Sebab kenapa Muhammad dan Jesus tak harus diterima menurut Hinduism.
Sebab kenapa Muhammad (Islam) dan Jesus (Christianity) tak harus diterima sbg pendidik agama, menurut agama Hinduism.Menurut agama Hindu, seseorang yg berminat mengenai hal agama, harus pergi dan belajar mengenai hal agama dari seorang guru yg layak mengajar beliau mengenai Spiritualism. Siapakah Guru yg dimaksudkan ini?
Source : http://www.sanskrit.org/www/Hindu%20Primer/guru.html
The idea of a guru is a misunderstood concept within Hinduism. Literally, a guru is a teacher. The word guru means “heavy” or “deep,” thus a guru is a person “heavy” or “deep” in knowledge. In this sense a school-teacher is a guru, a coach or athletic instructor is a guru, a fine-arts or even a dance teacher is a guru. One’s parents are also gurus. In the religious field, where the word is most commonly used, a guru is a Hindu religious teacher. So a priest or any person learned in Hindu lore may be a guru. The main purpose of the guru is to teach. In the popular mind there are many stereotyped images of what a guru looks like or how he acts. Usually long hair, beards, flowing robes and lots of bowing followers come to mind, but if we keep the idea of a teacher in mind we will not be confused.
Sometimes we hear of different kinds of religious gurus. There is an initiating guru (diksha guru), an instructing guru (shiksha guru), and even the “guru within” (chaitya guru). An initiating guru is a person who formally accepts a student into a religious order or sampradaya. This kind of guru gives a mantra and other articles of initiation in a ceremony called diksha. The instructing guru is the teacher who actually trains the student. Sometimes the instructing guru and the initiating guru are the same person. The guru within is said to be the “wee” voice of God within the heart that tells a person how to act, and so on. Conscience might be the best word to describe this type of guru. In fact, it is considered that God is the original guru and all other forms of guru represent this one original guru. The expression “eternal guru” (sat guru) is often used to indicate God as the original guru.
Within Hinduism a guru is given great respect, even to the point of offering worship (guru puja). One full-moon each year (during July/August) is even called the Guru Purnima and is dedicated to the worship of guru. To have a guru who acts as the master is an essential part of spiritual growth and so to feel respect for and to want to honor one’s guru is natural and healthy. However, there is a tendency within Hinduism for the development of guru “cults” where the worship of guru supersedes the worship of God. This generally takes place when the original idea of guru as teacher becomes diminished and is replaced by the idea of guru as "blesser." To be blessed by a guru is considered the greatest thing, but people forget that the real blessing of a guru comes in the form of study, discipline, and hard work that leads to knowledge and wisdom and not just with the touch of a hand. The idea of guru as blesser is a debasement of the true role of a guru.Sekarang, kita akan tengok samada Muhammad dan Jesus boleh dikatakan sbg seorang guru yg layak mengajar manusia akan Tuhan.
Orang-orang Islam berpegang kepada ayat-ayat Allah dalam al-Quran.
Berkata Allah :
Orang-orang yang kafir serta menghalangi (dirinya dan orang lain) dari jalan Allah, Allah sia-siakan segala amal mereka. Dan (sebaliknya) orang-orang yang beriman dan mengerjakan amal yang soleh serta beriman kepada Al-Quran yang diturunkan kepada Nabi Muhammad (s.a.w) – yang ialah kebenaran dari Tuhan mereka, – Allah mengampunkan dosa-dosa mereka, dan menjayakan keadaan mereka (di dunia dan di akhirat). Berlakunya yang demikian, kerana sesungguhnya orang-orang yang kafir menurut perkara yang salah, dan sesungguhnya orang-orang yang beriman menurut perkara yang benar dari Tuhan mereka. Demikianlah Allah menerangkan kepada umat manusia akan sifat dan akibat bawaan mereka masing-masing. (AQ : Muhammad : 1-3) Dalam agama Hindu, terdapat tiga jenis "Guru" - iaitu
Diksha Guru (Guru yg menerima murid bila murid tersebut datang kpd nya dan meminta diterima).
