Why Muhammad Loves Me Most?


Today it occurred to me that I am the most loved person by Muhammad.  No I am not kidding.

I have dedicated my life to combat Islam and get the world rid of this curse that has brought nothing but misery and pain to countless souls for so many centuries. I am working hard to help Muslims see the truth and leave their religion of hate and violence.  So why would Muhammad love me? Am I not undoing what he did? How can he love me more than anyone else?

I don’t believe God has a hell to burn humans.  This goes against the nature of God.  If God is love and God’s love is unconditional,  then hell is incompatible with the nature of God.

However, this does not mean that hell does not exist.  You see, even though God does not punish people and has no torture chambers, as Muhammad described them, it does not mean that we don’t punish ourselves.

As I said in the previous article, Should We Fear God?, this world is an illusion. This is what physicists in the 21st century are telling us.  We are not here. We are in the matrix in a very different dimension, remotely controlling our 3D hologram that we call our body.  At a point in time, this hologram that makes our physical body will stop responding to our commands and we lose its control. Nothing happens to us, our memory and our awareness are not affected. It is like your car stop working while you are driving it.  You get out of it. You look at it for outside. It seems strange, because you are used to be inside it.  But you are still you.  Nothing is changed.  You just don’t have your car.  At first we may not even realize that we have lost control of our body. In fact we may discover we have gained some cool abilities such as flying and we may wonder how can we do that.  When we look at our body from outside and see it lying there motionless, and recognize it as our own body, we become aware that we are dead.  At this moment, suddenly, the illusion of this world disappears. It is like waking up from a dream. We become conscious of what we did and how we played our game of life.  This moment of awakening can be exhilarating and joyous or it can be painful and remorseful. It depends on how we lived this life and what we did with it.  God will continue loving us. He will forgive us no matter what because that is His nature.  But whether we would forgive ourselves or not is another matter.

In this world, sociopaths have no conscience.  They do evil and don’t feel the pain that they cause to others.  One characteristic of  sociopaths and malignant narcissists, is lack of empathy. It is not that they are not aware that they are hurting others. They just don’t care and even enjoy it.  It gives them a sense of power to see others scream and suffer. Muhammad was fully aware that what he was doing to others was evil.  He raided, massacred and looted thousands of people, but when a few Bedouins killed one of his men and stole a few of his stolen camels, he  sent men after them, captured them, cut their extremities and left them in the sun to slowly die.  He stole the wealth of others but said if anyone steals from the stolen property he will go to hell.  He had awareness but no conscience.

Once we die, we wake up from this dream we call life and we will see what we have wrought.  That is the time that we will be filled with guilt, remorse and shame, or elation.  We will realize how much we screwed up the privilege of living this life and what a rare opportunity we missed to evolve spiritually. We become aware of the extent of the suffering we caused.

In this world we have the illusion of being distinct and separate individuals. In the real world (in the spiritual world), this distinction is blurred.  We will live the pain that we caused to others in our own soul. The pains of our victims become ours. You might have heard, what you do to others you do it to yourself. Well, this is the reality in the other world.  We actually live the experiences of those with whom we come in contact in this world. If we love them, we feel that love, and if we hurt them we experience that hurt.

This physical world has its laws. We know about gravity. If you drop yourself from a height, you get hurt. No one is punishing you and no amount of prayers can save you. The law of gravity takes care of you and this law applies to everyone.  The next world has its laws.  In that world we become one. We live each others’ experiences. We can see each others’ thoughts and feel each others’ feelings. I I have made you happy here, I will feel that exact feeling of happiness in the other world. It just boomerangs back to me. If I caused you pain, I will experience that pain in my own soul.  That is what we know as paradise and hell. There are no brothels or torture houses in the next world. Whatever we did to others boomerangs back to us. There is no judgement. But we will experience that feelings we brought in others. And that is because our souls are one. And whatever we do to others, we actually do to ourselves. If my right hand pinches my left hand, the pain is felt in all my body.  My left hand and right hand are not distinct from each other. Likewise our spiritual essence is all one reality.

Now imagine if you were a mass murderer in this world.  You will then carry the pain of all your victims and their loved ones.  You will live their pain.   But what if your name is Hitler or Muhammad? How much pain did you cause in this world? How much suffering did you bring to others?  Hundreds of millions of people? No the victims of Muhammad exceed billions and still counting.  He feels the pains of all these people.  This is unbearable.  I have hurt feelings out of ignorance and even though years have passed I am still pained every time I think about it.  My remorse is not going to help me because once I leave the illusion of this body, I will feel those hurts feelings that I caused again.  The information does not get lost. Nothing is deleted.  I did not kill anyone. I did not cheat anyone. I did not harm anyone. I hurt feelings with my unkind words.  And now that I am aware I know I am going to feel all the hurts I caused.  But I also did good things and loved.  I am going to feel that too.  I hope they overshadow the hurt that I caused. How can Muhammad endure the pain that he has caused to billions of his victims? He must feel the pains of those who were hurt also by his followers.  He is ultimately responsible for what they do.  If you do evil, because I convinced you to do it, both you and I are guilty.

