestors. Do we ever think if everything is true? Do we ever think that said things might be wrong? Do we ever negotiate with followers of other religions considering the possibility that their beliefs might be true which in terms invalidates our beliefs? Do we ever think all infidels out of our religion would go to religion-made hell just because of no reason? God made the decision of giving birth to them in a different religion as desired. So do they deserve hell really?
>It's the people who can't think rationally/logically and hence produce conflicts among views and actions.
How will people be able to think? They poisons of religions are seeded from the very childhood of religious people.
Forget about the people. Can you think?
God didn't prescribe any religion which has conflicts.
You are right. This is what invalidates all religions because all religions have conflicts. You don't know because you never tried to find it out.
>But, people still won't choose to do the right. They would always run for evil.
Could ever any religion prevent people from doing wrong? How could they? Even they themselves are not right. Do some research. It's not hard to find out among thousands of errors and inconsistencies in major religions.
Don't say that sometimes it works. Who cares for this sometimes beneficial religions!
> Religion IS for mankind. It never goes against mankind. It's the mankind who uses religion for satisfying their selfish needs. The blame is to be given not to religion, rather to those elfish people.
Religions failed again! Using enough faults lying inbetween religions this is made happened. Do you know the suicide bombers take the oath straight from Quran. But it's a different point of view. If you were born in that culture you'd have believed same way. But now you're not coz you are not going to bomb some people tongiht. A religion is so fragile? Then what good will it bring? What Shiya, Sunni dividends? What about differentiated cultures on women?
Just curiosity, did you see a documentary named "Inside the Koran"? It will help you to have some of the insights.
Before you cannot think neutrally you'll be puzzled by religious errors and keep cycling. So try to think neutral first. What if you were not provided any religion from your birth? Then which religion would had been true to you?
> If two people quarrel and kill one-another over the ownership of a car, is the car to be blamed for the mess or those two people??
Does people believe the car more than their ilfe unless religion is involved? If they feel like the order is from their Boss and that came straight from Allah they will not mess with the car but anything definitely? Then who is responsible?
> The other objections mentioned in the post are too easy to refute.
You said "it's the people who can't think rationally/logically and hence produce conflicts among views and actions."
You should think rationally first. You'll understand how much true they are; not comparable with just religious beliefs.
valai choltese :D
ReplyDelete"Do we ever think if everything is true? Do we ever think that said things might be wrong? Do we ever negotiate with followers of other religions considering the possibility that their beliefs might be true which in terms invalidates our beliefs?"
ReplyDeleteAnswer to all the above questions: at least I did, even if we ignore the fact that millions of people before me did. I asked myself exactly the same question - is everything I hear about religion true? And behold! Throughout years of research, I found out the truth - not all I "hear" about MY religion are true due to people's ignorance while speaking. But, what I came to find out - all I read in the original texts of MY religion are indeed true and contradiction-free.
"Do we ever think all infidels out of our religion would go to religion-made hell just because of no reason? God made the decision of giving birth to them in a different religion as desired. So do they deserve hell really?"
Nope. They never deserve hell just because of God's decision. God made human the best of creations. Why? Because he gave him something called 'brain' to think logically. So, it is up to you whether you'd use it to find out the right thing. Whether you born in a Muslim or Christian or Hindu or Atheist family, you must think whether what you're learning is the right thing. If you don't use your brain to know the right thing and consequently follow the wrong path, shouldn't you deserve punishment?
"How will people be able to think? The poisons of religions are seeded from the very childhood of religious people."
Again, this is people's fault, not religion's.
"Forget about the people. Can you think?"
At least I try to.
"God didn't prescribe any religion which has conflicts.
You are right. This is what invalidates all religions because all religions have conflicts. You don't know because you never tried to find it out."
False. Rather I tried my best to find out. The result? At least I didn't find any contradiction in the Quraan and the authentic Prophetic traditions. If you've found one, you're welcome to mention it. :)
"Could ever any religion prevent people from doing wrong?"
Yeah. During the life of the Prophet Muhammad (may peace be upon him), Islaam prevented people from doing wrong. You can read any history book mentioning that period for details. It's only one example.
"If you were born in that culture you'd have believed same way. But now you're not coz you are not going to bomb some people tongiht."
Wrong. Rather I'm not coz I KNOW the right thing from the very religious texts.
"What Shiya, Sunni dividends? What about differentiated cultures on women?"
Again, these are not religion's fault, rather people's. What about contradictions among the scientists about a scientific issue?? You must provide valid proof to justify you're the correct one. Same is true in the above mentioned cases. However, as people are blind and emotional, they don't want to accept proofs. That's why the contradictory views persist. Again, that's not religion's problem.
"What if you were not provided any religion from your birth? Then which religion would had been true to you?"
According to what I've mentioned before, I was a Muslim by birth before; now I'm a Muslim by choice.
"If they feel like the order is from their Boss and that came straight from Allah they will not mess with the car but anything definitely? Then who is responsible?"
The people is responsible. Why would they 'feel' that the order is from their boss? Rather they should 'verify' that the order is indeed from their boss and only then act accordingly. And it's certain that the boss won't order them something wrong to do, isn't it?
@Sreezin: If you want to just believe things for things there are many ideas and forms of things that actually work when you are in a challenging situation.
ReplyDeleteReligion kills much of your insights by showing wrong fear and superstition.
Is the world flat still now?
So you and your 21% find yourselves really brainy!! And others are all ignorant!! :D
ReplyDeleteYou have been grown up in islamic environment and you grown up as strict follower of Islam!! I know you'd have been same way follower of christian if you were born in christian environment.
If you were following Christian(or any other religion) strictly still being born in Muslim it might convinced me! But now you are dumb fool follower underestimating others!
You are overestimating your brain. What about the people who are inborn less merited? Are they not so called "Ashraful Makhlukhat"? The people who are more intelligent than you, do they make you inferior creation? If a beast; which you call beast for example chimpanzees get a better brain than the dumb human being. Then is that a better creation? Possibly "Ashraful Makhlukhat"!
I'm not really convinced. And I'm not amazed by your research result! There are so many errors and inconsistencies, you find out none!
Islam was kind of suitable for primitive times. It's completely worn out!
You are saying something about original text. What did Allah say in Quran?
Allah says: [We have revealed the Reminder and We have taken upon ourselves the duty of preserving it intact] (Al-Hijr 15:9).
So don't make us fool telling about your authenticity.
Don't keep yourself blind. Open your eyes.
And just don't decline seeing the links.. Research them please and do in amazing way. Remember only one error found in Quran invalidates the whole Quran. And trust there is not one!
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/SKM/contradictions.htm
http://www.chick.com/information/religions/islam/errors2.asp
http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=54
If you want use google to find more and use your quran to match them.
"If you were following Christian(or any other religion) strictly still being born in Muslim it might convinced me! But now you are dumb fool follower underestimating others!"
ReplyDeleteWhat about the other way around?? If somebody is following Islaam strictly still being born in Christian (or any other religion), would it convince you??? Don't keep yourself blind. Open your eyes. You'll be able to see that thousands of Christians and followers of other religions are accepting Islaam within their strict religious environment. Even Christian priests became Muslims after they sought for the truth and not just stayed as a simple Muslim, rather became scholars in comparing Islaam, Christianity and other religions (and of course, atheism). Were they paid for it or did they do it by making use of their own brain?
About what you said on people with less merit and beasts having better brain than human.
It seems that you've misunderstood the meaning of "the best of the creations". It refers to the mankind as a whole and not to individual persons. Man can think better than other animals in orders of magnitudes. There is of course differences of level of merit among people, but even the dumbest person can think much more better than any beast.
"Islam was kind of suitable for primitive times. It's completely worn out!"
There is no doubt that many scientific facts which were revealed relatively recently were already mentioned in the Quraan 1400 years ago. Then is it primitive or thousand years advanced?? Rather Islaam is completely compatible with time. Its rulings are formulated in such a way that those would be best suited to current people as well as to those coming later.
"You are saying something about original text.
Allah says: [...] (Al-Hijr 15:9).
So don't make us fool telling about your authenticity."
If I'm not mistaken, you've misunderstood my word "original text". It means the Quraan and the authentic Prophetic traditions. All other books referencing these sources are not considered as original. Rather the case is similar to the fact that we learned Newton's laws of motion from our H.S.C physics book - it's not the original book on laws of motion; rather the book written by Newton on these laws is called the original book.
Quraan has been and always will be preserved as it was revealed. Have any proof that it hasn't been? Anybody's welcome to put it forth. :)
"And just don't decline seeing the links.. Research them please and do in amazing way."
A true researcher never declines to study the logic of other views, and hence neither do I. Rather I already DID research on the issues posed in your provided links long ago.
Let me take as example only the first issue provided on the first link. You can find the answer to it at the following link:
http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/31865/
Similarly, answer to all the other issues can be found easily. Just google with "refuting contradictions in quran". (It's been 3 years since I left out my research work on these things. That's why collecting together all the issues would take me a lot of time right now. And hence I rather asked just to google.)
"Remember only one error found in Quran invalidates the whole Quran."
Everybody should agree to it without any doubt.
"And trust there is not one!"
Of course there is not one... I totally agree!!!
Bro, your sentence means "there is not any error", or more readably, "there is no error".
I believe you wanted to say, "And trust there is not ONLY one!". Rather believe it or not - all of those so-called errors have already been refuted by so many people!
LOL.
ReplyDeleteYou shouldn't had left your research. You got a point that patched with a fatwa. Leaving the strong points for refuting with google is really disappointing..
First read this: http://sa-sdft.blogspot.com/2010/03/blog-post_09.html
Answer me these:
ā§§ āĻৃāϤāĻĻাāϏ āĻĒ্āϰāĻĨা āĻāϞ্āϞাāĻš āĻোāϰāĻāύে āύিāώিāĻĻ্āϧ āĻāϰেāύāύি āĻেāύ?
⧍ āĻŽুāĻšাāĻŽ্āĻŽāĻĻ āϏা. āĻৃāϤāĻĻাāϏāĻĻেāϰ āĻšāĻ āύিāϝ়ে āĻŦিāĻĻাāϝ়ী āĻšāĻ্āĻ্āĻŦāϏāĻš āĻŦিāĻিāύ্āύ āϏāĻŽāϝ়ে āĻ āύেāĻ āĻিāĻু āĻŦāϞāϞেāĻ, āĻ āĻĒ্āϰāĻĨা āϰāĻĻে āĻূāĻŽিāĻা āύিāϞেāύ āύা āĻেāύো?
ā§Š āĻেāĻšাāĻĻে āĻĒāϰাāĻিāϤ āĻĒāĻ্āώেāϰ āĻŽāĻšিāϞাāĻĻেāϰāĻে āύিāĻ āĻ āϧিāĻাāϰāĻূāĻ্āϤ āĻĻাāϏী āĻšিāϏাāĻŦে āĻāĻŖ্āϝ āĻāϰে āϤাāĻĻেāϰ āĻোāĻ āĻāϰা āĻোāϰāĻāύে āĻেāύ āĻাāϝ়েāĻ(āĻāĻে āϧāϰ্āώāĻŖ āĻŦāϞা āϝাāĻŦে āĻি?) āĻāϰা āĻšāϝ়েāĻ?
ā§Ē āĻāĻāĻে āĻŦুāĻļ āĻŦাāĻšিāύী āϝāĻāύ āĻāϰাāĻ/ āĻāĻĢāĻাāύিāϏ্āϤাāύāϏāĻš āĻŦিāĻিāύ্āύ āĻĻেāĻļāĻĻāĻāϞেāϰ āϝুāĻĻ্āϧে āϝে āύাāϰী-āύিāϰ্āϝাāϤāύ-āϧāϰ্āώāĻŖ āĻাāϞাāϝ়, āϤা āϝāĻĻি āϧāϰ্āώāĻŖ āĻšāϝ়- āϤāĻŦে āύāĻŦী-āĻāϞিāĻĢা-āϏাāĻšাāĻŦীāϰা āϝা āĻāϰেāĻেāύ āϤাāĻে āύাāϰী āϧāϰ্āώāĻŖ āĻŦāϞা āĻšāĻŦে āύা āĻেāύো? (āĻŦুāĻļāĻŦাāĻšিāύী āĻে āĻৃāĻŖা)। āύা-āĻি āĻāĻ্āϤ āĻŦিāϧাāύ āĻļুāϧু āĻŽুāϏāϞিāĻŽ āĻিāĻšাāĻĻীāĻĻেāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āĻĒ্āϰāϝোāĻ্āϝ; āĻ āϰ্āĻĨাāϤ- āĻ āĻŽুāϏāϞিāĻŽāĻĻেāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āĻĒāϰাāĻিāϤ āĻĒāĻ্āώেāϰ āύাāϰীāĻĻেāϰ āĻোāĻ āĻāϰা āϧāϰ্āώāĻŖ āĻāĻŦং āĻŽুāϏāϞিāĻŽāĻĻেāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āĻুāĻŦāĻ āĻাāϝ়েāĻ āĻ āϏāĻāϝ়াāĻŦেāϰ āĻাāĻŽ(āĻোāϰāĻāύে āĻāĻĻেāĻļ/āĻĒāϰাāĻŽāϰ্āĻļ āĻĻেāĻāϝ়া āĻāϰ্āĻŽ āĻĒাāϞāύে āϤো āϏāĻāϝ়াāĻŦ āĻšāϝ় āĻŦāϞেāĻ āϤো āĻাāύি!!)
ā§Ģ 'āĻোāϰāĻāύ āϏāϰ্āĻŦāĻাāϞেāϰ, āϏāϰ্āĻŦāϝুāĻেāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āĻ āĻŦিāĻৃāϤāĻাāĻŦে āĻĒ্āϰāϝোāĻ্āϝ' āĻāĻŦং 'āĻ āĻāϝ়াāϤ āύাāϝিāϞেāϰ āϏāĻŽāϝ় āĻĻাāϏ āĻĒ্āϰāĻĨা āĻিāϞো, āϏে āĻĒāϰিāĻĒ্āϰেāĻ্āώিāϤে āϤāĻāύāĻাāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āĻāĻĨাāĻা āĻāϏেāĻিāϞো' - āĻāĻĻুāĻি āĻি āĻĒāϰāώ্āĻĒāϰāĻŦিāϰোāϧী āύāϝ় āĻি?
ā§Ŧ āĻ āϏāĻŽāϝ়েāϰ āĻĒ্āϰেāĻ্āώিāϤে āĻŦিāĻাāϰ āĻāϰāϞেāĻ- āĻĒāϰাāĻিāϤ āĻĒāĻ্āώেāϰ āύাāϰীāĻĻেāϰ āĻāĻĒāϰ āĻি āϤা āĻŦāϰ্āĻŦāϰāϤা āĻিāϞ āύা?
ā§ 'āĻŽুāĻšাāĻŽ্āĻŽাāĻĻ āϏা. āĻāϰ āĻāĻĨা-āĻāϰ্āĻŽ āĻŽু'āĻŽিāύāĻāĻŖেāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āĻ āύুāĻāϰāĻŖীāϝ়, āĻ āύুāϏāϰāĻŖীāϝ়' āĻ 'āĻ āĻšুāĻুāĻŽ āĻļুāϧু āĻāĻĒāύাāϰāĻ āĻāύ্āϝ, āĻ āύ্āϝ āĻŽু'āĻŽিāύāĻĻেāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āύāϝ়'- āĻāĻĻুāĻিāĻ āĻি āĻĒāϰāώ্āĻĒāϰāĻŦিāϰোāϧী āύāϝ়?
ā§ āĻোāϰāĻāύে āύাāĻŦাāϞিāĻা āĻŦিāĻŦাāĻš(āĻŦাāϞ্āϝ āĻŦিāĻŦাāĻš ) āĻĒ্āϰāĻĨা āϰāĻĻ āĻāϰāϞো āύা āĻেāύো? āĻŽুāĻšাāĻŽ্āĻŽাāĻĻ āϏ. āĻāϰ āϏāϰ্āĻŦāĻļেāώ (āĻŦিāĻŦাāĻšāĻৃāϤ) āϏ্āϤ্āϰী āĻŦিāĻŦি āĻāϝ়েāĻļা āϰা. āĻŦিāĻŦাāĻšেāϰ āϏāĻŽāϝ় āύাāĻŦাāϞিāĻা āĻিāϞেāύ (āϤিāύি āύāĻŦীāĻীāϰ āϏāϰ্āĻŦাāĻĒেāĻ্āώা āĻĒ্āϰিāϝ়āĻ āĻিāϞেāύ āĻŦāϞে āĻাāύা āϝাāϝ়) āĻāĻāĻে āĻāĻ āĻāϰ্āĻŽ āĻেāĻ āĻāϰāϤে āĻাāĻāϞে, āϧāϰ্āĻŽ āĻি āĻāĻāĻাāϤে āĻĒাāϰāĻŦে?
Do you underestimate Lalon? What about this song of lalon:
http://sa-sdft.blogspot.com/2010/03/blog-post_8758.html
What about this lines from Kazi Nazrul Islam
āĻŽাāύুāώেāϰে āĻৃāĻŖা āĻāϰি'
āĻ āĻাāϰা āĻোāϰাāύ, āĻŦেāĻĻ, āĻŦাāĻāĻŦেāϞ āĻুāĻŽ্āĻŦিāĻে āĻŽāϰি' āĻŽāϰি'
āĻ āĻŽুāĻ āĻšāĻāϤে āĻেāϤাāĻŦ-āĻ্āϰāύ্āĻĨ āύাāĻ āĻোāϰ āĻ'āϰে āĻেāĻĄ়ে,
āϝাāĻšাāϰা āĻāύিāϞ āĻ্āϰāύ্āĻĨ-āĻেāϤাāĻŦ āϏেāĻ āĻŽাāύুāώেāϰে āĻŽেāϰে।
āĻĒূāĻিāĻে āĻ্āϰāύ্āĻĨ āĻāύ্āĻĄেāϰ āĻĻāϞ! - āĻŽূāϰ্āĻāϰা āϏāĻŦ āĻļোāύো,
āĻŽাāύুāώ āĻāύেāĻে āĻ্āϰāύ্āĻĨ; - āĻ্āϰāύ্āĻĨ āĻāύেāύি āĻŽাāύুāώ āĻোāύো!
