Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14

Thread: Reply to Dr.Naik

  1. #1
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    Govinda Lokam
    Age
    45
    Posts
    738
    Rep Power
    356

    Reply to Dr.Naik

    Dr.Naik vs Ravishankar - A counter.( with a touch of humour)



    Dr. Naik:

    The word Hindu has
    geographical significance and was used to describe the
    people living beyond the river Sindhu or people living in
    the land watered by river Indus. Most of the historians,
    they say, that this word Hindu was first used by the Arabs.
    Some historians say it was used by the Persians when they
    came to India through the north western passes of Himalaya.
    According to encyclopedia of religion and ethics, Volume
    #6, Reference #699, it says that the word Hindu was not
    found in any of the Indian literature before the advent of
    the Muslims to India. According to Pandit Jawaharlal
    Nehru, he writes in his Book “the discovery of India” on
    page #74 and #75 that the word Hindu can be earliest traced
    to a source a tantrik in 8th century and it was used
    initially to describe the people, it was never used to
    describe religion.

    Sudarshan:

    False, The word Hindu has been used in the text Merutantra, and defines Hindu as "himsAyAm dUyate yasmad hindurityaBiDhIyate". One devoted to ahimsa is a Hindu - just the opposite of a muslim we see in pratice. I hope muslims will allow Hindus to be "real Hindus" (or not)?
    So to Hindus here :- Take pride in the word Hindu. It means one who is steadfast to ahimsa. ( but be careful while applying this to adharmis)




    Dr.Naik

    There are several revelations of Almighty God
    sent on the face of the earth, by name, 4 are mentioned in
    the Qur’an; the Torah, the Zabur, the Ingil, and the
    Qur’an; but there are various others like Suhufi Ibrahim;
    but all the scriptures that came, all the revelations that
    was sent by Almighty God before the last and final
    revelation of the glorious Qur’an, they were only meant for
    a particular group of people; and the message which they
    preached was supposed to be followed only till a particular
    time period. But because Qur’an is the last and final
    revelation of Almighty God, it was not sent only for the
    Muslims or only for the Arabs, it was sent for the whole of
    humanity.

    Sudarshan:

    Total BS. It is high time to rewrite Quran to prevent all its followers from taking to terrorism. Allmighty Allah's final revelation has been an absolute fiasco. This religion has been made only for some Asuras, and fortunately men are divine by nature that prevents a total tragedy..
    By naming something a "final revelation" all these religions have ensured stagnation of mankind.


    Dr.Naik:

    First, we will discuss the concept of
    God in Hinduism in the light of the Hindu scriptures. If
    we ask the common Hindu that how many Gods does he believe
    in? some may say 3, some may say 100, some may say 1000,
    while others may say 33 crores, 330 millions. But if you
    ask a learned Hindu who is well Versed with his Hindu
    scriptures, he will tell you that in Hinduism you should
    believe and worship only one God. But the common Hindu, he
    believes in a philosophy known as pantheism, everything is
    God. The common Hindu believes that the tree is God, the
    sun is God, the moon is God, the human being is God, the
    snake is God. What we Muslims believe is everything is
    God’s, everything belongs to God’s, ‘G’ ‘O’ ‘D’ with an
    apostrophe ‘s’; the tree belongs to God, the sun belongs to
    God, the moon belongs to God, the human being belongs to
    God, the snake belongs to God. So the major difference
    between the common Hindu and the common Muslim is that the
    common Hindu says everything are Gods, we Muslim say
    everything is God’s. The major difference is the
    apostrophe ‘s’.


    Sudarshan:

    Mr.Naik has to first learn what Hinduism is, having confused Hinduism with pantheism or monism. That is only one view of Hinduism. Other Hindus do not beleive dog, tree etc to be God( in the sense of monism). In any case there are no Hindus who beleive there are multiple supreme Gods.