We come to this world to love. That is the sole reason for this universe. Instead, Muhammad promoted hate. He lied, deceived, raided, looted, murdered, enslaved, raped and committed all sorts of heinous crimes and despicable acts that no animal would commit, all for the lust of power and vainglory. Now that he is dead and his veils of distinction are removed, he has become aware of what he has done.  In this world the lust for power had blinded him. In the other world he is fully conscious of his evil actions and their consequences. He lives them through and experiences each and every one of them in his soul.

God will forgive even Muhammad. But he will feel those pains.  He must be hiding far away from God and far away from God is hell.  Hell is where love does not exist.

For every action there is a reaction. If we sow the seeds of love, we harvest love and if we sow the seeds of hate we reap hate.  Like a stone that creates ripples when thrown in a pond, our deeds reverberate even after we die, sometimes for centuries and millennia.

I wondered how long will Muhammad’s torments last. It dawned on me that as long as people are victimized by his lies he will feel their torments.  Suddenly, I realized I am Muhammad’s best hope. By exposing his lies and ending the evil that he brought to this world I am setting him free from his eternal torment.  This is the only chance he has to get out of his hell. Do you see now why he is praying for my success?

Forty innocent high-school students were massacred a couple of weeks ago in Nigeria. They were killed by the followers of Muhammad who believe in his lies that all knowledge that is not in the Quran is satanic (Taghooti) and Jaheliyah.  Forty families will grieve for the rest of their lives.  Muhammad will feel and carry the pain of each and every one of them.  When Muslims murder innocent people in the name of Muhammad and his bogus Allah, they do it to themselves and also to Muhammad.

He will remain in hell as long as there are people who commit evil in his name.  We can set him free if we end the evil that he has unleashed.  Muslims have been invoking peace on their prophet for 1400 years, but his soul will keep burning in hell as long as his lies continue victimizing people.  The only way that he can have peace is if his cult is eradicated and his evil influence is ended.

The pains caused by Hitler are over. He will one day be set free from his torment. But the sufferings caused by Muhammad are mounting.  He must be in the worst hell. Let us have mercy on him. Once we get rid of his evil influence, he can set himself free from the fire of remorse that is consuming his soul.

You may also like...

39 Responses

  1. siddharth says:

    Myth #3: Hindu rulers systematically uprooted Buddhism.

    This is a very generic myth and to counter it we are going to use chronicles of Chinese travelers, some of whom, where students of Buddhist theology. When Hieun Tsang (the Chinese traveler and a student of Buddhist theology) was in India, king Harshavardhana organized the Kanauj assembly (643 AD). This king was a patron of both Shaivism and Buddhism and in fact Harshavardhana has written plays integrating legends from Puranas and Jataka. The invitees to the Kanauj assembly included King Bhaskaravarman of Kamrupa (Assam), many Buddhist monks, Hindu and Jain scholars. And where did Hieun Tsang pursue further studies? He did it in Buddhist University of Nalanda. Had Hindu rulers were so intent on finishing off Buddhism, how did this University survive? And a couple of centuries prior to this assembly at Kanauj, another Chinese traveler Faxian (330 – 420 AD) had chronicled the hold of Buddhism in India. Even in the two centuries between these two Chinese travelers, Buddhism did not wither away, which, clearly indicates that across this land ruled by Hindu kings, the growth of Buddhism was never curtailed.

    And let us further see what we can infer from Hieun Tsang about Buddhism in India, in his works –

    Buddhism was popular in Kanyakubja (modern day UP).
    Kanyakubja had 100 monasteries and 10,000 bhikshus along with 200 “Deva” (Hindu) temples
    Konkanpura (perhaps modern day Konkan or may be the areas around Kolhapur), he found great numbers of Buddhists coexisting with a similar number of non-Buddhists
    In Sindh he finds a large Sammitiya and Theravada population. He reports a fair number of Buddhists in what is now Pakistan.

    His chronicles, while discussing that some of the Hindu kings were not favorable to Buddhism, does not anywhere mention anything close to state sponsored violence being unleashed against Buddhists by these Hindu kings. And our Chinese friend (a known Buddhist student of theology) was of some repute and if these Hindu kings were so bigoted (as our modern day historians would have us believe), he would not have been allowed to enter into such kingdoms at all.

    So what the above instances go to show is that Hindu kings were not Hindu extremists that destroyed Buddhism, as, the modern day historians try to claim. Given the obvious gaps in their falsified accunts, some of the historians use King Mihirakula as a Hindu poster boy that unleashed violence against Buddhists. But what they willfully gloss over is that this king was not a Hindu but was a Hun ruler that belonged to a clan (of Central Asian Xionites origin) that invaded North West India. The historians claim that King Mihirakula was a Shiavitie but in his campaigns against the kingdom of Malwa and Gwalior, he razed down temples and Buddhist stupas alike and this confirms his non-Hindu origins. Just to be doubly sure, I am also presenting his lineage which proves he was not a Hindu. Mihirakula was the son of the Hun ruler called Toramana and their Hun lineage and the spread of the kingdom can be seen in the Jain literary work called Kuvalayamala.

    But our biased historians will have none of these and they will continue to parrot the lie that Hindu kings like Pushyamitra and Mihirakula persecuted Buddhists

  2. siddharth says:

    Decline of Buddhism in India:

    Here is where the falsified, unsubstantiated blatant lies of many a historian will be buried. Now, will our biased historians give us details of which of the Hindu kings pillaged and burnt down Buddhist monasteries? They hardly can but we are going to churn out some hard hitting facts.

