WELCOME TO CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM



The power of perfect reasoning is essential to know.


The one true religion

A discriminating intellect is that in which knowledge based only on words, real knowledge and ordinary knowledge based on sense perception or reasoning are present in a mixed state and the mind alternates between them.

"When the time of destruction is at hand the intellect becomes perverted." Vridha Chan. 16:17.
Topic of discussion
Five Tests of true religion - Feb 08, 2002
  1. It (revelation) must exist in its entirety from the very beginning of creation for all of mankind, and not over a long period of time after.
    Oppose - It is unjust of Yahwe, Allah and Christ, to deprive millions born before the revelation of the Ten Commandments, the Q'uran, and the New Testament of His 'divine wisdom'. An injustice which cannot be the work of a Just, Compassionate and Merciful God.
  2. It must conform with (immutable) Natural laws
  3. Oppose - The cause of the physical body is the reproductive element - any other method as man was created from dust or blood-clot and all other miracles of God and Prophets are a breach to this law.
  4. It must be in harmony with reasoning.
    Oppose - Incest which results in mental and physical infirmities, is an immoral action and it had to be the same also in the beginning (creation of one man and one woman).
  5. It must be in harmony with science.
    Oppose - Modern science has proven creation to be more than 6,000 years old, the earth is spherical and it rotates and revolves, contradictions to the Torah, Bible and Q'uran.
  6. Its truth must be confirmed by four evidences :-
  • Direct Cognition - Not all that is known by perception can be true.
  • Inferences - God is eternal therefore we can infer that there were past creations and as well as there will be future ones.
  • Testimony - The testimonies of Rishis, sages and seers of the Vedas (altruistic teachers are all in harmony with each other.
  • History - There are many books (Mahabharata, Valmiki's Ramayan) and source of other civilization which speak of the past ancient Vedic (Aryas) civilization of 5,000 years ago and earlier.

Let's be reasonable when it comes the most abstruse science of God (wisdom), the ignorant (by repenting) and the wise (by austerity) can never reap the same rewards.


WARNING! Reader's discretion is advised - the truth offends!
Past dialogues debunking Religion
Other discussion boards:-  Can a fool, fool God?    Do all paths lead to God?   Debunking evolution
Guestbook
​​​​​​​
The one true religion
"No one is more hated than he who speaks the truth." Plato
​​​​​​​
Welcome to constructive criticism
Start a New Topic 
1 2
Author
Comment
Is Tolerance Intolerant? Pursuing the Climate of Acceptance and Inclusion

We encounter an incredible diversity of cultures, lifestyles, and faiths. Unfortunately our conflicting identities and beliefs often exclude others. Is there truth to real acceptance and inclusion?

Re: Is Tolerance Intolerant? Pursuing the Climate of Acceptance and Inclusion

Ravi is a gift from God, a blessing to all who hear him speak, what a brilliant mind! God bless you Ravi Zacharias.

Brilliant mind?

A brilliant mind is one that thinks. Talking snakes and donkeys are definitely not the trait of such a mind.

"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

Re: Is Tolerance Intolerant? Pursuing the Climate of Acceptance and Inclusion

Scrolling thru the posts I see you're on a roll Vijai. Now...do you have s/thing constructive to add to the discussion? At this point, I'm guessing you get up on the wrong side of the bed every day...yes/no?

Re: Is Tolerance Intolerant? Pursuing the Climate of Acceptance and Inclusion

Yes, that's what religion is all about "guessing"! In that condition, how would you know what's constructive?

Re: Is Tolerance Intolerant? Pursuing the Climate of Acceptance and Inclusion

Vijai Singh an education is constructive, it's a construction of the brain. You sir , have no education

Re: Is Tolerance Intolerant? Pursuing the Climate of Acceptance and Inclusion

How do you explain one with "no education" who can think (vjsingh.info) and you and Ravi with a 'constructive' brain can converse with snakes and donkeys?

Re: Is Tolerance Intolerant? Pursuing the Climate of Acceptance and Inclusion

Vijai Singh the snakes and donkeys are made to see and speak as saved beings do by GOD (simply because He can), don't think that rejecting that fact will leave you with the same " thinking/reasoning (you claim to have now) during your punishment in hell. It says there is the weight of guilt/sin that cannot be removed during punishment ... in the Bible it mentions the yoke of Jesus is light. So that must mean the weight of death's yoke is terrible. Jesus also didn't force anyone to accept He is GOD just as the Father doesn't force anyone but he did require it. So you on YT proving you don't know what you are talking about shows very little in the way of education that you claim to have.

Re: Is Tolerance Intolerant? Pursuing the Climate of Acceptance and Inclusion

This man I call educated - "A God who would inflict "flood, fire, famine, plague, pestilence and drought" on humankind is nothing less than a "thug" in the sky." Prof.Dan Goldstick.

There is no cure for a fool, so I'm not here to do what even God can't.

"I have examined all the known superstitions of the word, and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology. Millions of innocent men, women, and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to support roguery and error all over the earth." Thomas Jefferson -

I don't know why you're quoting the Bible. It's not a revelation.
"Revelation is a communication of something, which the person to whom the thing is revealed did not know before. For if I have done a thing, or seen it done, it needs no revelation to tell me, I have done or seen it done nor enable me to tell it or write it. Revelation, therefore, cannot be applied to anything done upon earth, of which man is himself actor or witness and consequently all the historical part of the bible which is almost the whole of it, is not within the meaning and compass of the word revelation and therefore is not the word of god." Thomas Paine

Re: Is Tolerance Intolerant? Pursuing the Climate of Acceptance and Inclusion

Vijai Singh those are pagan religions, you do said you study, but you don't because you're uneducated.. burning people is a pagan religion.. Christianity is in the Bible. A specific group of books , do you know it? Did you read it? No you didn't .. Lutheran movement was a Christian movement until they killed him and sacrificed all his followers which the Pope's called pagans. Then as with any uprising they do not destroy it. They corrupt it and twist in their pagan freemasons system. Templars were the same. Roman catholicism did the same.. American protestantism did the same. Hinduism is pagan which is why you don't see facts clearly

You Don’t Understand the Bible because you are Christian

"the snakes and donkeys are made to see and speak as saved beings do"

Actually, snakes and donkeys do not talk because it is unnatural. What the Bible is describing is a parable. Not a historic event. This may come as a surprise to most Christians who profess to understand the Bible literally. 12th-century sage, the rationalist Maimonides felt that natural law is fixed and needs no change. This being the case, he did not believe in miracles. G-d created the world, as the Bible says, "Vry good," it therefor, would be insulting to say that a rain dancer needs use magic and dance to produce rain, arrogantly claiming that they know better than the Creator when rain ought to fall.

In his Guide for the Perplexed, Maimonides explains that the world functions according to the laws of nature. Maimonides felt that G-d is transcendental, meaning G-d created the world out of preexisting matter, established or re-arranged the laws of nature, and does not interfere with human affairs. It follows that angels and demons do not exist. G-d is all-powerful and needs no helpers. G-d is not a Pasha surrounded by servants that carry out the Pasha's commands. G-d has no need for assistants. When the bible speaks about angels, it is referring to the laws of nature which carry out the divine will. for example, the wind, rain, snow, and even good people, although human, are called angels.

