Home

 Articles

 Op-ed

 Authors

 FAQ

 Leaving Islam
 Library
 Gallery
 Comments
 Debates
 Forum

 

 

 Questions about God

Ali Sina vs. a Mystical Muslim

2007/12/17

Erum:
`Hi, my name is Erum (name changed), please do not disclose my name. I spent a large part of my life on your site and was thinking in harmony with Ali Sina's way of thinking until I asked about Allah to a dignified Scholar (Alim-e-Deen) who converted from agnotism to the real and deeper understanding of Islam. He is not just a wavering, illogical dishonest mullah. He opened my eyes with inner reason and the same he can do to you. The following is a response to Ali Sina's article on God that this scholar has prepared. If you are really looking for truth, then I am with you, as truth is the only thing I care about and because one of the names of Allah is Al-Haq. Let us see what truth we find out though. Let me know if you have answers to the following:

These questions are directed to Ali Sina (especially)

This is a response to Ali Sina's articles on God at http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles.htm#god

Ali Sina says he believes in what he calls "The Single Principle". He has a monism view of reality. He believes that God is not conscious/aware of human beings because the universe is tremendously large and that God is simply a principle like gravity, where you must obey the law in every walk of your life. He believes that God is non-being and mother of every being. But my question is - who created the universe? Laws do not act and creation itself is an act. If several years ago the universe was created out of nothingness and if nothingness itself has created everything; then my question is - How can nothingness create something out of nothingness. I mean, even if you consider the evolutionary account into consideration, there has to be something *Something* which has caused this universe (whether orderly or disorderly) into existance.


If something must have caused this universe then what has caused that cause to be? If everything needs a creator why should God be exempt? The notion of first cause does not answer the question of creation.

To answer the question of who created the universe, I would like you to imagine that you take a hose to the top of a mountain and open the tap. The water runs downhill creating a stream that follows the topography of the terrain. The stream sometimes goes to the left, then to the right, in some places it creates a pound and in other places a cascade. Now, who is the designer of that stream? Is it you? Is it God? Or is it the natural law of gravity? You and God had nothing to do with it. The stream is formed through gravity alone. When you think of the features of the earth youíll see that all of them are formed through natural phenomena. Winds, rains, earthquakes have shaped all the features on the earth. All mountains, all rivers, all oceans and continents are the products of natural phenomena. There is no need for a creator to form the features on this earth. The very existence of the earth is also a natural phenomenon. The same can be said about the sun, all other stars and galaxies. This universe operates through natural laws.

It is easy to see that the universe cannot operate without the natural laws but it can without God. The laws are the same. Just as there is no need for a God to create a stream, there is no need for a God to create this universe.

Erum:

For a long period of time I myself had monoistic or rather panthiestic interpretations of God. With half an hour meditation every day, feeling bliss and happiness inside, I was not too much concerned with the outer forms of life. I was conviced that my God is near to me. I also verified my view of life with these verses of Quran:

Quran Verse 50:16 "We are nearer to him than (his) jugular vein"

Quran Verse 24:25 "Allah is the Light of the heavens and the earth."


The Quran is authority for those who believe in it. For those who do not believe in the divine origin of this book, it is no evidence. It is like a Mormon trying to establish the validity of his claim by quoting the book of Joseph Smith. Since you and I do not believe in that book, the quotes from the book of Mormon do not constitute any proof for us.

Erum:

I know there is a spiritual reality of God that can be felt but can not be thought about.


Then it is subjective. It is unreasonable for God to manifest his truth in a subjective way and then punish those who do not feel it. If the consequence of the disbelief in God is eternal damnation, then the evidence must be objective and absolutely undeniable. This is like offering you several dishes, telling you to pick the tastier one and then punish you if you pick the wrong dish? Tastes are subjective, feelings are subjective. It would be injustice if God judged humans based on subjectivity. The evidence must not come through feelings but through logic. There is no way to establish any truth by appealing to feelings. The beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. I have debated with terrorists who are convinced to be right. They base their conviction, not on reason, but on feelings. Feelings can be manipulated. It is utterly foolish to follow oneís feelings.

Erum:

It is when you have expirated all thoughts, all ideologies, all beings, all attributes, all dogmas to arrive to a state of awareness beyond thought. When you are aware of your thoughts rather than thinking them. When you are a silent watcher, having a bird's view over the myraid forms of life and mundane everyday life and detached from whatever that happens to you. This gives you tremendous potential to transform yourself. Practices like meditation, body awareness, prayer and breathing exercises can help you achieve those states. But to consider such acts as end in themselves seem more ego centric than anything else. The very purpose of those acts was to relinquish us from our ego. But if those acts become an act of desiring inner happiness, gaining peace or having any kind of desire, ego is activated again. Therefore a conscious agent, who we call God is needed, so that whatever good deeds we do, we do it beacuse of him and not ourselves. That's why it is said in Quran numerous times that he's All-Aware and Watchful.


I see no relation between the practice of meditation and egotism. Furthermore, assuming they are egotistic exercises, which is an unproven statement, how did you come to conclude that a conscious agent such as God is needed? This is called the fallacy of ignoratio elenchi or irrelevant conclusion. Replace God with Santa Clause and youíll see that the argument remains just as valid. Therefore it is not a valid argument to prove the existence of a conscious God.

Again, quoting from the Quran, is no proof for those who do not believe in that book.

Erum:

Not until we have given all our desires to a conscious, intelligent and all aware God, we can never be free from our ego. Because no matter what you do, without a God you'll be paradoxically coming back to your own ego fulfilment. Until you let good things happen to you instead of forcing or controlling them, unless you let new feelings come into you, you are still playing mental gymnastics and far away from being enlightened. Because it is not knowledge, but wisdom that counts. And wisdom always comes, you have to become a recipient of it (either via prayer or worship or some other means) it is not learned or controlled. The need to control activates ego. Ego keeps on coming for people who fool themselves into believing they are the center of the universe. Until and unless you become really ego-free, by praising, loving, worshipping and be humble to a conscious, intelligent and loving God, you can never really be fully enligtened.


I do not see any correlation between the disbelief in God and egotism. One could also argue that the belief in God stems out of egotism. Donít the believers want to be saved by God and enter into his paradise?

This argument is weak. It is ad hominen and a logical fallacy. Those who do not believe in a personal God do not do it out of egotism and arrogance as Muhammad wrongly concluded, but because they do not find such notion logical.

Muhammad did not give any proof for the existence of his version of deity and all he did was to insult his detractors, calling them deaf, blind and without understanding. Because he was an illiterate man with simple mind he assumed that the notion of God is self evident and that those who do not believe must be egoists and arrogant. Sadly his followers, rehash this nonsense as if it is a logical argument. This is a logical fallacy. This is like I tell you about unicorn and then call you arrogant and egotist for not accepting my tale. This is how narcissists reason. Narcissists assume that everyone must accept whatever they say and if anyone rejects their balderdash claims, it is because that person is disdainful, obstinate and arrogant. It is never their fault. It is always the fault of others.

I am asking for proof that Allah is God and I am accused of lacking wisdom, being egotistic, wanting to be the center of the universe and control every things. All these are logical fallacies. Assuming I am all that and worse, where is the proof that Muhammad was telling the truth?

Erum:

God must be conscious and intelligent and aware of us. The whole purpose of life is to discover and worship Allah. As mentioned in the Quran Verse 51:56 "I have not created men and jinn except to worship me."


Said who? This is your understanding of God, but not mine. You cannot quote the Quran to prove the claim of the Quran. This is circulus in demonstrando. It is also a fallacy.
Erum:

The problem in today's organized teachings of clerics is that, they have not sufficiently taught us the concepts behind our worships and our morality. If we know the appropriate reason for every thing we do, we would have only fools asking such questions as why Allah wants his worship. It is something for our own benefit, it will make us more humble and loving. In other words, prayers are meant to be done with complete understanding of acts. When you prostrate before Allah, do so with humility and love and not with contempt and dislike. Once we understand what prayer and worship is, we have a life transforming tool to relinquish our ego and selfishness, and that should be a goal of every person.


This argument would have made sense if those who did not humble themselves in front of Allah were not punished sadistically for eternity. Let us say I tell you come and pay homage to me every day because in this way you become a humble person. But what if I beat you to death if you do not come? Doesnít that prove that I am the one who is desperate to be praised and the claim that praising me is good for you is a lie?

Muhammad depicted Allah as a narcissist. Why? Because Allah was his own alter ego. It was the projection of him self.
Someone who suffers from Narcissistic Personality disorder (NPD) has at least 5 of the following characteristics. Note that Allah and his messenger possess all these characteristics.
1. has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)
2. is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
3. believes that he or she is "special" and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)
4. requires excessive admiration
5. has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations
6. is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends
7. lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others
8. is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her
9. shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes
Source: http://www.narcissism101.com/
How can the maker of this universe have the exact characteristic of a narcissist?
Erum:

Ali Sina believes that Understanding always comes from the mind.


So where do you think that understanding comes from? From stomach? Of course it come from the mind? That is our organ for understanding.

Erum:

He makes the mistake of letting everyone decide morality for themselves. No Mr. Sina, morality is not a fruit cake. Unless we have a set of rules ordained by God, we can't be sure of whether we are on the right path or not. No matter what mental gymnastics you try, you will never be able to convince yourself and others about what's right and what's wrong.


You are going too fast. You have not yet proven the existence of God let alone that Muhammad was his messenger and now you are telling me that I must submit to the rules ordained by God? Which God? I do not believe that Muhammad had any understanding of God. As far as I am concerned this man was a charlatan liar. First you must prove the existence of God, and then prove that Muhammad was his messenger and then ask me to submit to him. Why should I follow the ordinances of Muhammad and not that of David Koresh who also claimed to be a messiah from God? Where is the proof? What if Muhammad was not a messenger of God but a messenger of Satan? Wouldnít it be a terrible mistake to follow such an impostor?

In all my debates with Muslims, here is where they have invariably fail. They have accepted that Muhammad was a prophet of God uncritically as if it is a given fact. Why is it that Muslims canít even consider the possibility that this man could have lied? Where is the proof that he was a prophet of God? This is the question that I have been asking for ten years. My question is not whether God exists or not. I can even accept the existence of God in whatever ways you want to define him. My question is where is the proof that Muhammad was the messenger of this God?

Erum:

Ali Sina is doing the same mistake Descrates did. A seventeen century philosopher, Descrates was asked what is the proof that he exists and he said, "I think therefore I am" He equated thinking with consciousness. He equated fact with truth. 300 years after Jean-Paul Sartre identified the problem in his statement and asserted simply "I am". What he meant by this? He meant, when we are aware of our thoughts, we are not thinking but we are just being aware. And reasoning is merely a part of our thinking and awareness or God-consciousness is something out of the fold of thinking and reasoning.

We need to make a distinction between fact and truth. What you see, hear, taste, smell and touch is a small box, a twisted picture of reality called fact. While, truth is the whole paradoxical reality, uncomprehensive by sense. It can only be felt in the heart, just like love, bliss and happiness. That's why we can't think about God. He's infinite and our finite minds are incapable of understanding God. It's like an ant understanding the power of the internet. We can not understand God, but can feel God. We cannot see God but can see his attributes in our lives.


I have no problem with your premise that we only can understand a portion of reality, that we are finite and as such cannot grasp the infinite, and that our senses deceive us. However, how do you jump from this premise to the claim that Allah is God and that Muhammad is his messenger? Canít I use the same argument and say, I am the messenger of God and since humans are finite I donít have to prove my claim? These are all fallacies. No sane God would send a messenger without proof and then punish us for not believing. We have thousands of impostors who claim to be messengers of God why should we believe in Muhammad and not in them?

Erum:

Before coming to Islam whole-heartedly, I was also under the impression that an egoless and God conscious person will automatically do good and abstain from evil. I thought that a person who is unconditionally happy and mature cannot harm anyone. I equated Consciousness with Conscience. But it turned out to be false because I found myself entering into the realm of moral relativism. What was once wrong turned good and dandy. My morality changed to suit my needs. I became more like a person who acts for his wishes rather than his rules. Until you surrender your will to God and unless you sacrifice your ego for the sake of God, there is no unconditional happiness and no bliss here and hereafter. Islam means surrendering your will to God in this context. Islam does not mean surrender to Muslim forces as Ali Sina thinks.


We see the recurrence of the same fallacy over and over. Where is the proof that Islam is from God? Assuming the morality of humans is relative, what proof do we have that the morality of Muhammad is superior and from God? What if Muhammad is shown to be an impostor?

You pooh-pooh reason and claim it is flawed. You say that one has to rely on his heart and feelings. I know for a fact that feelings can mislead us. People of all faiths believe in what they believe because they rely on their feelings. Their faith is not rational but nonetheless they are convinced of it. There is nothing more erroneous than relying on feelings for finding the truth. However, I am going even to accept this absurd claim that feelings can lead us to truth and based on that I mention a few of Muhammadís moralities and ask you to tell me how do you feel about them. Logically they are insane, but you do not believe in logics. So let us use feelings alone.

Muhammad said beat your wife if she disobeys you. He said slay the unbelievers and reduce them into dhimmis making them work and pay a jizyah tax so Muslims can live off the infidels, basically making money through extortion, like Mafia. One hadith quotes him saying, ďI have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy), and while I was sleeping, the keys of the treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand." [Bukhair 4:52:220] So he actually believed that God had given him the right to loot the wealth of everyone in the world. ďAbu Huraira added: Allah's Apostle has left the world and now you, people, are bringing out those treasures (i.e. the Prophet did not benefit by them). ď Yes that thug died before being able to rob Persia, Egypt, Indian and the rest of the world. However, his followers continued robbing people believing that God had given them the right. Is this moral in your opinion? I know you donít use reason but does your feeling approve these evil things? Put yourself in the shoes of a Jew living in Medina. Would you like to be treated the way Muhammad treated them? How does it feel if someone raids your home, kills you, then loots your wealth and rapes your wife and daughter while enslaving your mother and small children? Is that morally right? Forget about reason. Does your feeling approve Muhammadís crimes?

The morality I am adhering to is based on the Golden Rule. It is not a relativistic morality. The Golden Rule is an infallible measure of right and wrong. ďDonít do to others what you donít like to be done to you.Ē This is the essence of morality, not the absurdities stated by Muhammad? It is not moral to have sex with a 9 years old child. It is not moral to rape the captives of war, perform coitus interruptus on them or take them as slaves. It is not moral to raid peopleís homes and slay them with no warning when they are least prepared. It is not moral to lust after your own daughter in law. It is not moral to beat woman. Everything Muhammad did and said was immoral. Bending up and down and pointing your rear end to sky five times a day have nothing to do with morality. These rituals are stupid. They make no sense at all. Why do you think these rituals were so important to Muhammad? It is because he had several mental disorders and obsessive-compulsive disorder was one of them. God has no use for any of rituals. They do not benefit us either.

Does the belief in Islam and performance of its silly rituals make one a better person? Absolutely not! The contrary is true. The more a person is a believer the more savage and evil he becomes. Most Muslims barbarities happen when they come out of the mosques. That is where they metamorphose into animals. Look at the Muslim world. They are far more corrupt in every sense than the secular nations of the west, in every sense. Facts show that Islamic nations are more immoral and more corrupt than non-Muslim nations. If your understanding of morality is limited to sexuality, as often is the case with Muslims then Google Trends show that the words sex, porno, animal sex, anal sex, incest, child sex, etc, are terms predominantly searched in Islamic countries.

The very fact women are forced to cover themselves is because men think of them as sexual objects not has humans beings. They are awrat, which means vagina. Isnít this the word for woman in Pakistan? You call your mothers, sisters and daughters vagina?

Islam is an immoral religion even if you decide to shelve your brain and use only your feelings. I would feel angry and insulted if my mother sister and wife are called awrat?

Muslims use nikah for marriage. Do you know what it mean? It means fuck. Is this respect for women?
Erum:


Ali Sina has also said many times that a God that sends confusing messages is not worth our worship. But he forgot that one can misinterpret anything whatsoever. All you need is a brain full of hatred and double standards. A preconditioned mind cannot see good in all.


Isnít the reverse true too? Isnít it true that believers are unable to see the flaws that others can see in their religion?

Erum:

Ali Sina also thinks that all beliefs are foolish and we can only discover by doubting. In one context he is right, but in another he's dead wrong. If he's talking about the outer, manifested, physical and material world, then he's right. Yes we need to doubt to make great discoveries. But the same thing cannot be said about the inner, unmanifested, spiritual and conscious world. Here we need unshaken beliefs from our heart and will power.


If we donít have to use our brain, and uncritically believe, will you please tell us which religion should we believe and why? There are thousands of religions and cults, each claiming to be the only repository of truth. How are we supposed to find the right one?

I want you to answer this question that I have been asking for ten years repeatedly. Please tell me why I should accept Muhammad and not other claimants. What sets him apart from the rest? How do I know that he is not an impostor and for example Jim Jones, Charles Manson and Joseph Koni are? Tell me please in what ways Muhammad was superior to Charles Manson?

Erum:

We need not doubt about our self-esteem, sanity or trust in parents to live a happy life. We need absolute and sure beliefs on such matters. For the outer world it is wise to says, "I'll believe when I see it." But for the inner world we must affirm "I'll believe and I'll see it." Belief, Trust and Love are mighty words. They have their own usefulness. Logic and reasoning has their own beauty. Anyone who dogmatically gets attached to any one of those is delusional. We need both.


You are confusing apples with oranges. Yes we must trust and believe in our own capacity to overcome the difficulties, but to believe in someone who claims to be a messenger of God without evidence is insanity. These are two different things my friend.

I believe I will succeed to eradicate Islam. I have faith in the power of truth and I know that if everyone spreads the links to this site Islam will be eradicated. I receive daily emails from people who also donít like Islam but express their doubts in my optimism. I will not allow their doubts damper my faith. Yes, I have faith. Yes I trust that truth will eventually win over lies. All it is required is to spread it.  But I donít believe in absurdities and unsubstantiated claims of an imposter prophet pretender. I believe in love, I believe in beauty, I believe in the power of truth, I believe in the innate goodness in humanity that given a chance will overcome evil, but I do not believe in lies and fairytales. How can you not see the difference?

Erum:
Richard Dawkins kind of reasoning will give you people Hitler, Stalin (who were
confirmed atheists) and more godless people. No don't say, well we can be moral without God. You can be moral without God, but in reality that morality is always relative. Moral relativism won't build a just society. Dictatorship and/or religion by force is what we get from such assumptions. Concerning yourself with right and wrong is nothing but an ego trip. Sometimes wrong (mentally) turns out useful (spiritually). For example, trusting your wife, mother, father, society and people surrounding you will build conditions in your life where this trust will pay. Doubts on these levels won't prove useful. Yes of course, you can doubt when you find a reason to doubt the actions of those around you. But you have to start with belief, you have to start with trust and then only reasoning and doubting can follow.


Just as there are evil atheists, there are also evil religious people. At the very top, I would place Muhammad and bellow him there is a long list of evil men who were believers in God, such as Ali son of Abu Talib, Khalid ibn Walid, Khomeini, Khamanei, Ahmadinejad, Osama Bin Laden, Zarqawi, and virtually thousands of terrorists and millions of Muslims who have hatred of the Jews and non-believers in their hearts. Bad people existed also in other religions, although not to the extent that they are in Islam. There are also good and humanitarian atheists as well as good and humanitarian religious people. The belief in God does not make one a good person. As a matter of fact it can make good people do evil things with clear conscience. No non-Muslim would tolerate stoning, but Muslims tolerate it because their conscience has been impaired by their religion.  Muslims generally do not feel killing gays is something terribly evil.  They believe they deserve it.  Non-Muslims always give generously to humanitarian causes such as relief aids to calamity stricken people. Muslims give reluctantly and only to Muslims.

Come on, let us admit it. Islam has robed the humanity of Muslims and has reduced them into something less than human. This is a fact. This is the truth. I know this statement offends everyoneís sensitivity but I speak the truth. Muslims have less humanity than the rest of mankind. This has nothing to do with their race, or ethnicity, it has everything to do with the evil belief that they have embraced. It would be a lie to say Islam has had no effect on its followers. If that were the case, then what is the point of believing in it?  Islam has taken away the humanity of its adherence and to the degree that Muslims believe in Muhammad and follow him they are evil.

Many people write to me saying donít say Muslims are sub humans because it is not politically correct. Why do you want me to shut up? This is the reality. It is the painful reality that we must all accept. This evilness is not in their genes. It is part of the nefarious teachings that they receive. When you are taught from childhood that the Jews are apes and swine, when you are made to read every day that the Christians will receive the wrath of God on the account that they have gone astray, (Q. 1.7) when you are told that the unbelievers are najis, (filthy) that God hates them and that they are fuel of hell, it is inevitable that you grow up to become a hateful person and consequently lose your humanity. You become evil to the degree that you believe in Muhammadís lies and follow his example.

Erum:

Have you ever realized, no matter how much we get prone to our mental reasoning, we still do a lot of things just on trust. When you go to a supermarket, you pick up a can of drink, are you 100% sure that it has no poison in it? When you love someone, are you sure you will get into a healthy relationship after you marry? The fact of the matter is that you can't be sure. But by being sure, by being positive, by believing, by trust, you cross a bridge that gets you in situations where such trust helps you.


When I pick a can of drink from supermarket I trust because I know that the manufacturer has no gain in poisoning the public deliberately. In fact he will lose not only his license, but also his freedom. I also trust because I know that my government constantly inspects their operation to make sure that the product is safe.

There are times that we have to go to hospital for an operation. The doctors there put us on anesthetics, make us completely unconscious and then take a scalpel and cut our body open. But we trust them. Why? Because we know that the doctors and the surgeons are licensed to perform such operations and know what they are doing. We donít have to test each and every doctor. We trust that the government has tested them and licensed them to operate. Would we trust any Tom, Dick and Harry to perform an operation on us? Of course not! We must first make sure that they are qualified. Where is the qualification of Muhammad? Where is the proof that he was a messenger of God and not a snake oil vendor?

Now, let us compare Jesus with Muhammad. While Muhammad said that God gave him the key to all the treasures of the world and had authorized him to raid and loot, Jesus did not ask anything from anyone. He told his follower to shake the dust from their sandals when they leave a town. He did not raid anyone, did not rape anyone, did not lead an unholy life and at the end proved his sincerity by sacrificing his own life.

Muhammad was poor and penniless when he left Mecca. He had ruined the wealth of his wife completely and in Medina his followers used to send him dates to eat. In ten years, he raided numerous caravans, villages and towns, until he became the wealthiest man in Arabia. He raped women, deceived his victims, assassinated his critics, unlike Jesus who said turn the other cheek, Muhammad was the first to attack. It is not difficult to see that Jesus and Muhammad do not belong to the same league.

In matterd of faith I donít want to trust anyone blindly. But if I had to, I would trust Jesus because this man has passed his test of honesty. Muhammad failed that test. How can any sane person believe in a fiend like Muhammad? How can you worship a man after I show you all the evil things that he has done?

Erum:

Believing in God, Higher Power, Higher Self (whatever you want to call it) is very pleasing, it
gives us the power to know that we don't know. It gives us the power that we are powerless. And in that realization, transformation happens. In that detachment from our selves we become better, higher, richer, spiritual or whatever you want.


Yes, ignorance is bliss.

I do not have a problem if you want to believe in God, feel power in your powerlessness and as Paul says wisdom in your foolishness. But why believe in a fiend such as Muhammad? Why pick up the worst person to worship? If you are so desperate to believe, at least believe in Christ who was not an evil person. Why donít you believe in Buddha, Krishna or in Zoroastre? Why Muhammad?

I am not against faiths and beliefs. Often people of faith do wonderful things. But why do you want to believe in Devil?

Itís time to wake up. This stupidity must end.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Articles Op-ed Authors Debates Leaving Islam FAQ
Comments Library Gallery Video Clips Books Sina's Challenge
 

  ©  copyright You may translate and publish the articles posted in this site ONLY if you provide a link to the original page and if it is not for financial gain.