    An excerpt from “History Of Magadha” by L.L.S. Omalley; J.F.W. James (Veena Publication, Delhi, 2005, pp. 35: “ The Buddhism of Magadha was finally swept away by the Muhammadan invasion under Bakhtiyar Khilji, In 1197 the capital, Bihar, was seized by a small party of two hundred horsemen, who rushed the postern gate, and sacked the town. The slaughter of the “shaven-headed Brahmans,” as the Muslim chronicler calls the Buddhist monks, was so complete that when the victor searched for someone capable of explaining the contents of the monastic libraries, not a living man could be found who was able to do so. “It was discovered,” it was said, “that the whole fort and city was a place of study.” A similar fate befell the other Buddhist institutions, against which the combined intolerance and rapacity of the invaders was directed. The monasteries were sacked and the monks slain, many of the temples were ruthlessly destroyed or desecrated, and countless idols were broken and trodden under foot. Those monks who escaped the sword flied to Tibet, Nepal and southern India; and Buddhism as a popular religion in Bihar, its last abode in Northern India, was finally destroyed. Then forward Patna passed under Muhammadan rule.”
    And what did the Hindus that were fighting the Muhammadan invaders do for Buddhism during the invasions? Here are some excerpts from Alexander Berzin’s “The Historical Interaction between the Buddhist and Islamic Cultures before the Mongol Empire”:
    Although the Mithila rulers were Shaivite Hindus, they continued the Pala patronage of Buddhism and offered strong resistance against the Ghurids. They stopped, for example, an attempted drive to take Tibet in 1206.
    The Sena king (Hindu) installed defensive garrisons at Odantapuri and Vikramashila Monasteries, which were imposing walled citadels directly on the Ghurids’ line of advance.
    A Tibetan monk called Dharmaswamin visited Nalanda in 1235, nearly forty years after its sack, and found a small class still conducted in the ruins by a ninety-year old monk, Rahul Sribhadra. Weak and old, the teacher was kept fed and alive by a local Brahmin, Jayadeva. Warned of a roving band of 300 Turks, the class dispersed, with Dharmaswamin carrying his nonagenarian teacher on his back into hiding. Only the two of them came back, and after the last lesson (it was Sanskrit grammar) Rahul Sribhadra told his Tibetan student that he had taught him all he knew and in spite of his entreaties asked him to go home. Packing a raggedy bundle of surviving manuscripts under his robe, Dharmaswamin left the old monk sitting calmly amidst the ruins. And both he and the Dharma of Sakyamuni made their exit from India.

    Dr.Ambedkar’s take on the topic:

    “There can be no doubt that the fall of Buddhism in India was due to the invasions of the Musalmans,” writes the author. “Islam came out as the enemy of the ‘But’. The word ‘But,’ as everybody knows, is an Arabic word and means an idol. Not many people, however, know that the derivation of the word ‘But’ is the Arabic corruption of Buddha. Thus the origin of the word indicates that in the Moslem mind idol worship had come to be identified with the Religion of the Buddha. To the Muslims, they were one and the same thing. The mission to break the idols thus became the mission to destroy Buddhism. Islam destroyed Buddhism not only in India but wherever it went. Before Islam came into being Buddhism was the religion of Bactria, Parthia, Afghanistan, Gandhar and Chinese Turkestan, as it was of the whole of Asia….”

  3. siddharth says:

    Myth #4: Adi Shankaracharya instigated Hindu kings to rid India of Buddhism

    This is a myth that is completely unfounded. The historical records show that by the time Adi Shankaracharya started traveling and engaging Buddhist scholars in theological debates, Buddhism was already on the wane, due to the fact that monasteries started becoming organized power centers of kingdoms and instead of propagating the message of Gautama Buddha, they ended up setting agendas and started influencing the public discourse on theology. Buddhism had, by Adi Shankara’s time become monastery centric and the closed groups of monks started becoming corrupt. And in order to cling on to their exalted status the monks started espousing the very same superstitious beliefs that the original Buddha sought to destroy in the society of his time. Of course, we will deep-dive into reasons for the decline of Buddhism towards the end of this article.

    Returning to Shankara, if anything the spade work for a theological counterpoint / debate against Buddhism was put in place by the famous Purva Mimamsa scholar called Kumarila Bhatta from modern day Assam. He had enrolled in the Nalanda University to understand Buddhist theology so that he can do a comparative study with Vedas. He was thrown out of the University, when, he questioned the understanding of one of his teachers on Vedic philosophy, who, criticized the Vedas. Kumarila Bhatta had already weakened the theological hold of Buddhism amongst the masses, by the time Shankara arrived. Kumarila Bhatta engaged many a Buddhist scholar in public debates on Vedas and was instrumental in many kings that patronized these Buddhist scholars returning back to the Vedic fold.

    The debates that Shankara engaged in had the criterion that the one that lost the debate should embrace the faith of the victor. When Buddhist scholars lost debate after debate with Shankara, they had no choice but to honor the commitment and when they did so, the king / prince to whom these Buddhist scholars were mentors ended up following suit. There is nothing in the historical records, even remotely, to suggest that Shankara forced Hindu kings to unleash violence against the Buddhists.

