All posts by rdhoot

Muslims, idol-worshipers

muslim the idol worshipers

Muslims, idol-worshipers

 “We have seen thee turning towards every part of Heaven; but we will have thee turn to Kibla which shall please thee. Turn then thy face towards the sacred Mosque, and wherever ye be, turn your face, towards that part.” 2: 139.)

C. ~ Now is this trivial idolatry? We should think, it is the crudest form of idolatry.

Mohammedan. – We Mohammedans are not image-worshippers but image-breakers, because we do not believe that Kibla is God.

C. ~ They too, whom you call image-worshippers, do not regard the image as God. They profess to worship God behind the image. If you are image-breakers, why do you not break that big image called Kibla (the sacred Mosque).

M. – Good! We have the authority of the Qoran in turning our faces towards the Kibla, while the image-worshippers have none in their Veda to worship images. We most obey God anyhow.

C. ~ Just as you have the authority of the Qoran, the image-worshippers have that of the Puraanaas. As you believe the Qoran to be the Word of God, even so do they believe the Puraanaas to be the Word of God’s incarnation, Vyas. The difference between the Pauranics and yourselves is this that you worship a big image, while they bow down before the smaller ones. Your case is just the same as that of a man who strains at a gnat but swallows a camel.

Your Mohammad expunged the worship of small images from the Muslim faith, but introduced into it the worship of the sacred Mosque (at Mecca) which is as big as a hill. Is this idol worship on a small scale? You could be free yourselves from image-worship and the like evil practices only by embracing the Vedic religion and not otherwise. Unless you give up the worship of your big image, you should feel ashamed of yourselves and abstain from condemning the worship of small images found in other faiths and purify your hearts by avoiding idolatry.

Were there no places sacred before Kaaba?

 “When we decreed that the Kaba is sacred, you should go to Abraham’s place for prayers.” (2: 117.)

C.~ Had not God appointed sacred place before He sanctified Kaba? If he had, where was the necessity for consecrating Kaba? But if He had not it is indeed a pity that those who were born before that period had to go without a holy place. Perhaps it had not struck God to consecrate a place like Kaba before that.

” And who but he that hath debased his soul to folly will dislike the faith of Abraham, when we have chosen him in this world, and in the world to come he shall be of the Just.” (2:124.)

C. ~ Now can it ever be true that he who does not like the faith of Abraham is a fool? Why did God choose Abraham alone ( as the founder of the true faith)? If he did so on account of his being very religious, there were many others who were as religious as he, why did He not choose them as (His prophets)? But if he chose him because he was irreligious, He acted unjustly. It is quite true that is only the righteous who are loved by God and not others.

 

Allah destitute of compassion

allah just for muslim

Allah destitute of compassion?

 “Cut off the uppermost part of the infidels. “I will verily aid you with a thousand angels, rank on rank.” “I will cast a dread into the hearts of the infidels.” Strike off their heads then, and strike off from them every finger-tip.” (8: 7, 9, 12.)

C. ~ How destitute of compassion are God and his Prophets who order that the heads of the infidels should be cut off. Is such a God, as commands the faithful to put the infidels to sword, and sever there limbs (from their bodies) and aids them in this work, any better than Ravan, the cruel king of Ceylon? This command is te invention of the author of the Qoran and is not from God, but if it be from Him, our earnest prayer is that such a God may remain at a respectable distance from us.

“God is with the faithful. O ye faithful! Obey God and His apostle, O true believes, deceive not God and His apostle, neither violate your faith against your own knowledge. God laid a plot against them, and God is the best layer of plots.” (8: 19, 23, 26, 29.)

C. ~ Does God favor the Mohammedans? If so, He is unjust because He is the Lord of all (and not of the Mohammedans only). Is your God deaf that He cannot hear you unless He is spoken n (aloud)? Is it not wrong to couple the name of the Prophet with His name? Where is God’s treasure that He should be so afraid of its being stolen? Is it right to steal (the wealth of) others barring that of God and His Prophet?

Only the ignorant and the wicked can teach such things. Why is not that God, who deceives others and associates with the deceitful, hypocritical, cunning and wicked? These things lead one to infer that the Qoran is not the Word of God. Its author must have been a hypocritical and deceitful person, otherwise such objectionable things would not have been found in it.

“Therefore fight against them until there be no opposition in favor of idolatry and the religion be wholly God’s. and know that whenever ye gain any spoils, a fifth part therefore belongeth unto God, and to the apostle.” 8: 40, 42.)

C. ~ Who but the Mohammedan God would be so unjust in fighting and helping other to do the same and so active in causing breaches of peace? Now look at this religion, which sanctions wholesale robbery for the benefit of the Prophet! Are

“And if thou didst behold when the angels cause the unbelievers to die! They strike their faces and their backs, and unto say them, “Taste ye the pain of burning.” Wherefore we destroyed them in their sins, and we drowned the people of Pharaoh. Therefore prepare against them what force ye are able.” (8: 52, 56, 62.)

C. ~ Now-a-days Russia has trampled Trudy and England has taken possession of Egypt, and yet God and His angels have done nothing to help them! Have they gone to sleep? In the past these people any better than thugs? God participates in the crime of robbery when He takes His share of the loot. He brings disgrace on Himself by favoring such dacoits (thieves). We are at a loss to understand whence came such a book, such a God and such a Prophet in order to disturb the happy relations between different nations of the world and thereby inflict great suffering on them. Has not such faiths flourished in the world, all would have lived in peace with each other.

God used to kill and drown the enemies of His votaries, but He does not help them now. This shoes that He did nothing of the sort even in ancient times.

How evil is the command which say s that the faithful should do, as much as, lies in their power, to inflict pain and suffering upon the non-Mohammedans. Leave alone God, even a learned, righteous and tender-hearted man would not give such an order, and yet they (the Mohammedans) have the impudence to say that their God is Merciful and Just. It is on this account that the Mohammedan God is destitute of justice and mercy and the like good attributes.

“O Prophet! God is thy support and of such of the true believers who followeth thee. O Prophet, lead the faithful to war; if twenty of you persevere with constancy, they shall overcome two hundred. Eat therefore of what ye have acquired, that which is lawful and good; and fear God: for God is Gracious and Merciful.” (8:65, 66, 70.)