......।
(āύāĻāϰুāϞ)
āϏেāĻ āĻĒ্āϰাāĻীāύāĻাāϞ āĻĨেāĻে āĻŽাāύুāώ āĻোāύ āύা āĻোāύ āϏংāĻেāϰ/āĻোāϤ্āϰেāϰ āĻ āϧীāύে āĻĨাāĻে āĻļুāϧুāĻŽাāϤ্āϰ āĻিāĻু āĻŦাā§āϤি āϏুāĻŦিāϧা āĻĒাāĻā§াāϰ āĻāĻļাā§।
ReplyDeleteāϏেāĻ āĻĻিāĻ āĻĨেāĻে āĻŦিāĻাāϰ āĻāϰāϞে āϤ āĻāĻŽāύ āĻĻাঁā§াā§ āĻāĻŽি āĻŽুāϏāϞিāĻŽ āĻāĻা āĻĻাāĻŦি āĻāϰāϞে āĻŽুāϏāϞিāĻŽāĻĻেāϰ āĻĨেāĻে āϏাāĻšাāϝ্āϝ āĻĒেāϤে āϏুāĻŦিāϧা। āϤাāϰ āĻŽাāύে āĻি āĻāĻŽি āĻিāĻু āĻŦাā§āϤি āϏুāĻŦিāϧা āĻāĻĻাā§েāϰ āĻāύ্āϝāĻ āĻŽুāϏāϞিāĻŽ āĻŦা āĻšিāύ্āĻĻু āĻŦা āĻ্āϰীāϏ্āĻাāύ āĻšāĻŦ?āĻāϰ āĻোāϰāĻāύে(āĻ āύ্āϝ āϧāϰ্āĻŽāĻ্āϰāύ্āĻĨেāϰ āĻāĻĨা āĻāϞ্āϞেāĻ āĻāϰা āĻšāϞ āύা) āĻāϞ্āϞেāĻ āĻāĻে āϝাāϰা āĻĻāϞāĻ্āϝুāϤ āϤাāĻĻেāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āĻāĻে āĻāĻ িāύ āĻļাāϏ্āϤি। āϤাāϰāĻŽাāύে āϤাāϰা āĻĒāϰāĻাāϞে āϤ āĻূāĻ্āϤāĻোāĻীāĻ,āĻāĻšāĻাāϞেāĻ āĻূāĻ্āϤāĻোāĻী।āĻāĻ āĻļাāϏ্āϤিāϰ āĻŦ্āϝāĻŦāϏ্āĻĨা āĻেāύো?āĻŽাāύুāώেāϰ āĻāϞাāĻĻা āĻŽāϤāĻŦাāĻĻ āĻĨাāĻāϤেāĻ āĻĒাāϰে। āύাāĻি āĻāϞাāĻĻা āĻŽāϤāĻŦাāĻĻ āĻĨাāĻাāĻ āϝাāĻŦেāύা?? āĻāĻāύ āĻāĻĨা āĻšāĻ্āĻে āĻোāύ āĻāĻāĻāύ āϝে āĻ āύ্āϝ āϧāϰ্āĻŽেāϰ āϤাāϰ āĻĒ্āϰāϤি āĻāĻŽাāϰ āĻāĻāϰāύāĻāϤ āĻ āĻŽিāϞ āĻĨাāĻāĻŦেāĻ। āĻিāĻাāĻŦে?!! āϏেāĻাāĻ āĻāĻĨা। āϝে āĻ āĻŽুāϏāϞিāĻŽ āϤাāĻে āĻāĻŽি āĻāĻŽাāϰ āĻীāĻŦāύāϏāĻ্āĻী āĻšিāϏাāĻŦে āύিāϰ্āĻŦাāĻāύ āĻāϰāϤে āĻĒাāϰāĻŦ āύা(āĻĒāϰিāĻŦাāϰ āĻĨেāĻে āĻĒাāĻā§া āĻļিāĻ্āώা)। āϤাāϰāĻŽাāύে āϤাāϰ āĻĒ্āϰāϤি āĻāĻŽাāϰ āĻāĻāϰāύেāϰ āϤāĻĢাāϤ āĻĨেāĻেāĻ āϝাāĻ্āĻে। āĻāĻŽāύ āĻোāύ āϧāϰ্āĻŽ āĻāĻে āĻি āϝেāĻাāύে āĻŽাāύুāώে āĻŽাāύুāώে āĻেāĻĻাāĻেāĻĻ āύাāĻ?āύাāĻি āĻেāĻĻাāĻেāĻĻ āĻĨাāĻাāĻাāĻ āĻāĻিāϤ ??
āĻāĻŽি āĻāϏāϞাāĻŽ āϧāϰ্āĻŽাāύুāϏাāϰী āĻāĻা āĻŦāϞāϤে āĻĒাāϰিāύা।āĻŦāϞা āĻāϞে āĻāĻŽি āĻোāύ āϧāϰ্āĻŽেāĻ āĻŦিāĻļ্āĻŦাāϏী āύা। āĻাāϰāύ āĻāĻŽি āĻিāĻু āĻ āύুāĻļাāϏāύ āĻĒাāϞāύ āĻāϰি āĻিāĻু āĻāϰিāύা। āĻāϰ āĻāĻŽি āĻাāĻ āĻĒুāϰোāĻĒুāϰি āĻিāĻু āĻāĻāĻা āĻ্āϰāĻšāύ āĻāϰāϤে। āϏেāĻা āĻিāĻাāĻŦে āĻāϰা āϝাāĻŦে???
ReplyDelete@āĻĢাāϞāϤু,
ReplyDeleteWhy are you trying to buy what others are trying to sell? Life is long and every people have their own philosophy. We learn from our mistakes. See good and truth is not always welcome. So if you are not welcome on some very good visions of you don't be disappointed. They killed socrates for his wisdom really!
So hold on to your own belief. Day by day your mind grows up and you know better. It's better to have own judgement and knowledge than being blindly followed by.
The world is amorphous and no-one really knows everything. So don't worry.
At least you got to touch the reality that should make you feel better.
Happy hunting.
[Never mind. I wrote in English to make the access easier for international users.]
āĻāĻŽি āϝুāĻ্āϤি āĻাāĻāĻি, āĻোāύ āĻĻিāĻāύিāϰ্āĻĻেāĻļāύা āύā§। āĻŽāϤāĻŦাāĻĻ āύিāϰীāĻ্āώāĻŖেāϰ āĻĒāϰ āĻāĻŽিāĻ āĻ িāĻ āĻāϰāĻŦ āĻি āĻāϰা āĻāĻিāϤ āĻāĻŽাāϰ।
ReplyDeleteāĻāĻŽি āĻĒাāϰিāĻŦাāϰিāĻāĻাāĻŦেāĻ āĻŽুāĻ্āϤāĻিāύ্āϤা āĻāϰ্āĻাāϰ āϏুāϝোāĻ āĻĒেā§েāĻি। āϤāĻĨাāĻāĻĨিāϤ āύাāϏ্āϤিāĻ-āĻāϏ্āϤিāĻ āĻŽāϤāĻŦিāϰোāϧিāϤাā§ āĻāĻŽাāϰ āĻ āύীāĻšা āĻāĻে।āϏৃāώ্āĻিāĻāϰ্āϤাāϰ āĻ āϏ্āϤিāϤ্āϤ্āĻŦে āĻ āĻŦিāĻļ্āĻŦাāϏ āύাāĻ।
āĻĢাāϞāϤু āĻাāĻ āĻāĻĒāύি āĻŽāύে āĻšā§ āĻĻিāĻ āύিāĻĻāϰ্āĻļāύ āĻāϰ āϝুāĻ্āϤিāϰ āĻŽāϧ্āϝে āϤāĻĢাāϤ āĻা āĻāĻāύো āĻŦুāĻে āĻāĻ েāύ āύাāĻ। āĻāĻĒāύাāϰ āĻĒ্āϰāĻļ্āύ āĻিāϞ
ReplyDelete"āϏেāĻা āĻিāĻাāĻŦে āĻāϰা āϝাāĻŦে?" āĻāĻāĻা āĻšāϞ āĻĻিāĻ āύিāϰ্āĻĻেāĻļāύা āĻাāĻā§া। āϝāĻĻি āĻŦāϞāϤেāύ,
"āϏেāĻা āĻেāύ āĻāϰāĻŦ(āύা)?" āϏেāĻা āĻšāϤ āϝুāĻ্āϤিāϰ āĻ āύ্āύেāώāĻŖ। āϏুāϤāϰাং āĻāĻĒāύি āĻāĻে āύিāĻেāĻ āĻেāĻŦে āĻĻেāĻেāύ āĻāϏāϞে āĻāĻĒāύি āĻি āĻাāĻ্āĻেāύ। āϤাāĻাā§া āĻāĻĒāύাāϰ āĻāĻĨা āĻļুāύে āĻŽāύে āĻšāϞো āĻāĻĒāύি āĻāϧা-āύাāϏ্āϤিāĻ। āĻŽাāύে āĻāύāĻĢিāĻāϏāĻĄ। āϏেāĻ্āώেāϤ্āϰে āĻĻিāĻāύিāĻĻāϰ্āĻļāύ āĻāĻĒāύাāϰ āĻĒ্āϰā§োāĻāύ
āϏুāϏ্āĻĒāϏ্āĻāϤাāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āĻŦāϞāĻি āĻāĻŽাāϰ āĻŽāύ্āϤāĻŦ্āϝে āϝে āĻিāĻ্āĻাāϏা āĻিāϞ
ReplyDelete(āĻāĻŽি āĻāϏāϞাāĻŽ āϧāϰ্āĻŽাāύুāϏাāϰী āĻāĻা āĻŦāϞāϤে āĻĒাāϰিāύা।āĻŦāϞা āĻāϞে āĻāĻŽি āĻোāύ āϧāϰ্āĻŽেāĻ āĻŦিāĻļ্āĻŦাāϏী āύা। āĻাāϰāύ āĻāĻŽি āĻিāĻু āĻ āύুāĻļাāϏāύ āĻĒাāϞāύ āĻāϰি āĻিāĻু āĻāϰিāύা। āĻāϰ āĻāĻŽি āĻাāĻ āĻĒুāϰোāĻĒুāϰি āĻিāĻু āĻāĻāĻা āĻ্āϰāĻšāύ āĻāϰāϤে। āϏেāĻা āĻিāĻাāĻŦে āĻāϰা āϝাāĻŦে???)
āϏেāĻা āĻāϤ্āύāĻিāĻ্āĻাāϏা।
Sorry for being so late because of day-long work. :)
ReplyDelete“You shouldn't had left your research. You got a point that patched with a fatwa.”
LOLz… When you can’t answer to a logical argument, just label it as ‘fatwa’!!! Rather than emotionally calling it a ‘patched fatwa’, try to logically refute the arguments if you can. ;)
“Leaving the strong points for refuting with google is really disappointing..”
Yep. That’s why I already gave my proposal beforehand – put forth a point you think to be ‘strong’ and then let’s see it. It seems that you think the ‘slavery’ (and other) issues you posed in your post to be some ‘strong’ points. Fine. Let’s see those then.
The questions 1 to 4 and 6 – all the 5 questions are answered in details at the following link:
http://public.sharafat.co.cc/home/islaam_and_slavery.html
If you don’t have enough time to go through all of it, for your convenience, I’ve colored and bold-faced a small portion of it. You can first study those. If you don’t feel being convinced, then I’m sorry but you have no choice other than studying the topic in full. And of course, don’t forget to mention anything from that document which you can refute.
ā§Ģ 'āĻোāϰāĻāύ āϏāϰ্āĻŦāĻাāϞেāϰ, āϏāϰ্āĻŦāϝুāĻেāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āĻ āĻŦিāĻৃāϤāĻাāĻŦে āĻĒ্āϰāϝোāĻ্āϝ' āĻāĻŦং 'āĻ āĻāϝ়াāϤ āύাāϝিāϞেāϰ āϏāĻŽāϝ় āĻĻাāϏ āĻĒ্āϰāĻĨা āĻিāϞো, āϏে āĻĒāϰিāĻĒ্āϰেāĻ্āώিāϤে āϤāĻāύāĻাāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āĻāĻĨাāĻা āĻāϏেāĻিāϞো' - āĻāĻĻুāĻি āĻি āĻĒāϰāώ্āĻĒāϰāĻŦিāϰোāϧী āύāϝ় āĻি?
Of course these two wordings are contradictory. But the fact is, Islaam never says that slavery was only for the ancient period, rather it’s for all periods. For details, see the above link.
ā§ 'āĻŽুāĻšাāĻŽ্āĻŽাāĻĻ āϏা. āĻāϰ āĻāĻĨা-āĻāϰ্āĻŽ āĻŽু'āĻŽিāύāĻāĻŖেāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āĻ āύুāĻāϰāĻŖীāϝ়, āĻ āύুāϏāϰāĻŖীāϝ়' āĻ 'āĻ āĻšুāĻুāĻŽ āĻļুāϧু āĻāĻĒāύাāϰāĻ āĻāύ্āϝ, āĻ āύ্āϝ āĻŽু'āĻŽিāύāĻĻেāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āύāϝ়'- āĻāĻĻুāĻিāĻ āĻি āĻĒāϰāώ্āĻĒāϰāĻŦিāϰোāϧী āύāϝ়?
Nope. Take an example. Suppose a teacher says to his class – “this rule is applicable to all of you. However, it’s not applicable to students X and Y because of such and such.” Is there any problem? If you make it clear which rulings are for all people and which are for a few particular people, then where is the contradiction??
ā§ āĻোāϰāĻāύে āύাāĻŦাāϞিāĻা āĻŦিāĻŦাāĻš(āĻŦাāϞ্āϝ āĻŦিāĻŦাāĻš ) āĻĒ্āϰāĻĨা āϰāĻĻ āĻāϰāϞো āύা āĻেāύো? āĻŽুāĻšাāĻŽ্āĻŽাāĻĻ āϏ. āĻāϰ āϏāϰ্āĻŦāĻļেāώ (āĻŦিāĻŦাāĻšāĻৃāϤ) āϏ্āϤ্āϰী āĻŦিāĻŦি āĻāϝ়েāĻļা āϰা. āĻŦিāĻŦাāĻšেāϰ āϏāĻŽāϝ় āύাāĻŦাāϞিāĻা āĻিāϞেāύ (āϤিāύি āύāĻŦীāĻীāϰ āϏāϰ্āĻŦাāĻĒেāĻ্āώা āĻĒ্āϰিāϝ়āĻ āĻিāϞেāύ āĻŦāϞে āĻাāύা āϝাāϝ়) āĻāĻāĻে āĻāĻ āĻāϰ্āĻŽ āĻেāĻ āĻāϰāϤে āĻাāĻāϞে, āϧāϰ্āĻŽ āĻি āĻāĻāĻাāϤে āĻĒাāϰāĻŦে?
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, what do you mean by āύাāĻŦাāϞিāĻা ? Is it just the prior time of the natural age of puberty? Or is it the ‘human-defined’ prior time of 18 years??
Let’s consider the case that you meant the natural age of puberty. Now, the fact is – the marriage CONTRACT between Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and ‘Aishah (may Allaah be pleased with her) was done before she reached puberty. However, the CONSUMMATION of marriage was done AFTER she reached puberty. So, Islaam never prohibits to simply contract marriage before puberty. Rather it prohibits the consummation of marriage before puberty.
About your mentioned lalon’s song and similarly Nazrul’s poem – I don’t understand songs and poems well. However, I think the mentioned song and poem are not that difficult to understand. Just mentioning one line from the song (actually the summary line): “āĻŽাāύুāώে āϰāĻিāϤ āĻাāύি, āĻŽাāύুāώে āϰāĻিāϤ āĻাāύি āϞাāϞāύ āĻĢāĻিāϰ āĻāϝ়!”. If that’s the case, then I’d say: Lalon is saying that what HE knows is that religions are made by people. However, what I (and billions of people other than me) know is that Islaam and Quraan has been revealed from Allaah the Almighty. Have any doubt? Then let’s share it. :)
Now some words for “Faltu”...
ReplyDelete“āϏেāĻ āĻĒ্āϰাāĻীāύāĻাāϞ āĻĨেāĻে āĻŽাāύুāώ āĻোāύ āύা āĻোāύ āϏংāĻেāϰ/āĻোāϤ্āϰেāϰ āĻ āϧীāύে āĻĨাāĻে āĻļুāϧুāĻŽাāϤ্āϰ āĻিāĻু āĻŦাā§āϤি āϏুāĻŦিāϧা āĻĒাāĻā§াāϰ āĻāĻļাā§। āϏেāĻ āĻĻিāĻ āĻĨেāĻে āĻŦিāĻাāϰ āĻāϰāϞে āϤ āĻāĻŽāύ āĻĻাঁā§াā§ āĻāĻŽি āĻŽুāϏāϞিāĻŽ āĻāĻা āĻĻাāĻŦি āĻāϰāϞে āĻŽুāϏāϞিāĻŽāĻĻেāϰ āĻĨেāĻে āϏাāĻšাāϝ্āϝ āĻĒেāϤে āϏুāĻŦিāϧা। āϤাāϰ āĻŽাāύে āĻি āĻāĻŽি āĻিāĻু āĻŦাā§āϤি āϏুāĻŦিāϧা āĻāĻĻাā§েāϰ āĻāύ্āϝāĻ āĻŽুāϏāϞিāĻŽ āĻŦা āĻšিāύ্āĻĻু āĻŦা āĻ্āϰীāϏ্āĻাāύ āĻšāĻŦ?”