    While he did engage in discussions with many rulers persuasively about Hindu dharma, the charge of this Hindu Guru engaging in violence against Buddhists is the unilateral dream of biased historians. There is not even a shred of evidence that substantiates the charge of Adi Shankaracharya instigating violence against Buddhists. And just to be sure, if we deep dive into the Advaita philosophy, as expounded by Adi Shankaracharya, the same ethics that are seen in the Vedas, Upanishads & Bhagavad Gita, like truth, non-violence, service etc are seen. Had Adi Shankaracharya acted against what he publicly preached or had he done things blatantly contradicted the message of Vedas, he would have ceased to be the philosopher / saint he is.

  4. siddharth says:

    Myth #2: King Pushyamitra was a Hindu bigot that slaughtered Buddhist monks.

    This King Pushyamitra , who was a military general in the Mauryan army (when the dynasty’s power was on the wane), executed a coup and he founded the Shunga dynasty. The charge that historians desperately try to make is exactly the account we saw above (what Ashoka did), excepting that this time, Ashoka has been replaced by Pushyamitra and instead of Nirgranthas, the victims were Buddhist monks. And the delta information in deriding Pushyamitra comes in the form of a powerful Arhat creating many of the monks’ heads and having them sent to King Pushyamitra’s court. Do we need anything more in terms the credibility of the accounts of King Pushyamitra persecuting Buddhists? The myth seems to hinge on some magic of a senior Buddhist monk creating severed heads of other monks and sending them to the king! Also, this narrative on Pushyamitra occurs towards the end of Ashokavadana. And it gets even shallower, as, there are historical accounts of King Pushyamitra patronizing the construction of many Buddhist monasteries. This is where the statement of the historian Etienne Lamotte assumes significance: “To judge from the documents, Pushyamitra must be acquitted through lack of proof.” (History of Indian Buddhism, Institut Orientaliste, Louvain-la-Neuve 1988/1958, p.109)

  5. siddharth says:

    This is not against Buddhism or Buddhists but to those who lie that Hindus used violence to uproot Buddhism from this land. There is a myth of persecution of buddhists by hindus.

    Myth #1: Emperor Ashoka became enlightened after embracing Buddhism and he was the first and the last secular emperor ever to have ruled India.

    As we all know, Ashoka, propelled by a sense of guilt after the bloodbath in Kalinga embraced Buddhism as some form of redemption to overcome the same. Not many Marxist historians and Islamic historians in India do seem to acknowledge a little fact that Emperor Ashoka was helped by two of his Hindu mentors in this move. So, to start with, if Hindus were as dogmatic about their faiths, as these historians have projected Hindus to be and had persecuted Buddhists, why and how did those that had sway over this great emperor allow him to embrace Buddhism as his personal faith?

    And the anti-Hindu bias of these historians has forced them to hide Ashoka’s disdain towards other faiths, after he became a Buddhist. Here is an incident chronicled in “Ashokavadana” (acts of Ashoka) and I am quoting it verbatim – “….an incident occurred which greatly enraged the king. A follower of the Nirgrantha (Mahavira) painted a picture, showing Buddha prostrating himself at the feet of the Nirgrantha. Ashoka ordered all the Ajivikas of Pundravardhana (North Bengal) to be killed. In one day, eighteen thousand Ajivikas lost their lives. A similar kind of incident took place in the town of Pataliputra. A man who painted such a picture was burnt alive with his family. It was announced that whoever would bring the king the head of a Nirgrantha would be rewarded with a dinara (a gold coin). As a result of this, thousands of Nirgranthas lost their lives.” Only when Vitashoka, Ashoka’s favourite Arhat (an enlightened monk, a Theravada-Buddhist saint), was mistaken for a Nirgran tha and killed by a man desirous of the reward, did Ashoka revoke the order.

    But our biased historians would never even acknowledge this, as, Buddhism was supposed to have cleansed Ashoka of all negativities and this incident flies in the face of the secular image that these folks have carefully built.

  6. siddharth says:

    every one has ones version of history , but one thing is thr that hindus did not attack/destroy or harm buddhism that is the truth.

  7. siddharth says:

    Buddhism waned naturally because as it grew , people lost interest in sex , it was natural .I follow arya samaj , and thr teachings are great . It has been ages since i went to a temple , i meditate at home , i have not "worshipped " a brahmin and neither anyone has in my family forced me in any way to be religious .

  8. siddharth says:

    Your delusions have no limits , its a hobby of everybody to attack hindus it seems , hindus never "attacked " or harmed or remove buddhism , it waned with time . Buddhism has come from hinduism , lord buddha is dear to all . India had verna system , it was manipulated by selfish people and based on birth . It is the most stupid thing and it was fought by people like swami dayanand saraswati . Arya samaj is doing great work , thr are many such organisations and people that had fought it . Buddha was a yogi who followed path of yoga , his teachings are based on upanishads .