Revelation does not exist. Prophecy is the result of the higher intellect and not a miraculous communication from a divine agency. Thus, prophecy is a natural event. It follows that G-d never spoke to anyone.

In regards to your absurd statement about Catholics not being Christians, Martin Luther was a Christian, as well as the Pope. Both were cruel. Yet, Christians today do not reflect the cruelty of their ancestors.

Re: You Don’t Understand the Bible because you are Christian

Revelation does not exist.
Vj ~ So what is the source of your knowledge?

Re: Is Tolerance Intolerant? Pursuing the Climate of Acceptance and Inclusion


Vijai Singh you haven't found a cure yet have you. Did you ever question why if Christianity was such a fable has it been such a threat to the world as to torture and imprison the believers of Jesus. If it was so untrue why do those in history carry out so much hatred towards a simple hoax. Why do you feel the need to go out of your way to bash it if nothing of the supernatural kind is driving you. Why do you take time out of your oh so important life that supposedly came into being from a big bang. Next time a print shop has explosion maybe you'll discover some new profound dictionary to the universe. Hey it's just likely as the way they describe our origin for existence. Perhaps the monkeys will sit down with you and explain it all 😂🤣. That's as likely as the egg making and fertilizing itself to make the chicken.

Re: Is Tolerance Intolerant?

What kind of god would create one man and one woman leaving brothers with no choice to screw their own sisters? Do you know incest leads to mental and physical infirmity? I guess you don't have the brains to think that far.

"I have examined all the known superstitions of the word, and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology. Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to support roguery and error all over the earth." Thomas Jefferson

Re: Is Tolerance Intolerant?

Vijai Singh, I agree with what you wrote. The "Garden of Eden" story is about morality and intelligence, and the duty and obligation to develop one's intelligence. The Rambam felt that the Garden of Eden parable taught a person how to live life correctly. It is a metaphor.

The biblical book of Genesis accounts for many instances that seem unnatural. These include stories like the Garden of Eden, a talking snake, and a tree of good and evil. But should people believe these episodes allegorically or as true happenings? It is certainly true that the rabbis never insisted on interpreting irrational biblical events as literal truths. They openly and strongly rejected this approach, the way of the Christians and Moslems. It follows that the rabbis rejected the biblical anthropomorphic expressions about G-d. They said, “We describe G-d by terms borrowed from his creations in order to cause [ideas] to sink into the ear,” that is, to make them understandable to the people. “The Torah,” they explained, “speaks in the language of man.”

Philo was the first Jewish philosopher. He lived in Alexandria, Egypt. Philo was convinced that the Bible should not be taken literally. Unlike Greek myths, that were designed to deceive the masses with what the educated philosopher knows to be nonsense because the masses are unable to understand the truth. The masses need myths to add meaning to their lives. Even the Greek philosopher Plato admitted that myths fed the masses with a sense of security and contentment and, above all else, a freedom from fear. These myths, stressed Plato, didn’t teach the complete truth but “essential truths,” not “real truths,” what some call “the noble lie.” But Philo insists, that biblical stories transmit the truth and are true in a sense, that they teach a moral lesson. That biblical tales were never designed to be taken literally. Thus, for example, Philo states that the tales of creation, which are not true facts or even remotely real science, are parables with truthful, life-essential significance below their false literal surface. I can cite many examples of ancient Greek and Egyptian metaphors that prove the ancients (or at least the elite) did not take their myths at face value. for example, the Bible uses symbolism, such as numbers that represent three days to teach a lesson. Obviously, the writers knew that this was not a coincidence, as it is found in many places in the Bible. They are placed with intention, which points to the idea that the writers never intended that the stories be read at face value.

Maimonides, also recognized that the general population cannot understand the truth. Maimonides employed that thinking in much of his allegorical interpretation of the story of Adam and Even in the Garden of Eden. He writes that this story (or myth with a moral lesson) was written to teach people how to act and the importance of seeking knowledge. People should differentiate not between good and evil but from truth and falsehood. Adam and Eve represent the lower-levers of moral truths. Thus, Maimonides viewed the passage as a lesson: people should be less concerned with what is proper, represented by eating from the tree of good and evil and focus instead on what is true and false. See Genesis 3; Guide of the Perplexed.

Thus, the Rambam (Maimonides) sees the tree of "good and evil" in the parable not as a distinction from right and wrong but from truth and falsehood. Meaning that people should evaluate every situation, determine the best course of action, and act intelligently, not morally because morality is only a set of rules for the general public who needs to be told how to act in any given situation, but is by no means conventional.

And since G-d does only good and does not emit evil it is inconceivable to image that G-d would produce or create "dark forces" such as Satan or malevolent talking serpents (snakes) to manipulate or distort the creation of the world in which the Bible calls "Very good."

Re: Is Tolerance Intolerant?

Vijai Singh, I agree with what you wrote. The "Garden of Eden" story is about morality and intelligence, and the duty and obligation to develop one's intelligence. The Rambam felt that the Garden of Eden parable taught a person how to live life correctly. It is a metaphor.
Vj ~ Jonathan, why are you wasting so much time about the Torah/Bible, Garden of Eden, devil, Satan, parables and metaphors when it is not a revelation at all?

Do you really think an Omnipotent and Omniscient God of this infinite universe took all that time to personally intervene into all those petty little s-h-i-t to please the extremely ignorant?

"Revelation is a communication of something, which the person to whom the thing is revealed did not know before. For if I have done a thing, or seen it done,
it needs no revelation to tell me, I have done or seen it done nor enable me to tell it or write it. Revelation, therefore, cannot be applied to anything done upon earth, of which man is himself actor or witness and consequently all the historical part of the bible which is almost the whole of it, is not within the meaning and compass of the word revelation and therefore is not the word of god." Thomas Paine

Re: Is Tolerance Intolerant? Pursuing the Climate of Acceptance and Inclusion

Lucida Rose, it is very simple lady, I am saying your god isn't god, as God, being All-wise, knows better. Your bible was written by ignorant men and has nothing to with God.
Your god doesn't even know what he was doing before this creation.

Re: Is Tolerance Intolerant?

Vijai Singh "Do you know incest leads to mental and physical infirmity?"

Do you understand the mechanisms of why this is so? If there are only two people, and there are no defects or inferiorities in the genetic code, this is not a problem. It is when defects, drop-outs, or other damaged code is constantly reinforced that problems start to arise. And radiation from the sun (among other things) damages DNA. So over time, having a diversity of genetic code is a benefit, but also no guarantee against 'inferior' offspring.
Now, what I said here is an oversimplified explanation, as I have not the time nor inclination to explain it further here. Genetics is yet a little understood field, with complexities not yet imagined. As a species, we're just into the edge of the water in a vast ocean of data and knowledge needed to understand the system.

Re: Is Tolerance Intolerant?

The Odyssey is not a revelation, it is pure fiction and yet, scholars consider it a classic and continue to mine it for its lessons to this day. Similarly, the Bible can be mined for its lessons, even if it's not a revelation per se. So what exactly is “revelation”? Does G-d speak? Is it possible that a person can hear G-d’s voice? If G-d did not speak, was it inspiration or insight—but nevertheless an act Jonah, for example, was uncertain about. If it was G-d’s voice, as many insist, was it a small still voice as with Elijah or was it fiery thunder as with the people at Sinai? If G-d does not speak as the Rambam suggests, how then, was the Torah revealed?