Ask your common sense, you’ll definitely get the correct answer.
“āĻāϰ āĻোāϰāĻāύে(āĻ āύ্āϝ āϧāϰ্āĻŽāĻ্āϰāύ্āĻĨেāϰ āĻāĻĨা āĻāϞ্āϞেāĻ āĻāϰা āĻšāϞ āύা) āĻāϞ্āϞেāĻ āĻāĻে āϝাāϰা āĻĻāϞāĻ্āϝুāϤ āϤাāĻĻেāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āĻāĻে āĻāĻ িāύ āĻļাāϏ্āϤি।“
āĻāĻŽি āĻāϰāĻāĻŽ āĻোāύ āĻā§াāϤেāϰ āĻāĻĨা āĻাāύি āύা āϝেāĻাāύে āĻĻāϞāĻ্āϝুāϤ āĻšāĻŦাāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āĻļাāϏ্āϤিāϰ āĻāĻĨা āĻŦāϞা āĻšā§েāĻে। āĻুāϰāĻāύ-āĻšাāĻĻীāϏে āĻŦাāϰāĻŦাāϰ āĻŽুāϏāϞিāĻŽāĻĻেāϰ āĻŽāϧ্āϝে “āĻĻāϞাāĻĻāϞি” āϏৃāώ্āĻি āĻāϰাāϰ āĻ্āώেāϤ্āϰে āĻšুঁāĻļিā§াāϰ āĻāϰা āĻšā§েāĻে। āĻš্āϝাঁ, āϝāĻĻি āĻĻāϞāĻ্āϝুāϤ āĻŦāϞāϤে āĻŽুāϰāϤাāĻĻ āϤāĻĨা āĻāϏāϞাāĻŽāĻ্āϝুāϤ āĻšāĻŦাāϰ āĻāĻĨা āĻŦāϞ, āϤāĻŦে āĻāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āĻļাāϏ্āϤিāϰ āĻāĻĨা āĻāϏāϞাāĻŽে āĻŦāϞা āĻšā§েāĻে। āĻĒ্āϰāĻļ্āύ āĻšāĻ্āĻে āϝে, āĻāĻ āĻļাāϏ্āϤিāϰ āĻŦ্āϝāĻŦāϏ্āĻĨা āĻেāύ? āĻুāĻŦ āϏংāĻ্āώেāĻĒে āĻāϤ্āϤāϰāĻা āĻĻেāĻ (āĻāϤāĻ্āώāĻŖ āϧāϰে āĻাāĻāĻĒ āĻāϰāϤে āĻāϰāϤে āĻāϰ āĻাāϞ āϞাāĻāĻে āύা)। āϤুāĻŽি āϤোāĻŽাāϰ āϝāĻāύ āĻāĻ্āĻা āĻšāĻŦে, āϤāĻāύ āĻŽুāϏāϞিāĻŽāĻĻেāϰ āϏাāĻĨে āĻĨেāĻে āϏুāĻŦিāϧা āύিāĻŦা, āĻāϰ āϝāĻāύ āĻāĻ্āĻা āĻāϰāĻŦে, āϤāĻāύ āϤাāĻĻেāϰ āĻĨেāĻে āĻŦেāϰ āĻšā§ে āĻিā§ে āĻŽুāϏāϞিāĻŽāĻĻেāϰ āύাāĻŽে āĻŽিāĻĨ্āϝা āĻ āĻĒāĻŦাāĻĻ āĻāϰāĻŦা āĻāϰ āĻĻুāϰ্āύাāĻŽ āϰāĻাāĻŦা, āĻāĻা āϤো āĻšāϤে āĻĻেāĻā§া āϝাā§ āύা, āϤাāĻ āύা? āĻāϤ্āϤāϰāĻা āĻাāϞ āύা āϞাāĻāϞে āĻŦāĻāϞো, āĻĒāϰে āĻŦিāϏ্āϤাāϰিāϤ āĻŦ্āϝাāĻ্āϝা āĻāϰāĻŦ āύে, āĻāύāĻļা āĻāϞ্āϞাāĻš।
“āĻŽাāύুāώেāϰ āĻāϞাāĻĻা āĻŽāϤāĻŦাāĻĻ āĻĨাāĻāϤেāĻ āĻĒাāϰে। āύাāĻি āĻāϞাāĻĻা āĻŽāϤāĻŦাāĻĻ āĻĨাāĻাāĻ āϝাāĻŦেāύা??”
āĻš্āϝাঁ, āĻāϞাāĻĻা āĻŽāϤāĻŦাāĻĻ āĻĨাāĻāϤেāĻ āĻĒাāϰে āϝāĻĻি āϏāĻŦāĻুāϞো āĻŽāϤাāĻŽāϤāĻ āϝৌāĻ্āϤিāĻ āĻšā§। āϤুāĻŽি āϝāĻĻি āĻিāĻ্āĻাāϏা āĻāϰ āϝে, āĻাāύāĻাঁāϰāĻĒুāϞ āĻĨেāĻে āύীāϞāĻ্āώেāϤ āϝাāĻā§া āϝাā§ āĻেāĻŽāύে, āϤাāĻšāϞে āĻেāĻ āĻŦāϞāĻŦে āĻļāĻšীāĻĻ āĻŽিāύাāϰ āĻĻিā§ে āϝাāĻ, āĻেāĻ āĻŦāϞāĻŦে āĻŦাংāϞা āĻāĻাāĻĄেāĻŽীāϰ āĻĒাāĻļ āĻĻিā§ে, āĻেāĻāĻŦা āĻŦāϞāĻŦে āĻŦুā§েāĻেāϰ āĻĒাāĻļ āĻĻিā§ে। āĻāĻ্āώেāϤ্āϰে āϏāĻŦাāϰ āĻŽāϤāĻŦাāĻĻāĻ āϝৌāĻ্āϤিāĻ āĻāĻŦং āĻ্āϰāĻšāĻŖāϝোāĻ্āϝ। āĻিāύ্āϤু āϝāĻĻি āĻŽāϤāĻেāĻĻ āĻšā§ āĻŽিāĻĨ্āϝা āĻŦāϞা āϝাāĻŦে āĻি āϝাāĻŦে āύা, āϤাāĻšāϞে āϏেāĻ্āώেāϤ্āϰে āĻŽāϤāĻেāĻĻāĻা āĻāĻĻৌ āĻ্āϰāĻšāĻŖāϝোāĻ্āϝ āύā§। āĻāĻা āĻ āϤ্āϝāύ্āϤ āϝুāĻ্āϤিāĻĒূāϰ্āĻŖāĻাāĻŦে āĻĒ্āϰāĻŽাāĻŖ āĻāϰা āϝাā§ āϝে, āĻŽিāĻĨ্āϝা āĻŦāϞা āϝাāĻŦে āύা āĻāĻ āĻŽāϤāĻাāĻ āϏāĻ িāĻ āĻāĻŦং āĻ āύ্āϝāĻা āĻুāϞ।
“āĻāĻāύ āĻāĻĨা āĻšāĻ্āĻে āĻোāύ āĻāĻāĻāύ āϝে āĻ āύ্āϝ āϧāϰ্āĻŽেāϰ āϤাāϰ āĻĒ্āϰāϤি āĻāĻŽাāϰ āĻāĻāϰāύāĻāϤ āĻ āĻŽিāϞ āĻĨাāĻāĻŦেāĻ। āĻিāĻাāĻŦে?!! āϏেāĻাāĻ āĻāĻĨা। āϝে āĻ āĻŽুāϏāϞিāĻŽ āϤাāĻে āĻāĻŽি āĻāĻŽাāϰ āĻীāĻŦāύāϏāĻ্āĻী āĻšিāϏাāĻŦে āύিāϰ্āĻŦাāĻāύ āĻāϰāϤে āĻĒাāϰāĻŦ āύা(āĻĒāϰিāĻŦাāϰ āĻĨেāĻে āĻĒাāĻā§া āĻļিāĻ্āώা)। āϤাāϰāĻŽাāύে āϤাāϰ āĻĒ্āϰāϤি āĻāĻŽাāϰ āĻāĻāϰāύেāϰ āϤāĻĢাāϤ āĻĨেāĻেāĻ āϝাāĻ্āĻে।“
āĻš্āϝাঁ, āĻāĻāϰāĻŖেāϰ āϤāĻĢাāϤ āϤো āĻĨাāĻাāĻাāĻ āϏ্āĻŦাāĻাāĻŦিāĻ। āĻিāύ্āϤু āĻāĻ āϤāĻĢাāϤেāϰ āĻাāϰāĻŖে āĻি āĻāĻŽāϰা āĻ āĻŽুāϏāϞিāĻŽāĻĻেāϰāĻে āĻĻুāĻ āĻোāĻে āĻĻেāĻāϤে āύা āĻĒাāϰাāϰ āĻŽāϤ āĻĒāϰিāϏ্āĻĨিāϤি āϤৈāϰি āĻāϰāĻŦ? āĻোāĻĻ āĻুāϰāĻāύ āĻĨেāĻেāĻ āĻāϤ্āϤāϰāĻা āĻেāύে āύাāĻ: “āϝাāϰা āϤোāĻŽাāĻĻেāϰ āĻŦিāϰুāĻĻ্āϧে āϧāϰ্āĻŽেāϰ āĻাāϰāĻŖে āϝুāĻĻ্āϧ āĻāϰেāύি āĻāĻŦং āϤোāĻŽাāĻĻেāϰāĻে āϤোāĻŽাāĻĻেāϰ āĻŦāϏāϤāĻŦাā§ি āĻĨেāĻে āϤাā§িā§ে āĻĻেā§ āύি, āĻāϞ্āϞাāĻš āϤোāĻŽাāĻĻেāϰāĻে āϤাāĻĻেāϰ āϏāĻ্āĻে āϏāĻĻ্āĻŦ্āϝāĻŦāĻšাāϰ āĻāϰাāϰ āĻāĻŦং āύ্āϝাā§āĻĒāϰাā§āĻŖāϤাāϰ āϏাāĻĨে āĻāĻāϰāĻŖ āĻāϰāϤে āύিāώেāϧ āĻāϰেāύ āύি; āύিāĻļ্āĻā§ āĻāϞ্āϞাāĻš āύ্āϝাā§āĻĒāϰাā§āĻŖāĻĻেāϰāĻে āĻাāϞāĻŦাāϏেāύ। āϝাāϰা āϤোāĻŽাāĻĻেāϰ āĻŦিāϰুāĻĻ্āϧে āϧāϰ্āĻŽেāϰ āĻাāϰāĻŖে āϝুāĻĻ্āϧ āĻāϰেāĻে āĻāĻŦং āϤোāĻŽাāĻĻেāϰāĻে āϤোāĻŽাāĻĻেāϰ āĻŦāϏāϤāĻŦাā§ি āĻĨেāĻে āϤাā§িā§ে āĻĻিā§েāĻে āĻāĻŦং āϤোāĻŽাāĻĻেāϰāĻে āĻŦāĻšিāώ্āĻাāϰেāϰ āĻŦ্āϝাāĻĒাāϰে āĻĒৃāώ্āĻ āĻĒোāώāĻāϤা āĻāϰেāĻে, āĻāϞ্āϞাāĻš āϤোāĻŽাāĻĻেāϰāĻে āϤাāĻĻেāϰ āϏাāĻĨে āĻŦāύ্āϧুāϤ্āĻŦ āĻāϰāϤে āύিāώেāϧ āĻāϰেāĻেāύ। āĻāϰ āϝাāϰা āϤাāĻĻেāϰ āϏাāĻĨে āĻŦāύ্āϧুāϤ্āĻŦ āĻāϰāĻŦে, āϤাāϰা āϤো āϤাāĻšāϞে āĻ āϤ্āϝাāĻাāϰী।“ (āϏূāϰা āĻŽুāĻŽāϤাāĻšিāύাāĻš ā§Ŧā§Ļ:ā§Ž-⧝) āϏুāϤāϰাং, āϝাāϰা āĻŽুāϏāϞিāĻŽāĻĻেāϰ āϏাāĻĨে āϝুāĻĻ্āϧ āĻāϰāĻে āύা, āϤাāĻĻেāϰ āϏাāĻĨে āĻাāϰাāĻĒ āĻŦ্āϝāĻŦāĻšাāϰ āĻāϰāϤে āϤো āĻŦāϞা āĻšā§āĻ āύি, āĻāĻĒāϰāύ্āϤু āϤাāĻĻেāϰ āϏাāĻĨে āĻাāϞ āĻŦ্āϝāĻŦāĻšাāϰ āĻāĻŦং āύ্āϝাā§āĻĒāϰাā§āĻŖ āĻāĻāϰāĻŖ āĻāϰাāϰ āĻĒ্āϰāϤি āĻāϤāϏাāĻš āĻĻেāĻā§া āĻšāĻ্āĻে āĻāĻ āĻāĻĨা āĻŦāϞে āϝে, āύ্āϝাā§āĻĒāϰাā§āĻŖāĻাāϰীāĻĻেāϰāĻে āĻāϞ্āϞাāĻš āĻাāϞāĻŦাāϏেāύ।
“āĻāĻŽāύ āĻোāύ āϧāϰ্āĻŽ āĻāĻে āĻি āϝেāĻাāύে āĻŽাāύুāώে āĻŽাāύুāώে āĻেāĻĻাāĻেāĻĻ āύাāĻ?āύাāĻি āĻেāĻĻাāĻেāĻĻ āĻĨাāĻাāĻাāĻ āĻāĻিāϤ ??”
ReplyDeleteāĻেāĻĻাāĻেāĻĻ āĻĨাāĻাāĻাāĻ āĻি āĻāĻিāϤ?? āĻāĻা āĻĄিāĻĒেāύ্āĻĄ āĻāϰে। āϝে āĻাāύে, āĻāϰ āϝে āĻাāύে āύা, āϤাāϰা āĻি āϏāĻŽাāύ? āĻļিāĻ্āώāĻāĻāĻŖ āĻি āĻ্āϞাāϏে āĻাāϞ āϏ্āĻুāĻĄেāύ্āĻ āĻāϰ āĻাāϰাāĻĒ āϏ্āĻুāĻĄেāύ্āĻāĻĻেāϰ āĻŽāϧ্āϝে āĻেāĻĻাāĻেāĻĻ āĻāϰেāύ āύা? āĻŦāϰং āĻĒā§েāύ্āĻāĻা āĻšāĻ্āĻে āϝে, āĻāĻ āĻেāĻĻাāĻেāĻĻāĻে āĻļিāĻ্āώāĻāĻāĻŖ āĻিāĻাāĻŦে āĻŦ্āϝāĻŦāĻšাāϰ āĻāϰāĻেāύ। āϤাāϰা āϝāĻĻি āĻেāĻĻাāĻেāĻĻ āĻāϰাāϰ āĻĒāϰ āĻাāϰাāĻĒ āϏ্āĻুāĻĄেāύ্āĻāĻĻেāϰāĻে āĻ āĻŦāĻ্āĻাāϰ āϏাāĻĨে āĻুঁā§ে āĻĢেāϞে āύা āĻĻিā§ে āϤাāĻĻেāϰāĻে āϤাāĻĻেāϰ āĻুāϞ āĻāϰা āĻŦিāώā§āĻুāϞো āĻাāϞ āĻāϰে āĻŦুāĻাāύোāϰ āĻেāώ্āĻা āĻāϰেāύ āϤাāĻĻেāϰāĻ āĻŽāĻ্āĻāϞেāϰ āϏ্āĻŦাāϰ্āĻĨে, āϏেāĻাāĻ āĻšāĻŦে āϏāϰ্āĻŦোāϤ্āϤāĻŽ āĻļিāĻ্āώāĻāϤা। āĻāϰ āĻļিāĻ্āώāĻ āĻāϤ āĻিāĻু āĻāϰাāϰ āĻĒāϰāĻ āϝāĻĻি āĻ āϏ্āĻুāĻĄেāύ্āĻ āĻŦāϞে āϝে, āύা, āĻāĻŽি āĻাāϞ āĻšāϤে āĻাāĻ āύা, āϤাāĻāϞে āĻ āĻļিāĻ্āώāĻেāϰ āϤাāĻে āĻā§িā§ে āĻāϞা āĻাā§া āĻāϤি āĻĨাāĻāĻŦে āύা। āĻ িāĻ āĻāĻāĻāĻাāĻŦে āĻāϏāϞাāĻŽ āĻŦāϞে āϝে, āĻ āĻŽুāϏāϞিāĻŽāĻĻেāϰāĻে āĻৃāĻŖা āύা āĻāϰে āϤাāĻĻেāϰāĻে āϝুāĻ্āϤি āĻĻিā§ে āϤাāĻĻেāϰ āĻুāϞāĻুāϞো āĻŦুāĻাāĻ। āĻāϰ āĻāϰāĻĒāϰāĻ āϝāĻĻি āϤাāϰা āĻĒ্āϰুāĻĢ āĻĒাāĻā§াāϰ āĻĒāϰāĻ āĻোāϰ āĻāϰে āĻŽাāύāϤে āύা āĻাā§, āϤাāĻāϞে āϤাāĻĻেāϰāĻে āĻā§িā§ে āĻāϞা āĻাā§া āĻāϰ āĻী-āĻ āĻŦা āĻāϰাāϰ āĻāĻে। āĻিāύ্āϤু āĻāϰāĻĒāϰāĻ āϤাāĻ āĻŦāϞে āϤাāĻĻেāϰ āϏাāĻĨে āĻ āύ্āϝাā§ āĻāϰাāĻাāĻে āĻāϏāϞাāĻŽ āύিāώেāϧ āĻāϰāĻে – āĻš্āϝাঁ, āϤাāϰা āϝāĻĻি āĻŽুāϏāϞিāĻŽāĻĻেāϰāĻে āĻāĻ্āϰāĻŽāĻŖ āĻāϰে, āϤাāĻāϞে āĻŽুāϏāϞিāĻŽāϰা āĻ āĻŦāĻļ্āϝāĻ āϤাāĻĻেāϰāĻে āĻৃāĻŖা āĻāϰāĻŦে āĻāĻŦং āϤাāĻĻেāϰ āĻāĻ্āϰāĻŽāĻŖ āĻĒ্āϰāϤিāĻšāϤ āĻāϰাāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āĻŦ্āϝāĻŦāϏ্āĻĨা āĻ্āϰāĻšāĻŖ āĻāϰāĻŦে।
“āĻāĻŽি āĻāϏāϞাāĻŽ āϧāϰ্āĻŽাāύুāϏাāϰী āĻāĻা āĻŦāϞāϤে āĻĒাāϰিāύা।āĻŦāϞা āĻāϞে āĻāĻŽি āĻোāύ āϧāϰ্āĻŽেāĻ āĻŦিāĻļ্āĻŦাāϏী āύা। āĻাāϰāύ āĻāĻŽি āĻিāĻু āĻ āύুāĻļাāϏāύ āĻĒাāϞāύ āĻāϰি āĻিāĻু āĻāϰিāύা। āĻāϰ āĻāĻŽি āĻাāĻ āĻĒুāϰোāĻĒুāϰি āĻিāĻু āĻāĻāĻা āĻ্āϰāĻšāύ āĻāϰāϤে। āϏেāĻা āĻিāĻাāĻŦে āĻāϰা āϝাāĻŦে???”
