Posts Tagged ‘Morals’

Morals were not originated by skeptic philosophers

July 13, 2015

<www.religiousforums.com> Thread: “Morals were stolen by religions, not created by them”.

Proved totally wrong by paarsurrey.

Please click the post # below to view,comment and join discussion on the topic.

Post #71

Paarsurrey wrote:

Thanks for providing the information.
So the first philosopher as per the above information is Hesiod who lived in 7th century. BC.
If we go by the OP, the first philosopher who gave morality to the world happened to exist in the 7th century BC.
So before Hesiod nobody knew anything about morality. Is that a correct premise?
I don’t think so.
Regards

morphesium likes this.
Advertisements

One constant, timeless and consistent from one side of the world to the other, is flexibility of a moral; suited to the occasion

May 17, 2015

View, comment and join discussion on my post on< www.religiousforums.com > <Thread: Has the influence of Atheism (Agnosticism/Skepticism) improved civilization?>.

http://www.religiousforums.com/threads/has-the-influence-of-atheism-agnosticism-skepticism-improved-civilization.176963/page-3#post-4292039

Post #41

Paarsurrey wrote:

There is one constant, timeless and consistent from one side of the world to the other, it is flexibility of a moral. A natural instinct of a human done suiting the occasion is moral.
Briefly:
This means that we are to return good for good, and to exercise benevolence when it is called for, and to do good with natural eagerness as between kindred, when that should be appropriate.

Regards

NewGuyOnTheBlock liked this post. Thanks to him.

“Science is a magnificent force, but it is not a teacher of morals.”

March 5, 2014

Please view Paarsurrey’s comments on the following blog for your valuable opinion:

“Doug’s Dribblings”
“Read Your Civic Biology”

http://dougsdribblings.blogspot.ca/
http://dougsdribblings.blogspot.ca/2014/03/read-your-civic-biology.html?showComment=1394023091068#c7651234377284653128

paarsurrey March 5, 2014 at 7:38 AM
@ Doug B

“Here I have to agree with Bryan: “Science is a magnificent force, but it is not a teacher of morals.” It is for that reason that I feel the scientific worldview alone is not sufficient. At the same time I don’t feel the religious worldview alone will cut it, either.
The truth is: either science or religion can be abused and used to inflict harm. I’m not impressed with those on either side who would downplay the importance of the other. I don’t see why we can’t embrace both.” Unquote

I agree with you that both science and religion can be abused to harm humanity; but it is most truthful that religion and science both are good friends and can be used to benefit humanity the most. There is nothing contradictory in religion and science (based on natural laws) as both are from the same source of One-True-God (Allah Yahweh Ahura-Mazda Parmeshaware Eshaware). Religion is based on the Word of God while science is the Work of God; both embrace happily with one another.

Thanks and regards

In response to Challenge of Sam Harris : Reason, passions and Morality

February 8, 2014

In response to Challenge of Sam Harris, I have sent the following essay:

Reason, passions and Morality

The topic of morality has little relevance with science; hence this topic has never been discussed in any text book of science as to its claim or the reasons in this regards. The question relates to religion as its nature suggests.

The true relationship between the human morals viz-a-viz natural human instincts has been discussed and explained in the book “Philosophy of Teachings of Islam” by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (1835-1908) – the Promised Messiah. I will provide a summary of it below mostly in his words.

Natural conditions are not something distinct from moral conditions. When they are regulated and are used on their proper occasions, under the direction of reason, they acquire a moral character. Before they are controlled by reason and understanding they have not the character of moral qualities, but are natural impulses, however much they might resemble moral qualities.

For instance, if a dog or lamb displays affection or docility towards its master it would not be described as moral or good-mannered. In the same way a wolf or a tiger would not be described as ill-mannered on account of its wildness.

A moral state emerges after reflection and regard for time and occasion come into play. A person who does not exercise reason and deliberation is like a child whose mind and intellect are not yet governed by reason, or is like a madman who has lost his reason and good sense. A child or a mad man sometimes behaves in a manner that has the appearance of moral action, but no sensible person calls such conduct moral, as such conduct does not proceed from good sense and appropriateness, but is a natural reaction to the circumstances.

