And god createth the fanatics... Let me plunge into deep water and make an ass of myself... I do not mean to insult anyone, but I mean to present my view of reality.

This convoluted dissertation is unfortunately dedicated to debunking religious beliefs once more. Inside such beliefs is often contained absolutist ideas that will lead people to become fanatics, not exclusively so, but in a higher proportion than in non believers.

Usually, non believers are like lone wolves. They don't associate readily. Unless they are raised in a communistic environment.

Even the hordes of Visigoths (Wotan) and Normans (Thor, Odin) had their gods to give them the impetuousness of savage conquests. Give some people a religious belief and a gun (or a sharp weapon), and there is a good chance that they become fanatics under the smallest of provocation (or desire or exhortation). It can be as simple as this, though there are other factors that will enter the equation, including poverty of curiosity, testosterone, natural rabidness, wrong focus, usual youth idiocy, rebellion and defence of wrong (or right) ideas.

Oh, and by the way, Old Gus is a fanatic as well, relatively... a fanatic of observable reality.



So here I take the plunge, as more absolute trumpetism comes from the banquet of Allah to the ABC's "religion & ethics" department — I feel I have to be loudly trumpeting back. Here is what was on offer:



Shari'a is the eternal, immutable and unchanging law, or Way of truth and justice, as it exists in the mind of God. In essence, Shari'a is the ideal law as it ought to be in the Divine realm, and as such it is by definition unknown to human beings on this earth. Thus human beings must strive and struggle to realise Shari'a law to the best of their abilities.

In contrast, fiqh is the human law - it is the human attempt to reach and fulfil the eternal law as it exists in God's mind. As such, fiqh is not itself divine because it is the product of human efforts. Fiqh, unlike Shari'a, is not eternal, immutable, or unchanging. By definition, fiqh is human and therefore, subject to error, alterable and contingent.

The moral and ethical objectives of the Qur'an play a central and pivotal role in the process of legal analysis.

.....

Khaled Abou El Fadl is the Omar and Azmeralda Alfi Distinguished Professor of Law at the UCLA School of Law and Chair of the Islamic Studies Interdepartmental Program at UCLA.

--------------------------

I have lost the link to this ABC article.





These sentences could seem to have perfect sales pitch as they are made with an authoritative syntax. Boom. Statement. Boom. But a big huge call is made here... Sharia and the Koran were only invented around 1400 years ago and the planet is about 4.6 billion years old. Humans as Homo sapiens sapiens have treaded the grass for at least 500,000 years. Struth. Are we at liberty to ignore real history and stretch the decor as if Islam came from time "immemorial", as some religious organisations claim, in their oral memory while wearing a male apron that is not used in kitchens anywhere? So what is the "immutable and unchanging law, or way of truth and justice" in the mind of god since then? I ask. We are somewhat given five pillars of beliefs and action of belief. Fair enough.

Shahadah: declaring there is no god except God, and Muhammad is God's Messenger

Salat: ritual prayer five times a day

Zakat: giving 2.5% of one’s savings to the poor and needy

Sawm: fasting and self-control during the holy month of Ramadan

Hajj: pilgrimage to Mecca at least once in a lifetime if one is able

The Shia and Sunni both agree on the essential details for the performance and practice of these acts, but the Shia do not refer to them by the same name (see Ancillaries of the Faith, for the Twelvers, and Seven pillars of Ismailism).

------------------------------------

The Christians, not to be left behind on this score, have also created their own five tenets:

Hear-read, believe, repent, confess, baptise.

Beforehand, Christians also had and still have various ways to deal with human frailty and easy sin — such as the ten commandments:

Thou shalt have no other gods before me. (this seems to be familiar to all monotheistic outfit...)

Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.

Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.

Thou shalt not kill.

Thou shalt not commit adultery.

Thou shalt not steal.

Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.

Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s.

-------------------------

Here as well in this text, there are some major big calls being made similar to those in the Islam's pillars. But just looking at the second commandment, as a figurative artist, I have massively sinned daily by the truck load. Each cartoon is a HUGE SIN, though not very representative of the whatever.

When the catholic church was trying to convince people of its superior godly wares from early on, it thus sinned majestically, as it fabricated images in total contradiction to this second commandment. Yes I know, they also used the symbol of a fish for a while... During the "Renaissance" the Catholic Church added to this naive middle ages sauce which appeared on stained glass windows of cathedrals, with better realistic pictures than ever before — to counteract the new austerity movement as preached by the Protestants who strictly adhered to this commandment by having plain temples with no statues, no paintings and no decorations. I know. I was there...

Thus Christians, like Muslims, are not allowed to accept other "god" than their own in their belief. And no images please...