  9. Anonymous says:

    Quotations from the Holy Quran and the Holy Bible http://islamandchristianitybeliefs.blogspot.in/20

  10. Anonymous says:

    Beliefs of Islam and Christianity Pls help in promoting this for ignorants who have no idea of Islam's beliefs http://islamandchristianitybeliefs.blogspot.in/

  11. TnKuK says:

       Hohohohoho 😀 it's cute from a Jahil 🙂 if Quran is Jahiliya Give me one thing similar to the Quran the Bibble per example Hhhhhh please from your imagination i want to hear it Create one "Aya" and if it's similar to Quran i will leave islam 😀 i'm waiting litlle Jahil 😀

  12. TnKuK says:

    Hahahaha it's Soo funny verry funny Ow i didn't expect that it will be a funnier video than this visio Hahahahahahahaaay Wow why can i believe a Christian talking + she had a vision of our prophet saying that Hohohohohoho  😀 What ? it's the funniest  thing i have never heard i can't write it's really funny

        Did Muhammed talk with her in Korean pfffhahahaha  or in English Hhhhhhh or she was magic and she understood  Old Arabic that me as an arabian i can't understand some words Phohohohoho + he was argumenting Christian + she had a vision Wait  Me believe she  No NEVER i'am not enought stupid sorry 🙂

        And is she his sister to have a vision on him or she is a choosen women from jesus + the hell that she created isn't verry terrible Allah have a Hell that our fire in 1 of 100 what do you think if it's 100 of 100 you will melt and dispair 

  13. munmun says:

    Dear Mr Sina, Shia sources say Anas ibn Malik, Aisha & Abu Huraira ( main contribuers of Sunni hadith) tarnished image of Muhammad by their false ahadith working as puppets of Sunni dynasties which used them to justify & legalize their own behaviour & torture. True or false?

  14. Gaurav says:

    Hi Ali, so what happens to the soul after the death ? Does it take birth again ? How can the soul experience  all the torment and suffering it has caused to others while living, if it does not take birth again and get a body ? And what happens after God forgives a soul ? Does it take birth again ?

  15. i am a communist says:

    dear puneet

    i wish i am a dalit. unfortunately i was born in a "high caste" hindoo family. i have respect for ambedkar but do not fully agree with him either. he was against communism and put forth buddhism as its alternative. had he been a communist, the lives of people of his kind would have been better. i definitely am a marxist and leninist. i have never defended buddhism. as a theory it is a good one. but if put to practice it will definitely falter. if left to itself it will degenerate to the state it is in india and ceylon. 

    by the essential and necessary criteria to be a hindoo you should worship brahmin. it is a prerequisite to be a hindoo. unknowingly you still do that and will continus to do. now you people are in fool's paradise and not me. come out of it.

  16. Hindu arya says:

    grt article n yes it is word of realised conciousness, they r furthur described in dept in vedas n upanishads if u read it from authentic translations by some rishis n nt western scholars..

  17. knowTheEnemy says:

    ["…this is specially what muslim called jahilyah because i will never ever say something bad about your holly god…."]

    Are you saying that anyone who says something bad about other people's holy gods is a jahil (ignorant) living in jahilyah (age of ignorance)?? Well, Muhammad and his Quran have said all kinds of demeaning things about other religions. That would make Muhammad a jahil of the first order and Quran the book from jahilyah! You didn't intend to do this but you indirectly ended up telling the truth about Mo and his Quran!

    [" the point is that if you said the allah is bogus then why do not you try to construct a sentence like quran this is what the allah has challenged y0u to do"]

    That challenge was met a long time ago! Where have you been?? Google "sura like it" and check out the first link. Also read this article posted by Ali Sina years ago- http://faithfreedom.org/faq/65.htm

  18. ashfaq says:

    Oh my dear you do not know the actual deeds and actions he brought and convinced people to do you are in real dark because i follow him and i know the complete knowledge firstly you argue that muhammad said everything other than Quran is sanatic i do not know anything about such an argument  instead he said you must know and respect other believes and ideas other than muslims and a lot of blams and false arguments against him like he said if you killed one person this will be death of the whole humanity he strictly  stopped us from doing such actions Thirdly you said something about allah this is specially what muslim called jahilyah because i will never ever say something bad about your holly god the point is that if you said the allah is bogus then why do not you try to construct a sentence like quran this is what the allah has challenged y0u to do and you cannot help yourself to make yourself free from pain how you can you help others …………….

  19. aminthemystic says:

    "This is what physicists in the 21st century are telling us. We are not here. We are in the matrix in a very different dimension, remotely controlling our 3D hologram that we call our body. "

    My physics might be "patchy" to say the best. . . but I call this meaningless guff! It is nonsense.

    – –

    What physicists are saying this?

  20. aminthemystic says:

    Once Sina held that – those who believe in God cannot be rational. I, of course, disagreed. Sina by his own previous thinking . . . is not rational.

    – –

    Now the same babble – he would have condemned earlier . . . well look at him!

    What a whole load of nonsense . . . even Muslims never butchered modern science like this!

  21. Puneet Yadav says:

    OH my dear friend by writing this you proved that you have nothing to do with communism.You're a dalit and the devotee of DR.Ambedkar.That's why you're defending Buddhism and criticizing Hinduism.I don't understand that why some people don't show their real names.May be in this fear that they will be identified as dalits.They talk about change in the society,but due to inferiority complex they don't display their real names.They identify themselves as Marxist,atheist etc.However you're a dalit and criticize Hinduism as you wish.By the way no Hindu worships Brahmins.You're living in a fools paradise.I'm an OBC but your thoughts are nonsense.Wake up boy……Cheers.