    And you have no authority to kill others based on what they believe. What harm does a polytheist do to you? This idiotic Islamic monotheism has felled too many heads due its corrupted monotheism.



    Dr.Naik:

    It is mentioned in the Chandogya Upanishad Chapter #6, Section #2, Verse #1; ekam evaditiyam God is only one without a second.


    Sudarshan:

    Yes, it means that there is no second to God, that is there are no Satan or evil forces. The entire existance has God alone as the basis of existance. It has nothing to do with your interpretation of "one without a second".


    Dr.Naik:

    It is
    mentioned in the Swethaswethara Upanishad; Chapter #4,
    Verse #19 Na Tasya Pratima Asti of that God there is no
    Prathima, there is no likeness, there is no image, there is
    no picture, there is no photograph, there is no sculpture,
    there is no statue.

    Sudarshan:

    That does not mean God is a "nothingness", but simply inexpressible in human words or symbols. As long as the Andromeda galaxy is not photographed, the astronomer would use only a general nebula symbol while representing it. A peasant milking cows in India can grasp this much better than the so called scholars of Islam.


    Dr.Naik:

    It is mentioned in Swethaswethara
    Upanishad; Chapter #4, Verse #20; no one can see the
    Almighty God and it is further mentioned in Bhagwat Gita
    Chapter #7, Verse #20; all those whose intelligence has
    been stolen by material desires, they worship many Gods.

    Sudarshan:

    No one can see God with senses or mind - that is what is implied. The same Gita says that Arjuna was able to see God with the divine eyes. Men whose intelligence has been stolen due to passions like hatred, worship other demi-gods like Allah.(assuming that such a god exists)


    Dr.Naik:

    We Muslims
    have got no objection if someone says that Almighty God is
    khaaliq or Creator, but if someone says this Almighty God
    has got 4 heads and on each head is a crown, you are giving
    an image to Almighty God. We Muslims take strong exception
    to it.

    Sudarshan:

    Who cares about your objections? Your Allah is only the pagan moon god elevated to the status of the christian tyrant god by Muhammed after he had some hallucinations in a cave. So after all Islam is only "disguised paganism".

    Is there a rule that Almighty cannot assume heads? Brahma's four heads refer to the four vedas which he protects, that does not mean some God called Brahma sits with four heads outside the universe.
    Brahma is jnana-svarupi, the embodiment of wisdom, the role model of perfection, and hence denoted by four vedas.

    A formless God used in Islam is an utterly unemotional and useless form of worship. It is equivalent to nihilism in the garb of theism.



    Dr.Naik:

    We Muslims have got no objection
    if someone calls Almighty God as Rabb or Sustainer, but if
    someone says he is Almighty God who has got 4 hands and
    8 The True Call – A Paradigm Shift www.thetruecall.com
    giving an image to Almighty God, in one hand is the lotus,
    the second hand is the conch, traveling on the sea on the
    bed of snakes, we Muslims take strong objection to it.


    Sudarshan:

    You have no knowledge of Hinduism. Do you even know who this great Lord Vishnu is? He is infinite and all pervading, and is the one cause of everything, including your moon god Allah.(if he exists)
    How could he have hands and legs in the way you have imagined? Are you still thinking that Vishnu is a God watching things from outside the universe like your moon god? He is right here, and fills every atom here. His magnificent spiritual form cannot be described adequately even by greatest sages.

    Vishnu's chakra is the great discuss that purifies the senses, mind and intellect. The Chakra is Vishnu himself, called by the name of Sudarshana. Beware of this chakra before abusing it, it can rip through the mleccha throats.
    Vishnu's gada is symbolic of his great prowess. Mace always stands for might.
    Vishnu's lotus is his symbol of peace,grace,tranquility and bliss, which is sorely lacking in your tyrant God.
    Vishnu's conch is Jnana - the touch of the conch bestows on you divine wisdom.(which is sorely missing in the Islamic sensous heaven of 72 virgins)
    The sea on which he resides is the ocean of Satchidananda.
    The snake Ananta on which he rests is the bedrock and foundation of all creation - the source of serpent power referred to by Yogins.