They cannot steal, they cannot kill, they cannot make images representing god, the earth or depict anything else. This latter tenet also appears in the Muslim religion. The Muslims are better at it than the Christians... This is why Muslims do not represent god or any other form of image that illustrate the earth and use geometric designs in buildings and writing, to define their devotion to their unique god — except in advertising for cash and services. This is why the Taliban blew up the giant Buddhas in Afghanistan. And please do not try to tell me that the god of the Muslims, the god of the Christians and that of the Jews is the same... It makes no sense, under the delivery of messaging over history by various prophets — all declared false prophets by the other zealoted religions.

Prayer (brainwashing the belief into a habit-forming mantra) is the main tool used to coerce believers to Islam, instead of pictorial adventure show. And the fear of indulging in apostasy is strong... Should you show signs you do not believe, it is likely the religious guardians will put you to death...

Preaching is another way to tell you what you should do and will do. Preaching is an invention of religious mobs to cultivate the narrow-mindedness of spirit which the religions guardians preserve with utmost contempt through continual brainwashing: Believe or else. Or happy are the poor. The poor shall inherit the earth... What they don't tell you is that the rich, especially in the Christian outfit — in cahoot with most church leaders — are profiting their way to "heaven" on this earth by selling these delusions. Under Sharia rules, one cannot be a free-thinker. This is the purpose of sharia.


But the commandments are a bit iffilastic — or may I say our interpretations of them is more than dubiously caveated with ungodly provisos, in whatever religion we choose... Some religious mob (in Iran, yesterday) will hang someone for "interpreting" the religious dogma with modernity. That will teach you the strictures.

Anyway, a jealous god? Jealous of what? Even if we sin like hell, or pray to a "false" god, god has nothing to be jealous about... has he? He is king-pin, no? He is self-sufficient... Oh, I see, god created humans, pigs, dogs and blowfishes, so he could have a coterie of admirers, elevated along a complex protein food chain. Is not this the summit of narcissism, even if God is supposed to be everything? Does that mean that god is heaven and hell singularly? Does this mean that god is his/her/its own demon? Or does this show a generosity of spirit as god wants to share himself with other creatures while those who refuses his offer will burn in hell sadistically? Blimey...

The concept of god does not make any sense, except to simpletons, including studious scholar simpletons who go around in circles in the same pot, without looking at what's outside the pot. The invention of god is mostly designed to stop people thinking about reality and create strong illusionary bonding between individuals in a social context. It possibly happened with good intentions, but as we all know, hell is paved with good intentions.


Here, in Khaled Abou El Fadl's words, I thus spot a strong "fanaticism" about truth and god. This exclusivity is not new. Most single-god religions claim this very similar fanatical line. Their god is the only right one for everyone and all. In general, the majority of the populace take this dictum as a simple part of their life and won't let it develop into something nasty, because most people have leaned cuddly inhibitors that prevent personal social dysfunction that would hurt them or hurt people. And they have the fear of god instilled daily inside their guts.

Remove the fear of pain and add god's glorious commands to become ruthless about your beliefs, and you end up with a caliphate or an inquisition — you get fanaticism.

In both religion, some caveats have been developed to either go and kill infidels — or on the other side, in crusades to defend the sacred grounds. Though Christianity was a peaceful religion that grew with martyrdom and with strong masterly propaganda while turning the other cheek, it was highjacked by violent men in the fourth century and was quite ruthless until the eighteenth century, when the age of science and enlightenment started to investigate the "idea of god" and reverse the trend by (re)-inventing secularity.

Secularity and atheism may not be the same thing, but they have been concept long established in the psyche of some people, way before religion took over the roost, but whom for their own reason thought that god did not exist but they stayed very quiet for their own safety, to avoid the wrath of religious men in control of social interactions...

Apparently, the word used most often in Quran, that is so often mistranslated as kill; slay; or slaughter is not jihad, it is Qital and if you look to the Arabic, you will quickly understand this word in today's usage would clearly be combat.

Naturally, just as here in the U.S. we must stand up for righteousness and strive to prevent oppression, aggression and tyranny. This is the proper usage and understanding for this term, as you will discover while passing through the Tafsir and explanations by top scholars today.

Er... Mistranslated or not, the concept is still part of the motivation for some Muslims.

Same with Christians. They waged crusades and religious wars under whatever banner of "liberation" and "truth". Horrid. Our Turdy Idiot -in-Chief (Tony) is a present prime example of this delusion, himself supported by idiotic scribes who have no proper idea of the damage they are causing by bleating for war.

Now, take some immature young people who feel disenfranchised, especially males who are full of testosterone and primed to fight the old bulls (such as traditional hated imperial forces) to allay their frustrations (including sexual) of not being "able to score" or be top dog, add some addiction in the form of repeated religious mantra that tells them to fight the infidels to allay oppression with the hope of a glorious death, or just to defend their god, give them a gun and voila. You have an inexhaustible source of "fanatics" dedicated to fight for a cause, especially if this cause is exclusively reinforced to be "the truth".