A human infant, as soon as it is born, seeks its mother’s breasts, and a chicken, as soon as it is hatched begins to pick up corn. In the same way the spawn of a leech behave like a leech, a baby serpent behaves like a serpent and a tiger cub behaves like a tiger. A human infant begins to exhibit human reactions as soon as it is born and those reactions become more and more remarkable as it begins to grow up. For instance, its weeping becomes louder, and its smiles become laughter, and its gaze becomes more concentrated.

At the age of a year or eighteen months it develops another natural trait: it begins to display its pleasure and displeasure through its movements and tries to strike someone or to give something to someone. All these motions are natural impulses. Similarly a barbarian who possesses little human sense is like such an infant and displays natural impulses in his words, actions and movements and is governed by his natural emotions.

Nothing proceeds from him in consequence of the exercise of his inner faculties. Whatever surges up from his inside under the operation of a natural impulse and as a reaction to external stimuli, becomes manifest. It is possible that his natural impulses that are exhibited as a reaction to an external stimulus may not all be vicious, and some might resemble good morals, but they are normally not the consequences of reasonable reflection and consideration, and even if they are to some degree so motivated they cannot be relied upon on account of the domination of natural impulses.
In short we cannot attribute true morals to a person who is subject to natural impulses like animals or infants or the insane, and who lives more or less like animals. The time of true morals, whether good or bad, begins when a person’s reason becomes mature and he is able to distinguish between good and bad and the degree of evil and goodness, and begins to feel sorry when he misses an opportunity of doing good and is remorseful when he has done some wrong. This is the second stage of his life which is designated by the Holy Quran the self that reproves.

True Courage: Of the natural conditions of man is that which resembles courage, as an infant sometimes seeks to thrust his hand into the fire on account of its natural condition of fearlessness. In that condition a person fearlessly confronts tigers and other wild beasts and issues forth alone to fight a large number of people. Such a one is considered very brave. But this is only a natural condition that is found even in savage animals and in dogs.

To be steadfast against every personal passion or against any calamity that attacks like an enemy and not to run away out of cowardice is true courage. Thus, there is a great difference between human courage and the courage of a wild beast. A wild animal is moved only in one direction when it is roused, but a man who possesses true courage chooses confrontation or non-resistance whichever might be appropriate to the occasion.
I give below a passage from the book:

“It is characteristic of the human self that it incites man to evil and is opposed to his attainment of perfection and to his moral state, and urges him towards undesirable and evil ways. Thus the propensity towards evil and intemperance is a human state which predominates over the mind of a person before he enters upon the moral state. This is man’s natural state, so long as he is not guided by reason and understanding but follows his natural bent in eating, drinking, sleeping, waking, anger and provocation, like the animals. When a person is guided by reason and understanding and brings his natural state under control and regulates it in a proper manner, then these three states, as described, cease to remain the categories as natural states, but are called moral states.” Unquote

http://www.alislam.org/library/books/Philosophy-of-Teachings-of-Islam.pdf

One may like to read answer to the “FIRST QUESTION- The Physical, Moral and Spiritual States of Man” from the above book to understand the topic of morality fully.

Reason and Passion: in religion

February 6, 2014

Reason and Passion: in religion and government
http://triangulations.wordpress.com/2014/02/06/reason-and-passion-in-religion-and-government/

http://triangulations.wordpress.com/2014/02/06/reason-and-passion-in-religion-and-government/#comment-123860

paarsurrey
02/06/2014 at 11:15 am

I think Sam Harris has not understood the true relationship between the human morals viz-a-viz natural human instincts; which has truly been explained in the book “Philosophy of Teachings of Islam”. Sam Harris should read the question and its answer given by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad 1835-1908 in the above named book. I think he will get convinced and save the prize money also. Sorry for Jonathan Haidt, he may lose.