āĻুāĻŦāĻ āĻāĻŽāϤāĻাāϰ āĻĒ্āϰāĻļ্āύ। āϤāĻŦে āϤুāĻŽি āϝা āĻাāĻ্āĻ, āϏেāĻাāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āϤোāĻŽাāĻে āϏāĻŽā§ āĻāĻŦং āĻļ্āϰāĻŽ āĻĻুāĻোāĻ āĻĻিāϤে āĻšāĻŦে (āĻŽāύে āϰেāĻ – āϤুāĻŽি āϝāĻĻি āϏāϤ্āϝāĻে āĻাāύāϤে āĻাāĻ, āϤোāĻŽাāĻে āĻ āĻŦāĻļ্āϝāĻ āĻĒāϰিāĻļ্āϰāĻŽ āĻāϰāϤে āĻšāĻŦে)। āϤুāĻŽি āĻĒ্āϰāϤ্āϝেāĻ āϧāϰ্āĻŽেāϰ (āĻāĻŦং āϏেāĻ āϏাāĻĨে āύাāϏ্āϤিāĻāϤাāĻŦাāĻĻীāĻĻেāϰāĻ) āĻĒāĻŖ্āĻĄিāϤāĻĻেāϰāĻে āĻিāĻ্āĻাāϏা āĻāϰ – ā§§. āĻেāύ āĻāĻĒāύি āĻŽāύে āĻāϰেāύ āϝে, āĻāĻĒāύাāϰ āϧāϰ্āĻŽāĻ āĻāĻŽাāϰ āĻŽেāύে āĻāϞা āĻāĻিāϤ? ⧍. āĻ āύ্āϝাāύ্āϝ āϧāϰ্āĻŽেāϰ āĻŦ্āϝাāĻĒাāϰে āĻāĻĒāύি āĻী āĻŽāύে āĻāϰেāύ āĻāĻŦং āĻেāύ? āĻāĻŦাāϰ āϤুāĻŽি āϝāĻāύ āϏāĻŦ āϧāϰ্āĻŽেāϰ āĻŦ্āϝাāĻĒাāϰে āĻāĻ āĻĻুāĻি āĻĒ্āϰāĻļ্āύেāϰ āĻāϤ্āϤāϰ āĻĒেā§ে āϝাāĻŦা, āϤāĻāύ āϤুāĻŽি āĻāĻŦাāϰāĻ āϏেāĻ āϏāĻāϞ āĻĒāĻŖ্āĻĄিāϤāĻĻেāϰāĻে āĻিāĻ্āĻাāϏা āĻāϰ – āĻ āύ্āϝাāύ্āϝ āϧāϰ্āĻŽেāϰ āĻĒāĻŖ্āĻĄিāϤāĻāĻŖ āϤো āϤাāĻĻেāϰ āĻāĻŦং āĻāĻĒāύাāϰ āϧāϰ্āĻŽেāϰ āĻŦ্āϝাāĻĒাāϰে āĻāĻ āĻāĻ āĻāĻĨা āĻŦāϞেāĻেāύ। āĻāϏāĻŦ āĻāĻĨাāϰ āĻŦ্āϝাāĻĒাāϰে āĻāĻĒāύাāϰ āĻŦāĻ্āϤāĻŦ্āϝ āĻী? āĻŦ্āϝাāϏ, āĻāĻŦাāϰ āĻāĻ āϏāĻāϞ āĻāĻĨোāĻĒāĻāĻĨāύেāϰ āĻĒāϰিāĻĒ্āϰেāĻ্āώিāϤে āϤুāĻŽি āύিāĻেāϰ āĻŦিāĻŦেāĻ-āĻŦুāĻĻ্āϧি āĻĒ্āϰā§োāĻ āĻāϰে āϏিāĻĻ্āϧাāύ্āϤ āύাāĻ āϝে, āϤুāĻŽি āĻী āĻāϰāĻŦা। āĻāĻŽাāϰ āĻĒāĻ্āώ āĻĨেāĻে āĻ āĻŦ্āϝাāĻĒাāϰে āĻāĻাāĻ āϏāϰ্āĻŦোāϤ্āϤāĻŽ āĻĒāϰাāĻŽāϰ্āĻļ। āĻāϰ āĻĨেāĻে āĻāϤ্āϤāĻŽ āĻোāύ āĻĒāϰাāĻŽāϰ্āĻļ āĻেāĻ āĻেāύে āĻĨাāĻāϞে āϤাāĻে āĻāĻাāύে āϏেāĻা āĻ āĻŦāĻļ্āϝāĻ āĻāϞ্āϞেāĻ āĻāϰাāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āĻ āύুāϰোāϧ āĻāϰা āϝাāĻ্āĻে।
āϏāĻŦāĻļেāώে āĻāĻŽি āĻŦāϞāĻŦ (āϝāĻĻিāĻ āĻāϤিāĻŽāϧ্āϝেāĻ āĻŦāĻšুāĻŦাāϰ āĻĒ্āϰāϤ্āϝāĻ্āώ-āĻĒāϰোāĻ্āώāĻাāĻŦে āĻāĻা āĻāĻŽি āĻŦāϞেāĻি): āϏ্āϰāώ্āĻা āϤোāĻŽাāĻে āĻāĻāĻি āĻŦ্āϰেāύ āĻĻিā§েāĻেāύ āϝেāĻাāϰ āĻাāϰāĻŖেāĻ āϤুāĻŽি āϏৃāώ্āĻিāϰ āϏেāϰা āĻীāĻŦ। āĻāĻ āĻŦ্āϰেāύāĻাāĻে āύিāϰāĻĒেāĻ্āώāĻাāĻŦে āϝুāĻ্āϤি-āĻĒ্āϰāĻŽাāĻŖ āĻĒāϰ্āϝাāϞোāĻāύাāϰ āĻাāĻে āϞাāĻাāĻ। āϤুāĻŽি āĻĒāϰāĻাāϞে āĻŦিāĻļ্āĻŦাāϏ āĻāϰ āĻāϰ āύা-āĻ āĻāϰ, āĻ āύ্āϤāϤāĻĒāĻ্āώে āĻāĻ āĻীāĻŦāύে āϤোāĻŽাāϰ āĻŦ্āϰেāύāĻāϰ্āĻা āύিঃāϏāύ্āĻĻেāĻšে āϤোāĻŽাāϰ āĻāĻĒāĻাāϰে āĻāϏāĻŦে – āĻāϤে āĻোāύ āϏāύ্āĻĻেāĻšāĻ āύাāĻ।
āĻāϤ āĻĄিāĻেāĻāϞāϏ āϞেāĻাāϞেāĻি āĻāϰাāϰ āĻ āĻ্āϝাāϏ āύাāĻ, āϧৈāϰ্āϝāĻ āύাāĻ। āϝাāĻšোāĻ,
ReplyDeleteāĻĒ্āϰāĻĨāĻŽেāĻ āĻĢাāϞāϤু āĻাāĻā§েāϰ āϏুāϏ্āĻĒāώ্āĻ āĻĒ্āϰāĻļ্āύেāϰ āĻāϤ্āϤāϰ āĻĻিāϤে āĻাāĻ,
āĻāĻĒāύি āϝে āĻ āĻŦāϏ্āĻĨাāύে āĻāĻে āĻāĻাāĻে āĻŦāϞা āĻšā§ Agnostic (not Atheist)। āϝāĻĻি āĻ āϤ্āĻŽāĻিāĻ্āĻাāϏা āĻšā§ে āĻĨাāĻে āϤাāĻšāϞে āĻŽাāύুāώāĻে āĻĒ্āϰāĻাāĻļ্āϝে āĻাāύাāύোāϰ āĻĻāϰāĻাāϰ āĻিāϞ āύা, āϝেāĻšেāϤু āĻĒ্āϰāĻাāĻļ্āϝেāĻ āĻিāĻ্āĻাāϏা āĻāϰেāĻেāύ āϏুāϤāϰাং āϧāϰে āύিāĻ্āĻি āĻāĻাāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āĻāϏāϞেāĻ āĻāĻĒāύি āĻĻিāĻ āύিāϰ্āĻĻেāĻļāύাāĻ āĻাāĻ্āĻেāύ(āĻ āϰ্āĻĨাā§ āĻŽাāύুāώেāϰ āĻĒāϰাāĻŽāϰ্āĻļ)। āĻāĻĒāύি āϝāĻāύ āύিāĻে āĻĨেāĻেāĻ āĻŦুāĻāϤে āĻĒেāϰেāĻেāύ āϝে āĻāĻĒāύি āĻ āύুāĻļাāϏāύেāϰ āĻāĻĒāϰ āĻāϞāĻেāύ, āϏুāϤāϰাং āϧāϰে āύিāĻ্āĻি āĻāĻĒāύি āϝāĻĨেāώ্āĻ āϞāĻিāĻাāϞি āĻāĻŦং āύিāϰāĻĒেāĻ্āώāϤাāϰ āϏাāĻĨে āĻāĻুāĻ্āĻেāύ (āĻাāϞ āϞাāĻāϞো)। āĻāĻāύ āϝāĻĻি āϏāĻāϞ āϧāϰ্āĻŽāĻ āĻāĻĒāύাāϰ āĻাāĻে āĻĢেāĻāĻ āĻŽāύে āĻšā§ āĻāĻŦং āϝāĻĻি āϏৃāώ্āĻিāĻāϰ্āϤা āĻĨেāĻেāĻ āĻĨাāĻে āϤাāĻšāϞে āĻŽাāύুāĻŦāϧāϰ্āĻŽāĻাāĻ āĻি āϏāϰ্āĻŦাāĻĒেāĻ্āώা āĻ্āϰāĻšāύāϝোāĻ্āϝ āύā§? āĻাāϰāĻŖ āĻāĻĒāύি āϝāĻāύ āϏāĻāϞ āĻŽাāύুāώāĻে āϏāĻŽাāύ āĻাāϞāĻŦাāϏāϤে āĻļিāĻāĻŦেāύ āϤāĻāύāĻ āĻĒৃāĻĨিāĻŦী āĻšā§ে āĻāĻ āĻŦে āϤāĻĨাāĻāĻĨিāϤ āϏ্āĻŦāϰ্āĻেāϰ āĻŽāϤ। āĻāĻাāĻ āύিāĻļ্āĻāĻ āĻāĻāĻāύ āϏāϰ্āĻŦāĻ্āĻাāύী,āĻĒāϰāĻŽ āĻāϰুāύাāĻŽā§, āĻĒāϰāĻŽ āĻĻā§াāϞু āϏৃāώ্āĻিāĻāϰ্āϤাāϰ āĻোāĻে āĻ āύ্āϝাā§ āĻšāϤে āĻĒাāϰে āύা। āĻāϰ āĻāĻ āĻāϤ্āϤāϰ āϤো āĻāĻāĻু āĻেāĻŦে āĻĻেāĻāϞে, āύিāĻেāĻ āĻুāĻে āĻĒেāϤেāύ।
āĻĻ্āĻŦিāϤীā§āϤ āĻŽোāϞ্āϞা āϏাāϰাāĻĢাāϤ,
āϝে āϧāϰ্āĻŽে āĻŽাāύুāώে āĻŽাāύুāώে āĻেāĻĻাāĻেāĻĻ āĻāϰāϤে āĻŦāϞা āĻšā§ āϤা āĻāĻŽাāϰ āĻাāĻে āĻāύোāĻĻিāύো āĻ্āϰāĻšāύীā§ āĻšāϤে āĻĒাāϰে āύা। āϏেāĻা āĻĻোāϝāĻেāϰ āĻā§েāĻ āĻšোāĻ āĻāϰ āĻŦেāĻšেāϏ্āϤেāϰ āĻেāϞāĻŽাāύāĻĻেāϰ āϞোāĻেāĻ āĻšোāĻāύা āĻেāύ। āĻāϰ āϝে āĻāĻĄ āύিāϝেāϰ āϏ্āĻŦাāϰ্āĻĨেāϰ/āĻĻাāϏāϤ্āϤেāϰ/āĻāĻŦাāĻĻāϤেāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āĻāϤ āĻিāĻু āĻāĻাāϤে āĻĒাāϰেāύ āϏেāĻ āϏ্āĻŦাāϰ্āĻĨāĻĒāϰ āĻāĻĄেāϰ āĻ āϏ্āϤিāϤ্āϤে āĻŦিāĻļ্āĻŦাāϏেāϰ āĻোāύো āĻĒ্āϰā§োāĻāύ āĻŦোāϧ āĻāϰি āύা।
"āϝে āϧāϰ্āĻŽে āĻŽাāύুāώে āĻŽাāύুāώে āĻেāĻĻাāĻেāĻĻ āĻāϰāϤে āĻŦāϞা āĻšā§ āϤা āĻāĻŽাāϰ āĻাāĻে āĻāύোāĻĻিāύো āĻ্āϰāĻšāύীā§ āĻšāϤে āĻĒাāϰে āύা। āϏেāĻা āĻĻোāϝāĻেāϰ āĻā§েāĻ āĻšোāĻ āĻāϰ āĻŦেāĻšেāϏ্āϤেāϰ āĻেāϞāĻŽাāύāĻĻেāϰ āϞোāĻেāĻ āĻšোāĻāύা āĻেāύ। āĻāϰ āϝে āĻāĻĄ āύিāϝেāϰ āϏ্āĻŦাāϰ্āĻĨেāϰ/āĻĻাāϏāϤ্āϤেāϰ/āĻāĻŦাāĻĻāϤেāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āĻāϤ āĻিāĻু āĻāĻাāϤে āĻĒাāϰেāύ āϏেāĻ āϏ্āĻŦাāϰ্āĻĨāĻĒāϰ āĻāĻĄেāϰ āĻ āϏ্āϤিāϤ্āϤে āĻŦিāĻļ্āĻŦাāϏেāϰ āĻোāύো āĻĒ্āϰā§োāĻāύ āĻŦোāϧ āĻāϰি āύা।"
ReplyDeleteāĻŽুāĻে āĻিāύ্āϤু āϤুāĻŽি āĻ িāĻāĻ āĻŦāϞāĻ "āϏāĻāϞ" āĻŽাāύুāώ āϏāĻŽাāύ। āĻ āĻĨāĻ āϤুāĻŽি āĻিāύ্āϤু āĻāĻāĻāύ āĻŦাāĻাāϞি āĻāϰ āĻāĻāĻāύ āĻংāϰেāĻেāϰ āĻŽāϧ্āϝে āĻেāĻĻাāĻেāĻĻ āĻāϰ। āĻীāĻাāĻŦে? āĻাāϰāĻŖ āĻāĻāĻāύ āĻŦাংāϞাā§ āĻāĻĨা āĻŦāϞে āĻāϰ āĻāϰেāĻāĻāύ āĻংāϰেāĻিāϤে। āĻিāύ্āϤু āĻāĻ āĻেāĻĻাāĻেāĻĻāĻাāĻে āĻি āϤুāĻŽি āĻāĻāĻāύāĻে āĻাāϞāĻŦাāϏা āĻāϰ āĻāĻāĻāύāĻে āĻৃāĻŖা āĻāϰাāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āĻাāĻে āϞাāĻাāĻŦা?? āĻāĻŽি āĻী āĻŦāϞāϤে āĻাāĻ্āĻি āĻŦুāĻāϤে āĻĒাāϰāĻ? "āĻাāώাāĻāϤ" āĻ āϰ্āĻĨে āϤুāĻŽি āϝেāĻোāύ āĻŽাāύুāώেāϰ āĻŽāϧ্āϝেāĻ āϤো āĻেāĻĻাāĻেāĻĻ āĻāϰāĻŦা - āϤুāĻŽি āύিāĻļ্āĻā§āĻ āĻĨিāϏিāϏ āĻāϰাāϰ āϏāĻŽā§ āĻŽাāύুāώেāϰ āĻŽāϧ্āϝে āĻেāĻĻাāĻেāĻĻ āĻāϰাāϰ āĻেāώ্āĻা āĻāϰāĻŦা āϝে, āĻাāϰা āĻ āĻĨিāϏিāϏেāϰ āĻāĻĒিāĻ āĻাāϞ āĻাāύে āĻāϰ āĻাāϰা āϝাāύে āύা āĻāĻŦং āϏেāĻ āĻĒ্āϰেāĻ্āώিāϤে āϝে āĻাāύে, āϤাāϰ āĻাāĻেāĻ āĻĻৌā§াāĻŦা। āĻāĻ āĻেāĻĻাāĻেāĻĻ āĻĒাāϰāĻĢেāĻ্āĻāϞি āĻāĻে। āĻিāύ্āϤু āϝāĻāύāĻ āϤুāĻŽি āĻেāĻĻাāĻেāĻĻ āĻŦāϞāϤে āĻāϰেāĻāĻāύāĻে āύিāĻু āĻোāĻে āĻĻেāĻা āĻŦুāĻাāĻŦা, āϤāĻāύāĻ āĻেāĻাāϞ। āϝে āϧāϰ্āĻŽে āĻŽাāύুāώে āĻŽাāύুāώে āĻেāĻĻাāĻেāĻĻ āĻāϰāϤে āĻŦāϞা āĻšā§ āϤা āĻāĻāύোāĻ āĻাāϰো āĻাāĻেāĻ āĻ্āϰāĻšāĻŖীā§ āĻšā§ āύা। āĻāĻ āĻেāĻĻাāĻেāĻĻ āĻোāύ āĻ āϰ্āĻĨে? āϝāĻāύ āĻেāĻĻাāĻেāĻĻāĻা āĻāĻāĻāύ āĻāϰেāĻāĻāύāĻে "āĻĻেāĻāϤে āĻĒাāϰি āύা āϤোāϰে" āĻাāĻāĻĒ āĻāĻāϰāĻŖেāϰ āĻĻিāĻে āύিā§ে āϝাā§। āĻāϰ āĻāϏāϞাāĻŽ āĻāĻāύোāĻ āĻāĻ āĻেāĻĻাāĻেāĻĻেāϰ āĻ āύুāĻŽোāĻĻāύ āĻĻেā§ āύা। āĻāĻ āĻĻুāĻ āϧāϰāύেāϰ āĻেāĻĻাāĻেāĻĻেāϰ āĻāĻĨা āĻāĻŽি āĻāĻĻাāĻšāϰāĻŖāϏāĻš āĻāϰ āĻāĻেāĻ āĻŦ্āϝাāĻ্āϝা āĻāϰেāĻি। āĻāĻŦাāϰো āĻāĻেāϰ āĻĒোāϏ্āĻāĻা āĻĻেāĻে āύাāĻ।
"āĻāϰ āϝে āĻāĻĄ āύিāϝেāϰ āϏ্āĻŦাāϰ্āĻĨেāϰ/āĻĻাāϏāϤ্āϤেāϰ/āĻāĻŦাāĻĻāϤেāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āĻāϤ āĻিāĻু āĻāĻাāϤে āĻĒাāϰেāύ āϏেāĻ āϏ্āĻŦাāϰ্āĻĨāĻĒāϰ āĻāĻĄেāϰ āĻ āϏ্āϤিāϤ্āϤে āĻŦিāĻļ্āĻŦাāϏেāϰ āĻোāύো āĻĒ্āϰā§োāĻāύ āĻŦোāϧ āĻāϰি āύা।"
ReplyDeleteāĻ āĻāĻĨাāĻাāĻ āĻāϰ āĻāĻেāĻ āĻŦ্āϝাāĻ্āϝা āĻāϰেāĻি। āĻāϞ্āϞাāĻš āĻāĻŽাāĻĻেāϰ āĻোāύ āϧāϰāύেāϰ āĻāĻŦাāĻĻāϤেāϰāĻ āĻŽুāĻাāĻĒেāĻ্āώী āύā§। āϏাāϰা āĻĻুāύিā§াāϰ āĻŽাāύুāώ āϝāĻĻি āĻিāĻুāĻ āύা āĻāϰে, āϤাāϤেāĻ āϤাāϰ āĻিāĻুāĻ āϝাā§-āĻāϏে āύা। āĻŦāϰং āϤিāύি āĻāĻŦাāĻĻāϤ āĻāϰāϤে āĻŦāϞেāĻেāύ āĻŽাāύুāώেāϰ āύিāĻেāϰ āĻŽāĻ্āĻāϞেāϰ āĻāύ্āϝāĻ। āϝāĻĻি āĻŦিāĻļ্āĻŦাāϏ āύা āĻšā§, āϤাāĻšāϞে āĻুāĻŦ āĻোāĻ্āĻ āĻāĻāĻা āĻāĻĻাāĻšāϰāĻŖ āĻĻেāĻ। āĻāϞ্āϞাāĻš āĻāĻŽাāĻĻেāϰāĻে āĻāϝূ āĻāϰে āύাāĻŽাāϝ āĻĒā§āϤে āĻŦāϞেāĻেāύ। āĻেāύ? āĻļāϤ āĻļāϤ āĻাāϰāĻŖ āĻāĻে, āĻŽাāϤ্āϰ āĻā§েāĻāĻা āĻāϞ্āϞেāĻ āĻāϰāĻি:
ā§§. āϏāĻŽā§āĻŽāϤ āύাāĻŽাāϝ āĻĒā§াāϰ āĻŽāϧ্āϝ āĻĻিā§ে āĻāĻāĻāύ āĻŽাāύুāώ āĻļিāĻāϤে āĻĒাāϰে āĻিāĻাāĻŦে āϏāĻŽā§েāϰ āϏāĻĻ্āĻŦ্āϝāĻŦāĻšাāϰ āĻāϰāϤে āĻšā§।
⧍. āĻাāĻŽাāϤে āύাāĻŽাāϝ āĻĒā§াāϰ āĻŽāϧ্āϝ āĻĻিā§ে āĻŽাāύুāώে-āĻŽাāύুāώে āĻŦāύ্āϧāύ āĻĻৃā§ āĻšā§।
ā§Š. āĻĻিāύে ā§Ģ āĻŦাāϰ āĻāϝূ āĻāϰāϞে āϤোāĻŽাāϰ āĻļāϰীāϰে āĻāĻāύো āĻŽā§āϞা āĻāĻŽāĻŦে āύা। āĻāϰ āĻেā§াāϞ āĻāϰে āĻĻেāĻ: āϝেāϏāĻŦ āĻাā§āĻাā§ āϧূāϞা-āĻŦাāϞি āĻāĻŽে, āĻāϝূāϤে āϏেāϏāĻŦ āĻাā§āĻাāĻ āϧুāϤে āĻŦāϞা āĻšā§।
ā§Ē. āĻāĻāĻু āĻĒāϰāĻĒāϰ āϝāĻāύ āϤুāĻŽি āĻŽুāĻে āĻĒাāύি āϞাāĻাāĻŦা, āϤāĻāύ āϤোāĻŽাāϰ āĻĢ্āϰেāĻļ āϞাāĻāĻŦে।
āĻŽāĻাāϰ āĻŦ্āϝাāĻĒাāϰ āĻšāĻ্āĻে, āϝāĻāύ āĻāĻŽি āύাāĻŽাāϝ āĻĒā§āϤাāĻŽ āύা, āϤāĻāύ āĻāϏāĻŦ āĻāĻŽাāϰ āĻাāĻে āĻেāĻŦāϞ āĻĨিāĻāϰী āĻŽāύে āĻšāϤ। āĻāĻāύ āĻāĻŽি āύিāĻেāĻ āĻāϰ āϏুāĻĢāϞ āĻĒাāĻ। āĻāĻে āϝāĻāύ āĻŽāύোāϝোāĻ āĻĻিā§ে āĻাāĻ āĻāϰāϤে āĻĨাāĻাāĻাāϞীāύ āύাāĻŽাāϝেāϰ āϏāĻŽā§ āĻšāϤ, āϤāĻāύ āĻাāĻ āĻĢেāϞে āύাāĻŽাāϝ āĻĒā§āϤে āĻŦিāϰāĻ্āϤ āϞাāĻāϤ। āĻāĻāύ āĻāĻŽাāϰ āĻāϰāĻŽ āĻŦ্āϝāϏ্āϤāϤাāϰ āĻŽāϧ্āϝে āϝāĻāύāĻ āύাāĻŽাāϝেāϰ āϏāĻŽā§ āĻšā§, āϤāĻāύāĻ āĻুāĻŦ āĻাāϞ āϞাāĻে - āϝাāĻ, āĻ āύ্āϤāϤ ā§§ā§Ģ/⧍ā§Ļ āĻŽিāύিāĻেāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āĻāĻāĻু āĻŦ্āϰেāĻ āĻĒাāĻ্āĻি।
āĻŽোāĻ āĻāĻĨা, āϤুāĻŽি āϝে āĻ āĻিāϝোāĻāĻুāϞো āĻāύāĻ, āĻāϏāϞাāĻŽ āĻāĻāύোāĻ āϏেāϏāĻŦ āĻাāĻ āĻāϰāϤে āĻŦāϞে āύা। āϤোāĻŽাāϰ āĻāϰো āĻোāύ āĻāύāĻĢিāĻāĻļāύ āĻĨাāĻāϞে āĻাāύাāύোāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āϏ্āĻŦাāĻāϤ āĻাāύাāĻ্āĻি।
>> It doesn’t require mess of religions to understand what right is and what wrong is!
ReplyDelete>Might be somewhat true. But, people still won't choose to do the right. They would always run for evil. Then, how would you come up with a way to establish the right and prevent the wrong? Wait, you don't need to take time to think about it. Religion already provides these guidelines...
“A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death.” -- Albert Einstein
Einstein is not only a great scientist he was also an eminent social reformer and educationist, you should have known that.
>> Stand for mankind not for religion.
> Religion IS for mankind. It never goes against mankind. It's the mankind who uses religion for satisfying their selfish needs. The blame is to be given not to religion, rather to those selfish people.
Religion is guilty that’s what I explained.
>> I hope you know how badly affected the civilization is by the religion politics.
> Again, religion is not to be blamed for it, rather the people should be.
Yes people who created religions for interests except for Buddhism which is a philosophy not an imposting religion with lies.