This may come as a shock for most laypeople, but the Torah is a great human achievement but nevertheless, only a human achievement. Maimonides writes in the first chapter of his Mishneh Torah that G-d does not speak. How was the Torah revealed? Moshe looked into the laws of nature, which is a divine creation of G-d, and produced the Torah. Similarly, Abraham discovered G-d by studying the heavens, natural law. Thus, Maimonides considers it an obligation to develop one's intelligence. It is a mitzvah to study philosophy, science, and metaphysics to improve society. Are you bothered if the event was natural? How does this make you feel?

Why then does the Torah attribute its content to G-d? Because while G-d is not the immediate source of the Torah, G-d is the ultimate cause, because G-d created the laws of nature. It follows that miracles do not exist. G-d does not amend the laws of nature for any sake. Natural law is fixed and needs no change. Thus, G-d did not personally intervene to write the Torah, nor did He reveal it via prophecy. Prophecy is not the work of a divine agency but is merely higher intelligence. Thus, prophecy is a natural event.

Maimonides felt that G-d is transcendent and either created or formed the universe, placed in it the laws of nature, and does not communicate with prophets or interfere with nature by performing miracles, then it follows that, unless G-d somehow deviated from this norm, G-d did not communicate the Torah.

Re: Is Tolerance Intolerant?

Little Stevie Letch
The reason you're a Christian defending what is morally wrong is that you're stupid.

The laws of morality work one way from the beginning (of creation) to the end. What is immoral now could have never been morally right at any time, now, in the past or in the future.

Only the ignorant would be guilty of changing the rules in the middle of a game.

It is an action, virtuous or sinful, and not "mechanism" that decides morality or immorality. Get it lamebrain!

Re: Is Tolerance Intolerant?

the Torah is a great human achievement
Vj ~ Sure, anything so vulgar and immoral is an "achievement" in eyes of the ignorant.

On the other hand in the eyes of the wise, this is the achievement of revelation.
He revealed all kinds of knowledge, in the four Vedas:-

RIG VEDA was revealed to Agni.
YAJUR VEDA was revealed to Vayu.
SAMA VEDA was revealed to Angira
ATHARVA VEDA was revealed to Aditya.

The four Vedas with over 100,000 verses are considered the trunk of the tree. The Rishis were the authors of eleven hundred and twenty-seven expositions (branches of the tree) in dozens of texts contained sub-Vedas known as the UpaVedas and Vedangas which expound profound sciences:-

AYUR VEDA - studies anatomy, physiology, hygiene, sanitary science, surgery, etc.

DHANUR VEDA - teaches archery and other Military Science for self-defense from within and outside.

GHANDARVA VEDA - teaches the science and art of music

STHAPATYA VEDA- teaches engineering, architecture and all branches of mathematics in general.

All these subjects are considered spiritual studies and are inherent parts of the Vedas. The Vedangas contains grammar, (etymology) prosody, astronomy, and lexicography which according to the Indian Cultural conceptions are also parts and subjects of the Vedic religious studies. There are many other philosophical branches like the eleven Upanishads (Isha, Kena, Taitreya, Chhandogya, Shweta, Mundak, etc), the six Shastras or Darshanas and the four Brahmanas. Also, the Manu Smriti deals with the physical, political and social systems of Government all according to Vedic principles.

PS.
By the way, natural laws are uncreated, eternal. Then again, how would you know since your G-d didn't reveal anything?



Re: Is Tolerance Intolerant?

Vijai Singh
the Torah is a great human achievement
Vj ~ Sure, anything so vulgar and immoral is an "achievement" in eyes of the ignorant.

On the other hand in the eyes of the wise, this is the achievement of revelation.
He revealed all kinds of knowledge, in the four Vedas:-

RIG VEDA was revealed to Agni.
YAJUR VEDA was revealed to Vayu.
SAMA VEDA was revealed to Angira
ATHARVA VEDA was revealed to Aditya.

The four Vedas with over 100,000 verses are considered the trunk of the tree. The Rishis were the authors of eleven hundred and twenty-seven expositions (branches of the tree) in dozens of texts contained sub-Vedas known as the UpaVedas and Vedangas which expound profound sciences:-

AYUR VEDA - studies anatomy, physiology, hygiene, sanitary science, surgery, etc.

DHANUR VEDA - teaches archery and other Military Science for self-defense from within and outside.

GHANDARVA VEDA - teaches the science and art of music

STHAPATYA VEDA- teaches engineering, architecture and all branches of mathematics in general.

All these subjects are considered spiritual studies and are inherent parts of the Vedas. The Vedangas contains grammar, (etymology) prosody, astronomy, and lexicography which according to the Indian Cultural conceptions are also parts and subjects of the Vedic religious studies. There are many other philosophical branches like the eleven Upanishads (Isha, Kena, Taitreya, Chhandogya, Shweta, Mundak, etc), the six Shastras or Darshanas and the four Brahmanas. Also, the Manu Smriti deals with the physical, political and social systems of Government all according to Vedic principles.

PS.
By the way, natural laws are uncreated, eternal. Then again, how would you know since your G-d didn't reveal anything?



How were the Vedas revealed? What was the nature of their revelation? Did G-d speak to the four prophets or, was it inspiration or an insight as Maimonides suggests. If G-d spoke to the four prophets how did they hear His voice? Is it possible that a prophet can hear the voice of G-d or should we accept the more natural approach, that prophecy is a natural event when the prophet uses his intelligence and imagination to express his thoughts to the general public and only uses word like G-d spoke for poetry.

If we accept the fact that natural law is fixed and needs no change, it follows that G-d formed the world out of preexisting matter, and placed in it natural law (which is eternal), then it follows that revelation doesn’t exist.

Re: Is Tolerance Intolerant?

As a followup to my question regarding Vedic revelation, I would like to know how you attempt to reconcile reincarnation with science. You have said in the past that people generally don't remember their past lives. If this is so, then there is no evidence for reincarnation, it is blind faith.

What did Maimonides say

Maimonides rejected the concept of metempsychosis, also known as the transmigration of souls. This non-rational idea asserts that upon the death of a person, the soul is reborn in another person or animal. Needless to say, scientists have been unable to locate it [the soul] or find any evidence of its existence, probably because it doesn’t exist. Actually, the biblical word for “soul,” is nefesh, in Hebrew which means a “life force.” Thus, the soul is the digestive system in the body. It follows that the soul does not survive the body after death, it dies with the person. What survives is the intellect. Maimonides felt that resurrection and reward and punishment do not exist, only intellects. In his commentary on the Chelek chapter of Mishnah Sanhedrin, he explains that upon death a person’s intelligence joins the higher intelligence; and that this situation is the ideal. Thus it makes no sense that a person would want to be reborn at a lower and less satisfying level. only the intellect survives death and not the soul.

PS
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?

Re: Is Tolerance Intolerant?

How were the Vedas revealed?
Vj ~ These are excellent questions but only the wise are familiar with God's nature, attributes and characteristics. So if you want to know you must strive for this wisdom to know and when you do you will also be aware, as I do, that He has no cure for a fool.

This information on the source of ethics, morals, and all sciences would have been gratifying to a sensible person but as always never to a fool.

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

Here is why I am, what I am and you are, what you are.