I give below a passage from the book:

“It is characteristic of the human self that it incites man to evil and is opposed to his attainment of perfection and to his moral state, and urges him towards undesirable and evil ways. Thus the propensity towards evil and intemperance is a human state which predominates over the mind of a person before he enters upon the moral state. This is man’s natural state, so long as he is not guided by reason and understanding but follows his natural bent in eating, drinking, sleeping, waking, anger and provocation, like the animals. When a person is guided by reason and understanding and brings his natural state under control and regulates it in a proper manner, then these three states, as described, cease to remain the categories as natural states, but are called moral states.” Unquote

http://www.alislam.org/library/books/Philosophy-of-Teachings-of-Islam.pdf

One may like to read answer to the “FIRST QUESTION- The Physical, Moral and Spiritual States of Man” from the above book; about twenty pages in all.

“The holier they get, the scarier they get”

February 27, 2010

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/eboo_patel/2010/02/the_religious_textbooks_wars.html

Paarsurrey wrote:
February 26, 2010 7:27 AM

Hi friends

The Religion should be a part of the education of children in Schools; so that they have an idea of Ethics, Morals and the Spiritual progress. There is no harm if the point of view of the Seculars or Humanists or the Atheists is also accommodated in the text books.

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

Arkns wrote:
February 26, 2010 12:07 PM

Ahmadiyyas are peaceful Muslims. Unfortunately, they are persecuted in Pakistan. It seems someone told the Sunnis that they are the only true representatives of Islam. Meanwhile, the real McCoy is still out.

All this holy business in Islam, all this rigid viewpoints and ways of living is not amounting to much. Zilch would be nice but the overall effect is really negative, not even zero.

I have no problem with nonobservant Muslims. They are pretty nice. It is the devout ones that are scary. It seems that the holier they get, the scarier they get. One can see this when boarding a plane anywhere along with long bearded devout Muslims in skull caps. Their overwhelming piety makes the trip a scary one.

There are external laws of science as there are internal laws of the spirit. In the laboratory of the world, sodium plus chloride gives you sodium chloride. In the internal world, a longing heart plus religious practices (that is worth the paper they are written on) should give us a mellow heart. Spiritual practices must lead to an expanded consciousness, a heart that melts in empathy and love for fellow human beings. God and Prophet should lead you to universal love and compassion, not universal bloody-mindedness. I will question any God if the practices He prescribes leads towards hatred and not towards love.

Yes, from where I come from even God is answerable. Consider the Buddha who told Ananda, His chief disciple:
“Don’t accept something just because I said it. Go out and test what I say and accept it only if the results are positive but reject it if the results are negative”.

Thus spake Zarathustra!

Paarsurrey wrote:
February 27, 2010 8:35 AM

Hi friend arkns

I have enjoyed your entire post and agree with most of the points; in special the followings:
• The holier they get, the scarier they get.
• In the internal world, a longing heart plus religious practices (that is worth the paper they are written on) should give us a mellow heart.
• Buddha who told Ananda:”Don’t accept something just because I said it. Go out and test what I say and accept it only if the results are positive but reject it if the results are negative”.

Just a little question:

Are you a Buddhist or Zoroastrian? I hold them both in good esteem.

Regards

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

“The (religious) textbook wars”

February 27, 2010


http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/eboo_patel/2010/02/the_religious_textbooks_wars.html

Paarsurrey wrote:
February 26, 2010 7:27 AM

Hi friends

The Religion should be a part of the education of children in Schools; so that they have an idea of Ethics, Morals and the Spiritual progress. There is no harm if the point of view of the Seculars or Humanists or the Atheists is also accommodated in the text books.

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

YEAL9 wrote:
February 26, 2010 10:30 AM

More movements (and another Messiah) in a stream of Islamic sects;

“Ahmadiyya (äh mə dē’ yə), a contemporary messianic movement founded (1899) by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (1839-1908), b. Qadiyan, the Punjab. His Barahin-i Ahmadiyya, which he began to publish in 1880, was well received by his Islamic community. In 1889, he announced that he had received a divine revelation authorizing him to accept the baya, the allegiance of the faithful; he later also declared himself the Mahdi and the promised Messiah (masih) of Islam (1891).

His doctrine, incorporating Indian, Sufi, Islamic, and Western elements, attempted to revitalize Islam in the face of the British raj, Protestant Christianity, and resurgent Hinduism.

After his death, his followers elected Mawlana Nur ad-Din as his successor. Nur ad-Din died in 1914, and the community split into two branches. The majority remained in Qadiyan and recognized Ghulam Ahmad as prophet (nabi). The basic belief held by the Qadiyani community was and is that it is the sole embodiment of “True Islam.”

The founder’s son, Hadhrat Mirza Bashir ad-Din Mahmud Ahmad (1889-1965), was chosen as Khalifatul-Masih [caliph of the Messiah] by the Qadiyani branch, known today as the Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam (jamaat-i ahmadiyya). His half-century of leadership shaped the movement, operating after 1947 out of the city of Rabwah (which they founded and gave a Qur’anically inspired name) in Pakistan and administering a network of schools and hospitals.

His successors have been chosen from among Ghulam Ahmad’s descendants; the leader of the movement (since 2003) is Mirza Masroor Ahmad (b. 1950).

The other branch, less willing to distinguish itself from mainstream Islam, recognized Ghulam Ahmad as a reformer (mujaddid) and established what came to be known as the ahmadiyya anjuman ishaat-i Islam movement in Lahore, Pakistan, also known as the Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement. Both branches engage in energetic missionary activity in Nigeria, Kenya, Indonesia, and the Indian subcontinent.”

from: answers.com

Paarsurrey wrote:
February 27, 2010 8:21 AM

Hi friends

Our friend YEAL9 has provided good information about Ahmadiyya. Ahmadiyya is an enlightened movement not only to revitalize Islam but all the Revealed Religions of the world. Since it accepts reason, rationality and revelation as consistent tools of man for life; hence it bridges the gaps between Atheists and Theists also and in this way works for bringing about understanding and peace in the world. Ahmadiyya don’t see any real wedge between Science and Religion; the former being the Work and the later being the Word of the same Creator- God Allah YHWH.

I love Jesus and Mary as mentioned in Quran

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

Jesus was never attired in any special religious dress code

February 26, 2010

http://network.nationalpost.com/NP/blogs/holy-post/archive/2010/02/14/oregon-debates-ending-ban-on-teachers-wearing-religious-clothing-in-the-classroom.aspx#comments

Hi friends

I think Jesus was never attired in any special religious dress code. He even spoke against the Jewish priests who used it.
Religion is for learning Ethics, Morals and Spirituality; it does not need any dress code.

If the Atheists have any ideas on the above realms, there is no harm if their views are also accommodated.

I love Jesus and Mary as mentioned in Quran.

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim

The world has become like a close-net village

November 28, 2009

The world has become like a close-net village
http://forum09.faithfreedom.org/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4253&p=82713#p82713

Hello Paar, I understand your love of Jesus, Mary and Moses. However, about Krishna, Buddha, Zoroaster and Cyrus, are you sure you are not violating the Quranic injunction?

Buddha particularly was an agnostic or a Deist who never really discussed about divinity and supernatural in his teaching. Maybe your answer will be that these people were originally prophets but their teachings interpolated over time period. Right?

How about Confucius? Do you love him too?

Humanity is but one family.

Paarsurrey wrote:

Hi friends.

Since Quran is a Word of Revelation from the All-Wise, the Creator- God Allah YHWH; He sent Messenger Prophets to all the lands of the world to guide the humanity to His path. Now that the world has become like a close-net village; all these Messengers Prophets have been honored by Muhammad. The truthful Revelations, deeds/acts of all these Messengers Prophets have been secured in Quran; and their role has been set by God to introduce their nations and lead them to Muhammad – the Seal of Messengers Prophets; Muhammad authenticates their truthfulness, under lasting principles mentioned in Quran.

I love Jesus, Mary, Moses, Moses’ mother, Krishna, Buddha, Lao Tse , Confucius, Socrates, Zoroaster, Cyrus etc great leaders of the world in Ethics, Morals and Spirituality; I love them all; this is the teaching of Quran/Islam/Muhammad as explained by the Promised Messiah 1835-1908. I think it has got a lot of common sense and wisdom; my Atheist and Agnostic friends would admit.

Thanks

I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim