Religion In A Clubby Hole

This is an interesting satire that every jehadi Islamist must read....................

HURIES OF HEAVEN:
WHETHER COMPANION OR MATE?

GANU MIAH IN A HOAX :
Ganu Miah, alias Alhaj Moulana Syed Allama Ganu Miah Meijdi (this is his shortest name that his followers use) fell in a hoax to think, whether the Huries of the heaven were companions or mates. He raised the question to Alhaj Makbul Bepari, the father in law of his daughter. Makbul was of the opinion that the two meant the same thing. But that could satisfy our Ganu Miah.

Ganu Miah said, in the heaven there were provisions for (01) “Gardens with rivers and Azwajun Muhtahharatun (Q. 2:25). (02) Rivers of water, milk and clarified honey (Q. 47:15). (03) Gardens and vineyards and maidens with … (Q. 40-45). Then he said, he has tasted water, milk and honey many a times. So, whatever good be the taste of these items in the heaven, he had absolutely no intention to get those in the heaven.
Makbul smiled and endeavored to tell something through the biased twinkling of an eye. He said, Well, there will be Huries (maidens) in the heaven. Won’t they give heavenly pleasure ?
Ganu Miah replied – No. Those Huries would act as companions. What enjoyable shall I get from them ?
Makbul said – Beai, who would tell you ‘no’ if you want to enjoy them in the heaven ?
Ganu Miah said – Beai, how can you tell like this ? Don’t you know the Gandam story ?
Instantly Makbul had a dark face.

THE GANDAM STORY :
When he was a child Ganu Miah believed, Gandam was a forbidden fruit. But after he went for reading in the religious school, his teachers and friends taught him with elaborate details that it was the intimate relation of man and woman. He was told, since the story of Adam and Hawa was to be delivered publicly to all including children, people used to mention Gandam as fruit, when the children understood like that and the adults knew the real thing.

Nowadays, whenever he goes for religious deliberations, Ganu Miah invariably explains to his audience what Gandam means and the Gandam acts of Adam and Hawa. As a matter of fact Ganu Miah is renowned for his open discussions (of course with nasty words) of Gandam. In this matter he has mixed experience. Some of the invitees tell him, ‘Huzor, please explain the Gandam incidents with more details’. On some occasions the invitees tell, “Huzor, please use avoid the Gandam incident’. Ganu Miah’s question was “Why ?” The invitees reply, “Hindus and Christians live in the adjacent area. What would they think of our religion to learn, such topics and languages form part of our religion ?”
Both Ganu Miah and Makbul were aware, intercourse was a prohibited item in the heaven during the time of Adam and Hawa. Even personalities like Adam and Hawa were expelled from the heaven for doing that. In such a reality, how can the ordinary people expect to do that with the virgin Huris in the heaven ?

LAST RAY OF HOPE :
All on a sudden Makbul turned cheerful and said, Beai, what makes you so disheartened ? I believe god will give us permission to that. Don’t you remember, God said he would give “Azwajun Muhtahharatun (Q. 2:25) and high-bosomed virgins for companions (Q. 78:31) in the heaven ?
Ganu Miah laughed in despair and said, My Beai, did you forget, god gave Hawa to Adam as companion and wife. But even these persons were not given permission for intercourse. I know, in the holy book god has said, Hurs will be given as companions. Did he ever say anything about intercourse ?
Makbul nodded his head and said – No, he did not.
Ganu Miah added saying, In fact he cannot do that. How can he relax the rule by which he expelled his favorite and super man and women like Adam and Hawa ?

AMIDST THE SEA OF DARKNESS :
Ganu Miah calculated in his mind what and how much he invested for going to the heaven. He spent more than 10 valuable years of his life in prayer, 3 years in reading the religious books, over 3 lac Taka in Zakat and 5 lac Taka in pilgrimage and so on. Why ? What for ? Because he wanted to go to heaven. Now say, he is allowed to go to the heaven. There he will get water, wine, milk and honey. Also he would get many Huries. But what is the pleasure in getting so many Huries as companies unless he can enjoy them ? ‘Seeing so many beautiful ladies around without permission to do anything’ is definitely worse than living in the hell. He disclosed his mind to his Beai. Immediately Makbul expressed his consent by nodding.
Makbul said, Don’t get disheartened Beai. You will have no problem there in darkness.
Ganu Miah said, Beai, I know that well. I know : “If a huri looks down from her abode in heaven onto the earth, the whole distance shall be filled with light and fragrance (MISHKAT Vol. 3, Page 83-97). I also know, “A huri is a most beautiful young woman with a transparent body. The marrow of her bones is visible like the interior lines of pearls and rubies. She looks like red wine in a white glass” (TIRMZI, Vol. 2, Pp 35-40). But what I will do with the searchlight-eyed, transparent-bodied woman, if I cannot do that?
Makbul could not collect words to reply. He felt extremely ashamed to learn, being such a learned personality of religion he did not know the vital information that, irrespective of their number, beauty and other qualities hurries would be given in the heaven only as companion and nothing beyond. He searched the huge collection of his religious knowledge to find out something that could give himself and his Beai little consolation that they were not so fool as to make such vast investment only for water, milk, wine, honey and un-enjoyable companions. He felt like tearing his hair and beard. But he did not do that because he was aware, it was the God who would tear his beards and hair before allowing him in the heaven. He remembered the writings in IHYA ULOOM ED-DIN by IMAM GHAZZALI, Volume 4, Page 431, where they mention, “Muhammad said, “The inmates of Paradise will be beardless and hairless. They will be sixty cubits long and seven cubits broad”. Makbul imagined his and his Beai’s “beardless and hairless, sixty cubits long and seven cubits broad” body to suffer from the fire of the hell, because they were surrounded by “72 + 72 huris with no permission to do that.
LITTLE HOPE STILL :
At this stage Ganu Miah asked, Beai, in the heaven I shall get 72 huries. Also I shall get “500 Hurs, 4,000 unmarried women and 8,000 widowed women” (Imam Ghazzali: Ihya Uloom Ed-Din. Volume 4, Page- 430). I know I shall not get permission because even Adam and Hawa did not get it. Now tell me, what would God do if I do it with those women ?
Makbul laughed with pain and said, “Sorry Beai, you forgot one important sura. God knows your mind much before you. So, he has done what is needed to keep you away. In fact you cannot do that even if you wish or try.
Ganu Miah asked, Why ?
Makbul replied, Because, according to TIRMZI, volume 2 (page 35-40) “A houri is free from the routine physical disabilities of an ordinary woman such as menstruation, menopause, urinal and offal discharge, child bearing and the related pollution”. Do you remember that ?
Ganu Miah said, Yes I do. I also remember, what the great Imam Ghazzali told in Ihya Uloom Ed-Din, in Volume 4 (Page-430). He said, “According to Prophet Muhammad (SW) the Hurs of Paradise will be pure women—free of menstruation, urine, stool, cough and children”. Am I correct ?
Makbul replied : Yes Beai, you are correct.
Ganu Miah – But what these suras have to do with our problem ?
Makbul – Look Beai, God does not create anything without a purpose. Do you agree ?
Ganu Miah – Of course I do.
Makbul – In that case why should he create hurries like ordinary women like your wives ? Are not the hurries different because they do not have menstruation, urine, stool, cough and children ?
GANU MIAH FINDS NO HOPE :
Makbul’s statement broke the heart of Ganu Miah. He realized, the great investment he made in this life for heavenly pleasure after his death was gone to dogs.
KAMAL HOSSAIN

Re: # 177
`` I dont know why atheists are so afraid of God(which according to them doesnt exist) that even His name by someone causes them to sit up and look around. ``


Its not only atheists who do that. And the only reason that comes to my mind, is the abhorent crimes committed around the world in *H*is name.

A person generally turns to atheism because of one reason. He has a feeling that some grave injustice has been done to him for no fault of his. Like some sort of physical disability or pre-mature death of some near-one like child or a parent or a failure in carrer inspite of all sweating etc.He then feels that if so-called God is so magnificient, benevolent, kind hearted, merciful, loving so on and so forth then why alone he(the person) was chosen for the punishment?

The above has been explained by a learned saint which I can share with you all. Of course it is a matter of belief.

The learned man says that God loves good deeds and not bad deeds. If someone does bad deeds throught out his life ,he may not pay for it but...................... But he will not escape the wrath of God. If he doesnt payup in his lifetime, then somebody down the line will have to pay for it. Suppose, I commit murders, dacoity, exploitation of the poor etc. etc., then it may be possible that I may not pay for it but somebody down the line of my generation, my son, grandson, greatgrand son etc. will pay for my misdeeds. And if I dont want that to happen, I should not do wrong things in my life.

The learned man further says that when someone has to pay for the misdeeds of his ancestors, he should take it that he is paying up the loan of his ancestors and while paying up he is cleaning his future generations of the sins of his ancestors.

It is upto to you to believe in the above or not.

We are living in the information age which is supposed to be a scientific-technological miracle. The world is overflowing with information of all sorts. There is hardly anything which exists in the Laboratries, the results of which are not known to the outside world. Except for those experiments/reasearches which are still going on.

Exploration of God cannot be the only objective of mankind as on date. Mankind faces much more hurdles , diseases, poverty etc. Majority of the people have to work in those areas i.e. in the service of mankind rather than the service of God. No doubt.

But that does not mean that mankind should abandon God or refuse to believe in it. It is not going to serve any purpose. It is everyone`s personal prerogative and nobody should have any objection to one`s personal beliefs.

I dont know why atheists are so afraid of God(which according to them doesnt exist) that even His name by someone causes them to sit up and look around.

Most of the supporters of god, are obsessed with the `quantum mechanics `, `big bang`, `the property of matter and energy` and strangely enough,..er...e=mc squared (and nothing deeper than that). Stunning the rest of us who did not know that it applied to the world of gods (and by definition, ghosts - and goblins too!)

Half baked scientists, we are told, are useless to themselves and to others.

Hence, I would humbly (like all other atheists normally are) suggest, that since those on this board are hardly scientists of standing to debate these questions authoratatively, (or would nt like to, with people who hardly scratch the surface), they would do themselves (and us) a favour, by debating such heady stuff with employed geologists or physicists who will not only teach them the proper equations, but probably teach them a thing or two about atheism as well.

With whatever knowledge of science we have today, if the idea of God doesnt seem to be plausible then the idea that this creation has come out of nothing is also implausible. The most vocal critic of God like the Late-Carl Sagan also reach a dead end when they are unable to answer from where this creation has come out from??

One of the forum-member has pointed that if the property of Universe is such that the matter or energy or space can come out of void or vaccum, then the whole science will collapse. All physical and thermodynamical laws will go become redundant and the world will go haywire because then anything can come out of anything. Humans can then come out of tress, money can flow from your mouth and water can come out of desert sand. This seems impossible. The universe ,the matter, the energry et-al behave in a particular fashion universally. Hydrogen atom will not change whether it is in the glass of water or burning in a distant star.

The unique property of matter and energy universally indicate(without exception) that they have come out of a single source. The Hydrogen atom in water on earth and in a distant star has a single source. If one goes deeper and deeper then with whatever angle you look at it, it comes to the conclusion that something must have pre-existed the creation and all creation has come out with that something. Otherwise it is not possible.

Now the only question is where is that something now ?? Whether that something has dissolved in the creation or it has gone in the sleeping state after the creation or it exists parallely with the creation though in a plane which we humans cannot percieve with our senses or with the knowledge which we have as on date?

Re: # 169

Romair:

``There are certain questions, which it will not, ``someday`` answer. This has already been proven by science itself.......I am discussing the later point, not the former.......... ``

Science hasn`t proven any such thing. The reason you have forwarded has been put forward by theologians for centuries, to pull down scintific thoughts and many scientists have given their lives on burning stakes. Theologians have wrongly believed that people can live their entire life through believing in their religious belief, and therefore, do not need the probity and healthy cynicism that science permits. They have wrongly seen such freedom in human thoughts to be a threat to their existence.

Healthy probity and cynicism in science are allowed. These tools when applied by scientist have always pushed the limiy of knowledge, and have discovered new questions to be answered. Thus the set of unanswered questions shall never be empty, as science says the knowledge is limitless. Therefore, there will always be unanswered questions.

The developments in scientific thoughts are neither logical nor orderly. Lot has depended on how the society commits its resources to find answers for which questions, because while knowledge is recognized as limitless, the human resources are not unlimited. Scientists at best have 40 years of productive life, and that is generation and half. Thus a kind of continuity has indeed been maintained.

Unlike science, religion does put a limit beyond which believers cannot question. This is called belief system, according to me. For example, muslims believe in the finality of prophet and his message, and believers cannot care about implications of such a belief, because they are not allowed to question.

Another way to describe would be that each human has a thought space. One end of the thought space is the belief system, while the other end is determined by ability probe and question. Within these limits, each person tries to live life. A simple villager in Pakistan may be very happy with the without questioning and praying five times every day, just as he would not question his need to work and bring food home. However, when he walks from home to the field and observes little girls going to school, he may probe why not work harder and send his daughters to school. He may then decides work harder to push his limit on the other end.

Therefore, some may have very narrow thought space between these limits and be very happy also. While others may have pushed the belief system way far on the belief end, and through probity, observation, analysis and aciton may have pushed the limit way farther on the other end. This model of thought space fits human beings quite well.

However, problem comes when a group of persons with overlapping thought space, institutionalize their thoughts and go out to enforce on the other. This is easily observable in religions, but has also happened in science. Einstein`s refusal of accept quantum mechanics and rejection of Heisenberg`s principle of uncertainty, and then coining the term ``God does not play dice``, is an example that many scientists now believe, had slowed down the scientific development. An example on the religious end is clear from interactions at Chowk. Where you see many hindus having endless questions which degenerate into snide and insulting remarks about something many muslims on Chowk have concluded and accepted to be unquestionable truth and foundation of their belief system. The good thing is that in this thought space, the science, philosophy and religion blend, and produce new knowledge. This process is assured to happen for ever, as long as humans exist in the Universe.

More important question that comes to my mind is ``In knowledge society where access to knowledge and communication is becoming easier by the day, how long hinduism can survive with caste system, and Isalm can force its follower to believe in the finality of the messenger and message, and hence in the finality of 1,400 yer old human thought and knowledge, how long?

Anil

teshay, too to bara mazhabi hay yaar.....

Re: # 19

That is the real problem, dear bolta_aeena. People usually do not treat god to be a destinaion or an ideal to be attained but just a `keep` (Naoyzbillah) to fulfill their desires without bothering what he thinks of them. They even go so far as to massacre innocent people in the name of their respective gods. Of course they can kill people for many other causes but the religion is perhaps the most convenient handle to massacre innocent people unilaterally. That is perhaps why the Quran Hakeem says ``Those who are lead astray by Allah (or in the name of Allah) can find no guindance at all`` as they then think that they are doing `Jihad` by killing what they treat as `kafirs` which makes `jannat` guaranteed for them.

Romair bhaiya:

aap khuda ke liye science ke peeche lath le ker mat dorhain. koi faida nahin hay.

Science is not an idealogy. It is an activity. And it is a very promising activity. At least much more than religion which also can do wonders but those wonders are usually accompnied by millions murdered and raped.

In your liberal religious rhetoric, when you speculate that laws of physics will break, you are probably trying to sketch the so called Qayamat. Why do you bring such a silly thing to the discussion. How on earth does it matter to you if these laws break some day in future. All I can inform you is that they have never broken in the past and in our life (the most important thing to us) and arn`t likely to break in our lifetime. Why???? How the hell does it concern us in any way?

And then, what good are you trying to achieve by convincing people that science is useless? Is it all that useless? Why are we communicating? Why are we here? (I mean in front of our computers)

My sincere advice is that you contemplate some more.

hamidm mian #160/161: ``are you sure that there is a god ?``

No, I am not sure there is a God. I will never be sure, since I do not know of any way to prove it. However, I do know that science has its limitations. There are certain questions, which it will not, ``someday`` answer. This has already been proven by science itself.......I am discussing the later point, not the former..........

``... and by the way, when did you become an expert on god ?....... since you asked dost mittar for his credentials, let`s see yours ................``

Hmmm.....I will take this as a compliment. For some reason, you think I am an expert on everything. I am, by no means, an expert on God. I, thus, have no credentials. I am only an expert on military training, computer science, bulleh shah, karahi ghosht, punjabi movies, bathroom singing and the seductive art of aromatherapy massage..........

However, I admit my lack of expertise. All I am trying to highlight is the misguided wishful thinking of certain individuals who have conveniently concluded that, one day, science will, itself, turn its own rules on its head. They don`t know how. They just know it will happen, through a miracle...........

`` like i said before what is wrong with simply stating ``we don`t know yet, but we are working on it ``

There is nothing wrong with this. This is what I try to do. However, others aren`t so flexible. They are still stuck on notions that science will establish the concept of magic, someday. To accept what we are working on, we have to first know what can and cannot be done. Science cannot fill the gap I described. It, itself, states that. So hoping, needlessly, that science will someday fill it, is a road to nowhere. What will fill that gap:

I don`t know yet, but I am working on it..............

tahmed,

``To the nob-believers, all religions are based on superstitions or hearsay`` ...... and maulana, pray, what are religions based on if not just that .?....... do you mean to say that it is a scientific ``fact`` that a winged creature flitted into a cave to deliver his message to mo of mecca ......... or is a scientific fact that jesus walked on water and an elephant rode a rat (or was it vice versa ?) ..............

..... here is a scientific fact for you : if i don`t get off my keester and baste the turkey soon it will dry out and my life will be miserable, god or no god ............

...........happy thanksgiving ! .........

Romair:

`` and DM works on his theories that someday, it may proven that energy and matter can be created out of nothing``

Whe did I say that?

Romair:

``What exactly does, ``at least`` not yet mean?``

It means, dear Romair, that I am not as smart as you are. While you seem to know for sure what the scientists are going to discover in the next 100 or 1000 years, I do not claim any such knowledge.

But you have not addressed the question that I have posed several times. Why give the parents the right to indoctrinate their children so that they lose their faculties to objectively reflect on these issues when they become adults? At the very least, this will open the subject to much greater reflection and thought and we would have many more metaphysical theories and open debates than we have now, free from any fear of committing any blasphemy or burning in hell while doing so?

135 by tahmed32
``if it was simply science vs religion, there would be no issue. it is science vs superstition.``

To the non-believers, all religions are based on superstitions or hearsay, at best, so there is really no distinction between the two.

Religious people would have been on stronger grounds if they agreed among themselves, but they do not. Muslims think that Hindu beliefs and customs are superstitions and that Christ being son of God is a superstition; Jews believe that Christ was a false prophet and Mohammad merely stole their religion; Christians go to hinterlansds of India and ``expose`` false Hindu superstitions to their practitioners. Heck, Sattar and you cannot even agree if the Final Message was indeed delivered by the Final Messenger.

Why dont all you religious people come up with one common position and give us unbelievers a clear choice? As it is, you hate each other more than you hate us.

135 by tahmed32
``if it was simply science vs religion, there would be no issue. it is science vs superstition.``

To the nob-believers, all religions are based on superstitions or hearsay, at best, so there is really no distinction between the two.

Religious people would have been on stronger grounds if they agreed among themselves, but they do not. Muslims think that Hindu beliefs and customs are superstitions and that Christ being son of God is a superstition; Jews believe that Christ was a false prophet and Mohammad merely stole their religion; Christians go to hinterlansds of India and ``expose`` false Hindu superstitions to their practitioners. Heck, Sattar and you cannot even agree if the Final Message was indeed delivered by the Final Messenger.

Why dont all you religious people come up with one common position and give us unbelievers a clear choice?