This sort of youth development is very close to home as well. Statistically, young people under 25 and above 12 are likely to do something stupid — even without reason. Add the "truth" and the focus becomes dangerously magnified by a factor of ten.

There is no such thing as the "truth". The existence of god is not proven, only believed by some.


For good Old Gus, the belief in the existence of god is a giant affront to reality. God does not make any sense. Many people buy it though, because it is difficult to deal with uncertainty, the pain of reality and the large size of the unfathomable void, without the help of some form of "opiate of the people".


So, I don't believe a word of what Sharia says in "immutable and unchanging law, or way of truth and justice in god's mind". Similarly to Christianity this Shari'a appears to Gus as a very arrogant belief.

This belief is only relative to a collectively brainwashed people's desire to live with their idiosyncrasies by solving the criterias of who rules the roost. Inventing godly rules that make people submit or fight to "defend the faith" with hope of glory in the "afterlife" is bullshit... This is not new bullshit.

The Egyptians did it, The Jews did it, the Romans did it, the Greeks did it, the Christians did it, they all did it way before the Muslims got in on the act — the god's (or gods') rules. The Muslims are latecomers to this game, and they have some way to go before they can tone down a bit... I know there are some moderate Muslims out there, but the proportion of defender of the faith with violence is quite high amongst their believers. It is also fanatical in some christian communities as well.

Each of these past and present civilisations got their own "immutable and unchanging law, or way of truth and justice" that of course have been adapted in some ways from past social structures born of uncertainty in evolution of a social species. Nothing happened from scratch. The rainbow serpent dream-time of the Aboriginal people has far more integrity of spirit with nature than all of our Abrahamic bullshit combined.

I will also argue here that a language itself can become the conveyor belt for the mystical philosophy and this is why the Muslims don't often like their precious book to be translated... In the Arabic language, the Koran develops a strong aura of importance and mystic, especially when repeated ad nauseam with a dirge-like melody. The sounds are intoxicating, especially for someone with a "clear" heart (that is to say an accepting mind of what is said — not meaning that what is said is true or not).

Translated, the sacred texts can appear dogmatically infantile, like the text in the Bible often does, once it is translated from Latin. The words transcribed in modern languages looses their arcane and voodoo effect. One cannot chant English like one chants Arabic. The magic looses out a bit in modern monotonic lingo. As well, If you listen to most songs of praise in English (or Polish), father-christmasy naive infantilism reigns supreme. It makes me smile a bit, though really, I am humbly accepting that, as long as parishioners sing with a childlike fervour, they don't carry guns... Same with Muslims praying... I am grateful. Thank you.

In the christian past only "scholars" (theologians) learnt the original languages like Latin and Greek to study the ancient texts. Catholic mass was delivered in Latin till the early 1960s with some vague translations that only helped making sure we did not grasped the reality of the subterfuge. The important things was the Latin itself carried the mysterious mystic — engraved forever in this dead language, while the translation for plebs only gives weirdo short-cut meaning. The Latin was the higher connector to god. As if it was god's own lingo. Same with the Koran and Arabic. Since we did not understand a word of it from our childhood, it must have been mystically correct. Alluring but bollocks.

So when Khaled Abou El Fadl tries to explain that "fiqh it is the human attempt to reach and fulfil the eternal law as it exists in God's mind" and that "as such, fiqh is not itself divine because it is the product of human efforts." I tend to bend the knees and lift my hat... It's a neat trick. A trick which seems to have taken him in as well... Once more, like in most religious imposts, Reality is pushed aside. History is pushed aside. Religious belief is the decider. This high polarisation of puritanism or "strict" rules, say of Wahhabism for example leads to many abuses of the human purpose, but we will declare them pure.

For Old Gus, there is no need for any laws in the divine realm itself, as perfection would rule anyway.

And as you should know there is no universe where perfection exists. Perfection would be all everywhere. Unreal. I would say that this self-serving tirade by Khaled Abou El Fadl thus makes some impossible assumption that I cannot accept. Eternal, way of truth and justice as it exists in the mind of god? Big words, big illusions... How would we (he) know? Because it's written in a book? Not much humility here, despite often claiming being humble servants of god...

The writer knows all about god — or does he? — as all he would know here is what a certain Mohammed dictated to his young bride (when she was way underaged by modern day standards)... This was a way for Mohammed the clever spruiker to justify his conquering of neighbouring tribes and to a great extend, remove the rights of people, especially women, now under a (his) new code of behaviour. Check history.


God should not have a mind. A mind of god? God's mind? Blimey! Why would he or she or it have one? A bit presumptuously godamnothropomorphic. And as soon as we humans allocate a specific function to god's law, things go relatively wonky and weird away from humanity. This should not make sense, even to those people prepared to accept that he, she or it exists to look after us after we die, at a massive banquet or a paradise.