    Your Allah has no form like Brahma or Vishnu because he possesed none of these qualities.


    Regarding the sly question of Saadiq Bhai to Sri Sri Ravishankar on Vishnusahasranama:

    I was disappointed to see Ravishankar giving no defence to this. Perhaps he did not want to trigger any passions. I dont beleive that God is formless, and disagree with Islam's formless moon god. But the chaturbujam should have been easily explained by Ravishankar. It is too well understood to represent the three Ahamkara Abhimani devatas, the fourth being Mahat or Brahma, which are part on his divine body. Hindus use too many names and forms without understanding the significance and simply try to avoid answering by explaining it as an imagined form of Vishnu. Why should we even consider Islam as an alternative form of Dharma to whom nothing would make sense?
    Will he even try to understand if things are explained? Naw.

    Islam is just an amalgam of many myths rolled into one colossal myth.



    Dr.Naik's view on Kalki Avatara is plain bogus.

    Kalki = Muhammed?

    Kalki is Vishnu, full incarnate, Muhammed=ordinary mortal who died of poisoning unable to save his own life!! Vishnu indeed.
    Kalki will appear around the year 427,000 A.D.

    Eight qualities of Muhammed mentioned by Dr.Naik in Kalki section -

    wisdom,
    Self Control
    Revela knowledge
    Respectable lineage
    Valor
    Strength
    Gratefulness
    charity

    I wonder if Muhamed had even one of these...

    The eight powers in Kalki Purana refer to ashta-maha-siddhi or the powers of Anima,Mahima,Laghima,Garima,Prapti,Prakamya,Vashitva and Ishitva. Muhammed had none of these. He was just bookish 'prophet' who never knew God. He was a shrewd politician, that is all.


    If Dr.Naik believes in the authority of vedas and wants to quote them just where it fits him, his points maybe ignored. If he believes their full authority, then it is not a problem for us, but he will only become a Hindu, and no longer be a muslim.

    The Arabian religion prior to Muhammed may have its roots in Sanatana Dharma as pointed out by others. But Muhammed destroyed these cultures and people, borrowed these ideas and mixed them with other religions and also bluffed that he was to be the final messenger.


    Brotherhood between Hindu and Muslim maybe possible but I really doubt if that is possible as long as the muslim believes that he is the only truth and the final revelation of God. His intolerant version of monotheism will never allow this.
    Guard your Dharma, Burn the Myth, Promote the Truth, Crush the superstition.

  2. #2

    Re: Reply to Dr.Naik

    When we say god is Formless we must simultaniously admit the infiniteness of God. This has been indicated in the mantras "anantanm brahma" etc.

    A limited god will take the form of the space it occupies . As such ghosts are also formless.

    Koran has absolutely no concept of unlimited and infinite aspect of God. It's god is utterly personal but fanatic about not taking a form. As such no meditation is possible on the Koranic God. I think this was a well thought out plan on the part of muhammad (do deny any sort of contemplative practices among his followers).

    Infinity cannot be meditated upon by the human mind. It is attainable only on laya yoga. Hence we can only represent God with forms and point to his/her many aspects including infinity and start meditating.

    --------------------------

    It is high time Hindu's and all the rest start studying Koran and the Hadith from multiple sources and try to understand the religion as was taught and practiced by Muhammad instead of making conjectures about it.

    I agree with sudarshan that humans are divine by nature. But we have to just look around to see how a brain washing cult like Islam can create mosters out of divine humans. Reference to possibilities of asurik development is explained in good detail not just in Gita but in some Upanisads (not mentions puranas and itihasas). Very few pay attention to those lines in the zeal for universalism.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    Govinda Lokam
    Age
    45
    Posts
    738
    Rep Power
    356

    Re: Reply to Dr.Naik

    Quote Originally Posted by sm78
    When we say god is Formless we must simultaniously admit the infiniteness of God. This has been indicated in the mantras "anantanm brahma" etc.