"Only the wisest and stupidest of men never change." Confucius

PS
There is no shortcut to wisdom. It took me 20 years of study and practice (yoga) to acquire this wisdom. So if you need answers you have to start here - Initiation

Re: Is Tolerance Intolerant?

"There is no shortcut to wisdom. It took me 20 years... to acquire this wisdom..."

I agree with what you wrote. Maimonides taught that humans were created with a mind and have a duty to develop and improve themselves and society. This task is, indeed, not easy. It is difficult and burdensome. It requires constant, even daily effort, and it could take 20 years to accomplish. But it is the human thing to do. G-d desires that people use their intelligence to make the world better than we found it. Maimonides taught this truth.

Thank you for the link.

Re: Is Tolerance Intolerant?

I agree with what you wrote.
Vj ~ This is what you're agreeing with:

Your religion is blind.
".......religion without science is blind." Einstein

You're stupid.
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure......." Bertrand Russell

And cannot change.
"......stupidest of men never change." Confucius

If you see need to change it begins here.

Be ready to instantly reject any ideology you hold and see yourself as a child, inquisitive, honest and innocent, free of prejudice and bigotry, in pursuit of this
truth as Albert Einstein rightly explains it:

"I'm not an atheist, and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws."

The search for truth begins with a functional intellect.

We need to think about Maimonides

Many people who observe religion inadvertently observe superstitions. These types of people find it hard to abandon the immature notions they held since childhood. Their concept about G-d has not developed beyond what they learned as children. Maimonides showed how these notions are incorrect and child-oriented. Most people are unable to accept the truth and even feel threatened by it when they hear the truth.

In his commentary on Aristotle’s Ethics, Arab philosopher Abu Nasr al-Farabi wrote that the notion of life after death is plainly wrong: “senseless ravings and old wives’ tales.” Similarly, the highly respected Arab philosopher Averroes criticizes his predecessor, the philosopher Avicenna who felt that G-d is involved in mundane affairs. He disparages Avicenna for abandoning true philosophy and capitulating to the theology of the uneducated masses. Averroes, a contemporary of Maimonides, understands Aristotle to be saying that the world operates in a natural manner. Averroes, like Maimonides, understood that the world functions according to the laws of nature. Averroes and Maimonides were born in the same city, months apart, and although they never met, they would agree with their G-d concept. Could the same not be said for Dayanand Sarawati and the Arya Samaj (Noble Society)?

Maimonides, like Dayanand, felt that G-d is transcendental, that natural law (which is eternal) is fixed and needs no change. That G-d does not amend natural law for any sake. That G-d neither communicated the Torah nor the Vedas, respectively. Both were rationalist, and although Dayanand believed in the non-sensical, indeed the anti-rational concept of metempsychosis (of course you avoided my question because there is no evidence for reincarnation,) you will admit that had you studied Maimonides, as I have done, you would be a Maimonidean (a rationalist) at best and admire him at worst. Indeed you admire Stephen Hawking who was an atheist, how much more so should you respect Maimonides!

"The search for truth begins with a functional intellect."
In his Guide and medical writings (he was a physician) Maimonides taught that people should develop their intellect even if it means accepting truths from the Greek pagan Aristotle because Maimonides felt that the truth is the truth no matter what its source even if its from the Indian Dayanand. It is not an all or nothing acceptance. Thus, you should read The Guide for the Perplexed before you criticize his philosophy.

Maimonides stresses that his reader should read his entire book to uncover his teaching: “Do not read superficially, lest you do me an injury, and derive no benefit for yourself. You must study thoroughly and read continually; for you will find the solution of those important problems of religion, which are the source of anxiety to all intelligent men.”

Re: We need to think about Maimonides

Maimonides, like Dayanand, felt that G-d is transcendental, that natural law (which is eternal) is fixed and needs no change.
Vj ~ Maimonides, like Dayanand, doesn't have a source knowledge. Only God can enlighten the human race to who he really he is, the origin of matter, the soul and the order of the creation of the universe.

Again if your desire is to know the truth you must start here:

Be ready to instantly reject any ideology you hold and see yourself as a child, inquisitive, honest and innocent, free of prejudice and bigotry, in pursuit of this truth as Albert Einstein rightly explains it:
"I'm not an atheist, and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws." The search for truth begins with a functional intellect.

Re: We need to think about Maimonides

Again, thank you for the links. I would add the principle of Ockham’s razor which says that whenever there are two possibilities for an explanation, the simplest explanation is generally correct. It is simpler to say the universes caused itself rather than G-d dong it because the former conveys one action while the latter requires two (G-d acted and the world). Thus, it is simpler to say that reincarnation does not exist because scientists can now explain genetics, which is a simpler explanation.

The soul
The popular idea of a soul separated from the body which survives death is problematical. No one is able to explain how the soul controls the body if it is separate and not material. Descartes is famous for his statement: “I think; therefore I am.” Due to his catholic beliefs, he insisted on the existence of a soul, despite his need for proof; he was unable to explain how the soul affects the body or where it is located. Thus, Descartes is a good example of a thinking man who stopped thinking because he felt that his religion required him to do so.

The Greek philosopher Plato felt that the soul is the 'real me and the body is my clothing.' To him, it is irreverent whether the soul existed from the beginning of time because it will survive eternally. This thinking is problematic. Actually, the Hebrew word for soul is nefesh, it means a “life force.” In his De Anima, Aristotle contended, like the Hebrew Bible, that the “soul” is the life force and is comprised of systems found in the body, such as the nutritive and digestive systems, senses, and thinking. Plants and animals also have souls, but plants only have the nutritive part and animals have tow parts but lack thinking. Thus, the soul is natural, not spiritual.

Reincarnation
The notion of “transmigration of souls,” or “metempsychosis,” is an extreme iteration. It asserts that upon death, the soul is transferred to another person or animal. Needless to say, scientists have been unable to locate this absurd phenomenon. Virtually no one can foretell which body would get a preexisting soul, nor can they remember a preexisting life. In his commentary on the Chelek Maimonides explains that only the intellect survives and that this situation is the ideal. Thus it makes no sense that a person would want to be reborn at a lower and less satisfying level. It is a mystical notion, alien to rational Judaism.

PS
Your links did not provide the answer to my question. I have asked you to provide an explanation for reincarnation. You avoided the question, probably because there is no evidence for its existence. Though, please feel free to send a link that does answer this question.

Re: We need to think about Maimonides

"Only God can enlighten the human race"

Mystics commonly say that people cannot derive truths on their own. They prefer G-d or revelation. They are skeptical of the human ability to attain “true knowledge,” that humans are insufficient to do so. People, in their minds, are unable to discover the true purpose of anything. Many insist that people lack the ability to do so. But this is untrue. The Bible teaches that people can and should improve. The message of the biblical book of Esther is that G-d formed the laws of nature and is not involved in this world; G-d does not aid people; G-d expects people to learn how the laws of nature work and use their intelligence to improve themselves and society. People need to realize that they cannot rely on miracles; the miracles in the biblical books should be understood figuratively.