>> Debashis wrote: We bribe the god by praying (something like giving TEL(oil)) to get advantages in real life or life after death(!!!).
> Yeah - from people's point of view. God is such a fool that he can't even understand that the people (whom He created) are 'bribing' Him to get advantages!!! He doesn't even care if we don't do what He wants us to do. He needn't care whether we get advantages or are deprived of advantages. He just prescribed religion for our own good....
Sura 2: al-Baqara (The Cow), 2:21
“Allah created the mankind; they should worship Him.”
Contradiction: 3:97, 35:15 say “Allah does not need mankind and the jinns; He is free of
all want.”
What you said is a contradiction in quran. Did you read Quran well?
> Throughout years of research, I found out the truth - not all I "hear" about MY religion are true due to people's ignorance while speaking. But, what I came to find out - all I read in the original texts of MY religion are indeed true and contradiction-free.
ReplyDeleteI said once. Your religion is same way guilty as others and contains a lot lies and contradictions inside. You have seen a lot. Why do you deny?
Nope. They never deserve hell just because of God's decision. God made human the best of creations. Why? Because he gave him something called 'brain' to think logically……... If you don't use your brain to know the right thing and consequently follow the wrong path, shouldn't you deserve punishment?
You got wrong idea. I’ll talk about it more. You owe me thanks for the payback patience I’m giving to you to disabuse you out of religious misconceptions.
>> "How will people be able to think? The poisons of religions are seeded from the very childhood of religious people."
> Again, this is people's fault, not religion's.
Obviously religion is guilty enough.
>> "Forget about the people. Can you think?"
> At least I try to.
No you don’t. Your every thinking is religion-centred even you don’t think neutrally. Your every word is backed from a religion called Islam. When you at first assume the wrong answer as true how will you be able to differentiate true answer from wrong? I am not saying to assume that religion as wrong. At least don’t take it as correct. That’ll be helpfully neutral to start the thinking correctly. God damn if you could ever do that!
You don’t know how much limited you are!
False. Rather I tried my best to find out. The result? At least I didn't find any contradiction in the Quraan and the authentic Prophetic traditions. If you've found one, you're welcome to mention it. :)
I’ve mentioned. The world mentions it so much. Someone is sleeping awake cannot be waked up!
To help you I’ll mention more. But I fear you got a resistive mind you see everything from Islamic perceptions and become fooled by religious scruples! Let’s see how much you can help yourself.
>> "Could ever any religion prevent people from doing wrong?"
> Yeah. During the life of the Prophet Muhammad (may peace be upon him), Islaam prevented people from doing wrong. You can read any history book mentioning that period for details. It's only one example.
Again misunderstood. Under the hood of religion and costumes bad is still bad good is still good. You need to know the definition of justice from good philosophers. Then you’ll be able to differentiate between good and bad truly. Relgions are so limited!
>> "If you were born in that culture you'd have believed same way. But now you're not coz you are not going to bomb some people tongiht."
> Wrong. Rather I'm not coz I KNOW the right thing from the very religious texts.
You are a fool or what? Does the non-religious people of the roads and pavements know about your religious texts? Think like that. If your words had any effect in real there would have been no people out of your religion! But in real another religion still has the majority! What I wanted to mean is still having the best brain you wouldn’t have been muslim if you were born in Christian society. Like the majority is increasing still being born in their very own religious community.
You might name some Christians who came muslim. I know that much clever you are cycling around your religious garbage. Go to http://www.ex-muslim.org.uk/ you’ll find lakhs of muslims adopted different beliefs. That’s just an example. Reality is more bad for you if your ideas have still not changed.
>> "What Shiya, Sunni dividends? What about differentiated cultures on women?"
ReplyDelete> Again, these are not religion's fault, rather people's. What about contradictions among the scientists about a scientific issue?? You must provide valid proof to justify you're the correct one. Same is true in the above mentioned cases. However, as people are blind and emotional, they don't want to accept proofs. That's why the contradictory views persist. Again, that's not religion's problem.
It’s not true that only your view is correct and all others wrong. You should understand what contradiction means first. A contradiction is not stated just for one person’s emotional case. Religion containing contradictions is not good guideline for mankind.
Is science a religion? Is it imposed on anyone? Science is an established procedure to find the truth. Some concepts might be in development and in future might be proved different, but they are not imposed ever for personal interests in wrong ways. You’re having the very advantages of science like every other people. You shouldn’t believe in religious superstitions.
>> "What if you were not provided any religion from your birth? Then which religion would had been true to you?"
> According to what I've mentioned before, I was a Muslim by birth before; now I'm a Muslim by choice.
No you are wrong. You had 99.99999999..% probability of being Christian. Look at others you of that community. They Christian and they are happy. There are other religion followers too.
>> "If they feel like the order is from their Boss and that came straight from Allah they will not mess with the car but anything definitely? Then who is responsible?"
>The people is responsible. Why would they 'feel' that the order is from their boss? Rather they should 'verify' that the order is indeed from their boss and only then act accordingly. And it's certain that the boss won't order them something wrong to do, isn't it?
You misunderstood. These bosses are religious gurus who provide corrections for incompatible things in your religion and the book, Quran. Not believing them is denying the fundamentals of that religion.
>>"If you were following Christian(or any other religion) strictly still being born in Muslim it might convinced me! But now you are dumb fool follower underestimating others!"
ReplyDelete> …Even Christian priests became Muslims after they sought for the truth and not just stayed as a simple Muslim, rather became scholars in comparing Islaam, Christianity and other religions (and of course, atheism). Were they paid for it or did they do it by making use of their own brain?
You are too biased. You only know the opinion of one party. You don’t know the others’. That’s why you seek brain on accepting Islam. I got people in front of me accept Islaming to whom no religions did matter. The matter was only the help of neighbor muslims. He’d never gave a shit about this religion if he wasn’t seriously troubled being the minority in locality. You find too much truthfulness and intelligence on switching on Islam. You’d understand how fake that is if you were that other religion follower.
Definitely no one ever loves to change his religion/belief because his fellow society, his friends, relatives will leave him. Did you meet a religion switcher? Did you observe their true condition in real life? There is no Allah who made’em happy.
>> About what you said on people with less merit and beasts having better brain than human.
> It seems that you've misunderstood the meaning of "the best of the creations". It refers to the mankind as a whole and not to individual persons. Man can think better than other animals in orders of magnitudes. There is of course differences of level of merit among people, but even the dumbest person can think much more better than any beast.
Should I say you fool again! You didn’t get the logic. Definitely not. There are human beings who are worst than some intelligent beasts in case of intelligence. They are named disabled. I respect them but in your judgement, every people would find Islamic belief from intelligence. They’ll never find.
You think others will go hell. They think you people will be damned to hell. It’s called damnation without relief and etc. I focused on my post in a general statement that makes it easy to understand. But you never get it and you are banging with your own religion.
If you respect your religion too much then you shouldn’t dig it deep here because there are hateful crocodiles inside.
>> "Islam was kind of suitable for primitive times. It's completely worn out!"
ReplyDelete> There is no doubt that many scientific facts which were revealed relatively recently were already mentioned in the Quraan 1400 years ago. Then is it primitive or thousand years advanced?? Rather Islaam is completely compatible with time. Its rulings are formulated in such a way that those would be best suited to current people as well as to those coming later.