  22. Sak says:

    To all who loves animals
    I appeal you all to celebrate the day of Ramadan as the day of "Animal Protection" .Many animals will suffer painful death (halal death ) on 8th August of this year ,the day Ramadan will be celebrated upon this earth .This is a painful day in the history of humanity every year .I request Ali Sina to take initiative in this regard to pressurize United Nations to consider the day Ramadan as animal protection day.Those who wish to support please support this post by rating.

  23. Sak says:

    @ i am a buddhist ·
    have i mentioned Kanchi mutt any where ha ha ha ,again you are enveloping your selves with legend ,chuck had replied you properly,and no need of additions from me.

  24. cchuckc says:

    @i am a communist
    //yes legends they are but your legends. legends absolutely from kanchi mutt. //
    But still they are legends and nothing more. In a discussion involving history if you base your proof on legends then it exposes your bankruptcy.  

  25. cchuckc says:

    @i am a communist
    //sashanka killed buddhists in a mass scale. accept that. //
    Why should I when there aren't evidence for the same?I have given you enough justification for not believing the same. I am reiterating them again for your perusal:
    1. Nalanda flourished under him. And it was a Buddhist institution.
    2. Right under his nose, near Karna-Suvarna, his capital, there were few monastries at Raktamrttika-Mahavihara.
    3. There are no inscription issued by Shashanka himself glorifying Buddhist killing. It is expected that a person would glorify himself for having done such apparently great service to his religion.
    4. All negative reports are from sources being patronized by Harsha, be that Banabhatt or Xuanzang.
    5. Immediately later Bengal fell in the hands of Pala who were native Buddhist. If Shashank had annihilated the Buddhist, immediate rise of such a power wouldn't have been possible.

    //and what about the other kings and queens i have given as examples in my second post here?//
    I haven't. I accepted Mihirkula's attrocities. The others you have mentioned were minor rulers and we can discuss them one at a time. I have started with the first name you have mentioned.

    //now dont cry chuck baby. come to mama. mama will console you.//
    It still doesn't absolve you off Casteism. You are a deeply casteist person. The proof is what you wrote in your earlier post. Its you who is crying hoarse. You don't have to be a Hindu to be casteist. Thats a pretty foolish interpretation. 

    //i became a communist after coming to know the ways brahmans placed themselves//
    I am not asking how you become a communist, which itself is a misplaced ideology that has failed everywhere. This is proof who is crying here:-). 

    //i have a fairly good knowledge of indian history. the problem is i do not accept the history written by your historians. that must be your problem.//
    I saw your 'fairly good knowledge'. And they are not 'my historian'. I haven't yet quoted any historian. When plain logic and common sense is enough it is irrelevant to bring in legends etc to substantiate.

  26. i am a buddhist says:

    oh dear sakat.
    yes legends they are but your legends. legends absolutely from kanchi mutt. the previous deceased seer wrote a book titled voice of god.(that brute calls himself god). i searched wikipedia. nowhere it was written so. so i made my point. 

    i know very well that all the things said above were utter lies. lies are the ways of brahmans. they write full magnificent lies to decieve masses. this is one amog them. look. even you did not believe that. but you didnot know that the SOB was your SOB. 

    kumarila must have got inside the buddhist monastery by lies which are the ways of them. he must have got his hands inside the cookie jar one night and got caught and expelled. brahmans denied learning and knowledge to anyone other than themselves earlier, and now they were returned the same favor. so he incited mihirakula to kill buddhists. this only is the fact. rest were lies of brahmans.

  27. i am a communist says:

    And since you are most definitely not versed with direct education in ancient Indian history, let me tell you that not only Nalanda flourished under Shashanka, but there were few monasteries which existed in Raktamrttika-Mahavihara near Karnasuvarna, Shashanka's capital. I can accept that being a Shaiv, he definitely had little sympathy for Buddhism, who had his greatest rival Harsha, as their patron.

    yes dear chuck.
    I ve already accepted that. you need not prove it again. nalandha might have florished in his regime and he might have paid a visit to that place. that will not absolve him of his crimes in particular and that of hindu kings in general.

    And do you want me mention the bloody details of Brahman-suppression by Harsha himself in  Kannauj?

    ask our ali. he has a better word for this kind of arguments. arguments saying are you any saint for you to accuse me. and about harsha. he was the first person perhaps in the known world history to abolish death penalty. said that it will not come as a proof that he did not kill and i would not say that. but it was the duty of the head of the state to suppress any revolt against the state. harsha's victories cant help other king dear. sashanka killed buddhists in a mass scale. accept that.

    and what about the other kings and queens i have given as examples in my second post here? you conveniently forget about all of them. anyway you have accepted that buddhists were killed by hindu atrocities.  
     they burnt buddist monks alive along with their university the seat of their wisdom and soul.// 
    Yes it was. 

    and what about the next line dear. why cannot you deny as you always do. nalandha was burnt down again by hindus, along with its books and discoveries, and philosophies. hindoos were no less devious and diabolic than moslems in this matter. they do it all without guilt or remorse for they can pay the brahmans later with money and their wives to clear them of all their crimes.

    Now you are resorting to legends. Give me a correct historical reference to it. A concurrent inscription for example.

    are you denying the existence of amara and his immolation by sankara. strange.

    And what more, what you are recounting here smacks of Casteism, another favorite of the communist intellectuals you get in India. You are just proving yourself to be a deeply casteist person, judgmental, but with insufficient knowledge of ancient Indian history.

    now dont cry chuck baby. come to mama. mama will console you. but the fact is that brahmans are not allowed by themselves not to fight in any battle in the front lines. fro mythology to current days, you can see that. from the battles of deva – ashura, ramayana , right through the ages of mughals and into the fight for independence and recently in gujarat. one theory of why indians were kicked and drilled in their asses by everyone who passed by was brahmanism rendered half of its community wasted by slavery and a quarter of it wasted by cowardice. slavery of sutras and cowardice of brahmans. the rest failed miserably in defending their country. 

    and who is a casteist here dear chuck?? this is a stove calling pot black. caste based society was conceptualized, brought into existence and perpetuated by brahmans. i am not even a hindu now to be casteist. and no one can be casteist towards brahmans. casteism is atrocity of the brahmans towards lower castes and how can someone be casteist towards brahman. india is a failed and rotten society. as worms merry themselves in sewer hindoos and brahmans in particular swarm the land.

    i became a communist after coming to know the ways brahmans placed themselves and ruled the land. i come from a high caste. but after knowing all these facts i abhorred this system and society. the life of bhagat singh was an eyeopener in my life and i became his comrade. now i am no more a higher one and a hindoo. i am a proud communist. my personal opinions dont matter anywhere. but it is a known fact that brahmans do not take up arms in the fights. they hide behind the king and kick him to fight for them. mo is a brahman of arabia. he positioned himself as one near god like brahmans and incited others to do his war. and reaped all their fruits. the same with brahmans. they claimed their nearness to god attested by nothing other than books and positioned as high priests and ministers of the kings , actually ruling the country. even when kings fight and die they kill their opponent and not his ministers. this is the story of the rotten bharat.

    i have a fairly good knowledge of indian history. the problem is i do not accept the history written by your historians. that must be your problem.

  28. Ramesh says:

    The following are the beliefs of Islam and Christianity. Both Common Beliefs as well as special beliefs http://islamandchristianitybeliefs.blogspot.in/

  29. chuck says:

    @i am communist,
    //he would not have left it unrazed if it were a pure buddhist university.//
    Ha ha. Thats the problem isn't it? Its a mere speculation that you are making. Laying the facts bare should have opened you eyes. I have already given my reasons to believe that Shashanka isn't what is usually made out in the pro-buddhist or more specifically anti-hindu literature. The fact is Nalanda was intact, a few minor indiscretions were  blown up by Xuanzang which is expected given the known animosity between Shashank and Harsha. Second is the advent and progression of the Palas who were native bred rulers following Shashank, unlike, for example, the Sens who came from South. If Shashank had annihilated the Buddhist, such a mighty Buddhist regime wouldn't have come immediately after. Two other primary accounts of Shashanka are from Banabhatt and yet another Buddhist text called Aryamanjushrimulakalpa. 
    And since you are most definitely not versed with direct education in ancient Indian history, let me tell you that not only Nalanda flourished under Shashanka, but there were few monasteries which existed in Raktamrttika-Mahavihara near Karnasuvarna, Shashanka's capital. I can accept that being a Shaiv, he definitely had little sympathy for Buddhism, who had his greatest rival Harsha, as their patron. And do you want me mention the bloody details of Brahman-suppression by Harsha himself in  Kannauj?

    //nalandha university was burnt down by moslem maruaders headed by bhaktyar khilji. they burnt buddist monks alive along with their university the seat of their wisdom and soul.//
    Yes it was.

    //your theories of the king being a benevolent one come to big nulls. //
    Take a deep breath doc. Which king did I say was a benevolent one? Khilji was anyway 600 years after Shashank and since then it was Muslim rule all the way till 19th century. Which king are you referring to here?

    //if you want to turn your blind eye to it then it is ok . but as i reply this is not addressed to you alone. //
    I didn't. Point is I know it for a fact that some Hindu temples have come up where there were Buddhist monasteries, but some historians, prominently communist ones, have blown it out of proportion, not sparing Jagannath and Kashi Viswanath too. Fact is the death blows came from the Muslims. Buddhism was already in the decline when Sankara came around, at least in the North and Central India.

    //you must have known about Amara. the buddhist killed by sankara//
    Now you are resorting to legends. Give me a correct historical reference to it. A concurrent inscription for example.

    //as i said earlier bramans were coward lots. they are afraid to go to any battle as they are likely to get killed.//
    Only a person ignorant in Indian history would say that. And what more, what you are recounting here smacks of Casteism, another favorite of the communist intellectuals you get in India. You are just proving yourself to be a deeply casteist person, judgmental, but with insufficient knowledge of ancient Indian history. Most of what you say in the last para is just plain vitroil, doesn't deserve any further comment you know (similar to the cancer-fungi mix up Sina used).

  30. Lethal Texas says:

    Christianity and Islam are two sides of the same coin. The video at the end of the article gives us ample proof of the innumerable ways through which Christian evangelists destroy the native culture.

  31. Sakat says:

    Dear i am a communist ·
    Your references are restricted to legends,so legends cannot be trusted.However Adi Shankara has established four spiritual seats of learning and appointed four pontiffs to all these 4 seats during his life time .They are in existence since their establishments and,they have documents maintained since their inceptions ,if you want to know first hand information's then,perhaps you have to take refuge in administrators of these four seats and not with Wikipedia. I always try to go to the source independent of google them,i hope you understood what i meant.