    A limited god will take the form of the space it occupies . As such ghosts are also formless.
    I think you misunderstood the term "form" I meant here. Can you recognize God when you realize God in samAdhi? If so, then it must have a form, regardless of it being finite or infinite. I never meant a human form or a visual form. I did not specify that God is a spatial entity - he is beyond space and time. He must still have something "godly" in him that enables us to recognize that this is God. Without that distinguishing trait God cannot be recognized as distinct from anything else - that is the form of God. If God cannot be distinguished apart from the rest even superficially, it leads to the phlosophy of Mayavada.

    Ghosts have a form in their subtle body of five subtle elements - they are not formless.

    The base form of God is called Om, which forms the basis of subtlest forms and other forms.
    Guard your Dharma, Burn the Myth, Promote the Truth, Crush the superstition.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    October 2006
    Age
    73
    Posts
    321
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Reply to Dr.Naik

    It is my understanding that GOD IS CREATED ACCORDING TO HUMAN IMAGINATION. Each person defines God according to him whether he is a Hindu or muslim or a christian . Each one of us have personified and idolized this God entity. There is no theistic God, at least for me. Mono or poly theism has no meaning.

    I do believe in God, for me he/it is an experience. God is not HE or She or it. God is Love. If there is no big picture of Love in any of these world religions then it is not the word (metaphorically ) of God.

  5. #5

    Re: Reply to Dr.Naik

    Quote Originally Posted by vcindiana View Post
    It is my understanding that GOD IS CREATED ACCORDING TO HUMAN IMAGINATION. Each person defines God according to him whether he is a Hindu or muslim or a christian . Each one of us have personified and idolized this God entity. There is no theistic God, at least for me. Mono or poly theism has no meaning.

    I do believe in God, for me he/it is an experience. God is not HE or She or it. God is Love. If there is no big picture of Love in any of these world religions then it is not the word (metaphorically ) of God.
    Namaste,

    I think we're getting away from the subject of this thread. The subject is a response to Dr. Naik's spiritual arrogance and limited view of Hinduism. Having spent some time on an Islamic Forum, and having watched the video of Dr. Naik's debate with Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, I have come to the conclusion that Dr. Naik does not have the CAPACITY to understand Hindu concepts. He does not know how to recognize symbolism and allegory, and doesn't have the intelligence to understand that Brahman can be both Nirguna and Saguna. If he did, he would not accept the concept of Allah as presented in the Qu'ran.

    The problem is, Dr. Naik has an extremely limited and erroneous concept of what God is..

    Pranam,

    Devi

  6. #6
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Posts
    640
    Rep Power
    109

    Re: Reply to Dr.Naik

    Namaste Devi,
    Quote Originally Posted by devisarada View Post
    I think we're getting away from the subject of this thread. The subject is a response to Dr. Naik's spiritual arrogance and limited view of Hinduism. Having spent some time on an Islamic Forum, and having watched the video of Dr. Naik's debate with Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, I have come to the conclusion that Dr. Naik does not have the CAPACITY to understand Hindu concepts. He does not know how to recognize symbolism and allegory, and doesn't have the intelligence to understand that Brahman can be both Nirguna and Saguna. If he did, he would not accept the concept of Allah as presented in the Qu'ran.

    The problem is, Dr. Naik has an extremely limited and erroneous concept of what God is..
    Yes, I agree. Dr. Naik is no scholar or student of Sanatana Dharma (although he pretends to be). His singular purpose in life is to show that Islam is the fulfillment of all world religion. For prove his point, he will take any work or writing (objective or not) and use that as evidence. He is of the opinion that the coming of the messenger of God (Muhammed) is predicted in the Vedas and Bhavishya Purana. His views leave much to be desired. Sri Sri should have called him on it, but failed in the debate, imo.