That’s fool paradise. Islam never knew science. No joking.. Many erroneous issues have been resolved by religious leader time to time. If you read Quran from first to last you’ll see discussions about those Arab people at that primitive time, places on proximity and related facts on Muhammad. They are related to Muhammad’s life, his hates, his fears and the people, relatives who disobeyed him. There are contradictions about the implementation technique too. I’ll mention if you continue writing your novels. What can you sense from that? Completely written on that time and space. Now it worns out long before.
Not only one book came. There are many kitabs: the Suhuf Ibrahim, the Tawrat, the Zabur, the Injil etc are major. Didn't they came from Allah?
One kitab after another comes because that previous becomes inappropriate with the flow of time, space and race. Same way comes Quran.
Now if a kitab really came from Allah how do they become faulty and inappropriate? There are many contradictions with quranic laws and current phenomenons. Now alims and other so called wise religious people are called to compromise these conflicts..
A book that came from Allah becomes invalidated? And humans decide what should be the modification?
Dig it up. If you have just to come to deny every fact and reason against Islam then I politely say please leave. I haven’t come to make assaults on Islam. My intentions are far from these narrow low-level things.
>>"You are saying something about original text.
>>Allah says: [...] (Al-Hijr 15:9).
>>So don't make us fool telling about your authenticity."
>If I'm not mistaken, you've misunderstood my word "original text". It means the Quraan and the authentic Prophetic traditions. All other books referencing these sources are not considered as original. ………………………. Quraan has been and always will be preserved as it was revealed. Have any proof that it hasn't been? Anybody's welcome to put it forth. :)
Yes, you are mistaken. I said your Allah preserves Quran on his own interest as said. So there cannot be modified copies which in terms stand against this statement.
About all your words where you've tried to say that religion is guilty - you said that you've discussed it and I'm also saying that I've discussed it, too. In this case, the audience would decide whether the statement is correct.
ReplyDelete"Sura 2: al-Baqara (The Cow), 2:21
“Allah created the mankind; they should worship Him.”
Contradiction: 3:97, 35:15 say “Allah does not need mankind and the jinns; He is free of all want.”
What you said is a contradiction in quran. Did you read Quran well?"
Of course I read the Quraan very well (and much better than you did) - to the extent that I learned Arabic just to correct people like you who think themselves to be 'neutral' but yet copy-paste texts from websites without even verifying whether the so-called contradictory aayaat they're copying are indeed meant in the Holy Quraan as they're trying to mean.
Below are the translations of the actual aayaahs in the referred chapter and verse numbers:
2:21. O mankind! Worship your Lord Who created you and those who were before you so that you may become Al-MuttaqÃģn (the pious).
3:97. ...and whoever disbelieves, then AllÃĸh stands not in need of any of the 'AlamÃŽn (mankind and jinns).
35:15. O mankind! it is you who are the needy, but AllÃĸh is Rich (Free of all wants and needs), Worthy of all praise.
This is quite simple English and is clearly comprehendible that Allaah is giving a clear message here that everyone should worship Him so that they become pious. It is not the need of Allaah, but for the good of the mankind as piousness would obviously bring good to people.
Brother, if you want to know the truth, then first of all, be neutral. When you quote something, first check whether that quoted message indeed exists in the reference exactly as you're quoting. You shouldn't blindly copy-paste from websites to suit to your own desires. It's a reprehensible deception.
"Your religion is same way guilty as others and contains a lot lies and contradictions inside. You have seen a lot. Why do you deny?"
ReplyDeleteI deny because I can proof (quite easily) that the claims of existence of those so-called lies and contradictions in Islaam are themselves lies. I already proved quite a few. If you think you're smart enough to refute those, give it a try.
You think that religion is imposed on people. However, Islaam never says to impose it on anybody. Rather surah Kaafiroon (chapter 109) says that if you don't want to come to Islaam, then be with your own religion/view. Islaam is for people's own good. If they don't want it, nobody has the right to force them accepting it. Rather Allaah says in the holy quran (2:256) "There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the Right Path has become distinct from the wrong path."
Brother, before you state something, you should do some research to verify what you're saying is correct.
"I am not saying to assume that religion as wrong. At least don’t take it as correct. That’ll be helpfully neutral to start the thinking correctly. God damn if you could ever do that!"
Yeah, I already mentioned before that I did that long before. I already mentioned before that I started research when I suspected that what people are telling me is not correct. And I know very well how to be neutral to think correctly.
"I said your Allah preserves Quran on his own interest as said. So there cannot be modified copies which in terms stand against this statement."
The Quraan has indeed been preserved without any modification. You're asking about different copies. Tell me, our Bangabandhu gave a historic speech on 7th March; has it been preserved? Of course it is. But it wasn't a written document, it was a speech. Now, if you write in plain bangla and if you write it in Banglish (Bangla text written with English characters which is common in messenger chats), if both of them sound like the original speech when read, then would you say that his speech has been modified because of different copies?? Quraan was revealed as speech, not as a written script. All the copies of Quraan that you think to be 'different' actually sounds exactly the same when they are recited. So, it indeed has been preserved.
You have mentioned many other issues which can be logically refuted very easily. However, as I found out from your last posts that you're in fact not acting neutral, therefore I think that refuting those would only waste my valuable time. By grace of Allaah, I have all the patience, knowledge and expertise needed to clear all your confusions, but first, you must comply to the following:
ReplyDelete1. You must act neutrally and logically (not emotionally). Before you state anything, verify that what you're referencing actually exists in the referenced book.
2. Try to do some research thinking. Rather than copy-pasting the so-called contradictions from websites, try to google for refutations of those contradictions - you're guaranteed to find the answers to all the so-called contradictions on the Internet. Study those; and if, still you find out that those answers can be refuted, then present those contradictions with your refutations. Don't merely utter words without researching even a little bit.
3. Try to be modest. You don't need to call someone fool, dumb, limited etc. to refute his arguments. Smart people need only logical arguments to refute somebody else's arguments. If you can't respect people, don't think they'd thank you just because they owe you to (and it's silly to demand thanks from people or reminding them of owing thanks, anyway...).
4. Try to be honest. If you can't refute my arguments, you should admit that. Don't try to bypass those arguments. You raised some serious objections on contradictions in the Quraan and 'slavery' issue in Islaam. If you can refute my arguments on those issues, then present your arguments. Otherwise, you should admit that the objections you raised were not correct indeed.
So, as I said - adhere to these common-sense rules and I'll have all the patience and time needed to clear all of your confusions, if Allaah wills.
@ Sharafat,
ReplyDelete“āĻāϰ āĻোāϰāĻāύে(āĻ āύ্āϝ āϧāϰ্āĻŽāĻ্āϰāύ্āĻĨেāϰ āĻāĻĨা āĻāϞ্āϞেāĻ āĻāϰা āĻšāϞ āύা) āĻāϞ্āϞেāĻ āĻāĻে āϝাāϰা āĻĻāϞāĻ্āϝুāϤ āϤাāĻĻেāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āĻāĻে āĻāĻ িāύ āĻļাāϏ্āϤি।“
āĻāĻŽি āĻāϰāĻāĻŽ āĻোāύ āĻā§াāϤেāϰ āĻāĻĨা āĻাāύি āύা āϝেāĻাāύে āĻĻāϞāĻ্āϝুāϤ āĻšāĻŦাāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āĻļাāϏ্āϤিāϰ āĻāĻĨা āĻŦāϞা āĻšā§েāĻে। āĻুāϰāĻāύ-āĻšাāĻĻীāϏে āĻŦাāϰāĻŦাāϰ āĻŽুāϏāϞিāĻŽāĻĻেāϰ āĻŽāϧ্āϝে “āĻĻāϞাāĻĻāϞি” āϏৃāώ্āĻি āĻāϰাāϰ āĻ্āώেāϤ্āϰে āĻšুঁāĻļিā§াāϰ āĻāϰা āĻšā§েāĻে। āĻš্āϝাঁ, āϝāĻĻি āĻĻāϞāĻ্āϝুāϤ āĻŦāϞāϤে āĻŽুāϰāϤাāĻĻ āϤāĻĨা āĻāϏāϞাāĻŽāĻ্āϝুāϤ āĻšāĻŦাāϰ āĻāĻĨা āĻŦāϞ, āϤāĻŦে āĻāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āĻļাāϏ্āϤিāϰ āĻāĻĨা āĻāϏāϞাāĻŽে āĻŦāϞা āĻšā§েāĻে। āĻĒ্āϰāĻļ্āύ āĻšāĻ্āĻে āϝে, āĻāĻ āĻļাāϏ্āϤিāϰ āĻŦ্āϝāĻŦāϏ্āĻĨা āĻেāύ? āĻুāĻŦ āϏংāĻ্āώেāĻĒে āĻāϤ্āϤāϰāĻা āĻĻেāĻ (āĻāϤāĻ্āώāĻŖ āϧāϰে āĻাāĻāĻĒ āĻāϰāϤে āĻāϰāϤে āĻāϰ āĻাāϞ āϞাāĻāĻে āύা)। āϤুāĻŽি āϤোāĻŽাāϰ āϝāĻāύ āĻāĻ্āĻা āĻšāĻŦে, āϤāĻāύ āĻŽুāϏāϞিāĻŽāĻĻেāϰ āϏাāĻĨে āĻĨেāĻে āϏুāĻŦিāϧা āύিāĻŦা, āĻāϰ āϝāĻāύ āĻāĻ্āĻা āĻāϰāĻŦে, āϤāĻāύ āϤাāĻĻেāϰ āĻĨেāĻে āĻŦেāϰ āĻšā§ে āĻিā§ে āĻŽুāϏāϞিāĻŽāĻĻেāϰ āύাāĻŽে āĻŽিāĻĨ্āϝা āĻ āĻĒāĻŦাāĻĻ āĻāϰāĻŦা āĻāϰ āĻĻুāϰ্āύাāĻŽ āϰāĻাāĻŦা, āĻāĻা āϤো āĻšāϤে āĻĻেāĻā§া āϝাā§ āύা, āϤাāĻ āύা? āĻāϤ্āϤāϰāĻা āĻাāϞ āύা āϞাāĻāϞে āĻŦāĻāϞো, āĻĒāϰে āĻŦিāϏ্āϤাāϰিāϤ āĻŦ্āϝাāĻ্āϝা āĻāϰāĻŦ āύে, āĻāύāĻļা āĻāϞ্āϞাāĻš।
- āĻāϤ্āϤāϰāĻা āĻাāϞো āϞাāĻে āύাāĻ।
“āĻŽাāύুāώেāϰ āĻāϞাāĻĻা āĻŽāϤāĻŦাāĻĻ āĻĨাāĻāϤেāĻ āĻĒাāϰে। āύাāĻি āĻāϞাāĻĻা āĻŽāϤāĻŦাāĻĻ āĻĨাāĻাāĻ āϝাāĻŦেāύা??”
āĻš্āϝাঁ, āĻāϞাāĻĻা āĻŽāϤāĻŦাāĻĻ āĻĨাāĻāϤেāĻ āĻĒাāϰে āϝāĻĻি āϏāĻŦāĻুāϞো āĻŽāϤাāĻŽāϤāĻ āϝৌāĻ্āϤিāĻ āĻšā§। āϤুāĻŽি āϝāĻĻি āĻিāĻ্āĻাāϏা āĻāϰ āϝে, āĻাāύāĻাঁāϰāĻĒুāϞ āĻĨেāĻে āύীāϞāĻ্āώেāϤ āϝাāĻā§া āϝাā§ āĻেāĻŽāύে, āϤাāĻšāϞে āĻেāĻ āĻŦāϞāĻŦে āĻļāĻšীāĻĻ āĻŽিāύাāϰ āĻĻিā§ে āϝাāĻ, āĻেāĻ āĻŦāϞāĻŦে āĻŦাংāϞা āĻāĻাāĻĄেāĻŽীāϰ āĻĒাāĻļ āĻĻিā§ে, āĻেāĻāĻŦা āĻŦāϞāĻŦে āĻŦুā§েāĻেāϰ āĻĒাāĻļ āĻĻিā§ে। āĻāĻ্āώেāϤ্āϰে āϏāĻŦাāϰ āĻŽāϤāĻŦাāĻĻāĻ āϝৌāĻ্āϤিāĻ āĻāĻŦং āĻ্āϰāĻšāĻŖāϝোāĻ্āϝ। āĻিāύ্āϤু āϝāĻĻি āĻŽāϤāĻেāĻĻ āĻšā§ āĻŽিāĻĨ্āϝা āĻŦāϞা āϝাāĻŦে āĻি āϝাāĻŦে āύা, āϤাāĻšāϞে āϏেāĻ্āώেāϤ্āϰে āĻŽāϤāĻেāĻĻāĻা āĻāĻĻৌ āĻ্āϰāĻšāĻŖāϝোāĻ্āϝ āύā§। āĻāĻা āĻ āϤ্āϝāύ্āϤ āϝুāĻ্āϤিāĻĒূāϰ্āĻŖāĻাāĻŦে āĻĒ্āϰāĻŽাāĻŖ āĻāϰা āϝাā§ āϝে, āĻŽিāĻĨ্āϝা āĻŦāϞা āϝাāĻŦে āύা āĻāĻ āĻŽāϤāĻাāĻ āϏāĻ িāĻ āĻāĻŦং āĻ āύ্āϝāĻা āĻুāϞ।