Shiksha guru (guru yg menberikan tunjuk-ajar dlm pelbagai bidang, terutamanya bidang yg memerlukan latihan physical dan tunjjuk-ajar spt perubatan) dan akhir sekali,
Chaitya guru (guru yg diterima oleh seseorang murid secara rohani). Contoh terbaik perhubungan antara murid dan guru dlm bentuk Chaitya ini adalah antara Drona dan Ekaliva (seorang pemburu kasta rendah yg tidak diterima oleh Drona kerana castanya tetapi dia menerima Drona sbg guru dan menjadi seorang pemanah yg lebih baik dari Arjuna (murid utama Drona).
Kalau dilihat dari konsep atas, kita boleh katakan bahawa seseorang Hindu menpunyai dua pilihan bila ingin menjadi seorang murid dlm bidang Spiritualism. Dia boleh mendekati seorang guru dan diminta dijadikan murid ataupun menjadikan seseorang guru itu sbg gurunya melalui Chaitya guru. Malahan, tak salah sekiranya kita mengatakan bahawa mereka2 yg buat meditasi menjadikan Tuhan itu sendiri sbg Guru.
Malahan Gautama Buddha itu sendiri pernah mengembara selama 20 tahun dan melakukan pelbagai meditasi sebelum menjadi Buddha. Beliau juga merupakan seorang murid yg mengunakan cara Chaitya utk mndapatkan Kebenaran dan menjadi Guru kpd murid2nya dikemudian hari.
Tetapi apakah kelayakan Muhammad dan Jesus? Pernahkah mereka menpelajari agama mereka dari sesiapa pun? Jawapannya adalah TIDAK.
Jesus tak pernah berguru dgn sesiapa pun. Walaupun kini ada juga orang Kristian yg sibuk mendakwa bahawa Jesus pernah datang ke India dan belajar dari sana sebelum pergi balik ke Middle East dgn ilmu tersebut, akan tetapi tak ada bukti mengatakan sedemikian. Jadi, Jesus adalah seorang yg tak ada ilmu Spiritualism yg berkauliah.
Muhammad juga sama nasib dgnnya. Kita tahu bahawa dia pernah bermeditasi di Gua Hira tetapi kita tidak pernah diberitahu dari mana Muhammad belajar meditasi tersebut.
Orang Islam boleh mendakwa bahawa Muhammad menjadi murid kpd Tuhan melalui Chaitya (dimana seseorang itu boleh menjadikan Tuhan sbg Gurunya). Akan tetapi mereka tidak tahu bahawa seseorang yg belajar melalui Chaitya tidak boleh mengajar sehingga dirinya "lulus" dlm pelbagai ujian yg ditetapkan oleh Gurunya (dlm kes ini, Tuhan). Boleh dikatakan dlm bentuk perguruan semua yg dikatakan di atas, perguruan jenis Chaitya adalah paling susah kerana ujian2 yg berikan adalah berat - spt ujian nafsu, ketakutan, kedengkian, tamak dan lain2. Muhammad pernah lari balik ketakutan selepas bertembung dgn Jibrail di Gua Hira, jadi dari sini, kita mampu melihat apakah kekuatan mental dan spiritual dia. Oleh itu, kita boleh katakan bahawa Muhammad gagal dlm ujian pertama lagi dah. Why people should use the Hindu criteria in the first place? Both Jesus and Muhammad (peace be upon them) were not Hindu in the first place, why should they follow Hindu way of doing thing?
In this "Guru" context, the way I see it is, one have to believe in what Hindu says about the "Guru" first before they can believe in Islam, which technically doesn't make any sense.
I'm puzzling now as of why you want to use Hindu criteria for "Guru" to judge Jesus and Muhammand (pbut).
In Malaysia, I found most of hooligans and ganster are hindus which indians...Police shot dead this ethnic like 'lipas'....the police are not to be blame onthis issue.
Let me tell u the truth.....base on my experience....
I was not that educated...left school and complete my study form 3...since, working hard ...work in pub...
Indians over there nuisance...
I goes out to enjoy...here too indians are trouble marker
lepak2 at park with myfriends...indians are nuisance...drinking beers...dancing...unpleasant words...peoples will stay away if see such indians...
now running my business...still facing same problem with indians....why?
does something went wrong??? hinduism??
Now, I have also seen ex hindusconverting to Christians,,,,
so much different in terms of behaviours....speech, good human behaviours and etc
hence, The Bible indeed makes changes to ex hindus to better man of the world...
we dont need to go further,,,, one example is madam sepi...rude talk, bad attitude and etc....
thats how hindus shape her up...
Btw, Hindusim is good religion but it has been corrupted....so,,,,only Bible can leads this peoples with sound mind manners
Amen{:1_545:}
mashimaru83 posted on 28-10-2013 01:05 PM static/image/common/back.gif
Why people should use the Hindu criteria in the first place? Both Jesus and Muhammad (peace be upon...
Good question - Why do I use the criteria of "Guru" according to Hinduism to judge Muhammad and Jesus. Answers are :-
1. Muslims kept saying that Islam is the ONLY religion to be followed and all other religions prior to Islam should be abandoned. Therefore, I was showing them that Muhammad doesn't fit to be a Guru according to these (prior) religious standards.
2. Muslims kept saying that Islam is the continoity of pervious religions (like Hinduism, Buddhism and Judaism). I was showing the fact that Muhammad doesn't even fit the standards set by humans toward their own Guru (another human being) much less a more saintly figure closer to Divine.
3. Religions which came AFTER Hinduism and before Islam (between 5,000 years ago to 1,400 years ago) have religious leaders who fit these criteria. For example, Gautama Buddha himself have worked hard for his enlightnment, obtained it and stayed in the World to teach it to fellow human beings as a Teacher (a Guru). However, Muhammad did not follow this standards - which is odd considering that a Supreme God should have a better candidate for a Guru instead of Muhammad who RAN at his first test (of Fear). Therefore, it is logical to say that either Allah is not God or Muhammad is not a Guru (but one pretended to be) or BOTH are true.
4. Finally, this thread is more toward Hindus and Buddhists alike who should judge carefully who Muhammad (and Jesus) are claimed to be before they could renounce their own religions and follow Islam.
Thank you for such an awesome post, Sephiroth. Seriously, I kinda like these explanations about "Guru".
One thing that I would like to ask is that, I believe you are saying that "Guru" obtains their knowledge from their "Guru", and their "Guru" obtained it from their "Guru". Hence, this forms a 'chain of knowledge' and expands as time goes by.
Simple question : Who was at the end of the chain? I've noticed that you mention this :
In fact, it is considered that God is the original guru and all other forms of guru represent this one original guru. The expression “eternal guru” (sat guru) is often used to indicate God as the original guru.
Is it safe for us to understand that according to Hinduism, God is the 'original Guru' that bestows religion to the first human ever to become a guru?
Hope my question makes sense. If it doesn't, please enlighten us further. Thanks in advance! :) Sephiroth posted on 28-10-2013 01:55 PM static/image/common/back.gif
Good question - Why do I use the criteria of "Guru" according to Hinduism to judge Muhammad and Je ...
Sephiroth:
1. Muslims kept saying that Islam is the ONLY religion to be followed and all other religions prior to Islam should be abandoned. Therefore, I was showing them that Muhammad doesn't fit to be a Guru according to these (prior) religious standards.But then that doesn't explain why we should follow Hindu standards. There are also other religions claimed to be prior to Islam, not just Hindu.
Sephiroth:
2. Muslims kept saying that Islam is the continoity of pervious religions (like Hinduism, Buddhism and Judaism). I was showing the fact that Muhammad doesn't even fit the standards set by humans toward their own Guru (another human being) much less a more saintly figure closer to Divine.Please bring the evidence of Muslims who kept saying Islam is the continuity of the mentioned previous religions. Which muslims?
Sephiroth:
3. Religions which came AFTER Hinduism and before Islam (between 5,000 years ago to 1,400 years ago) have religious leaders who fit these criteria. For example, Gautama Buddha himself have worked hard for his enlightnment, obtained it and stayed in the World to teach it to fellow human beings as a Teacher (a Guru). However, Muhammad did not follow this standards - which is odd considering that a Supreme God should have a better candidate for a Guru instead of Muhammad who RAN at his first test (of Fear). Therefore, it is logical to say that either Allah is not God or Muhammad is not a Guru (but one pretended to be) or BOTH are true.
4. Finally, this thread is more toward Hindus and Buddhists alike who should judge carefully who Muhammad (and Jesus) are claimed to be before they could renounce their own religions and follow Islam.The reason why everyone should use the standards is still un-answered. Look, I'm talking about everyone, not just Muslim. Which part of the standards say that you cannot fail at the first time?
Even the origin of these standards are questionable? The link in the first post only talk about what Guru is. Where did the standards in second post come from? I don't see any quotation or reference to Hindu/Buddha scriptures. Please provide the quotation or reference as evidence to your truthfulness.
by mashimaru
But then that doesn't explain why we should follow Hindu standards. There are also other religions claimed to be prior to Islam, not just Hindu.
First of all, give me ONE GOOD REASON WHY standards of Hinduism is not good enough for you? I choose Hinduism because it is the OLDEST religion and its followers have brought great knowledge and wisdom to those who did not have it (like those people in South East Asia between 100 AD to 1400 AD).
I could have use Buddhism but Buddha did not speak of any God nor taught His followers to follow His teachings like a religion (therefore, should not be used as a standard to judge a religion). I could have used Judaism and Christianity but Islam pre-judged these beliefs as "corrupted" beliefs therefore, Muslims can weasel out of it easily.
So, give me a proper reason why Hinduism - the oldest and most successful religion (in term of peace and social development prior to Muslim and Western conquests) should not be used?
by gunblade712
Is it safe for us to understand that according to Hinduism, God is the 'original Guru' that bestows religion to the first human ever to become a guru?
You should remember the dangerous part here :
The guru within is said to be the “wee” voice of God within the heart that tells a person how to act, and so on.
This quote means that a person who takes God as his teacher can only listen and follow God's instruction. HE IS NOT TO TEACH WHAT HE HAD LEARNT TO OTHERS FOR HE IS A STUDENT. A person who take God's as a Teacher is a STUDENT FOR LIFE. In this relationship, the Master is God and the Student is the one who takes God as his teacher. He cannot take another student or teach any religion on behalf of God (thus becoming a teacher himself). Last edited by Sephiroth on 29-10-2013 08:26 AM
by Gunblade712
One thing that I would like to ask is that, I believe you are saying that "Guru" obtains their knowledge from their "Guru", and their "Guru" obtained it from their "Guru". Hence, this forms a 'chain of knowledge' and expands as time goes by.
There is not End or Beginning in knowledge. You are student today, you take a Guru and learn what he knows. During the time you are learning, you will question your Guru through series of questioning, investigation and self-meditation. You will accumulate your own findings with that of your Guru and become a Mastered Student by the end of your learning period. Then tomorrow, you will take a Student for yourself (as you are anointed a Guru). Your Student will repeat the same process as you have done with your own master and the process continues. The knowledge accumulates, refined and revised as each generation goes.
If you look at the History, before Mankind, there are other Ape-like creatures walking the Earth. Each of them had an accomplishment which are transferred to the next Ape-like creature. One creature discovered Fire, another spear, another how to hunt in packs, another how to create Arts on the cave walls and create necklace of seashells. And when humans came, they have received all these accumulated knowledge from these ape-like creatures who lived before them and used it to become civilized.
Sephiroth posted on 29-10-2013 08:15 AM static/image/common/back.gif
by mashimaru
Sephiroth:
First of all, give me ONE GOOD REASON WHY standards of Hinduism is not good enough for you? I choose Hinduism because it is the OLDEST religion and its followers have brought great knowledge and wisdom to those who did not have it (like those people in South East Asia between 100 AD to 1400 AD).
So, give me a proper reason why Hinduism - the oldest and most successful religion (in term of peace and social development prior to Muslim and Western conquests) should not be used? OLDEST is not necessarily the true one. Within your own belief circle, it looks correct but going outside of the circle, people need evidence for your claim before they can establish the truthfulness of your claim. We can't simply change our religion just because someone discover an older religion than the current one! We have to assess the teaching first before we establish anything.
Great knowledge, peace and social development is too subjective. Other people outside of your belief circle also have those criterias. If that is the measure of absolute truth in relation to the God, then people will have a hard time deciding what the actual absolute truth is, all people regardless of their faiths have those criterias. Which one should they follow?
That is why I'm asking from you the evidence for your claims so that we can prove its truthfullness. Again, you claimed that the standards were from Hindu. Yet I didn't see any evidence for it. The link in the first post only talk about what Guru is. Where did the standards in second post come from? I didn't see any quotation or reference to Hindu/Buddha scriptures. Please provide the quotation or reference as evidence.
Sephiroth posted on 29-10-2013 08:15 AM static/image/common/back.gif
by mashimaru
This quote means that a person who takes God as his teacher can only listen and follow God's instruction. HE IS NOT TO TEACH WHAT HE HAD LEARNT TO OTHERS FOR HE IS A STUDENT. A person who take God's as a Teacher is a STUDENT FOR LIFE. In this relationship, the Master is God and the Student is the one who takes God as his teacher. He cannot take another student or teach any religion on behalf of God (thus becoming a teacher himself).
Oh ok. So we are to understand that according to Hinduism, a person who learns from God directly is a student for life and thus are unable to convey his knowledge (obtained from God) to another human being; he cannot take up another as his student.
Is this the right understanding? Thanks again!
Sephiroth posted on 29-10-2013 08:25 AM static/image/common/back.gif
by Gunblade712
I got this part, too. :)
But what I wanted to ask is the chain of knowledge :
Student < Guru
This is the first chain. Let's say, you are the Guru, and we are all the students. Hence, we are obtaining this knowledge from you. You, on the other hand, were once a student to an older guru, hence the chain goes :
Us < Seph (guru) < Hindu Priest (previous guru)
The chain will again expand, because the Hindu Priest (who was once your Guru) must obtain his knowledge from another guru. Hence :
Us < Seph (guru) < Hindu Priest (previous Guru) < Hindu Priest from India (older previous guru).
So the chain will go up and up and up. I'm not sure whether you believe in the start of mankind/creation (I assume you do; I've remembered you mention about the End of the World and starts of a New Age), but the chain must started somewhere. Even if a person suddenly obtained knowledge, he must obtain it from someone/some being who is much more intelligent and wiser than him.
That's what I would like for you to explain to us; according to Hinduism, where does the First Knowledge comes from?
Sorry for the long explanation. Hope you understand my question.
by Gunblade712
Is this the right understanding? Thanks again!
Yes, that is correct. Logics here are :-
1. Since God is the Teacher and a human is a Student, his (human's) lessons can last from the day he is born to the day he dies. Therefore, his lessons will never be completed.
2. IF a student is to become a Teacher, the student MUST show he is capable of absorbing all the knowledge of the Teacher as well as improve what he had learnt. And since it is IMPOSSIBLE for a human to absorb God's knowledge (without killing himself) or to improve God's knowledge, thus he (human) cannot exceed his Teacher, thus he become a student for life.
3. The lessons he (humans) learn from God is specifically for himself. He cannot learn lessons on behalf of another person nor another race. In Chaitya Gurukolam (Lessons through Chaitya Methods), the relationship between Student and Master is based on individuality. It is between You and God. Your lessons is based on your own life and the lessons are for Life. Many sages and Saints (in Hinduism) have followed this methods, abandoning worldly possessions and life style to be with their Master (God).
You could ask another question - Then how to teach the Society or others? Answer is :- Students of Chaitya Gurukolam cannot teach. Fullstop. They can only live their lives properly and allow themselves to be examples of Spiritual lifestyle for others to learn from. They could also "ask" God if a society has problems (some Sages can foresee events ahead of the time - visions given by God to selected few - like Sage Vyasa). Jika orang HIndu mempunyai guru yang paling best maka mengapa seorang Yahudi yang bernama Michael H. Hart. Hart yang menulis buku bertajuk “The 100 : A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History (100 Tokoh Paling Berpengaruh Sepanjang Masa)” memilih Nabi Muhammad saw sebagai orang yang paling berpengaruh manakala Nabi Isa itu prang yang ke tiga paling berpengaruh, dan pengasas Buddha, Siddhartha Gautama, orang ke empat paling berpengaruh?
Nabi Muhammad saw lari ketakutan dari gua Hiraq bukan dia takut pada Malaikat Jibrail tetapi dia takut sebab dia tak tahu apa sebenarnya berlaku pada dirinya. Dia tertanya-tanya benarkah dia adalah Pesuruh Allah. Sebab itu sebaik sahaja malaikat Jibrail datang lagi membawa wahyu yang ke dua tidak lama selepas menerima wahyu pertama, maka dikala tu dia dah tak takut lagi sebab dia dah tahu memang dia pesuruh Allah dan dah bersedia untuk sebarkan agama Allah.
Ketika menyebarkan agama Allah dia adalah guru yang baik bila dia bukan sahaja menjadi Diksha Guru,Shiksha guru dan Chaitya guru tetapi juga menunjukkan tingkah laku sebagai manusia terbaik di sisi Allah kepada sekalian manusia yang ada. Sehingga kini kami tahu tentang dia melalui hadis-hadis yang ada.
Sebaiknya kamu buat homework sebelum mengata Nabi Muhammad saw tidak benar. Baca hadis untuk tahu siapa sebenarnya Nabi Muhammad. Kamu baca tentang Nabi Muhammad melalui kitab yang ditulis oleh orang kristian yang memusuhi Nabi Muhammad maka memang le kamu dapat yang tak baik tentang dia. Sephiroth posted on 29-10-2013 11:28 AM static/image/common/back.gif
by Gunblade712
ah nice! wanted to ask about how to teach society but you took the question out of my mouth. I understand this one. thanks Seph. :loveliness:
hope you can explain to me about my other question (which is kinda long).
by mashimaru83
OLDEST is not necessarily the true one. Within your own belief circle, it looks correct but going outside of the circle, people need evidence for your claim before they can establish the truthfulness of your claim.
Oldest is not necessarily the true one? Where is the proof that newest is true one? I don't see your logic here. If you look at something old, it is TIME-TESTED. The questions have been asked, answered, revised through the generations and re-asked again. The new is NOT TIME-TESTED.
People need evidence, you say. What is the evidence that Jesus existed or even died for your pathetic a$$ that you could follow Christianity? Or that Muhammad is actually listening to God (and not hallucinating) before you follow Islam? And that Atheism could lead you to a higher level of understanding and not end up like a freaking dog? Where the hell is your evidence (for your belief) before you could come and ask others? :curse:
We can't simply change our religion just because someone discover an older religion than the current one!
You are mistaken. No one asking you to change. Do you know WHY?
250 years ago, no one believed that there was something called Gravity holding us down. They believe that the mountains were pasted onto the ground, and that the roots of the trees gripped itself and kept it from falling down and that humans were kept on the ground by the will of God. No one believe in Gravity existed, but no one dared to test it by jumping off a mountain.
Same here with Laws of karma, Dharma and Satyam (Truth). It matters NOT whether you believes in it or follows our beliefs or change your belief accordingly. WE DO NOT CARE $HIT. Do you know why? Cos regardless of what you believe (or don't), the Effects of Karma is real (just like Gravity) and you will get what you deserve eventually. {:1_550:}
If that is the measure of absolute truth in relation to the God, then people will have a hard time deciding what the actual absolute truth is, all people regardless of their faiths have those criterias. Which one should they follow?
IF one generation (of people) can decide what is the Truth, then how can it is called Absolute Truth? Where is the logic in assuming your generations have all the facts that they could make a claim that they know Absolute Truth? IF your very basic of argument is faulty, how are you going to find truth???
1500 years ago - Hinduism is Truth in most part of Asia. 1400 - 1700 AD, Islam and Christianity came. Today, Hinduism is considered False. Bottomline - People cannot determine what is Absolute Truth.
The link in the first post only talk about what Guru is. Where did the standards in second post come from?
If you have read what is Guru, then why are you asking where the second post comes from? Do I need to cut and paste from another website in order to satisfy your ego? Or have you people become so dull that you are incapable of making your own explanation based on what you have read? :shakehead3: by Gunblade712
That's what I would like for you to explain to us; according to Hinduism, where does the First Knowledge comes from?
Both Hinduism and Buddhism have the similar idea of where knowledge came from. First - understand that when I said knowledge, it is LIMITED to Worldly knowledge alone. Spiritual Knowledge comes much much later.
Worldly Knowledge comes from Suffering (or Buddhists calls it Dukka). The first suffering we endure is the suffering of existence or duality. Single cell organism (1 Sense) came to understand it exist. Once it knew it exist, it knew it is alive, and replicate itself continuously to repeat the process.
Then knowledge of Space comes (2nd Sense). One cell looks at another in a distance and knew that there is a gap in between. It reaches out and get in touch. Two reach out to four, four to eight and it goes on. Single cell organism starts to form colony of living glo.
Then comes the knowledge of dimension (3rd Sense) that flat is not the Whole World but it is two dimension - up and down. Same way we view 3D objects. Colony of living glo begins to take shape, creating forms and increasing in size. Become small animals (like fish and insects).
Then comes the knowledge of 4th Senses (higher dimension) - distance and movement. Fish and insects begins to evolve to a bigger creatures. Suffering continuous in form of hunger, thirst, sickness and death. Animals evolve to become predator and prey. Predators begin to adapt to changes. Smaller hunters gather in packs to bring down larger animals and larger animals become solo hunters to bring down smaller hunters (thus allowing more meat for itself). Preys begins to learn to adapt - become social creatures who gather around in a larger group for safety. This in turn allows the knowledge of the Fifth Sense to come.
After a long time, an animal which have been socializing begins to become self-aware. It divide itself away from other animals which it hunts and keeps as pets (like dogs, sheep and cows). It feels pain and fear and wonders about Death. It learns about the Cycle of Life within Nature, which gives it the first knowledge of Spiritualism. When humans reached this level 250,000 years ago, we have reached the sixth senses.
So, bottomline - suffering causes life to learn and move forward. Sephiroth posted on 29-10-2013 12:47 PM static/image/common/back.gif
by Gunblade712
So, bottomline - suffering causes life to learn and move forward.
correction.....
We are responsible for our actions and thoughts
when we do good (postive) ...it circle positive
when we do bad (negative) it circle negative
so, we should mind our tongue too...before we says something...
our actions and thoughts as well...
Last edited by Truth.8 on 29-10-2013 05:45 PM
Sephiroth posted on 29-10-2013 12:47 PM static/image/common/back.gif
by Gunblade712
Oh ok.. I remember the story of Siddharta Gautama's 'movitation' to seek 'the truth', he saw pain, suffering, and death (betul?)
Though I understand the concept and explanation, it doesn't actually fill in the gap. Let's continue more on the explanation : from a single cell, it has realized and moved forward towards 'evolution' (is it suitable to use this word?). By the peek of it's 'evolution', it will become a being knows how to conquer other beings, solve problems and survive in the wild. Let's give this being's name; "Man".
Man, when reaches it's pinnacle (during THAT time), will start to wonder about things that he does not know (I believe this is the crux of the explanation; the cell, the being, starts to wonder about things that it does not know). During one time, "Man" will question the reason for his existence. By time, he will question about his own master (seeing how he, himself, is the master of the 'lesser being'). Does he have a master, or is he absolute? What is death? Who created the sky? Is there anyone living beyond the clouds?
During that time, according to Hinduism, who gave the first "Man" the knowledge of the unknown/unseen?
To make it simpler, who was the first guru of mankind and/or who was mankind's guru?