Thank you for sharing your thinking.
I think that we are mostly in agreement.
The great Jewish philosopher and sage Moses Maimonides (1138-1204), personal physician to the Sultan, Muslim leader Saladin, felt that the truth is the truth no matter what its source even the pagan Aristotle and Indian meditation. He would accept those ideas that he thinks are correct. He would reject ideas that he knows are not true such as mysticism and reincarnation. He would not reject truthful ideas even if the people or nation or group teaching them do not accept the Noahide commandments or the Torah or even G-d. It is not an all or nothing acceptance. Those ideas that are true are true, those ideas held by the same people that are not true are not true.

Although you may not agree with everything he says, it is important because they may make us think. The following are some of his ideas. Here are 10 principles I think are worth noting. You do not have to agree with all of them.

1. G-d is transcendental, meaning G-d does not involve Himself in human affairs.
2. G-d created the world out of preexisting matter, placed in it the laws of nature, and no longer interferes with human affairs. Therefore, we cannot know anything about G-d except for what G-d is not (God has no body and is one).
3. Prophecy is merely higher intelligence. It follows, that G-d never spoke to anyone and prophecy is not a miraculous communication by G-d nor is it the work of a divine agency. It follows that revelation does not exist.
4. G-d does not hear prayer and does not pay attention to individual human needs.
5. Since G-d is not involved in human affairs, we do not believe in miracles. Natural law is fixed and needs no change.
6. Since G-d is good, He doe not emit evil. Evil is the result of three things, 1) people harm themselves when stepping in front of a red light or 2) people harm others as when one nation decides to dominate over another and 3) natural law, although good for the world at a whole as when a hurricane cleans the earth may harm people residing near the proximity.
7. G-d does not protect us. People should act intelligently and fend for themselves and not rely on G-d to perform a miracle. No matter how pious, people should not sit, pray and passively perform irrelevant devotional deeds as if expecting a remedy. Thus, people should improve themselves and society.
8. The creation story exists only as a metaphor. The Garden of Eden story is a parable about intelligence over morality.
9. Angels and demons do not exist. G-d is not a Pasha surrounded by servants that carry out the Pasha's commands. G-d has no need for assistants. The term malakh (angels) are a metaphor for the forces of nature. If one wants to think of the existence of angels, think of the natural forces such as rain, snow, the laws of gravity, etc.
10. Genetics, disease, drugs and diet can all effect an embryo, and are scientifically proven. Reincarnation is not proven. Why imagine a reason, when science provides an explanation?

People are often afraid to accept new ideas – yet his ideas are generally very intelligent. Readers can decide if they want to accept his ideas in total or in part or not at all. They are thought-provoking.

Thank you for sharing your thinking.
Vj ~ You're most welcome R. Jonathan!

I think that we are mostly in agreement.
Vj ~ I agree "mostly"!

The great Jewish philosopher and sage Moses Maimonides ...... felt that the truth is the truth no matter what its source
Vj ~ The great Maharishi Swami Dayanand (1824 - 1883) would disagree. Truth, whenever you come to know it, has only one source (Vedas), because it is one, the same, for all, in all ages and all creations, past, present, and the future.

He would reject ideas that he knows are not true such as mysticism and reincarnation.
Vj ~ Well, that's what you get when the source doesn't matter? The idea that all are not born equal, physically, mentally and spiritually has to be the work of past birth. If not, God is unjust.

it is important because they may make us think.
Vj ~ While thinking is good, it is important that it is guided by the correct knowledge to ascertain the truth.

Here are 10 principles I think are worth noting.
Vj ~ And here is ten principles that are worthier noting.

Since G-d is not involved in human affairs, we do not believe in miracles. Natural law is fixed and needs no change.
Vj ~ True about natural laws, but the Torah is all about miracles and God interfering in human affairs.

Why imagine a reason, when science provides an explanation?

Vj ~ Reason or science alone doesn't have all the answers.
"Science without religion is lame and religion without science is blind." Albert Einstein.

They are thought-provoking.
Vj ~ Indeed they are, but is it enough?

Thank you for sharing your thinking.
I found Maharishi's 10 principles, like Maimonides before him, to be very helpful and insightful.
Shalom.

Thank you for sharing your thinking.
Vj ~ You're welcome!
You must continue to develop your reasoning power and only my site can help you do that.
All the Abrahamic scriptures (Torah, Bible, and Q'uran) are not a revelation. They were put together by ignorant men and you can prove me wrong by answering this question.

What was this God doing before this creation?

Take care and good luck.
Vj

Excellent question. Scholars have asked the question for centuries. The answer is, there are many midrashim that say all kinds of things about it, a kind of science fiction.

Accordingly the midrash [Tehillim] states that, "G-d built worlds and destroyed them" prior to the creation of the [our] universe.

Scholars have asked the question for centuries.
Vj ~ It was never a "hidden secret" for us the Aryas. We knew it since the very beginning of creation.

सू॒र्याच॒न्द्र॒मसौ॑ धाता य॑तापू॒र्वम॑कल्पयत्।
दिवं॑ च पृथि॒वीं चा॒न्तरि॑क्ष॒मथो॒ स्वः॑॥३॥

SOORYAA CHANDRA-MASAU DHAATAA
YATHAA POORVAM AKAL-PAYAT
DIVAM CHA PRITHIVEEM
CHAANTA-RIK-SHAM ATHO SWAH.
(Rig Veda X, 190)

In this cycle of creation, God created the sun, moon, earth and sky, and all the natural elements like air, fire, and water, and all life-forms. These, He created exactly as He did in the past, and as He would continue to do in the future.

Accordingly the midrash [Tehillim] states that, "G-d built worlds and destroyed them" prior to the creation of the [our] universe.
Vj ~ This is true, but what would have been His revelation to the people of the previous worlds?
It certainly couldn't be the Torah, Bible or Q'uran, as they contain historical references of one specific world.

On the other hand, the Vedas, which are free of historical references, are good for all worlds, past, present and future.

"what would have been His revelation?"

"The most detestable wickedness, the most horrid cruelties, and the greatest miseries that have afflicted the human race have had their origin in this thing called revelation" — Thomas Paine.

G-d created the world, arranged it to function according to the laws of nature, and had no further need to be involved in earthly affairs. Refer to principles' 3 and 6. Since G-d is not involved in human affairs, we do not believe in miracles. Natural law is fixed and needs no change. It follows, that G-d never spoke to anyone and that revelation does not exist.

Moses Maimonides criticized what most people think about G-d, “He who thinks about G-d and talks about him at length without scientific knowledge does not truly talk about G-d and think about Him. For what he has in his imagination and
talks about is merely a figment of his imagination." — Guide of the Perplexed.

Maimonides stressed that we should know G-d, and since it is impossible to know G-d’s essence, people must learn about G-d's creations. That is the study of the natural world and the improvement of science. People should develop their intellect to study what G-d created, natural law. When the Bible tells us the parable that people can't fathom the divide, but see His back after He passes, it is referring to the impact of natural law that G-d created. For no sensible person would ever rely on faith or tradition in a medical procedure. People should fend for themselves and not rely on G-d to perform a miracle.

"The most detestable wickedness, the most horrid cruelties, and the greatest miseries that have afflicted the human race have had their origin in this thing called revelation" — Thomas Paine.
Vj ~ It is the Abrahamic revelations that gave him and others of his scholarly thinking, such an impression.

And if they had gone into Hinduism, it isn't any better.

Is it possible that any moral man can tolerate the supremely disgusting and insufferable stuff to be found, for instance, in the Linga Purana? The feats of the Linga, though heroic(!) indeed, are a record of shame and a tale of utter indecency and obscenity. Do such books teach religion? If the reply be in the affirmative, then I say that they teach religions which can only debase the people." Swami Virjanand

....and that revelation does not exist.
Vj ~ If revelation (divine instructions) doesn't exist, how would we know the functions of natural laws and that he isn't involved in earthly affairs? How else can we know the origin of matter, the material cause of the universe and the origin of the souls.

Moses Maimonides criticized what most people think about G-d,
Vj ~ Maimonides would be wrong to be critical of people's thinking without first declaring the source of his knowledge.

1) Maimonides would agree with Paine.

“how would we know the functions of natural laws?”
2) By studying natural law. We can only understand these things or even G-d by studying the sciences. Religion based on faith without using intellect is not real religion. His source knowledge is natural law. Abraham discovers G-d by studying the heavens (natural law).

1) Maimonides would agree with Paine.
Vj ~ Of course, he would agree. What do they know of the Vedas?

A distinguished Scientist, Dr. Flemming, pointed out the necessity of Revelation in the course of a "Science and Religion" lecture in November 1914 in London.

"If we are to obtain more solid assurance, it cannot come to the mind of man groping feebly in the dim light of un-assisted reason, but only the communication made directly from this Supreme Mind to the finite mind of man."

By studying natural law.
Vj ~ How do you explain that it failed Einstein so many other scholars of science?

"We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws." Albert Einstein

We can only understand these things or even G-d by studying the sciences.
Vj ~ Doesn't seem science alone is enough according to Einstein.

"Science without religion is lame and religion without science is blind." Albert Einstein

Abraham discovers G-d by studying the heavens (natural law).
Vj ~ What a pity, no one told Thomas Paine it was that easy to discover God.

PS
You speak of a lot of reasoning and natural law, but the truth is you're a complete idiot. Abraham was an adulterer, certainly not the trait of a godly man.

“Of course, he would agree. What do they know of the Vedas?”

If he knew, we would have said something similar to what he said in the Shemonah Perakim, his medical books: “Listen to the truth from whoever speaks it.”

“How do you explain that it failed Einstein“

Yes, it is true that we will make mistakes along he way, but having said that, we have a mind (intelligence), and we are obligated to use it as G-d desires, not sit back and pray passively. For example, democracy has faults but that does not mean we should abandon it and resort to dictators who tell us how to act. The same rationale applies to the study of sciences.

"religion without science is blind." 

Einstein meant “religion” as a metaphor for the laws of nature. He meant that one should approach science with the same zeal and awe of religion. 

“no one told Thomas Paine it was that easy”

Paine wrote, “I believe in one God, and no more; and I hope for happiness beyond this life.” — The age of reason. 

This entails that Paine understood G-d through nature, like Spinoza, and Maimonides before him. 

“but the truth is...”

Neither passive piety nor study of holy books will bring people closer to G-d. At the end of the Guide, Maimonides imagined religious scholars stumbling in endless circles, never quite finding the entrance to the palace.

Maimonides wrote that “the truth is the truth no matter what its source.” People make a terrible mistake when they think that only their own religion communicates the truth. What seductive black magic exists in the phrase “I know” that keeps people from the truth!

“Listen to the truth from whoever speaks it.”
Vj ~ So why aren't you listening to me?

I dislike and reject the notion of “faith,” which is the acceptance that an idea is true even though the idea is clearly shown to be false by science, the use of our five senses, or reasoning. I accept as true only facts that are rational. I am a follower of Maimonides, a maimonidean, a rationalist. Yet I think we are mostly in agreement. But you can decide if you want to accept his ideas in total or in part or not at all.

PS
I never said you had to agree with everything he says. Though, they are thought-provoking.

I dislike and reject the notion of “faith,” which is the acceptance that an idea is true even though the idea is clearly shown to be false by science, the use of our five senses, or reasoning.
Vj ~ So why don't you put your reasoning where your mouth is and show me where my faith is "false by science, the use of our five senses, or reasoning".

"show me where my faith is false by science"
Reincarnation.
Genetics, disease, drugs and diet can all effect an embryo, and are scientifically proven. Reincarnation is not proven. Why imagine a reason, when science provides an explanation?

We should “Follow the truth from who ever speaks it.” Thus everyone, of every religion, and creed must be respected and listened to; for even your faith has some truths. Maimonides was correct: “Listen to the truth from whoever speaks it.”

Reincarnation.
Vj ~ The purpose of creation is reincarnation says my faith.
What does your faith say?

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them they have been fooled." Mark Twain

Why imagine a reason, when science provides an explanation?
Vj ~ We also gave the world science.

"We owe a lot to Indians, who taught us how to count, without which no worthwhile scientific discovery could have been made." Albert Einstein

"What does your faith say?"
My faith says to "Be all that you can be!"

"We owe a lot to Indians…” Albert Einstein”
You would like to check what he wrote about the Jains,

“Jainism is of very high order. Its important teachings are based upon science. The more the scientific knowledge advances the more those Jain teachings will be proven. And it is indeed so with Jainism.”

Thus he was referring to the Jains of India.

My faith says to "Be all that you can be!"
Vj ~ Is that why you're so stupid (cocksure)? I meant what does your faith say about the purpose of creation.

You would like to check what he wrote about the Jains,
Vj ~ You should check what Swami Dayanand wrote about the Jains

Jainism is atheistic and the source of all ethics, morals, and sciences are the Vedas (revealed knowledge). So if their teachings were highly scientific one can easily figure out where they got it from. Anyways they are still Indians.

See what Maimonides has to say regarding the purpose of the world in his Guide 3:32. He answers this well.

Jains reject vedas and dayanand rejects the Jains. They are Indians - yet their religion is older than the vedas.

Which one is it? Jains or vedas? According to Einstein, the Jains are the source of science: Its important teachings are based upon science.

See what Maimonides has to say regarding the purpose of the world in his Guide 3:32. He answers this well.
Vj ~ No so "well" to mention it here though.

"The trouble with the world the stupid are cocksure............" Bertrand Russell

yet their religion is older than the vedas.
Vj ~ The Vedas were revealed at the very beginning of this creation (3.8 million years ago) and Jainism is only 3500 years old. Am I not right about you being stupid?

the Jains are the source of science:
Vj ~ The source of my knowledge is Brahma (via the Vedas) and the source of your knowledge is G-d (via the Torah) and where do you think they being atheist got their source knowledge?

PS
And if the source of science isn't the Torah, does it not mean your G-d is a failure?

You would like to check Guide 3:32. If you read it for yourself, you can't accuse me later when I've given you the source.

See here: https://booksnthoughts.com/the-truth-is-the-truth/

"The trouble with the world the stupid are cocksure”
You can’t use that anymore. You would like to revisit Feb 16, 2019 - 1:00PM on your blog:

“Vj ~ Again let me explain, "cocksure" simply means the wise are absolutely sure…”
Turk responded with, “ That leaves you the only stupid one who's "cocksure,” and bragging to know.”
"Vj ~ In reality, the wise are "cocksure", because that is what wisdom is about. They have all the answers."
Turk ~ So you finally admit you are cocksure, which is stupid.

Seems like you're the only one who's "cocksure".

"at the very beginning"
How can they pre-date the Jains when the vedas mention Jainism?

PS
humans weren't around 3.8 million years ago. That is clearly shown to be false by science.

You would like to check Guide 3:32.
Vj ~ Still not good enough for you to put it here, eh! Why the fear, you're already

"The trouble with the world the stupid are cocksure”
You can’t use that anymore.
Vj ~ Of course, I can. What would two fools know of the wise?

How can they pre-date the Jains when the vedas mention Jainism?
Vj ~ So now, the stupid know more of the Vedas than the wise.

humans weren't around 3.8 million years ago. That is clearly shown to be false by science.
Vj ~ Who would know more of science, those who "taught the world how to count" or stupid who is cocksure?

Vj ~ Still not good enough to put it here, eh!

I could ask you the same question. Why don’t you first answer Katsumoto’s question. Or are you avoiding to deny the obvious, that you have no proof. At least I have provided you with a source. Nonetheless, here is what he says:

‎משנה תורה הלכות דעות א:ד-ה
‎[ד-ה] כָּל אָדָם שֶׁדֵּעוֹתָיו כֻּלָּן דֵּעוֹת בֵּינוֹנִיּוֹת מְמֻצָּעוֹת, נִקְרָא ‘חָכָם’. וּמִי שְׁהוּא מְדַקְדֵּק עַל עַצְמוֹ בְּיוֹתֵר, וְיִתְרַחַק מִדֵּעָה בֵּינוֹנִית מְעַט, לְצַד זֶה אוֹ לְצַד זֶה, נִקְרָא ‘חָסִיד’. כֵּיצַד: מִי שֶׁיִּתְרַחַק מִגֹּבַהּ הַלֵּב, עַד הַקָּצֶה הָאַחֲרוֹן, וְיִהְיֶה שְׁפַל רוּחַ בְּיוֹתֵר, נִקְרָא ‘חָסִיד’; וְזוֹ הִיא ‘מִדַּת חֲסִידוּת’. וְאִם נִתְרַחַק עַד הָאֶמְצָע בִּלְבָד, וְיִהְיֶה עָנָו, נִקְרָא ‘חָכָם’; וְזוֹ הִיא ‘מִדַּת חָכְמָה’. וְעַל דֶּרֶךְ זוֹ, שְׁאָר כָּל הַדֵּעוֹת. וַחֲסִידִים הָרִאשׁוֹנִים הָיוּ מַטִּין דֵּעוֹת שֶׁלָּהֶן מִדֶּרֶךְ הָאֶמְצָעִית כְּנֶגֶד שְׁתֵּי הַקְּצָווֹת. יֵשׁ דֵּעָה שֶׁמַּטִּין אוֹתָהּ כְּנֶגֶד הַקָּצֶה הָאַחֲרוֹן, וְיֵשׁ דֵּעָה שֶׁמַּטִּין אוֹתָהּ כְּנֶגֶד הַקָּצֶה הָרִאשׁוֹן; וְזֶה הוּא ‘לִפְנִים מִשּׁוּרַת הַדִּין’. וּמְצֻוִּין אָנוּ לָלֶכֶת בִּדְרָכִים אֵלּוּ הַבֵּינוֹנִיִּים, וְהֶם הַדְּרָכִים הַטּוֹבִים וְהַיְּשָׁרִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמָר (דברים כח:ט), ‘וְהָלַכְתָּ בִּדְרָכָיו’.

Vj ~ Of course, I can. What would two fools know of the wise?

Are you sure you’re wise?

Vj ~ Who would know more of science?

By your own admission, you are “cocksure.” And you would like to check what the scientist have to say regarding the origin of life.

“Do not consider it proof just because it is written in books (vedas), for a liar (Dayanand) will deceive with his tongue will not hesitate to do the same with his pen.” — Maimonides

PS
“The risk of a wrong decision is preferable to the terror of indecision” — Maimonides

Why don’t you first answer Katsumoto’s question. Or are you avoiding to deny the obvious, that you have no proof.
Vj ~ My answer would still be "irrelevant" as Confucius says "the stupidest of men never change".

‎משנה תורה הלכות דעות א:ד-ה
‎[ד-ה] כָּל אָדָם שֶׁדֵּעוֹתָיו כֻּלָּן דֵּעוֹת בֵּינוֹנִיּוֹת מְמֻצָּעוֹת, נִקְרָא ‘חָכָם’. וּמִי שְׁהוּא מְדַקְדֵּק עַל עַצְמוֹ בְּיוֹתֵר, וְיִתְרַחַק מִדֵּעָה בֵּינוֹנִית מְעַט, לְצַד זֶה אוֹ לְצַד זֶה, נִקְרָא ‘חָסִיד’. כֵּיצַד: מִי שֶׁיִּתְרַחַק מִגֹּבַהּ הַלֵּב, עַד הַקָּצֶה הָאַחֲרוֹן, וְיִהְיֶה שְׁפַל רוּחַ בְּיוֹתֵר, נִקְרָא ‘חָסִיד’; וְזוֹ הִיא ‘מִדַּת חֲסִידוּת’. וְאִם נִתְרַחַק עַד הָאֶמְצָע בִּלְבָד, וְיִהְיֶה עָנָו, נִקְרָא ‘חָכָם’; וְזוֹ הִיא ‘מִדַּת חָכְמָה’. וְעַל דֶּרֶךְ זוֹ, שְׁאָר כָּל הַדֵּעוֹת. וַחֲסִידִים הָרִאשׁוֹנִים הָיוּ מַטִּין דֵּעוֹת שֶׁלָּהֶן מִדֶּרֶךְ הָאֶמְצָעִית כְּנֶגֶד שְׁתֵּי הַקְּצָווֹת. יֵשׁ דֵּעָה שֶׁמַּטִּין אוֹתָהּ כְּנֶגֶד הַקָּצֶה הָאַחֲרוֹן, וְיֵשׁ דֵּעָה שֶׁמַּטִּין אוֹתָהּ כְּנֶגֶד הַקָּצֶה הָרִאשׁוֹן; וְזֶה הוּא ‘לִפְנִים מִשּׁוּרַת הַדִּין’. וּמְצֻוִּין אָנוּ לָלֶכֶת בִּדְרָכִים אֵלּוּ הַבֵּינוֹנִיִּים, וְהֶם הַדְּרָכִים הַטּוֹבִים וְהַיְּשָׁרִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמָר (דברים כח:ט , ‘וְהָלַכְתָּ בִּדְרָכָיו’.

Vj ~ Great O 'wiseone'now everyone knows the purpose of creation. When I quote the Vedas it is done in both Sanskrit and English. It is what a truly sincere person would do.

Are you sure you’re wise?
Vj ~ If I answer in the affirmative, how would you know that I am or not?

By your own admission, you are “cocksure.”
Vj ~ All wise men are! It is the reason we engaged both the "stupid" and the "intelligent". Only the wise know who is "stupid", who is "intelligent" and above all, who is wise.

"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt." Bertrand Russell

And you would like to check what the scientist have to say regarding the origin of life.
Vj ~ I already did. I found science to be completely blind when it comes to the origin of life.

“Do not consider it proof just because it is written in books (vedas), for a liar (Dayanand) will deceive with his tongue will not hesitate to do the same with his pen.” — Maimonides
Vj ~ This kind a sh-i-t (books - Torah; liar - Maimonides) is exactly why "the stupidest of men never change."

PS
Vedas is Dayanand's source-knowledge. What is Maimonides source-knowledge?

“When I quote the Vedas it is done in both Sanskrit and English. It is what a truly sincere person would do.”

You don't read very well, do you? Here's the quote:
משנה תורה הלכות דעות א:ד-ה 
Seems like your book does not enlighten you on all points if you can’t read.

“If I answer in the affirmative, how would you know?”

You already told me. By your own admission, you are “cocksure.” 
Vj ~ All wise men are!
So you are stupid, cocksure. Thank you for enlightening me on this one point. This solves much. 

Vj ~ I already did. I found science to be completely blind when it comes to the origin of life. 

Only that 99% of scientists, who well surpass your intelligence, tend to disagree.

“This kind a sh-i-t (books - Torah; liar - Maimonides)”
Well, no, I'm not insisting it, Maimonides is. Take it up with him, if you've got a problem with it.

“Vedas is Dayanand's source-knowledge. What is Maimonides source-knowledge?”
Natural law. Get it? Well surpasses any book. Refer to Maimonides’ quote concerning books. Because no G-d would ever, not for any reason, use book form to communicate as books tend to be mistranslated.

Are you sure you’re wise?
Vj ~ If I answer in the affirmative, how would you know that I am or not?

If I answer in the affirmative, how would you know that I am or not?

Does it matter whether God exists? What matters is knowledge (the study of natural law) and behavior (responsibility). People should become all that they can be.

Are you sure you’re wise?
Vj ~ If I answer in the affirmative, how would you know that I am or not?

Are you going to give me an answer?

Are you going to give me an answer?

What do you think?

What do you think?
Vj ~ There is nothing think about, I already knew you're an idiot.
You can't even provide Maimonides' source knowledge.

Maimonides studied the heavens (natural law). I not only provided a links but I also provided the quote. It’s your own fault you can’t read Hebrew.

I have nothing to say to you anymore.

Maimonides studied the heavens (natural law).
Vj ~ So who taught Maimonides the idea of "the heavens (natural law)"?

It’s your own fault you can’t read Hebrew.

Vj ~ I don't have any need to know Hebrew.
"Belief in God childish, Jews not chosen people.." Einstein's letter.

I have nothing to say to you anymore.
Vj ~ I know, it is a trait of the ignorant.
Anyways thank you for the dialogue. It was certainly entertaining for me as the wise can draw nectar (wisdom) from poison (ignorance).

1. Maimonides enjoyed the philosopher Aristotle.
2. Maimonides would agree with Einstein.
3. Thank you for sharing your thinking.
Shalom.

Maimonides enjoyed the philosopher Aristotle.
Vj ~ Did Maimonides know that Aristotle didn't become a philosopher by just looking up into "the heavens"?

Maimonides would agree with Einstein.
Vj ~ So how come you don't?
"We owe a lot to Indians, who taught us how to count, without which no worthwhile scientific discovery could have been made." Albert Einstein

Thank you for sharing your thinking.
Shalom.
Vj ~ There was no indication throughout this dialogue that it was of any benefit to you, so why are you thanking me?
Namaste.

"So how come you don't?"

Then, I assume you agree with this also,

"The eternal mystery of the world is its intelligibility. True religion (Jainism) fastens to this element of intelligibility and creates a system of thought and action which leads to true harmony and bliss. And it is indeed so with Jainism".
"We owe a lot to Indians, who taught us how to count, without which no worthwhile scientific discovery could have been made." - Albert Einstein

and this,

“Jainism is of very high order. Its important teachings are based upon science. The more the scientific knowledge advances the more those Jain teachings will be proven.” - Albert Einstein

"There was no indication throughout this dialogue that it was of any benefit to you"

How would you know that?

"There was no indication throughout this dialogue that it was of any benefit to you"
How would you know that?
Vj ~ Simple, you're still the same dumb ass as when you first came in.

It is Indians who gave the world science and not Jews!

PS
And here is why Einstein couldn't have any praise for Jainism.

"And here is why Einstein couldn't have any praise for Jainism."

Then your quarrel is not with me but with the smartest man who ever lived, Einstein,

"Jainism is of very high order. Its important teachings are based upon science. The more the scientific knowledge advances the more those Jain teachings will be proven.” - Albert Einstein

Whuch Indians? According to Einstein, the Jains.

Truth be told, only by study of natural law could one develop their intellect.

Neither passive piety nor study of the vedas, yogi, or mystical tracts bring people to G-d. Near the end of the Guide, Maimonides summarized his views in a parable and pictured vedic scholars as people who stumble outside G-d’s palace seeking ways to enter the palace but without knowing how to enter. They are forever, going in circles.

"And here is why Einstein couldn't have any praise for Jainism."

Then your quarrel is not with me but with the smartest man who ever lived, Einstein,

"Jainism is of very high order. Its important teachings are based upon science. The more the scientific knowledge advances the more those Jain teachings will be proven.” - Albert Einstein

Which Indians? According to Einstein, the Jains.

Truth be told, only by study of natural law could one develop their intellect.

Neither passive piety nor study of the vedas, yogi, or mystical tracts bring people to G-d. Near the end of the Guide, Maimonides summarized his views in a parable and pictured vedic scholars as people who stumble outside G-d’s palace seeking ways to enter the palace but without knowing how to enter. They are forever, going in circles.

Then your quarrel is not with me but with the smartest man who ever lived, Einstein,
Vj ~ So why are you still a Jew and following Maimonides?

Belief in G-d childish..... Jews not chosen people.. Einstein's letter.

"There was no indication throughout this dialogue that it was of any benefit to you"
font color=brown>How would you know that?
Vj ~ "Only the wisest and the stupidest of men never change." Confucius

"So why are you still a Jew and following Maimonides?"

Because Maimonides was a rationalist. Like Confucius before him.

font color=brown>"Belief in G-d childish..... Jews not chosen people.. Einstein's letter."

Maimonides would agree. G-d is transcendent (has no body and is one). Spinoza's G-d.

Even Einstein agrees with them. He said: “I believe in Spinoza’s God who reveals Himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns Himself with fates and actions of human beings.”

Truth be told, there is no such thing as a personal G-d who is involved in human affairs, who listens and responds to prayers, who tests people, rewards them for good deeds and punishes them for bad ones. Spinoza (1632-1677), as we mentioned earlier, agreed with this.

Maimonides did not think Jews are better than other people.

Maimonides would agree. G-d is transcendent (has no body and is one). Spinoza's G-d.
Vj ~ The Vedas said it long before Maimonides and Spinoza.

"NA TASYA PRATIMAA ASTI YASYA NAAM MAHAVIDYASHAH." Yajur Ved 32:3
He the Supreme, of infinite glory, has no likeness, weight or measurement.