-āĻāĻ āĻāϤ্āϤāϰেāϰ āĻĒ্āϰেāĻ্āώিāϤে āĻŦāϞāϤে āĻšā§। āϝāĻĻি āϞāĻ্āώ্āϝ āĻ িāĻ āĻĨাāĻে āϤাāĻšāϞে āϝে āĻāĻĒাā§েāĻ āϞāĻ্āώ্āϝে āϝাāĻā§া āĻšোāĻ āύা āĻেāύ āϝাāĻā§া āϝাāĻŦে।āϤাāĻšāϞে āϤ āĻāĻŽāύ āĻšāϤে āĻĒাāϰে āĻŽা āĻāύāύ্āĻĻāĻŽā§ীāϰ āĻŽāϤাāύুāϏাāϰে 'āϝāϤ āĻŽāϤ āϤāϤ āĻĒāĻĨ' āϏāĻ িāĻ āĻŽāϤ। āĻোāϰাāĻāύে āĻāĻে,'āϝাāϰা āϤোāĻŽাāϰ āĻĒ্āϰāϤি āϝা āĻ āĻŦāϤীāϰ্āĻŖ āĻšā§েāĻে āĻ āϤোāĻŽাāϰ āĻĒূāϰ্āĻŦে āϝা āĻ āĻŦāϤীāϰ্āĻŖ āĻšā§েāĻে āϤাāϤে āĻŦিāĻļ্āĻŦাāϏ āĻāϰে āĻ āĻĒāϰāϞোāĻে āύিāĻļ্āĻিāϤ āĻŦিāĻļ্āĻŦাāϏ āĻāϰে.........āϤাāϰাāĻ āϏāĻĢāϞāĻাāĻŽ'- āϏেāĻ āĻ āύুāϝাā§ী āĻŦāϞা āϝাā§ āϏāĻŦ āϧāϰ্āĻŽেāĻ āĻāĻļ্āĻŦāϰāĻŦাāĻĻেāϰ āĻāĻĨা āĻāϞ্āϞ্āϝেāĻ āĻāĻে। āĻিāĻু āϧāϰ্āĻŽে āĻāĻেāĻļ্āĻŦāϰāĻŦাāĻĻ āĻিāĻু āϧāϰ্āĻŽে āĻŦāĻšেāĻļ্āĻŦāϰāĻŦাāĻĻ। āĻāĻŦং āĻļেāώেāϰāĻĻিāĻে āĻĒ্āϰāĻাāϰিāϤ āϧāϰ্āĻŽে āĻāĻেāĻļ্āĻŦāϰāĻŦাāĻĻāĻ āĻŽুāϞ āĻāĻĨা। āϧāϰāϞাāĻŽ āĻļেāώেāϰāĻĻিāĻে āϝেāϏāĻŦ āϧāϰ্āĻŽ āĻĒ্āϰāĻাāϰিāϤ āĻšā§েāĻে āϏেāĻুāϞোāĻ āĻŦিāĻŦেāĻ্āϝ। āϤাāĻšāϞে āĻি āĻāĻŽāύ āĻšāĻā§া āĻāĻিāϤ āĻিāϞ āύা āĻāĻেāĻļ্āĻŦāϰāĻŦাāĻĻ āĻŽাāύāϞেāĻ āĻāĻŽি āϏāĻ িāĻāĻĒāĻĨে āĻāĻি। āϏেāĻা āϝে āϧāϰ্āĻŽāĻ āĻšোāĻ āύা āĻেāύ। āϤাāĻšāϞে āĻেāύো āĻļুāϧুāĻŽাāϤ্āϰ āĻāϏāϞাāĻŽেāϰ āĻĒāĻĨেāĻ āϝেāϤে āĻšāĻŦে? āĻāĻŽি āϝāĻĻি āĻāĻেāĻļ্āĻŦāϰāĻŦাāĻĻি āĻšāĻ āĻāĻŦং āĻাāϞো āĻাāĻ āĻāϰি āϤাāĻšāϞে āĻেāύো āĻāĻŽি āϏ্āĻŦāϰ্āĻে/ āĻŦেāĻšেāϏ্āϤে āϝেāϤে āĻĒাāϰāĻŦ āύা? āĻāĻŽি āϤ āϝেāĻোāύ āĻāĻĒাā§ে āĻ āĻীāώ্āĻ āϞāĻ্āώ্āϝে āϝেāϤে āĻĒাāϰি। (āĻāϰ āĻāĻŽি āϝāĻĻি āϏāĻŦ āϧāϰ্āĻŽেāĻ āϏāĻŽ্āĻŽাāύ āϰাāĻি āĻāϰ āĻোāύ āϧāϰ্āĻŽāĻ āϞৌāĻিāĻāĻাāĻŦে āĻĒাāϞāύ āύা āĻāϰি āĻļুāϧু āϏāĻŦ āϧāϰ্āĻŽেāϰ āĻŽূāϞ 'āĻāĻļ্āĻŦāϰ'āĻ āĻŦিāĻļ্āĻŦাāϏ āϰাāĻি āĻāĻŦং āϏā§āĻĒāĻĨে āĻĨাāĻি āϤাāĻšāϞে āĻāĻŽি āĻি āĻŦিāĻĒāĻĨāĻাāĻŽী āĻŦāϞা āϝাā§? )
“āĻāĻāύ āĻāĻĨা āĻšāĻ্āĻে āĻোāύ āĻāĻāĻāύ āϝে āĻ āύ্āϝ āϧāϰ্āĻŽেāϰ āϤাāϰ āĻĒ্āϰāϤি āĻāĻŽাāϰ āĻāĻāϰāύāĻāϤ āĻ āĻŽিāϞ āĻĨাāĻāĻŦেāĻ। āĻিāĻাāĻŦে?!! āϏেāĻাāĻ āĻāĻĨা। āϝে āĻ āĻŽুāϏāϞিāĻŽ āϤাāĻে āĻāĻŽি āĻāĻŽাāϰ āĻীāĻŦāύāϏāĻ্āĻী āĻšিāϏাāĻŦে āύিāϰ্āĻŦাāĻāύ āĻāϰāϤে āĻĒাāϰāĻŦ āύা(āĻĒāϰিāĻŦাāϰ āĻĨেāĻে āĻĒাāĻā§া āĻļিāĻ্āώা)। āϤাāϰāĻŽাāύে āϤাāϰ āĻĒ্āϰāϤি āĻāĻŽাāϰ āĻāĻāϰāύেāϰ āϤāĻĢাāϤ āĻĨেāĻেāĻ āϝাāĻ্āĻে।“
āĻš্āϝাঁ, āĻāĻāϰāĻŖেāϰ āϤāĻĢাāϤ āϤো āĻĨাāĻাāĻাāĻ āϏ্āĻŦাāĻাāĻŦিāĻ। āĻিāύ্āϤু āĻāĻ āϤāĻĢাāϤেāϰ āĻাāϰāĻŖে āĻি āĻāĻŽāϰা āĻ āĻŽুāϏāϞিāĻŽāĻĻেāϰāĻে āĻĻুāĻ āĻোāĻে āĻĻেāĻāϤে āύা āĻĒাāϰাāϰ āĻŽāϤ āĻĒāϰিāϏ্āĻĨিāϤি āϤৈāϰি āĻāϰāĻŦ? āĻোāĻĻ āĻুāϰāĻāύ āĻĨেāĻেāĻ āĻāϤ্āϤāϰāĻা āĻেāύে āύাāĻ: “āϝাāϰা āϤোāĻŽাāĻĻেāϰ āĻŦিāϰুāĻĻ্āϧে āϧāϰ্āĻŽেāϰ āĻাāϰāĻŖে āϝুāĻĻ্āϧ āĻāϰেāύি āĻāĻŦং āϤোāĻŽাāĻĻেāϰāĻে āϤোāĻŽাāĻĻেāϰ āĻŦāϏāϤāĻŦাā§ি āĻĨেāĻে āϤাā§িā§ে āĻĻেā§ āύি, āĻāϞ্āϞাāĻš āϤোāĻŽাāĻĻেāϰāĻে āϤাāĻĻেāϰ āϏāĻ্āĻে āϏāĻĻ্āĻŦ্āϝāĻŦāĻšাāϰ āĻāϰাāϰ āĻāĻŦং āύ্āϝাā§āĻĒāϰাā§āĻŖāϤাāϰ āϏাāĻĨে āĻāĻāϰāĻŖ āĻāϰāϤে āύিāώেāϧ āĻāϰেāύ āύি; āύিāĻļ্āĻā§ āĻāϞ্āϞাāĻš āύ্āϝাā§āĻĒāϰাā§āĻŖāĻĻেāϰāĻে āĻাāϞāĻŦাāϏেāύ। āϝাāϰা āϤোāĻŽাāĻĻেāϰ āĻŦিāϰুāĻĻ্āϧে āϧāϰ্āĻŽেāϰ āĻাāϰāĻŖে āϝুāĻĻ্āϧ āĻāϰেāĻে āĻāĻŦং āϤোāĻŽাāĻĻেāϰāĻে āϤোāĻŽাāĻĻেāϰ āĻŦāϏāϤāĻŦাā§ি āĻĨেāĻে āϤাā§িā§ে āĻĻিā§েāĻে āĻāĻŦং āϤোāĻŽাāĻĻেāϰāĻে āĻŦāĻšিāώ্āĻাāϰেāϰ āĻŦ্āϝাāĻĒাāϰে āĻĒৃāώ্āĻ āĻĒোāώāĻāϤা āĻāϰেāĻে, āĻāϞ্āϞাāĻš āϤোāĻŽাāĻĻেāϰāĻে āϤাāĻĻেāϰ āϏাāĻĨে āĻŦāύ্āϧুāϤ্āĻŦ āĻāϰāϤে āύিāώেāϧ āĻāϰেāĻেāύ। āĻāϰ āϝাāϰা āϤাāĻĻেāϰ āϏাāĻĨে āĻŦāύ্āϧুāϤ্āĻŦ āĻāϰāĻŦে, āϤাāϰা āϤো āϤাāĻšāϞে āĻ āϤ্āϝাāĻাāϰী।“ (āϏূāϰা āĻŽুāĻŽāϤাāĻšিāύাāĻš ā§Ŧā§Ļ:ā§Ž-⧝) āϏুāϤāϰাং, āϝাāϰা āĻŽুāϏāϞিāĻŽāĻĻেāϰ āϏাāĻĨে āϝুāĻĻ্āϧ āĻāϰāĻে āύা, āϤাāĻĻেāϰ āϏাāĻĨে āĻাāϰাāĻĒ āĻŦ্āϝāĻŦāĻšাāϰ āĻāϰāϤে āϤো āĻŦāϞা āĻšā§āĻ āύি, āĻāĻĒāϰāύ্āϤু āϤাāĻĻেāϰ āϏাāĻĨে āĻাāϞ āĻŦ্āϝāĻŦāĻšাāϰ āĻāĻŦং āύ্āϝাā§āĻĒāϰাā§āĻŖ āĻāĻāϰāĻŖ āĻāϰাāϰ āĻĒ্āϰāϤি āĻāϤāϏাāĻš āĻĻেāĻā§া āĻšāĻ্āĻে āĻāĻ āĻāĻĨা āĻŦāϞে āϝে, āύ্āϝাā§āĻĒāϰাā§āĻŖāĻাāϰীāĻĻেāϰāĻে āĻāϞ্āϞাāĻš āĻাāϞāĻŦাāϏেāύ।
- āĻāĻŽাāϰ āĻĒ্āϰāĻļ্āύ āĻিāϞ āĻেāύ āĻāϏāϞাāĻŽ āĻ āύ্āϝ āϧāϰ্āĻŽেāϰ āĻĒ্āϰāϤি āĻāĻĻাāϰ āĻšāϤে āĻĒাāϰāϞ āύা? āĻেāύ āĻ āĻŽুāϏāϞিāĻŽāĻĻেāϰ āϏাāĻĨে āĻŦৈāĻŦাāĻšিāĻ āϏāĻŽ্āĻĒāϰ্āĻ āĻ āĻŦৈāϧ āĻāϰে āĻĻিāϞ?? āύাāĻি āĻāĻাāĻ āĻŽাāύুāώেāϰ āϏৃāώ্āĻ। āĻāĻŽি/āĻāĻŽāϰা āύিāĻেāĻĻেāϰ āĻŽāϤ āĻāϰে āĻāĻ āύীāϤি āĻাāϞু āĻāϰেāĻি ??
@Atiq,
Allah created the mankind; they should worship Him.”
Contradiction: 3:97, 35:15 say “Allah does not need mankind and the jinns; He is free of
all want.”
-āĻāϤে āĻāϤিāĻেāϰ āϏাāĻĨে āĻāĻāĻŽāϤ।
>> "Forget about the people. Can you think?"
ReplyDelete> At least I try to.
No you don’t. Your every thinking is religion-centred even you don’t think neutrally. Your every word is backed from a religion called Islam. When you at first assume the wrong answer as true how will you be able to differentiate true answer from wrong? I am not saying to assume that religion as wrong. At least don’t take it as correct. That’ll be helpfully neutral to start the thinking correctly. God damn if you could ever do that!
- āĻāĻাāύে āĻāĻĒāϤ্āϤি āĻāĻে। āϝāĻĻি āύাāϏ্āϤিāĻāĻ āĻšā§ে āĻĨাāĻে āĻāĻļ্āĻŦāϰেāϰ āĻĻোāĻšাāĻ āĻেāύ??!!!
O.T: āĻŦেāĻļীāϰāĻাāĻ āĻ্āώেāϤ্āϰেāĻ (āύিāĻেāϰ āĻĻেāĻা)āĻāĻāĻা āϏāĻŽā§ে āĻŽাāύুāώ āĻুāĻŦ āĻāϰ্āĻŦāĻাāĻŦে āĻŦāϞে āĻŦেā§াā§ āĻāĻŽি āύাāϏ্āϤিāĻ। āĻāĻŦং āĻোāϰ āϝুāĻ্āϤিāĻ āĻĻাā§ āĻāϰাā§ āϝেāĻুāϞো āĻāĻŽি/āĻāĻŽāϰা āĻāĻŽāϞে āύা āύিā§ে āĻĒাāϰিāύা। āĻিāύ্āϤু āĻĒāϰে āĻāĻĻেāϰ āĻিāύ্āϤাāϰ āĻāĻĻাāϰ্āϝেāϰ āϏাāĻĨে āĻāĻĻেāϰ āĻাāϰ্āϝāĻāϞাāĻĒেāϰ āĻŽিāϞ āĻĒাāĻ āύাāĻ। āĻāĻŽāύāĻি āĻāĻĻেāϰ āĻ āύেāĻāĻেāĻ āĻāĻ্āĻāϰāĻĒāύ্āĻĨী āĻোāϰা āĻŽুāϏāϞিāĻŽ āĻšāϤেāĻ āĻĻেāĻেāĻি।āĻļেāώ āĻŦā§āϏে āĻāϰা āĻেāύ āĻোāϞা āĻোāĻ āĻŦāύ্āϧ āĻāϰে āĻĢেāϞে(āĻŽāϤ āĻĒাāϞāĻাā§)?? āĻāĻা āĻি āϤাāĻĻেāϰ āĻāĻ্āĻাāĻৃāϤ āύাāĻি āĻ āĻাāύ্āϤেāĻ :-? :-s
@āĻĢাāϞāϤু,
ReplyDeleteI don't believe in traditional God who cares about mankind. I have very different perceptions on the word God.
> God damn if you could ever do that!
It was completely not intentional that I mentioned that word. See that fundamentalist has no intention to learn anything. He knows nothing but from one side and he thinks he knows everything. Too much complacence. That's what made me little bit angry not seeing any change on his on sided biased point of view.
āĻāĻŽি āĻি āĻāϰ্āĻŦāĻāϰে āĻāĻāύো āĻŦāϞেāĻি āĻāĻŽি āύাāϏ্āϤিāĻ? āĻāϤে āĻāϰ্āĻŦেāϰ āĻিāĻু āύাāĻ। āĻŦিāĻļ্āĻŦাāϏ āϏāĻŽ্āĻĒূāϰ্āĻŖ āύিāĻেāϰ āĻাāĻে।
> āĻāĻŽāύāĻি āĻāĻĻেāϰ āĻ āύেāĻāĻেāĻ āĻāĻ্āĻāϰāĻĒāύ্āĻĨী āĻোāϰা āĻŽুāϏāϞিāĻŽ āĻšāϤেāĻ āĻĻেāĻেāĻি।āĻļেāώ āĻŦāϝ়āϏে āĻāϰা āĻেāύ āĻোāϞা āĻোāĻ āĻŦāύ্āϧ āĻāϰে āĻĢেāϞে(āĻŽāϤ āĻĒাāϞāĻাāϝ়)?? āĻāĻা āĻি āϤাāĻĻেāϰ āĻāĻ্āĻাāĻৃāϤ āύাāĻি āĻ āĻাāύ্āϤেāĻ?
If you think it's a craze and proud to be atheist and you become atheist just for that and there is no reasoning and matches on your life it's no surprise that you might become Muslim again. Atheists are very much philanthropists & they have good contributions for mankind. Not only there are agnostics, seculars and many types. It depends on you what belief you cling to. I agree with you there should be matches in people's work with their belief.
Obviously the people you are talking about are too weak to be atheists.
> You have mentioned many other issues which can be logically refuted very easily. However, as I found out from your last posts that you're in fact not acting neutral, therefore I think that refuting those would only waste my valuable time. By grace of Allaah, I have all the patience, knowledge and expertise needed to clear all your confusions, but first, you must comply to the following……….
ReplyDeleteThat’s why I said your arrogant and complacent existence came here to do nothing but deny. āϤিāϞāĻে āϤাāϞ āĻŦাāύিāϝ়ে āĻšāĻāϞেāĻ āĻĒ্āϰāϤ্āϝাāĻ্āϝাāύ āĻāϰāϤেāĻ āĻšāĻŦে।
“Indeed, your Lord is Allaah, Who created the heavens and the earth in Six Days, and then He rose over (Istawa) the Throne (really in a manner that suits His Majesty). He brings the night as a cover over the day, seeking it rapidly, and (He created) the sun, the moon, the stars subjected to His Command. Surely, His is the creation and commandment. Blessed is Allaah, the Lord of the ‘Aalameen (mankind, jinn and all that exists)!”
ReplyDelete[al-A’raaf 7:54]
What I understand from this is that Allaah created the heavens and the earth in six days. This is clear.
But in another passage Allaah mentions the creation of the heavens and the earth, and He says (interpretation of the meaning):
“Say (O Muhammad): Do you verily disbelieve in Him Who created the earth in two Days? And you set up rivals (in worship) with Him? That is the Lord of the ‘Aalameen (mankind, jinn and all that exists).
He placed therein (i.e. the earth) firm mountains from above it, and He blessed it, and measured therein its sustenance (for its dwellers) in four Days equal (i.e. all these four ‘days’ were equal in the length of time) for all those who ask (about its creation).
Then He rose over (Istawa) towards the heaven when it was smoke, and said to it and to the earth: ‘Come both of you willingly or unwillingly.’ They both said: ‘We come willingly.’
Then He completed and finished from their creation (as) seven heavens in two Days and He made in each heaven its affair. And We adorned the nearest (lowest) heaven with lamps (stars) to be an adornment as well as to guard (from the devils by using them as missiles against the devils). Such is the Decree of Him, the All-Mighty, the All-Knower”
[Fussilat 41:9-12]
Then He “placed therein (i.e. the earth) firm mountains from above it, and He blessed it, and measured therein its sustenance (for its dwellers)” in four days equal– i.e., in two days that were added to the two days in which He created the earth, so the total is four days. It does not say that the creation of the mountains and the measuring of the sustenance took four days.
--- http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/31865/
It does not say that the creation of the mountains and the measuring of the sustenance took two days.
“Quran 2: 29 It is He who hath created for you all things that are on Earth; THEN He turned to the Heaven and made them into seven firmaments (Skies)….
Quran 79: 27 - 30 Are you the harder to create, or is the heaven that He built? He raised the height thereof and ordered it; and He has made dark the night thereof, and He brought forth the morning thereof. And after that, He spread (flattened) the earth”
And does it match modern science? Do you believe that, Earth was created first, after that, God created Heaven? Modern science tells us that? Or how come seven firmaments (layers)? Modern science tells us that, actually there is no such thing Sky is no “roof” over us. It is only a space with no known boundary at all. These verses simply reinforce the ancient idea of ROOF over us which is called SKY, is it not so? How funny!
Mention if your translations are different.
I searched for refutation of contradiction related to Sun-set and Sun-rise. Couldn’t find relevant result. May be you would find. Contradiction statement is there: http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/SKM/contradictions.htm
ReplyDeleteYou might post the refutations here or send me through emails. I want to see refutations of all on that page:
4- A Resting Place For Sun!?
5- Why Allah Created Stars!
6- Is Sky/Heaven A ROOF or Canopy Over the Earth?
7- Does Sun Rotate Around the Earth?
8- Does Earth Spread Out Like Carpet (flat)
9- Is Man Created From Clotted Blood?
10- Is Religion Compulsive or is it not?
And for contradictions on this pages: http://islamic.org.uk/internalc.html [some contradictions might be repeated]
http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=54
> LOLz… When you can’t answer to a logical argument, just label it as ‘fatwa’!!! Rather than emotionally calling it a ‘patched fatwa’, try to logically refute the arguments if you can. ;)
ReplyDeleteNope I was not emotional. Seems like you don’t verify your referred links: http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/31865/
They labeled it as fatwa no. 31865.
>> ā§Ģ 'āĻোāϰāĻāύ āϏāϰ্āĻŦāĻাāϞেāϰ, āϏāϰ্āĻŦāϝুāĻেāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āĻ āĻŦিāĻৃāϤāĻাāĻŦে āĻĒ্āϰāϝোāĻ্āϝ' āĻāĻŦং 'āĻ āĻāϝ়াāϤ āύাāϝিāϞেāϰ āϏāĻŽāϝ় āĻĻাāϏ āĻĒ্āϰāĻĨা āĻিāϞো, āϏে āĻĒāϰিāĻĒ্āϰেāĻ্āώিāϤে āϤāĻāύāĻাāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āĻāĻĨাāĻা āĻāϏেāĻিāϞো' - āĻāĻĻুāĻি āĻি āĻĒāϰāώ্āĻĒāϰāĻŦিāϰোāϧী āύāϝ় āĻি?
> Of course these two wordings are contradictory. But the fact is, Islaam never says that slavery was only for the ancient period, rather it’s for all periods. For details, see the above link…
Why do you always misunderstand simple things? I didn’t say slavery is gone. At the time of advent of Islam slavery was a disease of the society which had even legitimate forms. And Quran supported it. But now slavery is abominable and completely against law, banned, restricted everywhere over the world.
The matter of fact that quran supports it means it worn out.
>> ā§ 'āĻŽুāĻšাāĻŽ্āĻŽাāĻĻ āϏা. āĻāϰ āĻāĻĨা-āĻāϰ্āĻŽ āĻŽু'āĻŽিāύāĻāĻŖেāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āĻ āύুāĻāϰāĻŖীāϝ়, āĻ āύুāϏāϰāĻŖীāϝ়' āĻ 'āĻ āĻšুāĻুāĻŽ āĻļুāϧু āĻāĻĒāύাāϰāĻ āĻāύ্āϝ, āĻ āύ্āϝ āĻŽু'āĻŽিāύāĻĻেāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āύāϝ়'- āĻāĻĻুāĻিāĻ āĻি āĻĒāϰāώ্āĻĒāϰāĻŦিāϰোāϧী āύāϝ়?
> Nope. Take an example. Suppose a teacher says to his class – “this rule is applicable to all of you. However, it’s not applicable to students X and Y because of such and such.” Is there any problem? If you make it clear which rulings are for all people and which are for a few particular people, then where is the contradiction??
Still you didn’t get it.
āĻুāĻŦ āĻŽāĻা āĻĒাāĻ্āĻিāϞাāĻŽ āϝāĻāύ āĻļাāϰাāĻĢাāϤেāϰ āϰিāĻĒ্āϞাāĻāĻুāϞো āĻĒā§āĻিāϞাāĻŽ। āϏāĻŦāĻেā§ে āĻŽāĻাāϰ āĻŦেāĻĒাāϰ āĻāĻ āϝে āĻŦেāĻļিāϰāĻাāĻ āĻ্āώেāϤ্āϰেāĻ āĻāĻŽাāϰ āĻŽāύে āĻšā§েāĻে āϝে āĻāϤিāĻ āϝা āĻŦুāĻাāϤে āĻেā§েāĻে āĻļাāϰাāĻĢাāϤ āĻāϤো āĻāĻীāϰে āύা āĻĸুāĻে āĻেāĻŦāϞ āĻļাāĻŦ্āĻĻিāĻ āĻ āϰ্āĻĨāĻুāϞো āĻŦুāĻāϤে āϏāĻ্āώāĻŽ āĻšā§েāĻে āĻāĻŦং āĻŦিāĻাāϰ-āĻŦিāĻļ্āϞেāώāĻŖāĻ āϏেāĻাāĻ āĻāϰেāĻে। āϞāĻিāĻ āĻĻিā§ে āĻুāϞāĻেā§া āĻŦিāĻļ্āϞেāώāĻŖ āĻāϰাāϰ āĻĻāϰāĻাāϰ āĻি? āĻāĻāĻু āĻŦিāĻŦেāĻāĻŦোāϧ,āĻŽāύুāώ্āϝāϤ্āϤ āĻāϰ āĻĻāϰ্āĻļāύ āĻĨাāĻāϞেāĻ āĻāĻāĻা āϏুāϏ্āĻĒāώ্āĻ āĻšā§ে āĻāĻ ে āĻোāύāĻা āϏāϤ্āϝ āĻāϰ āĻোāύāĻা āĻŽিāĻĨ্āϝা।
ReplyDeleteāĻļাāϰাāĻĢাāϤ āϤোāĻŽাāϰ āϰিāĻĒ্āϞাāĻā§েāϰ āĻĒ্āϰāϤ্āϝেāĻāĻা āϞাāĻāύ āϧāϰে āϧāϰে āĻāĻŽি āĻŦুāĻিā§ে āĻĻিāϤে āĻĒাāϰāϤাāĻŽ āϤোāĻŽাāϰ āĻুāϞāĻুāϞো āĻোāĻĨাā§ āĻোāĻĨাā§, āϤāĻŦে āĻĻূঃāĻেāϰ āĻŦিāώ⧠āĻāĻ āϝে āĻāĻŽি āĻāĻāϏāĻŦ āĻŦিāώā§ে āĻŦেāĻļি āϝুāĻ্āϤি-āϤāϰ্āĻ āĻĻিā§ে āύিāĻেāϰ āĻŦুāĻĻ্āϧি-āĻ্āĻাāύāĻুāϞো āĻাāĻšিāϰ āĻāϰāϤে āĻাāĻ্āĻি āύা।
āĻļুāϧু āĻāĻāĻা āĻĒ্āϰāĻļ্āύ āĻāϰāϤে āĻাāĻ? āĻে āϧāϰ্āĻŽ/āĻিāϤাāĻŦ/āĻāϞ্āϞাāĻš āĻāϏāĻŦ āύিāϰāĻĒেāĻ্āώāĻাāĻŦে āĻŦিāĻাāϰ-āĻŦিāĻļ্āϞেāώāĻŖ āĻāϰাāϰ āϏাāĻŽāϰ্āĻĨ āϰাāĻে? āĻāĻāĻāύ āĻŽাāύুāώ āϝাāϰ āĻāĻĒāϰ āĻোāύো āϧāϰ্āĻŽেāϰ āĻĒ্āϰāĻাāĻŦ āύাāĻ, āύাāĻি āĻāϰেāĻāĻāύ āϝাāϰ āĻāĻĒāϰ āĻāĻāĻা āϧāϰ্āĻŽেāϰ āĻļāĻ্āϤিāĻļাāϞী āĻĒ্āϰāĻাāĻŦ (āĻূāĻĒ্āϰāĻাāĻŦ) āĻāĻে?
āĻĒৃāĻĨীāĻŦিāϰ āĻĻিāĻে āϤাāĻিā§ে āĻĻেāĻ,āĻিāύ্āϤা āĻāϰ,āύিāϰāĻĒেāĻ্āώ āĻšā§ে āϏāϤ্āϝেāϰ āϏāύ্āϧাāύ āĻāϰ। āϧāϰ্āĻŽেāϰ āĻāύ্āϝ āĻāĻ āĻĒৃāĻĨিāĻŦীāϤে āϝে āĻ āĻļাāύ্āϤিāϰ āϞীāϞা, āĻŽৃāϤ্āϝুāϰ āĻā§াāĻā§ি āϤোāĻŽাāϰ āϤāĻĨাāĻāĻĨিāϤ āϏৃāώ্āĻিāĻāϰ্āϤা āϝāĻĻি āϤা āĻাāύāϤেāύ āϤাāĻšāϞে āĻāĻāύāĻ āĻŽাāύুāώāĻে āĻĒৃāĻĨিāĻŦীāϤে āĻĒাāĻ াāϤেāύ āύা। āĻāϰ āϝāĻĻি āĻেāύেāĻ āĻĒাāĻ িā§ে āĻĨাāĻেāύ āϤāĻŦে āĻāĻŽাāϰ āĻিāĻুāĻ āĻŦāϞাāϰ āύাāĻ। āϤুāĻŽিāĻ āĻŦিāĻাāϰ āĻāϰāĻŦে।
>> ā§ āĻোāϰāĻāύে āύাāĻŦাāϞিāĻা āĻŦিāĻŦাāĻš(āĻŦাāϞ্āϝ āĻŦিāĻŦাāĻš ) āĻĒ্āϰāĻĨা āϰāĻĻ āĻāϰāϞো āύা āĻেāύো? āĻŽুāĻšাāĻŽ্āĻŽাāĻĻ āϏ. āĻāϰ āϏāϰ্āĻŦāĻļেāώ (āĻŦিāĻŦাāĻšāĻৃāϤ) āϏ্āϤ্āϰী āĻŦিāĻŦি āĻāϝ়েāĻļা āϰা. āĻŦিāĻŦাāĻšেāϰ āϏāĻŽāϝ় āύাāĻŦাāϞিāĻা āĻিāϞেāύ (āϤিāύি āύāĻŦীāĻীāϰ āϏāϰ্āĻŦাāĻĒেāĻ্āώা āĻĒ্āϰিāϝ়āĻ āĻিāϞেāύ āĻŦāϞে āĻাāύা āϝাāϝ়) āĻāĻāĻে āĻāĻ āĻāϰ্āĻŽ āĻেāĻ āĻāϰāϤে āĻাāĻāϞে, āϧāϰ্āĻŽ āĻি āĻāĻāĻাāϤে āĻĒাāϰāĻŦে?
ReplyDelete>First of all, what do you mean by āύাāĻŦাāϞিāĻা ? Is it just the prior time of the natural age of puberty? Or is it the ‘human-defined’ prior time of 18 years??
It’s the law of the country and same kind of law exists over the world. The law states to reach 18 years before getting married.
Indolent marriages, fatwa and salish crimes have been consistent news in our daily newspapers. They are human beings misguided by Quran causing oppression on women, child and their relatives. The effect is such intense that social awareness programs and human right organizations’ measures don’t work often. The imams of mosques aver fatwas which in most cases intolerant punishments for innocent people. Depressing indeed. Quran has contributions on making the world worse every day. For example this news was published in daily star,
“Last month, a woman in Brahmanbaria, first alleged to have been raped and later said to have had a relationship with the man, was married off by her parents to a different man. Finding her seven months pregnant one month into their marriage, the husband divorced her. After returning to her parent's village, the woman was tried by a local salish or arbitration led by village elders and rural clergy and sentenced to 101 lashings and a fine of Tk. 1,000. Later, however, the father of her child was pressured into marrying her and the woman, who had at first filed a case against the arbitrators who had punished her, took the case back.”
How cruel is that! It should give some foods for thoughts.
>About your mentioned lalon’s song and similarly Nazrul’s poem – I don’t understand songs and poems well. However, I think the mentioned song and poem are not that difficult to understand. Just mentioning one line from the song (actually the summary line): “āĻŽাāύুāώে āϰāĻিāϤ āĻাāύি, āĻŽাāύুāώে āϰāĻিāϤ āĻাāύি āϞাāϞāύ āĻĢāĻিāϰ āĻāϝ়!”. If that’s the case, then I’d say: Lalon is saying that what HE knows is that religions are made by people. However, what I (and billions of people other than me) know is that Islaam and Quraan has been revealed from Allaah the Almighty. Have any doubt? Then let’s share it. :)
You are right. You didn’t understand. Fakir Lalon and other fakirs/gurus of his time knew about contradictory facts about Islam and Quran. On the following lines of his famous song:
“āĻি āĻাāϞাāĻŽ āĻĒাāĻ াāĻāϞেāύ āĻāĻŽাāϰ āĻļাāĻšী āĻĻāϝ়াāĻŽāϝ়!
āĻāĻেāĻ āĻĻেāĻļেāϰ āĻāĻেāĻ āĻাāώা āĻāϝ় āĻোāĻĻা āĻĒাāĻ াāϝ়?
āĻāĻ āϝুāĻে āϝা āĻĒাāĻ াāϝ় āĻাāϞাāĻŽ,
āĻ āύ্āϝ āϝুāĻে āĻšāϝ় āĻেāύ āĻšাāϰাāĻŽ!
āĻāĻŽāύি āĻĻেāĻি āĻিāύ্āύ āϤাāĻŽাāĻŽ! āĻিāύ্āύ āĻĻেāĻা āϝাāϝ়!
āϝāĻĻি āĻāĻāĻ āĻোāĻĻাāϰ āĻšāϝ় āϰāĻāύা, āϤাāϤে āϤো āĻিāύ্āύ āĻĨাāĻে āύা!
āĻŽাāύুāώেāϰ āϏāĻāϞ āϰāĻāύা, āϤাāĻ āϝে āĻিāύ্āύ āĻšāϝ়!
āĻি āĻাāϞাāĻŽ āĻĒাāĻ াāĻāϞেāύ āĻāĻŽাāϰ āĻļাāĻšী āĻĻāϝ়াāĻŽāϝ়!”
he mentioned some of his philosophical views and stated that Quran is rather written by mankind than a God or Gods.
Our rebel poet Kazi Nazrul Islam was also an Islami researcher, composer of numerous Islami songs. He knew the facts about the so called divine book too.
It’s not doubt. It’s truth.
>Below are the translations of the actual aayaahs in the referred chapter and verse numbers:
ReplyDelete>2:21. O mankind! Worship your Lord Who created you and those who were before you so that you may become Al-MuttaqÃģn (the pious).
>3:97. ...and whoever disbelieves, then AllÃĸh stands not in need of any of the 'AlamÃŽn (mankind and jinns).
>35:15. O mankind! it is you who are the needy, but AllÃĸh is Rich (Free of all wants and needs), Worthy of all praise.
That was the summarized version of the verses quoted from the book of author Abul Kashem. Because of the fact that you are arrogant you think that only your translations make sense. Let’s take your translation into account.
2:21 says worship lord to become Al-MuttaqÃģn. If you are not Al-MuttaqÃģn you are not qualified. You cannot go to heaven rather you’ll be punished. Now does the author’s compilation make any sense?
This is indeed a contradiction in Quran.
> You think that religion is imposed on people. However, Islaam never says to impose it on anybody. Rather surah Kaafiroon (chapter 109) says that if you don't want to come to Islaam, then be with your own religion/view. Islaam is for people's own good. If they don't want it, nobody has the right to force them accepting it. Rather Allaah says in the holy quran (2:256) "There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the Right Path has become distinct from the wrong path."
This is not true because of the fact that it also states that infidels will be punished severely and they will be damned to hell (interpretation for not being permitted to heaven). Infidels are represented negatively. It’s why the religion is called to impose making the followers think they are the best among all. People excluding them actually don’t deserve anything good.
> The Quraan has indeed been preserved without any modification. You're asking about different copies. Tell me, our Bangabandhu gave a historic speech on 7th March; has it been preserved? Of course it is. But it wasn't a written document, it was a speech. Now, if you write in plain bangla and if you write it in Banglish (Bangla text written with English characters which is common in messenger chats), if both of them sound like the original speech when read, then would you say that his speech has been modified because of different copies?? Quraan was revealed as speech, not as a written script. All the copies of Quraan that you think to be 'different' actually sounds exactly the same when they are recited. So, it indeed has been preserved.
ReplyDeleteYou are heretic and pathetic. I’m quoting from freethinker Abul Kashem’s book:
“This inquiry is intimately connected with the question: Is Mohammed the last prophet/apostle of Allah and is Quran the final book of Allah?
When I searched the Quran I could find only the following verse which deals with this matter.
33:40 Muhammad is not The father of any Of your men, but (he is) The apostle of God And the Seal of the Prophets: And God has full knowledge Of all things. (Translation by A. Yusufali)
In his commentary on this issue, Yusufali writes:
"When a document is sealed, it is complete and there can be no further addition. The holy Prophet Muhammad closed the long line of Apostles. God's teaching is and will always be continuous, but there has been and be no Prophet after Muhammed. The later ages will want thinkers and reformers, not Prophets. This is not an arbitrary matter. It is a matter full of knowledge and wisdom: "for God has full knowledge of all things." (A. Yusufali; THE
HOLY QUR'AN Translation; page 1119, commentary number 3731)"
If we accept this explanation of Yusufali, then, of course, Mohammed is the last prophet and the apostle of Allah. But there are many Muslims (?) who do not believe in Yusufali's analysis; like the Qadiani Muslims (or Ahmedia). They accept the Quran but do not accept Mohammad as the last prophet. How about the followers of Rashad Khalifa? They make a clear distinction between a prophet and an apostle. So, their version of the finality of Mohammad and the Quran is quite different. They accept only the Quran and consider Mohammad as a messenger only and not the final prophet. In fact, Rashad Khalifa claims that he had a dream where he was transported to heaven to meet Mohammad and he (Mohammad) asked to him rescue the Muslims from the present day decay (that implies that Rashad Khalifa is the next prophet after Mohammad). Rashad Khalifa's followers consider the mainstream followers (that is Sunni, Shia, Ahmedia...etc) to be the followers of Satan and not true Muslims. They even have their own version of the Quran and refuse to accpet the Shia/Sunni/Ahmedi versions. What do all these controversies prove? Yes, Quran is not really an unalterable document that many innocent Muslims tend to believe. You can really manipulate this doctrine of hate to suit your needs. There is no central authority on Quranic matters for the Sunnis who form the bulk of the present Muslims. So, it is like a fish market. Anything goes as long as you have the money and the clout to do that.
If you are a true freethinker/humanist you should not accept any of these stories. We must accept the fact that the Quran is a complete hoax and is never a revelation of Allah (or God), but it (the Quran) is the concoction of a megalomaniac who used the illiterate and the uncultured Arab Beduins to impose his narcissistic ambition to conquer the world through brute force.
If you are not accepting this truth then you are not a complete freethinker/humanist, your umbilical cord with Islam is not cut yet. You are more of an Islamic Agnost or a Islamic Freethinker or the latest invention, Islamic Atheist!!
-- Abul Kasem”