  32. i am a communist says:

    daer sakat
    is this way to score brownie points.

    legend is that kumarila disguised himself as a buddhist to learn buddhism to refute it. he was learning in nalandha. one day his lies were exposed and he got expelled. some say he was pushed from balcony (note: kumarila was said to have been 'shoved'(sic) from balcony and not that he pushed some monk). and he was saved by vedas with injury to his eye. (As said by the old wretch the last sankaracharya in his book. ) he got guilty that he cheated his teacher. so he burnt himself according to the legend. but as is well known they are real cowards and cunning foxes and fabricate stories. he lived according to some traditions and lived to a ripe old age. noone knows who else died for him in his place.

  33. Ali Sina says:

    Well thank you but that is not really true. Yes we need individuals with rock solid faith to inspire others, but it is ultimately the power of the multitudes that will bring change. Buddha was one individual but without people he would have not been even remembered. All social transformations are brought by the masses. However, it does not take much to mobilize masses when a few people are convinced.

  34. I am a communist says:

    dear ali.
    the moron is long dead. but his thoughts are very much alive, posing a great danger to mankind. you cannot eradicate lies with another lie. all things unproven are lies till they are proved. so do  not deviate from your goal by clinging to some fantasy theories. you have truth in your armor and that is enough to kick out islam. adhere to the principles of truth. who are you trying to pacify dear ali. these hindoos? try mocking their institutions of injustice. then see for yourself the true face of them. they are worse than moslems. moslems are brute but atleast honest that they have declared their goals. when you show them their lies and deception from truth there are chances that they may repent and stop drinking the poison. but hindoos, they are both cowardly and manipulative, and dogmatic. it will be very difficult next to impossible to wrench them from this absurdity. do not equate hinduism with buddhism. it is like equating islam with zoarastrianism. hinduism is brahmanism. as there is just one teaching of Mo and noting else – i am the final messenger of god . so worship me, there is only one teaching of hinduism- brahmans are the supreme and god incarnates. so accept their supremacy and divinity. worship them. nothing else.
    you may fondle a cat. it may be arrogant but harmless. try not to kiss a snake. hindoos are that. run away from the snake or better strike on its head. all the things that you find noble are stolen from buddhist thinkers. they have incorporated them all as their own and deceiving you all. you can see an anology here too. all the noble teachings found in koran are stolen from jewish torah, or christian books.( there is a conspiracy theory that jesus christ himself was a buddhist, he lernt from buddhists in india before 30 years of age. but that isa different case). so do not get deceived by them. all that is noble in hindoo scripts were stolen from buddhist thinkers whom they have killed or neutralised somehow.

  35. I am a communist says:

    dear ali
    i think of late you have been reading many hindoo literature and buddhist ones. good for you to get enlightened. i too want to live in those fantastic ideas of a holographic maya world. but the world is not full of roses. even if such a thing exists or our memories are being tracked and meticulously stored in some computer  of god, this is the real world for us now. we live right here. this world is very much full of materialism. devoid of god (atleast here in this universe). we can deal with god when we get to know him. if you want to immerse them in this maya world then you do the mistakes of mo you vehemently fight against. 

    yes. what you tell may be entirely true. but we got no evidence of it till now. we can fantasize god and his heaven when we prove them. till then dont deceive yourself.

    you may not be aware of an intelligent man but a cunning and cruel one, the antithesis of Buddha – Adisankara. if you have time get to know about him. try to read his  teachings. do you know that buddhists were killed on a grander scale than what mo did to jews?. he was more cunning than mo. if you look on the outside, he never got married, taught non killing-ahimsa, lived a life of austerity. but as like the nature of all brahmins he made the kings to do the dirty job for him. he was the chief instrument behind the mass killings and driving away of all buddhists and jains in india. he "cleansed" it of all buddha's teachings and restored the old order – one of inequality, hate filled, caste based. How did he do it? He was a mayavad – proponent of fantasy world, where brahmin was the incarnate god. 

    so this fantasy universe theories are a danger, blunting us against the sharp and cruel reality of the world. 

    but i am not blaming the great minds who think of it. they are giving a mathematical skeleton for the theory. but note this. till proved they are just that. PURE MATHEMATICAL THEORY . so strive to eradicate inequality in our proven order dear. you are a wonderful soul. your thoughts are noble and you are for a noble cause. but naive. you try to get supported by all theories proven or not to oppose ma(hma)dism. even if there were a god that theory must be subjected to rigorous experiments. he must be a material one. (he need not have a body or be a solid one or not even an energy form) still he will be a material one. so keep writing. we love you. 

    my advise is always drop a disclaimer about all theories before placing them before your followers or they may get a false idea that they were yours and you are a supporter of it. my best wishes for a long wonderful and a healthy life ahead.

  36. test01 says:

    Some parapsychologists have attempted to establish by scientific experiment whether a soul separate from the brain, as more commonly defined in religion rather than as a synonym of psyche or mind, exists. Milbourne Christopher in his book Search for the Soul (1979) explained that none of the attempts by parapsychologists have yet succeeded

  37. test01 says:

    hi Ali Sina, Medical science proves ther is nothing like soul.

Leave a Reply