C. ~ Now what kind of justice, wisdom or righteousness is it that one should support one’s followers even though they perpetrate injustice? He, who causes breach of peace and himself fights as well as helps others to do so, loots other people and yet calls the loot lawful, can never be Merciful and Compassionate.

Leave alone God, such a thing can never be true even of a good man. Such things make it impossible for us to believe that the Qoran is the Word of God.

Allah ignorant of physics

allah dont know phyiscs

Allah ignorant of physics ?

“Verily, your Lord is God Who hath made the Heavens and the Earth in six days – then mounted His throne to rule all things.” (15:3.)

C. ~ Space is not the result of combination or a compound substratum. It is uncreated, eternal. The assertion, that it was created, furnishes a positive proof of the fact that the author of the Qoran was ignorant of physics. Had God to spend full six days on the creation of the world? When it is written in the Qoran “Be’} and “it was,” it follows that this assertion about the creation of the world in six days is baseless. Were the Muslim God All-pervading, why would He establish Himself in the heavens or the sky? And if God has to thing of His administration, He is nothing but a prototype of a human being. Were He Omniscient, why would He cogitate seated passively? This shows that the Qoran is he production of minds steeped in savagery and destitute of all knowledge of God.

“And guidance and a mercy to the faithful.” (10: 55)

C. ~Is God the monopoly of the Muslims only, and have others no claim on Him? And is He partial, that He reserves His mercy only for the Muslims, and denies it to others. If by Muslims He meant “the faithful” they do not stand in need of guidance. If God does not furnish guidance to people other than the Mohammedans, His knowledge is of no use.

“That he might make proof which of you will excel in work – And if thou say “After death ye shall surely be raised again.” The infidels will certainly exclaim, “This is nothing but pure sorcery.” (11: 8, 10.)

C. ~ When God has to examine works, He is not Omniscient. And if He does raise people after death, are we to think that those who are raised are condemned for an indefinite period to wait for a settlement of their date? Again, is it not opposed to His own Divine law to raise the dead? Is it possible that God should compromise His Godhead by infringing His own law?

“And it was said, “O Earth! Swallow up thy water” and “Cease, O Heaven.” And the water abated. O my people! this is the she-camel of God and a sign unto you; let her go at large, and feed on God’s Earth.” (11: 43, 66.)

C. ~ What childish talk is this? Can the earth or the heavens ever hear? And if God possesses a she-camel, He must also possess a he-camel further He must own elephants, horses, donkeys, etc.! and does it reflect any credit on God to get His she-camel to feed in the field of the others? Does God ever ride the she-camel? If such is the Muslim God, His house must be distinguished for all the pomp and splendor to be found in the house of a mundane potentate.

C. ~ If, after the Day of Judgment, all people must repair either to heaven or hell, why should the earth or the sky then continue to exist? And if heaven and hell or to endure as long as the earth and the sky endure, then it follows that the assertion “that they shall abide in heaven or hell for ever” is baseless. It is the ignorant that talk in this vain, and not the wise, or God. 92. “Therein shall they abide while the heavens and the earth shall last. And as for the blessed ones – their place the Garden! Therein shall they abide while the heavens and the earth endure.” (11: 109, 110.)

“When Joseph said to his father, “O my father! Verily I beheld eleven stars and the sun and the moon.” (12: 4.)

C. ~ This verse contains a dialogue between a father and his son, which shows that the Qoran is not from God but is the production of some man who has embodied in it the biographies of human beings.

“It is God who hath reared the heavens without pillars thou canst behold: then mounted His throne and imposed laws on the sun and the moon. And He it is who hath outstretched the earth. He sendeth down the rain from heaven; then flow the torrents in their due measure.” ((13: 15)

“God is open-handed with supplies to whom He will, or is sparing.” (13: 2, 3, 15, 22.)

C. ~ The Muslim God is entirely innocent of all knowledge of Physical Science. Were He conversant with Physical Science, He would not have talked of rearing heavens on pillars. If God dwells in a particular locality or in the heavens, He cannot be Almighty or all-Encompassing. Had the Muslim God known aught of the Science of the clouds, He would have coupled the words, “He made the water go up to the sky,” with the words, “he sendeth down the rain from the heaven.”

This shows that the author of the Qoran was ignorant of the science of clouds. If God confers happiness on some or condemns others to misery without paying any regard to their merits or demerits, He is partial, unjust and utterly ignorant.

Does God create by the caprice of His Will

allah is not great

Does God create by the caprice of His Will ?

If it is God Who feeds people and makes them observe the laws of health, there should be no disease. But we see that even the Mohammedans do suffer from disease. If it is God who cures people of disease the Mohammedans should always recover, but as they do not, it is clear that the Mohammedan God is not a skilful doctor, for if He were so, the Mohammedans would always come round. Again, if it is God Who kills people and brings them to life, then He alone should take the consequences. On the contrary if it be believed that punishment or reward is awarded according to deeds done (by the soul) in many births, He cannot be held blameworthy. If God forgives sins and dispenses justice on the last day, He will be a sinner and a promoter of sin. It he does not forgive sins, it cannot but he said that this teaching of the Qoran is false.

 “Thou art only a man like unto us: produce now some sign, if thou speakest the truth. Said, the she-camel shall be a sign unto you: she shall have her portion of water.” (26: 154, )

C. ~ Who would believe that the camel came out of stone. Those who pinned faith to it were savages. The sign of the camel was something which looks boorish, not Divine. If this book had been revealed, ti would not contain such senseless things.

“O Moses! Verily I am God, Mighty, the Wise: cast down thy rod. And when he saw it, that it moved, as though it had been a serpent, he retreated and fled. And God said O Moses, fear not, for my messengers are not disturbed with fear in my sight.” “Rise not up against me: and surrender yourself unto me.” (27: 9, 10, 27, 32.)

C. ~ Now mark! God calls Himself Might, even a good man would not indulge in self-commendation, why should God do so? He became the Lord of the savages by tempting them with a sort of jugglery. Such things cannot be written in the Word of God. If He is the Lord of the seventh heaven, He cannot be God being localized. If it is a bad thing to rebel, why did God and Mohammad write a book to extol themselves, even though the Prophet at the instigation of God killed many which was worse than rebellion. The Qoran is full of repetitions and self-contradictory statements.

“And thou shalt see the mountains, and shalt think them firmly fixed; they shall pass away, even as the clouds pass away. This will be the work of God, who rightly disposes all things: and he is well acquainted with that which ye do.” (27: 90.)

C. ~ Perhaps in the country where the author of the Qoran lived, the mountains moved on like clouds, for nowhere else it is so. The vigilance of God can be judged by the fact that He could not catch the rebel Satan and punish him. Who can be more careless than one who could not. apprehend one rebel and punish him.

“And Moses struck him with his fist and slew him: and he said, O Lord, verily I have injured my own soul, wherefore forgive me. So God forgave him; for He is ready to forgive, and Merciful. The Lord createth what He pleaseth; and chooseth freely.” 28: 14, 15, 66.)

C. ~ Now mark again! Are not God and Moses the Prophet of the Mohammedans and the Christians, both unjust because the latter killed people and God forgave him his sins. Does God create by the caprice of His Will? Was it due to mere caprice that one was born a king and anther a pauper; one a scholar, and another a fool. If it is so, the Qoran dos not inculcate truth, and the Mohammedan God being unjust is no God at all.

“We have commanded man to show kindness towards his parents: but if they endeavor to prevail with thee to associate with me that concerning which thou hast no knowledge, obey them not. We hereafter sent Noah unto his people, and he tarried among them not. We hereafter sent Noah unto his people, and he tarried among them one thousand years, save fifty years.” (29: 7, 13.)

C. ~ Of course, it is good thing to serve one’s parents and it is also right not to obey them when they ask one to believe that God shares His homage with some other being. But they should not be believed if they command one to tell lies, hence this injunction is only a half truth. If He sent only Noah and other prophets to the world who sent the other creatures? If it be said that he sent all, then why not believe that all are prophets. If formerly people lived for 950 years, why do they not attain that age now? This statement is also wrong.

“God produceth creatures, and will hereafter restore them to life: then shall ye return unto Him. And on the day whereon the hour shall come, the wicked shall be struck dumb for despair. And they who shall have believed, and wrought righteousness, shall take their pleasure in a delightful meadow: Yet if we should send a blasting wind, and they should see their corn yellow and burnt up. This hath God sealed up the hearts of those who believe not.” (30: 10, 11, 14, 50, 58.)

C. ~ If God ordains Creation twice and not thrice, He must be sitting idle before the first Creation and after the second, and will lose all vitality after creating the world twice. If the sinners are struck dumb with despair on the day of judgment, so much so good, but we hope that this verse does not mean that all except the Mohammedans will be branded as sinners and struck dumb with despair, for at many places in the Qoran by the word of sinner is meant a non-Mohammedan.

If the Mohammedan paradise consists of residence in a garden and adornment of the body, it is just lie this world. In that case it is necessary y that gardeners and goldsmiths should be there or God should do their work. Again, if some denizen of paradise gets a smaller number of ornaments, he might commit theft and be hurled down into hell. If it be so the doctrine of eternal heaven would be falsified.

If God superintends agriculture operations, He must needs have gained some experience in the agricultural art! Even if it be believed that God being Omniscient knew all this, He cannot escape from the charge of having bullied and blustered. If God sealed the hearts of men and caused them to commit sin, He must be held answerable for the offence and not men; even as the Commanders are held responsible for defeat or victory, so God must be regarded answerable for sins.

“These are the signs of the wise book. He hath created the heavens without visible pillars to sustain them, and hath thrown on the earth mountains firmly rooted, lest it should move with you. Dost thou not see that the God causeth the night to succeed the day, and causeth the day to succeed the night? Dost thou not see that the ships run in the sea, through the favor of God, that He may show you of his signs?” (31: 1, 9, 28, 30.)

C. ~ How funny! That a book like this should be regarded full of wisdom even though it teaches things opposed to science, such as the creation of the heavens without visible pillars to sustain them and the fixing of the mountains in the earth with a view to keep them immovable. Even persons who are a little bit educated cannot write such nonsense or believe in such balderdash. Again, how wise is the statement that the day is entangle with the night and night with day! Every body knows that day and night co-exist. The Qoran cannot be a book of true knowledge, for this statement is absolutely foolish. It is not opposed to true knowledge to say that the ships run into the sea through the favor of God when in reality they are propelled by machinery and by sailors? Would not the sign of God ( a ship) sink if it was made of iron or stone? Verily this book cannot have been written either by God or by a learned man.

 

Is the earth stationary

flat earth

Is the earth stationary ?

“When the earth shall be shaken with a shock, and the mountains shall crumble with a crumbling and shall become scattered dust.” (55: 4, 6.)

“Then the people of the right hand, what shall be the people of the right hand! And the people of the left hand, what shall be the people of the left hand.” (56:8,9>)

“On coaches in wrought with gold and studded with stars reclining on them face to face: aye -blooming youths go round about to them, with goblets and ewers and a cup of flowing wine, their brows ache not from it nor fails the sense: and will such fruits as shall please them best, and with flesh of such birds, as they shall long for and theirs shall be the Houris, with large dark eyes, like pearls hidden in their shell.” (56: 15 -22)

“And on lofty beds. Of a rare creation have we created the Houris and we have ever made them virgins, dear to their spouses, of equal age with them.” (56: 31, 33.)

“And fill your bellies with it. I swear by the falling stars.” (56: 54, 74.)

C. ~ Now mark the strange assertions of the author of the Qoran! As it is, the earth is always in motion and will therefore be moving also at the time referred to by Him. It proves, however, one thing, namely, that the author of the Qoran believed the earth to stationary. Will He make the mountains fly as if they were so many birds? Even if they are transformed into insects and moths, they shall retain minutest bodies. Why then deny that they may be born again? Indeed! Were not the Muslim God corporeal, how could anyone stand on His right or left (as asserted in the Qoran)? Do the inmates of paradise always keep sitting idle, reclining on their pillows, or do they ever do anything? If they keep sitting idle, they could not properly digest their food, which must produce disease and thus carry them early to their graves. But it they do any work, they must be earning their livelihood in paradise after the fashion of mortals here. What is there then to distinguish paradise from this world? Of course nothing. If those boys always live in paradise, their parents as well as their fathers – and mothers-in-law must also do the same. This means that it must be a big colony there wherein diverse kinds of disease are bound to prevail on account of the accumulation of the night soil and other kinds of filth. If (as asserted) they eat fruits, drink water out of tumblers and quaff wine out of wine-cups, why would not they be subjected to head-aches, and indulge in unbecoming expressions? If it be a fact that they surfeit themselves there with fruits and with the flesh of birds and beasts, they are sure to be afflicted with various kinds of disease and suffering. There must also be slaughter-houses as well as butchers’ shop in paradise and bones must be scattered here and there. Verily, it is hard to sufficiently praise the Muslim Paradise! It seems as if it is even superior to Arabia! Of course when they become inebriate by free indulgences in meat and wine in paradise, they must stand in need of beautiful girls and handsome youths, otherwise the potations might affect their brains, and thereby transform them into raving maniacs! It is right that there should be a sufficient number of beds to accommodate so many people in paradise. Of course it stands to reason that there should be youths in paradise when God had created virgins there. But we are told that the virgins in paradise are destined to be united to those male mortals who repair to paradise from this world. What about those male youths then who perpetually swell in paradise? God has kept reticent as regards their marriage, will they also along with the virgins be surrendered to their candidate-mortals from this world? God has thrown no light on this point, and it must be regarded as a great omission on His part. If women in paradise are united to men of the same age, it is not, since the male should always be twice as old as the female or even older. So much regarding the Mohammedan paradise, as regards the Mohammedan hell, its inmates will have to feed on (thohar) Euphorbia nereifolia [This means that there are thorny trees in hell baring thorns], and drink hot water. Such then are the sufferings they will be afflicted with in hell.

Is the Muhammad prophesied in the Vedas?

false prophet

Is the Muhammad prophesied in the Vedas?

 Now there is only one thing left (before we are done with this subject.) the Mohammedans, not often, say, write or publish that the Mohammedan religion is spoken of in the Atharva Veda. It will suffice to say that there is not a word about this faith in the Veda in question.

M. –Have you read the whole of the Atharva Veda? If you have refer to Allopanishad. It is given there in plain words. Why do you then say that nothing is said in the Atharva Veda about the Mohammedan religion? Here is a passage from the Allopanishad: –

Asmallam ille Mitra Varuna………allorasul Mohammad Akbarasya Allo Allam……..etc.

That Mohammad is here spoken of as the prophet in unequivocal terms, is a sufficient proof of the fact that the Muslim faith has its origin in the Veda.

A. ~ If you have not read the Atharva Veda, come to us and look through its pages from beginning to end, or you may go to any person who knows that book and read with him all the verses given in its twenty chapters. You will never find the name of your Prophet in it. And as regards Allopanishad it is not given in the Atharva Veda or in its ancient commentary, called the Gopath Braahama or in any of its Shaakhaas (branches). We surmise that some one wrote it in the reign of the Emperor Akbar. Its author appears to have been a man who knew a little of Sanskrit and Arabic, because in its text both Sanskrit and Arabic words occur. For example, the Arabic words Asmallam Ille and the Sanskrit words Mitra and Varuna occur in the above passage and the same is seen throughout the whole book.

If we look to its meaning, it is altogether artificial, unsound and opposed to the teachings of the Veda (while the construction of words and sentences, is quite ungrammatical). The followers of other creeds who are blinded by bigotry have also likewise forged Upanishads such as Swarop Upanishad, Narsinhatapni, Ramtapni, Gopal tapni.

M. – No one ever expounded this theory ( as regards the Allopanishad) before; how can we then believe you?

A. ~ Our statement cannot be wrong whether you believe it or not.

Your contention can be accepted as true only when you, in a manner similar to that in which we have shown it to be wrong, point it (Allopnishad) out in the Veda, the Gopath, or in any of its ancient Shakhaas and show satisfactorily that the interpretation you put upon it is in harmony with context.

M. – What a good religion is ours. By embracing it one can enjoy all the pleasures of this world as well as attain salvation hereafter.

A. ~ Other sectaries also say “Our creed is the best, all other are bad. No one can attain salvation without accepting our faith.” All that we believe is that truthfulness in speech, love, fellow-feeling and the like virtues, in whatever creed they may be found, are commendable, while wrangling, and harboring of jealousy and hatred, dissimulation and the like evil practices, advocated by whatsoever creed they may, are condemnable. If you are sincerely desirous of getting hold of truth, embrace the Vedic religion.

 

ALLAH WAS NOT OMNISCIENT

house of allah

ALLAH WAS NOT OMNISCIENT

  “And when we said unto the angels, worship Adam, they all worshiped him except Eblis (Satan), who refused, and was puffed up with pride and became of the number of the unbelievers.” 2: 32.)

C. ~ This indicates that the Mohammedan God was not Omniscient i.e., He was not cognizant of the three periods of time – the past, the present, and future. Had he been Omniscient, He would not have created Satan. Nor was God All-powerful, since when Satan deliberately refuse to obey Him he could do nothing against him. Now if only one infidel (Satan), could trouble God so much as to render Him helpless what will He and His votaries do when they will have to cope with millions (according to their own belief) of infidels? God increased infirmity in some and let others astray. He must have learnt such things from Satan and Satan from God.

 “And we said, O Adam, dwell thou and thy wife in the garden, and eat of the fruit thereof plentifully wherever ye will; but approach not this tee, lest ye become of the number of the transgressors. But Satan caused them to forfeit paradise, and turned them out of the state of happiness wherein they had been, whereupon we said, Get down, one of you shall be an enemy unto the other; and there shall be a dwelling place for you on earth, a provision for a season. And Adam learned words of prayer for His Lord and then came down to earth.” (2: 33 – 35.)

C. ~ This indicates that God was not omniscient inasmuch as He one moment blesses Adam saying “Dwell thou…. In the garden” and in the next turns them out. Had He been cognizant of the future, He would not have blessed him at all? It also appears that God was powerless to punish Satan, the tempter.

Did God plant that tree for Himself or for others? If it was for others He should not have prevented them (Adam and his wife) from tasting the fruit thereof. God could never do such things, nor could they be ever found in His book. What were the words Adam leant from God and how did Adam come down on earth? Is the paradise somewhere in the sky or on some hill? Did Adam fly sown like a bird or fall down like a stone?

It appears that there is dust in paradise since Adam was made of dust. Angels too like Adam must also have been made of dust inasmuch as bodily organs cannot be made without dust (earthly material) but the body made of dust, must perish. Hence if the angels are also subject to death, one should like to know where they go after death. On the other hand if they do not die, they could not have been born, but if they were born, they would surely die. If this be the case, the statement of the Qoran that women in paradise live for ever cannot be valid inasmuch as they must also die. It follows, therefore, that all those who go to heaven will also die.

If Allah is in every direction why Muslims face only Mecca?

“Whichever way ye turn, there is the face of God.” (2:109.)

c. ~ If this is true, why do the Mohammedans turn their face towards Qibla (i.e., the sacred Mosque at Mecca)? If it be argued that they have been commanded to do so, to answer that they have also been permitted to turn their face in whatever direction they choose. Not which of these two (contradictory statements) should be held to be true. If God has a face, it can only be in one direction and not in all directions at one and the same time.

Allah’s omniscience in doubt, keeps a memorandum.

“When they come forth from Thy presence, a party of them broods by night over other than thy words; but God writeth down what they brood over. Desire ye to guide those whom God hath led astray? But for him whom God leadeth astray, thou shalt by no means find a pathway.” (4:90.)

C. ~ Now God cannot be Omniscient, since He keeps a Daybook and a Ledger. But if He be Omniscient, why would He keep a memorandum. The Mohammedans hold that the devil is wicked, since he tempts all. One should kike to know the difference between God and the Devil considering that God Himself leads the people astray. Of course, there is this much difference that God is the greater Devil of the two, because the Mohammedans themselves aver that he that enticeth is the devil. Verily their own affirmation makes out their God a veritable Devil.

Allah is also not omnipresent.

“Your Lord is God, who in six days created the Heaven and the Earth, and then mounted the throne. Call upon your God with lowliness and in secret.” (7:52, 53.)

C. ~ Can He, who creates the world in six days and rests on His throne in heaven, ever be an Omnipotent, and Omnipresent God? Being destitute of such attributes (as Omnipresence) He cannot even be called God? Is your God deaf that He can hear you only when He is spoken to (aloud)? All these things cannot be from God. Hence the Qoran cannot be the Word of God. He must have indeed got fatigued when He had to rest on the seventh day after having created the world in six days. We wonder if He is still asleep for has awakened. If He is awake, is He there doing something or just strolling about and enjoying Himself.

“Lay not earth waste with deeds of license.” (7:52.)

C. ~ This is indeed good advice, but in other places (in the Qoran) the faithful have been directed to wage war against infidels and even to slaughter them. Does not the Qoran now contradict itself? Ti appears that Mohammad must have adopted the first course when he was weak and the second one when he had gained power. These two teachings being self-contradictory cannot be true.

“So he threw down his rod, and lo! It distinctly became a serpent.” (5. 105.)

C. ~ This goes to indicate that even God and Mohammad believed in such false things. If so, both of them were ignorant. The laws of nature can never be subverted just as no man can make the eyes and the ears do the work of other senses. This is more jugglery.

“And we sent upon them the flood and the locusts and the lice and the frog and the blood. Therefore, we took vengeance on them and drowned then in the seal and we brought the children of Israel across the sea. For the worship they practice in vain.” (7: 130, 132, 134.)

C. ~ Now behold! Is it not just like what an imposter does when he frightens a man by saying that he will send snakes to kill him? Why is not God, who is bigoted that He drowns one nation in the sea in order to help the other to cross it, a sinner?

Can there be any religion more false than one that daubs all religions (other than itself), whose followers can be counted by millions, false and calls itself the only true one, since no religion can boast that all of its followers are good. It becomes only idiots to give an exparte decree. Has the religion founded n the Old Testament become false or was it some other faith, we should like to know what it was and by which name it is mentioned in the Qoran.

“Thou shalt not* see me. And when God manifested Himself to the mountain He turned it do dust! And Moses fell in a swoon.” (7: 139.)

Is Allah all-pervading?

“They shall continue therein forever: for God is a great reward. O true believers, take not your fathers or your brethren for friends, if they love infidelity above faith. Afterwards God sent down his security upon his apostle and upon the faithful, and sent down troops of angels, which ye saw not; and he punished them who disbelieved; and this was reward of the unbelievers. Nevertheless God will hereafter be turned unto whom He pleaseth. Fight against them who believe not in God.” *: 10, 12, 24, 25, 27.)

C. ~ Now how can God be All-pervading if He lives near those who are in paradise? But if He is not All-pervading, He can neither be the Creator nor the Judge of the world. It is wrong to advise men to forsake their parents of course, one should not obey them if the advise one to do wrong, but all the same one should always serve them.

If God was kind to the Mohammedans and sent down troops of angels to help them in the past, why does He not do so now? If He punished the unbelievers and “turned unto whom He pleased,” why does He not do the same at the present time? Could not God advance His faith without commanding His votaries to fight? We say good-bye to such a God! He is more of a showman than a God.

“We await for you the infliction of a chastisement by God, from Himself, or at our hands.” (8:53.)

C. ~ Do the Mohammedans constitute God’s police that He seizes non-Muslims either with His own hands or has been seized by the hands of the Mohammedans? Are millions of other people displeasing unto God, and are Mohammedans, though they might be sinners, pleasing unto Him? If such is the case, the Mohammedan God resembles a veritable tyrant. It is strange that even sensible Mohammedans should believe in a religion which has no foundation to rest upon, and is opposed to reason.

Is Allah limited by space like man?

“He governeth all things from heaven even to the earth, hereafter they shall return unto Him, on the day whose length shall be a thousand years, of those which ye compute. This He who knoweth the future and the present; the Mighty, the Merciful. And then formed him into proper shape, and breathed of His Spirit into him; say; the angel of death, who is set over you, shall cause you to die…If we had pleased, we had certainly given unto every soul its direction: but the word which hath proceeded from me must necessarily be fulfilled, when I said, verily I will fill hell with both genii and men.” (32: 4, 5, 8,10, 12.)

C. ~ Now it is quite clear that the God of the Mohammedans is limited by space like man, for if He were Omnipresent, it could not be said of Him that He is stationed at a particular place for the purpose of carrying on administrative work and that He descends and ascends. He cannot but be regarded as limited by space if He sends down angels and Himself remains hung up in the sky, while His emissaries are sent about on errands. How could God know it, if His angels were bribed into perverting the facts of a case or sparing the life of a doomed person.

He could find out only if He were Omniscient and Omnipresent, but that He is not. If He had been so, where was the need of sending angels and testing people in any way? Again, He cannot be said to be Omnipotent, because it takes a thousand years to arrange for the return of His emissaries. If there is an angel of death, what is there that will bring about his death? If it be said that that angel is eternal, then it will have to be believe that God is not Incomparable at least so far as eternity is concerned. One angel cannot ask many people to repair to hell simultaneously, and if God looks at the fun after filling hell with innocent people who have been doomed to torture, he is unrighteous, unjust and merciless. A book teaching such things cannot be the work of God or of a learned man, while a being devoid of justice and mercy cannot be Divine.

“Say, light shall not profit you, if ye fly from death or from slaughter: O wives of the Prophet, whosever of you shall commit a manifest wickedness, the punishment thereof shall be doubled unto her twofold, and this is easy with God.” 33: 16, 30.)

C. ~ Mohammad wrote or dictated this verse to keep people from running away from the field of battle so that victory might be assured to his army, his soldiers might not dread death, his wealth might increase and his religion might spread. If the wife of the prophet is not to appear in public shamelessly (without a veil), why should the prophet do so. It is just that the wife should suffer for this offence and the prophet escape scot free.

INTOLERANCE TOWARDS NON-MUSLIMS

behead those who insult islam

INTOLERANCE TOWARDS NON-MUSLIMS

 2. Praise be to God, the Lord of all creatures, the Compassionate, the Merciful.” (1: 1, 2.)

C. ~ Had the God of the Qoran been the Lord of all creatures, and been Merciful and kind to all, He would never have commanded the Mohammedans to slaughter men of other faiths, and animals, etc. If He is Merciful, will He show mercy even to the sinners? If the answer be given in the affirmative, it cannot be true, because further on it is said in the Qoran “Put Infidels to sword,” in other words, he that does not believe in the Qoran and the Prophet Mohammad is an infidel (he should, therefore, be put to death). (Since the Qoran sanctions such cruelty to non-Mohammedans and innocent creatures such as cows) it can never be the Word of God.

STONES FOR UNBELIEVERS

8. “If ye be in doubt concerning the revelation which we have send down into our servant, produce a chapter like unto it and call your witnesses, beside God, if ye say truth. But if ye do it not, nor shall ever be able to do it, justly fear the fire whose fuel is men, and stones prepared for the unbelievers.” (2:21, 22)

C. ~ Well! Is it impossible to produce a chapter like unto it? Did not Maulvi Fiazi in the time of king Akbar compile a Qoran without making use of any dotted letters in it? What kind of fire is the hell fire? Is not the fire (of this world) to be feared? The fire of this world also consumes anything that may be put into it.

Just as it is stated in the Qoran that stones have been prepared for the non-believers, likewise it is said in the Puraanaas that Malechhas* are doomed to hell. Now, which of these two statements should be accepted as correct? According to each of these, the adherents of one sect go to hell and those of the other to heaven. Both of these statements are therefore false. The truth is that only the good and the virtuous will enjoy happiness, while the wicked will be subjected to pain and suffering which faith they may belong to.

 

Slaying non-muslims and innocent animals to be on Allah’s path.

31. “And say not of those who are slain on God’s path that they are dead, nay, they are living! But ye understand not.” (2:149)

C. ~ Where is the necessity of slaying other and of being slain on God’s path? Why do you not say plainly that all this is meant for accomplishing your selfish ends. You hold out this inducement to people that they may fight well and help you to gain victory you’re your enemies and acquire wealth and power by looting other and thereby enable you to live in luxury and enjoy sensual pleasures.

32. “God is severe in chastising. Follow not the steps of Satan, He only enjoineth upon you evil and wickedness and that ye should aver of God that which ye know not.” (2: 164, 165.)

C. ~ You’re your God punish the wicked and reward the virtuous, or does He show mercy to the Mohammedans and torture others? If the latter, He is not God. But if your God is not partial (to your), He will reward the virtuous and punish the wicked whatever religion they may profess. This being the case, the belief in the Qoran and in Mohammad (as the prophet of God) becomes unnecessary. Why did God create Satan – the enemy of the human race who has been tempting all mankind. Is He not cognizant of the future? If you say, He has created Satan just to try man, it cannot be right, because only one who is possessed of finite knowledge would do such a thing; while One who is Omniscient is already aware of the good or evil deeds of the soul. Now if Satan tempts all mankind, who tempted Satan? If it be said that Satan tempts himself, why could not others tempt themselves? Where is then the necessity of supposing Satan to be the tempter of al mankind? If God was the tempter of the Devil, He was more devilish than the Devil. But such a thing could not be said of God. Whosoever goes astray from the right path does so through evil company and ignorance.

33. “But that which dieth of itself, and blood, and swine’s flesh, and that over which any other name than that of God hath been invoked is forbidden you.” (2: 168.)

C. ~ Now one should pause to think and realize that an animal whether it dies a natural death or is put to death, is a dead body all the same; of course there is a little difference but that difference counts for nothing so far as death is concerned. Swine’s flesh is forbidden (but not human flesh), shall we then conclude that is right to eat human flesh? Can it ever be commendable to torture animals to death in God’s name? This casts a blot on the good name of God.

Why does He suffer the animals to be tortured by the Mohammedans in the absence of sins committed in their previous lives (by those animals)? Is He not Merciful to them? Does He not love them as a father loves his children? God did not forbid the slaughter of such animals as are useful to man, and by failing to do it has proved Himself to be an enemy of the human race, and brought disgrace on Him by being guilty of having sanctioned the slaughter of (useful) animals. Such things can never be true of God or of His word.

The height of prejudice.

5. “If they do not withhold their hands, seize them, and slay them, wherever you find them. A believer killeth not a believer but by mischance, and whoso killeth a believer by mischance shall be bound to free a believer from slavery; and the blood money shall be made o the family of the slain believer unless they convert it into alms. But if the slain believer be of a hostile people, let him confer freedom on a slave who is a believer. But whoever shall kill a believer of a set purpose, his recompense shall be hell, for ever shall he abide in it, God shall be wrathful with him.” (4: 94-96.)

C. ~ This is the height of prejudice. The Qoran enjoins on its believers to kill the non-Mohammedans but to spare the Mohammedans. If they dill heir co-religionists by mischance, they shall have to make aments for it by freeing a believer from slavery, but if they kill non-Mohammedans, even though it be through a mistake, they shall inherit Heaven.

Such teachings deserve to be utterly discarded. Such a book, such a Prophet and such a religion do nothing but harm. The world would be better off without them. Wise men would do well to discard a religion so absurd and accept the Vedic faith which is absolutely free from error. The Mohammedans say that one who kills a Mohammedan shall be condemned to a residence in hell; on the other hand, believers in other religions contend that a man attains to heaven by killing a Mohammedan, now which of the two should one believe to be true and which false?

The fact is that all false creeds begotten of ignorance should be renounced, the Vedic religion alone deserving the allegiance of all – a religion which directs every human being to follow in the footsteps of the righteous and shun the path of the wicked.

59. “But whosoever shall sever himself from the Prophet after that ” the guidance” has been manifested to him, shall follow any other path than that of the faithful, we will cast him into hell.” (4: 135.)

C. ~ Now mark the prejudice of God and of His Prophet! Mohammad like other men of his stamp, was well aware that if he did not stamp his religion with divine authority it would never flourish, or would he or his followers be able to obtain help and power which might help them to live a life of ease and luxury. All this goes to show that Mohammad knew only too well how to compass his selfish ends and to deprive others of their due – a fact which proves that he was no well-wisher of humanity. Such a man can never command the trust and confidence of good and enlightened men.

60. “Verily, they who believed, then become unbelievers, then believed and again became unbelievers, and then increased their unbelief – it is not God who will forgive them, or guide them into the way.” (4: 134.) “Whoever believed, not in God and His Angels and His Book and His Apostles, and the last day, he verily hath erred.” (4: 135.)

C. ~ Can you ever now assert that God is one without a second? Is it not self-contradictory to call God Incomparable and yet at the same time believe that there are others who share Divine privileges with Him? Does not God forgive sins after He has done so three times? Does not God guide men after they have denied Him and His Prophet more than three times? Even if all were to take advantage of the teachings of this verse, unbelief will multiply immensely.

 

Was one man created in the beginning of Creation or more than one?

men and women

Was one man created in the beginning of Creation or more than one?

Q- Was one man created in the beginning of Creation or more than one?

 A.~ More than one; because souls, that on account of their previous good actions deserve to be born in the Aishwari – not the result of sexual intercourse – Creation, are born in the beginning of the world. It is said in the Yajur Veda, “(In the beginning) there were born many men as well as rishis, i.e.., learned seers of nature. They were progenitors of the human race.” On the authority of this Vedic text it is certain then that in the beginning of Creation hundreds and thousands of men were born. By observing nature with the aid of reason we come to the same conclusion, viz., that men are descended from many fathers and mothers (i.e., not from one father and one mother).

Q-  In the beginning of Creation were men created as children, adults or old people or in all conditions?

A.~ They were adults, because had God created them as children they would have required adults to bring them up, and had created them as old men, they would not have been able to propagate the race, therefore He created them adults.

Q-  Does creation ever had a beginning?

A.~ No; just as the night follows the day and the day follows the night, the night precedes the day and day precedes the night, so does Creation follows Dissolution and Dissolution follows Creation, Dissolution precede Creation, and Creation precede Dissolution. This alternate process has been eternally going on. It has neither a beginning, nor an end, but just as the beginning and end of a day or of a night are seen, so do Creations and Dissolutions have beginnings as well as ends. God, the soul and prakriti – the primordial elementary matter – are eternal by nature, whilst Creation, and Dissolution are eternal by pravah -i.e., they follow each other in alternate succession – like the flow of a river which is not continuous throughout the whole year. It dries up and disappears in summer, and reappears in the rainy season. Jus as the nature, attributes, and character of God are eternal, so are His works – the Creation, Sustenance, and Dissolution (of the world).

Does not the belief of souls in lower beings impute partiality?

Q- God put some souls in human bodies, while others he clothed with bodies of ferocious animals such as tigers, others with those of cattle, such as cows, others with those of birds and insects, other still with those of plants. Does not this belief impute partiality to God?

A.~ No, it does not impute any partiality, because He put souls into the bodies they deserved according to deeds done in the previous birth. Had He done so without any consideration as to the nature of their deeds, He would have been unjust indeed.

 

Revelation of Vedas

vedas 1

Revelation of Vedas

Q. Whose hearts did God reveal the Vedas in?

A.-“In the beginning, God revealed the four Vedas, Rig, Vayu, Sama, and Atharva, to Agni, Vayu, A’ditya and Angira, respectively.” SHAPATHA BRAHMAN 11: 4,2.3.

Q.But it is written in the Shwetashwetar Upanishad, ” In the beginning God created Brahma and revealed the Vedas in his heart.”SHEWTAR UPANISHAD 6:18. Why do you say that they were revealed to Agni, and other sages?

A.- Brahma was instructed in the knowledge of the Veda through the medium of the four sages , such as Agni. Mark what Manu Says: “In the beginning after human being had been created, the Supreme Spirit made the Vedas known to Brahma through Agni, etc., i.e., Brahma learnt the four Vedas from Agni, Vayu, A’ditya and Angira.” MANU: 23

Q. Why should He have revealed the Vedas to those four men alone and not to others as well? That imputes favouritism to God.

A.- Among all men those four alone were purest in heart, therefore, God revealed the true knowledge to them only.

Q. Why did He reveal the Veda in Sanskrit instead of a language of some particular country?

A.~ Had He revealed the Veda in the language of some particular country, He would have been partial to that country, because it would have been easier for the people of that country to learn and teach the Veda than for the foreigners, therefore, it is that He did it in Sanskrit that belongs to no country, and is the mother of all other languages. Just as He has ordained the material creation such as the earth, etc., which is also the source of all the useful arts, for the equal good of all, so should the language of the Divine revelation be accessible to all countries and nations with the same amount of labour. Hence the revelation of the Veda in Sanskrit does not make God partial to any nation

Evidence that proves the the Vedas to be Divine revelation.

Q. What evidence have you to prove that the Veda in Sanskrit is of Divine origin and not the work of man?

A- The book in which God is described as He is, viz., Holy, Omniscient, Pure in nature, character and attributes, Just, Merciful, etc., and in which nothing is said that is opposed to the laws of nature reason, the evidence of direct cognizance, etc., the teachings of the highly learned altruistic teachers of humanity (A’ptas), and the intuition of pure souls, and in which the laws, nature, and properties of matter and the soul are propounded as they are to be inferred from the order of nature as fixed by God, is the book of Divine revelation. Now the Vedas alone fulfil all the above conditions, hence they are the revealed books and not books, like the Bible and the Q’uran which we shall discuss fully in the thirteenth and fourteenth chapters (of this book) respectively.

Q.There is no necessity for the Veda to be revealed by God. Men can by themselves by degrees augment their knowledge and thereafter make books as well.

A.- No, they cannot do that, because there can be no effect without a cause. Look at savages such as the Bhils. Do they ever become enlightened by themselves without being instructed by others? The same is true of men in civilized communities, they need to be taught before they become educated. Similarly, had not God instructed the primitive sages in the knowledge of the Veda and had not they in their turn taught other men, all men would have remained ignorant. If a child were kept in a sequestered place from its very birth with no other company but that of illiterate persons or animals, on attaining maturity he would be no better than one of his company.

.

Take for example the case of Egypt, Greece, or the Continent of Europe. The people of all these countries were without a trace of learning before the spread of knowledge from India. In the same way before Columbus and other Europeans went to America, the natives had been without any learning for hundreds and thousands of years. Now some of them have become enlightened after receiving education from the Europeans. Similarly, in the beginning of the world men received knowledge from God and since then there have been various learned men in different periods, Says Patanjali in his Yoga Shastra.

“As in the present time we become enlightened only after being taught by our teachers, sowerein the beginning of the world, Agni and the other three Rishis (sages), taught by the greatest of all teachers – God.” YOGA SHASTRA SAMADHI, 26. His knowledge is eternal. He is quite unlike the human soul that becomes devoid of consciousness in profound sleep and during the period of dissolution. It is certain, therefore, that no effect can be produced without a cause.

Q- The Vedas were revealed in the Sanskrit language. Those Rishis were ignorant of that language. How did they then understand the Vedas?

A.- They were made known to them by God, and whenever great Sages, who were yogis, imbued with piety, and with the desire to understand the meanings of certain mantras and whose minds possessed the power of perfect concentration, entered the superior condition, called Samaadhi, in contemplation of Deity. He made known unto them the meanings of the desired mantras. When the Vedas were thus revealed to many Rishis, they made expositions with historical illustrations of the Vedic mantras and embodied them in books called the Brahmanas which literally means an exposition of the Veda.

 

“The names of the Rishis, who were seers of certain mantras and for the first time published and taught the exposition of those mantras, are written along with those mantras as token remembrance.” Nirukta 1-20. Those who look upon those Rishis as the authors of the mantras should be considered absolutely in the wrong. They were simply seers of those mantras.

Q. Which books are called the Vedas?

A.- The book called the Rig Veda, the Yajur Veda, the Sama Veda and the Atharva Veda – the Mantras Sanhitas only and no other.

Q. But the sage Katyayana says. The mantras Sanhitas together with the Brahmanas constitute the Vedas.

A.- You must have noticed that in the beginning of every Mantra Sanhita and at the end of each of its chapters it has always been the practice from time immemorial to write the word Veda, but it is never done so in the case of Brahmanas. We read in the Nirukt, “This is in the Veda, this is in the Brahmanas;” NIRUKT 5: 3 & 4 – in the same way we read in Panini, ” In the Chhanda (Veda) and Brahmanas, etc.” ASHTADHYAYI 4: 2, 66. It is clear from these quotations that the Veda is the name of books distinct from the Brahmanas. The Veda is what is called the Mantra Sanhita or a recollection of mantras, whilst the Brahmanas are the expositions of those mantras. Those who want to know more about this subject can consult our book called ” An introduction to the Exposition of the Vedas”, wherein it is proved on the authority of various kinds of evidence that the above quotation quoted as Katyayan”s could never be his. Because if we believe that, the Veda, could never be eternal, for in the Brahmanas there are to be found biographies of various Rishis and Sages, kings and princes; but since biographies of persons can only be written after their birth, the Brahmanas that contain those biographies must have been written after the birth of those Rishis and kings, etc., and therefore, cannot be eternal. The Veda does not contain the biography of any person, on the other hand in it only those words are used by which knowledge is made known. There is no mention of any proper names fo any particular event or individual in the Veda.

Q- How many Shaakhaas (branches) are there of the Veda?

A.- Eleven hundred and twenty-seven.

Q.What are Shaakhaas (branches)? A.- The expositions are called shaakhaas.

Q.We, hear of learned people speaking of the different parts of the Veda as shaakhaas. Are they wrong?

A.- If you think over it a little, you will understand that they are in the wrong, because all the Shaakhaas are attributed to Rishis such as Ashwalaayani and others, whilst the authorship of the Veda is ascribed to God. It other words, as the author of the four Vedas is believed to be God, so are Rishis held to be the authors of the shaakhaas, such as Ashwalaayani. And besides, all the shaakhaas take Veda texts and expound them, while in the Veda texts only are given. Therefore, the four Vedas – the books of Divine revelation – are like the trunk of a tree, whose branches (shaakhaas) are the books, such as Ashwalaayani, written by Rishis and not revealed by God,

As the parents are kind to their children and wish for their children and wish for their welfare, so has the Supreme Spirit, out of kindness to all men, revealed the Veda by whose study men are freed from ignorance and error, and may attain the light of true knowledge and thereby enjoy extreme happiness as well as advance knowledge and promote their welfare.

Q. Are the Vedas eternal or non-eternal?

A.- They are eternal. God being eternal, His knowledge and attributes must necessarily be eternal, because the nature, attributes and character of an eternal substance are also eternal and vice versa.

Q ~ Oh, I see. God must have given knowledge to those Rishis who afterwards composed the Vedas. Is that what you mean?

A.- There can be no ideas without words. No one but an All-knowing Being has the power to make such compositions as are full of all kinds of knowledge and require the perfect knowledge of music and poetry, meters, such chhandhaas and notes, etc. True, after having studied the Vedas, the Rishis, in order to elucidate the various branches of learning, made books on Grammar, Philology, Music and Poetry, etc. Had not God revealed the Vedas, no man would have been able to write anything. The Vedas, therefore, are revealed books. All men should conduct themselves according to their teachings, and when questioned as to his religion let everyone answer that his religion is Vedic, i.e., he believes in whatever is said in the Vedas.