Accordingly, G-d formed the universe to function according to certain rules that are good for the universe—the laws of nature. Having done so, He no longer interferes with or changes nature or people in any way. Prayer does not cleanse people of misdeeds. Prayer is a moment of self-reflection. The world works according to the laws of nature. One of these laws is that every act has consequences. Acts do not go away, they can have long-lasting effects, even for generations. Those who did wrong were punished after they repented (David also repented), but it was because of the consequences of their acts, not G-d's dong. It follows that G-d does not answer prayer. Thus, Maimonides writes that G-d spoke to no one. How then, were the Vedas revealed? While your link showed when and where the Vedas were revealed, it failed to explain how they were revealed. I am interested in the how.

Since G-d does not speak, it follows that G-d did not communicate the Vedas. There is, however, one explanation. Natural law. That the four prophets, like Moses, derived at truth from their own, by their intelligence. The source knowledge for Maimonides is the laws of nature, which is a divine creation of G-d, not holy books that were developed.

People have a duty to study and develop themselves intellectually, to understand how the world functions, and to improve themselves and society, without depending on divine assistance.

Re: We need to think about Maimonides

It is simpler to say the universes caused itself rather
Vj ~ A sensible person, like myself, would want to know the purpose of creation.

Thus, it is simpler to say that reincarnation does not exist because scientists can now explain genetics
Vj ~ So you're saying the truth wasn't for those before, now that "scientists can explain genetics"?

The popular idea of a soul separated from the body which survives death is problematical..... This thinking is problematic.
Vj ~ Of course, it is for the ignorant. Strive for wisdom for only the wise are free of such problems.

Needless to say, scientists have been unable to locate this absurd phenomenon.
Vj ~ A pedant - book knowledge minus common sense. You've got to think man!
"Science without religion is lame..........." Albert Einstein

You avoided the question,
Vj ~ What do you not understand when I say there is no cure for a fool?

because there is no evidence for its existence.
Vj ~ The purpose of creation is for the eternal souls to reap the fruits of their actions, virtuous (happiness) or sinful (pain and misery). Unless Judaism has got a better one.

I am interested in the how.
Vj ~ Again if you're interested you must start here:

Be ready to instantly reject any ideology you hold and see yourself as a child, inquisitive, honest and innocent, free of prejudice and bigotry, in pursuit of this truth as Albert Einstein rightly explains it:
"I'm not an atheist, and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws." The search for truth begins with a functional intellect.

People have a duty to study and develop themselves intellectually,
Vj ~ Of course, but in the absence of the correct knowledge (Vedas), they can only end up like you, a fool.

Re: We need to think about Maimonides

I will try to write more fully in a few days. In the interim, I will tell you that Maimonides felt that people should improve themselves and society.

Vj ~ A sensible person, like myself, would want to know the purpose of creation.

Maimonides gives us the answer. It is profoundly foolish to suppose that G-d created the world and forbad people the joys of this world. Maimonides taught that people should rely on themselves and not G-d. People must learn from all others no matter what their religion. Thus Maimonides accepted the pagan Aristotle. Maimonides felt that the truth is the truth no matter what its source, and we are obligated to seek truth. 

Vj ~ So you're saying the truth wasn't for those before, now that "scientists can explain genetics"? 

I do not comprehend what you wrote. Please reword your question or statement in a few lines. 

You write, "There is no cure..."

If you are referring to sin, the word “sin” is not found in the Bible. The word is chet, and it means “to miss the mark.” One can imagine an archer releasing his shaft and shooting an arrow, realizing that he missed his target. What do you do when you miss your target? Do you beat your chest, weep devastatingly, and create all kinds of ceremonies to “atone” for the missed shot? No. You consider why you got the disappointing results, reach into your quiver, and shoot again. This rational approach examines why one failed and asserts not to repeat the loss. Thus prayer is a time for reflection, to judge one’s self. G-d does not answer prayer. People need to recognize, that the world functions according to the laws of nature. One of these laws is that acts have consequences, and they can have long-lasting effects even for generations. For example, King David made a sin, an adulterous relationship with Bat Sheva. G-d does wipe the slate clean nor cleanse them of misdeeds with repentance (David also repented), but due to the consequences of the action, he suffered. 

Vj ~ Of course, but in the absence of the correct knowledge (Vedas), they can only end up like you, a fool.

I take a different approach. People should develop their minds and not sit back, relax, study religious texts (Vedas), and passively perform irrelevant deeds (yoga) expecting G-d to remedy society. This is, in essence, Pascal's Wager. This popular view is enshrined in holy books. It does not bear repeating. Thus, a self-effacing saint who sits in seclusion is not pious. People should improve themselves and society. Whether or not G-d requires it is irrelevant, for He will be pleased. This is a sure bet, as it improves the world either way.

Re: We need to think about Maimonides

I will try to write more fully in a few days. In the interim, I will tell you that Maimonides felt that people should improve themselves and society.
Vj ~ This is why the truth will always be problematic for the ignorant. dayanan felt that people should improve themselves by doing less of reading and writing and think (reason) more.

He says, in studying the systems of philosophy, it is necessary that the mind adopt a discipline of impartiality and sobriety. It must then be raised to an exalted mental condition through the process of reasoning. This intellectual function is required for the comprehension of recondite and invisible truths of and .

Maimonides gives us the answer.
Vj ~ That's a rather foolish answer, but of course, you can't do any better because Maimonides is a fool himself. The wise know, for everything that is made there is a maker.

Maimonides taught that people should rely on themselves and not G-d.

Vj ~ Yes individual effort is necessary, but it is hopeless without the proper instructions. Here is Dayanand's, where is Maimonides?

People must learn from all others no matter what their religion.
Vj ~ I have learned (comparative study) all religions, except mine, are false.
"If all the religions of the world were in harmony with each other there would have been one religion but since they all oppose each other there is one true religion." Swami Dayanand
And what have you learned from my religion so far?

Maimonides felt that the truth is the truth no matter what its source, and we are obligated to seek truth.
Vj ~ Truth is one the same, for all in all ages, from the very beginning to the end. It can only have one source. That source must be free of historical references because it is for all creations, past, present and future ones. So far this universe and the Vedas have been around for nearly 2 billion years. Maimonides is a dunce and so are you, Jonathan.

I do not comprehend what you wrote.

Vj ~ I told you there is no short cut to wisdom, perhaps if you start now you can in 20 years' time.

If you are referring to sin, the word “sin” is not found in the Bible.
Vj ~ How could it, when the Bible itself is all sin? It begins with disobedience, murder, adultery, incest, etc. and it goes on and on. Only revelation can enlighten us to what is virtue and sin.


I take a different approach

Vj ~ It is the reason you don't know what is a sin.


Re: We need to think about Maimonides

I will try to write more fully in a few days. In the interim, I will tell you that Maimonides felt that people should improve themselves and society.
Vj ~ This is why the truth will always be problematic for the ignorant. dayanan felt that people should improve themselves by doing less of reading and writing and think (reason) more.

He says, in studying the systems of philosophy, it is necessary that the mind adopt a discipline of impartiality and sobriety. It must then be raised to an exalted mental condition through the process of reasoning. This intellectual function is required for the comprehension of recondite and invisible truths of and .

Maimonides gives us the answer.
Vj ~ That's a rather foolish answer, but of course, you can't do any better because Maimonides is a fool himself. The wise know, for everything that is made there is a maker.

Maimonides taught that people should rely on themselves and not G-d.

Vj ~ Yes individual effort is necessary, but it is hopeless without the proper instructions. Here is Dayanand's, where is Maimonides?

People must learn from all others no matter what their religion.
Vj ~ I have learned (comparative study) all religions, except mine, are false.
"If all the religions of the world were in harmony with each other there would have been one religion but since they all oppose each other there is one true religion." Swami Dayanand
And what have you learned from my religion so far?

Maimonides felt that the truth is the truth no matter what its source, and we are obligated to seek truth.
Vj ~ Truth is one the same, for all in all ages, from the very beginning to the end. It can only have one source. That source must be free of historical references because it is for all creations, past, present and future ones. So far this universe and the Vedas have been around for nearly 2 billion years. Maimonides is a dunce and so are you, Jonathan.

I do not comprehend what you wrote.
Vj ~ I told you there is no short cut to wisdom, perhaps if you start now you can in 20 years' time.

If you are referring to sin, the word “sin” is not found in the Bible.
Vj ~ How could it, when the Bible itself is all sin? It begins with disobedience, murder, adultery, incest, etc. and it goes on and on. Only revelation can enlighten us to what is virtue and sin.


I take a different approach

Vj ~ It is the reason you don't know what is a sin.


Re: We need to think about Maimonides

I will try to write more fully in a few days. In the interim, I will tell you that Maimonides felt that people should improve themselves and society.
Vj ~ This is why the truth will always be problematic for the ignorant. Dayanand felt that people should improve themselves by doing less of reading and writing and think (reason) more.

He says, in studying the systems of philosophy, it is necessary that the mind adopt a discipline of impartiality and sobriety. It must then be raised to an exalted mental condition through the process of reasoning. This intellectual function is required for the comprehension of recondite and invisible truths of and .

Maimonides gives us the answer.
Vj ~ That's a rather foolish answer, but of course, you can't do any better because Maimonides is a fool himself. The wise know, for everything that is made there is a maker.

Maimonides taught that people should rely on themselves and not G-d.
Vj ~ Yes individual effort is necessary, but it is hopeless without the proper instructions. Here is Dayanand's, where is Maimonides?

People must learn from all others no matter what their religion.
Vj ~ I have learned (comparative study) all religions, except mine, are false.
"If all the religions of the world were in harmony with each other there would have been one religion but since they all oppose each other there is one true religion." Swami Dayanand
And what have you learned from my religion so far?

Maimonides felt that the truth is the truth no matter what its source, and we are obligated to seek truth.
Vj ~ Truth is one the same, for all in all ages, from the very beginning to the end. It can only have one source. That source must be free of historical references because it is for all creations, past, present and future ones. So far this universe and the Vedas have been around for nearly 2 billion years. Maimonides is a dunce and so are you, Jonathan.

I do not comprehend what you wrote.
Vj ~ I told you there is no short cut to wisdom, perhaps if you start now you can in 20 years' time.

If you are referring to sin, the word “sin” is not found in the Bible.
Vj ~ How could it, when the Bible itself is all sin? It begins with disobedience, murder, adultery, incest, etc. and it goes on and on. Only revelation can enlighten us to what is virtue and sin.

I take a different approach
Vj ~ It is the reason you don't know what is a sin.

Re: We need to think about Maimonides

Dayanand felt that people should improve themselves by doing less of reading and writing and think (reason) more.
Shocking as this may sound, Maimonides already taught the same teaching hundreds of years earlier. Maimonides also felt that people should improve themselves and society by developing their intelligence. Neither passive piety (yoga) nor reading religious text (vedas) bring people to G-d. Near the end of the Guide, Maimonides disparages those who study religious text in solitude, preventing any improvement or contribution to society. Such a person doesn’t even come close to G-d.

Maimonides is a fool himself. The wise know, for everything that is made there is a maker.
Many scholars disagree, writing: “before him, there was none such … and after him there will be none such.” This indicates that not even Dayanand reached the same level of intelligence as Maimonides.

Yes individual effort is necessary, but it is hopeless without the proper instructions. Here is Dayanand's, where is Maimonides?
Maimonides felt that people should improve themselves and society and not rely on G-d, miracles, or religious texts. To do otherwise is an insult to human intelligence.

And what have you learned from my religion so far?
I am currently writing a review of your book. I will post it tomorrow.

So far this universe and the Vedas have been around for nearly 2 billion years.
Science tends to disagree. According to scientist, the universe has been around for about 15 billion years. But that's ok, the Vedas were only off by a few billion years. Amazingly, the Vedas have been around for only 2 billion years despite the lack of the invention of language. One would have to wonder where the Vedas were being kept since humans have not yet evolved by this point. In reality, Gavin Flood sums up mainstream estimates, according to which the Rigveda was compiled from as early as 1500 BCE over a period of several centuries, seeing many developments. Flood 1996, p. 37

I told you there is no short cut to wisdom, perhaps if you start now you can in 20 years' time.
Reviewing your book is a good start. In essence, people should help themselves. This is the meaning of the tale of the Garden of Eden: people need to work hard, the sweat of their brows. Nothing worthwhile comes easy; if it is easy, it is probably wrong.

Only revelation can enlighten us to what is virtue and sin.
You follow the rules of morality, the way of the stupid masses. Maimonides taught to make decisions not on morality but intelligence. (more on that later)

It begins with disobedience, murder, adultery, incest, etc. and it goes on and on.
I covered this in my review of your book, which I will post tomorrow.

It is the reason you don't know what is a sin.
I answered this. You err by your lack of knowledge of natural law. Maimonides stood in stark constant and was opposed to the childish notion of reward and punishment. The world works according to the laws of nature. One of these laws is that every act has consequences. Note that G-d does not wipe out the misdeed, the consequences do not go away. French philosopher Gersonides (Ralbag) wrote that acts have consequences and they can have long-lasting effects, even for generations.

Re: We need to think about Maimonides

Neither passive piety (yoga) nor reading religious text (vedas) bring people to G-d.
Vj ~ So you're saying Maimonides practiced yoga and read the Vedas?

Vj ~ The wise know, for everything that is made there is a maker.
Many scholars disagree
Vj ~ So you're saying these "scholars" are wiser than the wise?

and not rely on G-d, miracles, or religious texts.
Vj ~ So you're saying the Bible is not about God, miracles, or religious texts?

Science tends to disagree.
Vj ~ So Einstein is an idiot for saying science is lame and your religion (Judaism) is blind?
"Science without religion is lame and religion without science is blind." Einstein

Nothing worthwhile comes easy;
Vj ~ So you're saying my 20 years of individual effort (study and practice) which required me to rise as early as 3 am were easy?

You follow the rules of morality
Vj ~ So you're saying a man's conduct isn't measured by morality?

One of these laws is that every act has consequences.
Vj ~ Sounds more like the law of karma and not nature. What you sow that you reap!

PS
When it comes to philosophy, a man who reads and writes all his life is an idiot.

"Philosophy and reason will remain the most beautiful sanctuary they have always been for the select few." Albert Einstein

Re: We need to think about Maimonides

So you're saying Maimonides practiced yoga and read the Vedas?
Maimonides did not rely on G-d (Vedas) or ritual (yoga). He was a philosopher and relied on reason (thinking).

So you're saying these "scholars" are wiser than the wise?
Are you saying the "wise" were smarter than Einstein? Maimonides did not think Jews are better than other people. All people were created in the image of G-d. Maimonides acknowledged that people who are not Jewish of all religions, even pagans, can learn the truth and reach perfection. But the point is not to be missed: Indians are not the exception. To say otherwise would make both you and your god a racist.

So you're saying the Bible is not about God, miracles, or religious texts?
The Torah is not G-d-oriented. It is human-oriented. Although it does teach about G-d being formless and one. People need to realize that they cannot rely on miracles; the miracles in the biblical books should be understood figuratively.

There is only one G-d in Judaism but the Vedas are polytheistic.

So Einstein is an idiot for saying science is lame?
Albert Einstein said, “I believe in Spinoza's God, who reveals himself in the lawful harmony of the world, not in a God who concerns himself with the fate and the doings of mankind.”

Baruch Spinoza borrowed his philosophy from Abraham ibn Ezra and Maimonides.

Vj ~ So you're saying my 20 years of individual effort (study and practice) which required me to rise as early as 3 am were easy?
That depends if you ever spend any time thinking. If you did not study philosophy and science but read religious text (Vedas) in solitude and contributed nothing to society, it was a waste of time.

So you're saying a man's conduct isn't measured by morality?
Morality says not to speed red lights and help old ladies cross the street. But what if one is pursued by a murderer and has to speed the light to save their life or the lady is crazy and harmful if touched. Morality is faulty. It is a set of rules for the masses, people who do not think. Maimonides taught that people should act intelligently, evaluate the situation and act accordingly.

Sounds more like the law of karma and not nature. What you sow that you reap!
karma is immoral, as, in the case of a natural disaster, the people killed deserved their fate. This is an injustice, and can never be the act of a moral and just G-d. I take a different approach. The world operates under the laws of nature, not karma.

When it comes to philosophy, a man who reads and writes all his life is an idiot.
Maimonides would agree! According to Aristotle, a person who focuses his time in contemplative study (Vedas), neglect to improve themselves or society, refraining from proper habits in the avoidance of the joys of this world in extream isolation are not religious and certainly not pious – nor can they be called appropriately human.

Aristotle defined what it meant to be human. To be human is to develop the intellect. It is what separates us from animals. To do otherwise would be almost not human, or to put it differently, it would be less than human.

PS
People are not made in the “image” of G-d because G-d has no body and is one. People are not made in terms of likeness but in intellect.

Re: We need to think about Maimonides

Vj ~ So you're saying Maimonides practiced yoga and read the Vedas?
Maimonides did not rely on G-d (Vedas) or ritual (yoga).
Vj ~ If he didn't how would he know that "neither passive piety (yoga) nor reading religious text (vedas) didn't bring people to God?

Are you saying the "wise" were smarter than Einstein?
Vj ~ If I answer in the affirmative would you know how smart the wise are?

There is only one G-d in Judaism but the Vedas are polytheistic.
Vj ~ So you've read the Vedas?

So Einstein is an idiot for saying science is lame?
"Science without religion is lame and religion without science is blind." Einstein


Albert Einstein said, “I believe in Spinoza's God,
Vj ~ You did not answer the question, dumb-a-s-s! Is it because your religion is in his blind's list?

That depends if you ever spend any time thinking.
Vj ~ Didn't Maimonides tell you Raj yoga is about deep mental contemplation, where the mind alternates between what is true and what is false?

When it comes to philosophy, a man who reads and writes all his life is an idiot.
Maimonides would agree!
Vj ~ So you agree you're an idiot?

PS
I put together this website because I have something to say and I know a fool's purpose when one shows up.

"Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something." Plato

Review of Vj’s book (Part One)

We will go threw a few (but of course not all) of Vj’s claims. In his book, he does a lot of writing but no thinking, as we will see shortly. The quotes in red are from his book.


“god absorbs into himself or contains the universe… the universe is inside god.”
One of G-d's attributes is that G-d does not change. The Vedas assume a change in G-d, a fallacy.
People cannot have a religious experience with G-d nor connect with Him with yoga or after death.


“The sun was moving and the earth was flat.” 
This is not so. It is, however, an excellent example of people accepting an idea without thinking because it seems simple. Aristotle knew the earth was round, as did Columbus and Maimonides. You then miraculously equate all Christians with the evils of slavery. Yet men like William Wilberforce, an abolitionist, was a Christian. You conveniently omit him in order to push your agenda.


Raziman, a pseudonym for an Indian scientist (Ph.D.) counters pseudoscience. He is a top contributor to Quora and admin. Raziman writes, “Vedas contain no physics and no relativity. It is intellectually dishonest to make these claims as there is nothing special about the Vedas." If, however, you ever found the remedy to cancer, it would save humanity much effort. But there is no science in the Vedas.

“Scientists today are reincarnations of Vedic-” 
This is a big assertion and is blind faith. As with all other suppositions, this is pure speculation. Stephen Hawking (an atheist) was irreligious. Jews on average have the highest IQ without Vedic revelation. They have Maimonides’ rationalism.

Vedas are anti-science, claiming the world to be only 2 billion years old. Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan asserts that there were other worlds before Adam and Eve were created, accepting the scientific findings that the world is billions of years old. The Vedas are off by a few billion years. Additionally, you write that humans coexisted with dinosaurs and that a human footprint was millions of years old. All your ideas about evolution are traced from Christian creationism, ideas that modern science rejects. Yet again, you dislike modern science. You prefer blind faith.

Your critique of the Bible is no better. You attack the biblical patriarchs for their misdeeds, yet Dayanand himself was not free of sin. No man is free of sin. Anyone who tells you differently is a liar. For Dayanand was poisoned sixteen times before he was either poisoned by the Maharaja's (King) concubine or he committed suicide. Either way, there was no karma.


Does it make sense to believe in extraordinary people totally unlike normal mortals? Ordinary people are not extraordinary; isn’t reading about superhuman characters as efficacious as reading a novel with fairies? In any event, the biblical characters are parables. For example, Arnold B. Ehrlich, Bible scholar, and rabbi felt that King Saul and King David never existed. Thus, the Bible is also free of historic references (if it matters to you).

Lastly, G-d is not revealed in nature or history. Thus G-d or devils are not the cause of evil. What we consider evil has one of three sources. One is that people harm themselves when they step outside a cold day. The other is when people harm others, such as when Hitler decided to expand Germany, killing millions. The third is the laws of nature which are good for the earth as a whole, even though these laws harm individuals frequently. For example, hurricanes clean the earth but can kill people residing near the proximity.

G-d's message to Job is that the world is like a whirlwind, operating under natural law. Thus, it is a fallacy to think that the world was only created for humans. There is no such thing as a personal G-d. (Also, why believe in Karma when science provides an explanation?

Review of Vj’s book (Part Two)

Many religious people accept divine revelation. This faith was introduced by Paul. Paul wanted to convert many pagans to Christianity. He taught that people surrender to G-d’s wisdom, ignoring their intelligence.

British philosopher, Bertrand Russell quotes Roman Catholic philosopher Thomas Aquinas saying, “If the highest aim of a captain were to preserve his ship [have faith], he would keep it in port forever.” He taught that truth is known through reason, which is a natural revelation. He taught that matters such as G-d’s existence, truth, and goodness can be understood through reason. Thus, the Hebrew Bible requires proper behavior, not faith. Revelation did not cease; it is ongoing. Revelation is in the development of science, not religious text.