    OM Shanti,
    A.



  7. #7

    Re: Reply to Dr.Naik

    salaam,

    You are right. Dr. Naik is no hindu scholar. He is a fundamentalist muslim. I don't know why he speaks about other faiths. He seems to be obessed with hinduism. Most ordinary muslims and hindus in India don't care for what Dr. Naik has to say. He is like a parrot.

    I don't know why he tells lies that prophet Muhammed (PBUH) coming is talked about in the vedas. If this were true, why wouldn't us muslims embrace the all powerful vedas then?

    Quote Originally Posted by Agnideva View Post
    Namaste Devi,

    Yes, I agree. Dr. Naik is no scholar or student of Sanatana Dharma (although he pretends to be). His singular purpose in life is to show that Islam is the fulfillment of all world religion. For prove his point, he will take any work or writing (objective or not) and use that as evidence. He is of the opinion that the coming of the messenger of God (Muhammed) is predicted in the Vedas and Bhavishya Purana. His views leave much to be desired. Sri Sri should have called him on it, but failed in the debate, imo.

    OM Shanti,
    A.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    December 2007
    Age
    63
    Posts
    3,218
    Rep Power
    4728

    Re: Reply to Dr.Naik

    Namaste,

    I have heard Dr Naik & respect him as a scholar. In fact, I consider him instrumental in making the World understand the true meaning of verses of Q'uran. When a big part of the Muslim clerics are brainwashing the unsuspecting young minds on distorted meaning of Q'uranic verses quoting them in isolation without referring to the actual context, this man is bravely claiming that such an interpretation is wrong. Mind it, it is not an easy task to say anything against clerics in Islam (it is not like Sanatan Dharma where dissenting voices are equally respected & given equal opportunity for a healthy debate) .... there would be many baying for your blood.

    So, Dr. Jakir Naik is playing a very good role & spreading the correct message in Islam.

    However, comparing him with Ravishankar is not correct. Ravishankar is a Saint who has realised the Truth. Ravishankar knows in his heart what the Truth is whereas Dr Naik doesn't "know" but he has read what the Truth is. There is a big difference between knowing by own experience & having a bookish knowledge. Someone can say, I know what the taste of a mango is ... I have read everything about the taste of mango. The other one says, I have not read all those books but I have tasted mangoes & I know how it tastes. The difference between these two people is exactly the difference between Sri Sri Ravishankar & Dr Jakir Naik. Dr Naik has the gift of gab, quite a good knowledge of contemporary religions & in all these areas he scores above Sri Ravishankar but he has no personal experience of the Truth & in that area Sri Ravishankar scores above Dr Jakir Naik.

    Regarding his obsession with Hinduism. I see it coming naturally to anyone who loves India because it matters a lot for this country & anyone who loves this country how the Muslims & Hindus live together in India. He may have shortcomings ... he can never understand the essence of Hinduism looking through Abrahimic religion's eyes ... but he is trying to find something common between the two religions & that itself is a praiseworthy task. We must realise that Islam is highly intolerant over saying anything against whatever is written in Q'uran ... Q'uran is considered the final word ... everything stated must conform to whatever is written in Q'uran. No Muslim can dare go beyond those lines. So, within the limited freedom Dr Naik enjoys being a Muslim, he is doing a great job --- for the Muslim World, at least.

    OM
    "Om Namo Bhagvate Vaasudevaye"

  9. #9

    Re: Reply to Dr.Naik

    This guy is a joke. He believes God has actual hands and feet like humans.

    He represents a perverted form of Islam.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Age
    37
    Posts
    840
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Reply to Dr.Naik

    Yes but according to his school they say "God's Hand is real but not like our hand." etc...
    Anyways this brings up a question. Arent the manifestation of God indeed forms that have hands and feet etc?? Just a question im wondeirng. I know ascribing limbs to GOD is rejected by majority muslims.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •