Re: What is more important - to worship or to understand God?
[QUOTE]
I guess you mean with training, you train them the rituals of prayers etc.....but just performing these rituals: is that worship? or is worship indeed understanding what and why you are doing it?
[/QUOTE]
Well! it reminds me one of my five time 'nimazi' muslim friend. Once I asked him do you know Arabic? He replied, "No". Then I asked him when you offer your prayers do you understand the meanings of words that you recite during your prayer? He replied, "No". Then I asked is it necessary to be aware of the meanings of those reciting words during pray or not? He replied, "No it is not necessary to be aware about the meanings of those words that we recite during our pray." That person is a post graduate qualified person.
Now what in your opinion, is there any difference between rituals and prayers?
[QUOTE]
wudn't these two things be the same?
[/QUOTE]
To understand God and to understand our ownselves and this universe - both these things can be same provided that the God is not any religion's God. When we try to understand our ownselves and this universe, we have to face a number of such questions which are simply forbidden by religious Gods. So by believing in those religious Gods we cannot make attempts to understand our ownselves and this universe. We shall not be allowed by the religion to ask such questions as why there are many contradictions between real observable universe and that picture of universe which has been imposed on us by the religion? Then why our minds are logical and why the attributes of religious God are illogical? If our intellect and wisdom is unable to prove the existence of such religious Gods then why we are required to believe in the existence of such religious Gods?
[QUOTE]
here too u imply that following blindly without understanding is worshipping....i don't know if that's true
[/QUOTE]
It only implies that religion require blinde beliefs. It does not let you to keep your eyes open and ask wise questions. If you ask questions you shall be among the kaffirs etc.
[QUOTE]
similarly, what is the proof that they aren't? cuz even in this scenario our intellect will fail to prove that they aren't. somewhere along the line it is a matter of faith....but everything flowing out of it can most surely be based on intellect.
[/QUOTE]
Yes our intellect and wisdom do have its limitations. But our intellect and wisdom are also our maximum boundaries. We cannot cross our own boundaries. Then why we are required to believe in what is beyond the scope of our maximum limits? Is it not right to believe in only what is understandable because only this is what that we can rationally do. Ok we do need faith also at some times. But why to have too much rigid a faith? Where our intellect and wisdom fails, we do resort to faith but there always remain element of doubt in such kind of faith. Religion does not allow to keep this kind of doubt. Religion demands surity in those (mostly irrational i.e. which are beyond the scope of rationality) beliefs.
[QUOTE]
before asking these questions, another more important question: all the things which presume have come in the human mind as a result of intellect and wisdom: how do we know that even those things are rightly interpreted by us? in the end it all boils down to constructing a coherent stream of thought, without knowing that outside this structure the things are right or wrong, as long as within this structure all is coherent...
[/QUOTE]
Holy Books also come to the knowledge of common person (like you and me) through ordinary mind processes. What is the proof that lets say Muslim's holy Book has been rightly interpreted by any one existing Muslim?
Baseless surity is the demand of religion. Human minds natural tendency (a mind which works also) is to keep doubting in the baseless things. Orders of religion are against the natural mind tendency. Can it not be concluded that religion is just unaware about the natural tendency of human mind?