The Principle of Gradual Development

In Guide 3:32, Maimonides writes that everything develops gradually, as according to the laws of nature. For if we are to imagine that the Aryans possessed super technology, why can no one find these ancient computers, flying crafts, or the factories that built them? the answer is because they did not exist.

Maimonides was convinced, as are most scientists today, that people of the past were ordinary human beings with no intellectual powers or revelation. Science has been progressing since ancient times. Maimonides even admits that future generations will understand science better than he does. Science agrees that IQs are increasing. Thus, modern scientific studies have confirmed Maimonides’ impressive perceptive thinking.

Maimonides also felt that people have a duty to improve. Thus, Maimonides rejected the doctrine of the “decline of the generations,” a view Dayanand accepts. Dayanand was pessimistic. Dayanand has gone so far as to apply the notion to everything, even science, and mathematics. He ignored, even disdained the findings of recent science, such as evolution. Thus Dayanand is a good example of a thinking man who stopped thinking because he felt that his religion required him to do so.

You write that the pyramids were built with advanced technology to guide jets. This is pure speculation. It is also problematical, for no serious academic scholar or professor of archaeology would assume this. Furthermore, the Egyptians themselves document how they constructed the pyramids as demonstrated by French architect Jean-Pierre Houdin. Had ancient Aryan civilization possessed immense technology, it should be easy for someone to present that technology to the scientific community, prompting scientists to abandon their current views, however, no one can cite such a commuter probably because it never existed. It is pure nonsense.

Additionally, JB hare writing for the Sacred Text Archive said the following of the craft in the Vedas: “[They are] absurdly non-aerodynamic… brutalist wedding cakes, with minarets, huge ornithopter wings, and dinky propellers.” He questioned whether Dayanand had any grasp of basic physics.

In short, Dayanand's claim is a fantasy. It captures the imagination of his adherents without the necessity to bring proof for the slightest assertion because there are none. As Christopher Hitchens rightly asserted. ”What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence."

Review of Vj’s book (Part Three)

The following are some rational ideas proposed by Maimonides.

What does Maimonides teach?

1. Maimonides emphasized that people should understand the world in a scientific manner.
2. That people have a duty to develop their intelligence.
3. 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.
4. Angels and demons do not exist. G-d is all-powerful and needs no helpers. They are forces of nature.
5. G-d speaks to no one. It is a person with higher intelligence. Thus, Prophecy is a natural event.
6. Maimonides did not believe in miracles. The biblical stories are parables that teach moral lessons.
7. G-d is transcendental, formed the world out of preexisting matter, placed in it the laws of nature, and withdrew.
8. G-d does not have anthropomorphisms or anthropopathisms.
9. Maimonides emphasizes that God has no body and is one. G-d has no emotions and does not become angry when you sin.
10. Maimonides says that whenever the Bible says G-d did something it is a metaphor for the laws of nature.
11. G-d is the ultimate cause of the source because G-d created the laws of nature.
12. G-d does not hear prayer and does not redeem history, for G-d does not change.
13. Observing religion does not change nature nor does it transforms the person who fulfills religious teachings.

Are Jews chosen?

Maimonides “did not think Jews were inherently better than other people."

What Does Holiness Mean?

Can the soil turn holy? No. Holiness is only when people use things in a proper way. Holiness is the result of actions.

A Messiah

The messianic age is a gradual evolutionary process. It is a natural period and people should work to create such an age. Maimonides writes: “Do not think that the messiah must perform miracles. Do not think the laws of nature will change.” The messiah will be a human who lives and dies as all humans.

Reincarnation

Genetics, disease, drugs and diet can all effect an embryo, and are scientifically proven. Reincarnation is not proven. It is blind faith and is pure speculation. Why imagine a reason, when science provides an explanation? Thus it makes no sense that a person would want to be reborn at a lower and less satisfying level. It is a mystical notion, alien to rational Judaism.

Summary

Vj would have us believe the Bible was always taken literally and ignore the rationalism of Maimonides. But the truth is that the rabbis always understood the Bible allegorically and we cannot ignore Maimonides. Thus, Maimonides was more reasonable than Dayanand, as clearly shown above.

"the stupid are cocksure"

We will go threw a few (but of course not all) of Vj’s claims. In his book, he does a lot of writing but no thinking,
Vj ~ No need for part two Johathan. This is your problem.

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

You're definitely not an atheist.

"Only the wisest and the stupidest of men don't change." Confucius

PS
The source of wisdom is revealed knowledge.

Maimonides: The Exceptional Mind

You're definitely not an atheist.

So, are you saying you an atheist? I am not an atheist.

Maimonides Reason Above All

"The trouble with the world the stupid are—“

You would like to revisit Feb 16, 2019 - 1:00PM:

Vj ~ let me explain, "cocksure" simply means the wise are absolutely sure…
Turk ~ That leaves you the only stupid one who's cocksure, and bragging to know.

"Vj ~ 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.

By your own admission, you admit you are cocksure. So you’re stupid. Definitely not intelligent.

“The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.“ British philosopher, Bertrand Russell

This solves much. Also, you never replied to my criticism because you have no answers.
This has been an excellent conversation.

PS
Vedic revelation is pure nonsense.

Re: Maimonides Reason Above All

Vedic revelation is pure nonsense.
Vj ~ It is for the stupid!

you never replied to my criticism
Vj ~ Why should I, when there is no cure for a fool?

"Only the wisest and the stupidest of men never change." Confucius

Re: Maimonides Reason Above All

Vedic revelation is pure nonsense.
Vj ~ It is for the stupid!

So you're saying you're stupid and that's why it's for you?

"We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid." Benjamin Franklin

Do you agree with this?

Hi Vijai Singh,

The following are some ideas about God. They are thought provoking because they make us think. Please read them carefully.

Do you agree that God is transcendent, having formed the world out of preexisting and eternal matter, placed in it the laws of nature, and does not interferes with human affairs. That angels and demons do not exist. God is all-powerful and needs no helpers. That God never spoke to anyone. It follows, therefore, that God does not hear prayer and does not redeem history, for God does not change. That God has no body and is one. That God has no emotions. That miracles do not occur. Natural law is fixed and needs no change. People should understand the world as it actually is, in a scientific manner. That people have a duty to develop their intelligence?

My question:

Do you agree with everything in total or in part or not at all? This can be a yes or no answer.

Daniel

Re: Do you agree with this?

Do you agree with everything in total or in part or not at all? This can be a yes or no answer.
Vj ~ Hello Daniel! Must be related to Jonathan.

Where in my work does it say otherwise?

What I know is from God (revelation) and what the ignorant know isn't and that explains why they are stupid.

Re: Maimonides Reason Above All

So you're saying you're stupid and that's why it's for you?
Vj ~ In the eyes of a fool, the wise are stupid and revelation (Vedas) is nonsense.

"We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid." Benjamin Franklin
Vj ~ Actually there is no effort at all if one chooses to remain stupid. The opposite requires effort.

"There is no turpitude in consuming alcohol, drugs, meat, committing adultery or entertaining erroneous thoughts for that is the natural way of created beings, but abstinence brings great reward." Manu

The practice of abstinence requires hard work.

Re: Do you agree with this?

Thank you for sharing your thinking. I think that we are in agreement. I agree with what you wrote.

Thanks for your help.
Be well.

1 2