What for?

In this eternal bliss cometh, do we become little pieces of god ourselves? Is this due because we deserved it by not sinning?... Do we look after our side of the ledger to please him/her/it while we're alive — by mostly archaic rules that can make us behave like extremist shits on a stick, sinning at most time, with hope for redemption? The biggest sin being war and infliction of death, even under rules of god.

Religions give us a sense of belonging to group with the same mind-set. It does not mean the mind-set is correct... Nothing in regard to truth or justice here, except in using the fear of god to make people submit to higher human authority. Once we belong, we accept the rules of justice and only faith gives us the sense of truth. But all are illusions — collective illusions carefully managed to keep people under foot. Should one become removed from the faith, there are some religious rules that will make sure one is killed for this grand sin — that of renouncing "the only god".... The Inquisition did that, way before some current Muslims sects do.


God does not make sense.


Unfortunately, many brainwashed geezers can't wait to sit at god's banquet where pleasures of course are far better than the pain we feel on this crummy planet — so they turn to the dangerous strict views in this grand desire, including fighting the infidels with bombs and swords. The infidels religiously respond in kind and more... It ain't going to help our humanity. We're religiously nutty.

Trying to understand god's mind is a big ask indeed — totally lacking in humility and I believe that a brainless monkey has more chance of achieving this feat than the most intelligent of human.

I must confess here, between you and a heavenly forbidden apple tree, that I once met god. From his glorious cloud, He/she/it instructed me in no uncertain terms to tell people out there that they should not go to war in his name no matter what — and that women are not to be treated like second rate citizens. We should not be making some excuse about the social value of hiding women under a tent, or not paying women the full quid a man would earn, because capitalist traditions demands it.

He/she/it also told me that angels were overrated birdwinged drunks and that those Archangels were little upstarts who though too good of themselves, as chief wardens of heaven. And the big creaky gates needed a bit of oil... I was about to ask where should the oil come from (thinking of Iraq and other middle east human extremist religious depots) when god disappeared in a puff of smoke and mirrors. I understood then that he/she/it told me he/she/it did not exist — or that if he/she/it did, he/she/it could careless about these ridiculous moronic savages that call themselves humans and who destroy his little planet of finely-tuned evolving nature. Time for him/her/it to piss-off to another place — a more friendly place, a few thousand light years away. It only takes him/her/it a tiny jiffy. He/she/it knows the short cuts and can fly faster than light...


So, the Shari'a is to serve the best interests of human beings?... I can see nothing wrong with that except in the details... So many details could appear barbaric, unless they are reinterpreted and toned down from some of their atrocious ways. For example, in my book of godly mishaps, chopping people's hands off for a thieving sin should be replaced with privation of candy for a few months. Stoning to death is a bit old-fashioned.


So which is that best interest? Make sure women are psychologically caged under a tent to stop males be tempted to think what they're going to think about anyway? Wage war on infidels? Stop people from singing? Destroy any representative images? Make sure education is limited to one book? No education for women? Live like permanent soldiers with a gun by the side of the bed? Raise one's back five times a day to reinforce the habit of belief? Whatever you fancy sir, but, please do it in your own head. There is no beauty in forcefully sharing such religious beliefs with a gun and through the sinister look of stylistic deceit... At most time, unfortunately, this thingy called religion, especially its fanatical dictums can make us end up in tears and wars and conflicts — in pain...


It's not the game of throne, but the game of nasty dummies. Us in a quagmire once more. Would god be so bored and so perverse as to allow this sort of shit on his/her/its small pebble? I don't think so...

MEN (and here I mean religious men) have invented god to suit the social constructs in which one group of socio-psychopath wants to rule above all others — especially rule over women and reproductive rights, with a few stylistic hocus-pocus decisions attached to make the deceit palatable to mostly ignorant brainwashed plebs — happy (or in fear of doing the wrong thing) to be brainwashed mono-cultured defenders of faith.

Thus starts a weird structure of dubious laws (defined as divine and as human with a separating paper thin bulkhead) that are basically suspect and mostly unacceptable should one be a humanist. They can only be applied socially with strictness because the illusion and fear of god needs to be furiously maintained in such a group of brainwashed scholars leading brainwashed crowds, for the illusion to be effective and survive. And the whole thing is packaged and regurgitated as tradition. Since we're creature of habits like pigs in mud we accept crap as a given gift from god. By teaching the power of god, we equally teach the power of "evil", while forgetting to teach about humanity and nature. Nature has a bigger part to play on this planet.

There is as much deceit in applied Islam as there is in applied Christianity or Judaism. Most tenets are good in all these beliefs should they be followed, but at most time, these tenets become contradictory or irrelevant in our final dangerous decisions and warring actions, for which excuses of bad faith become godly commands.

Religion did not make any sense under proper philosophical and scientific scrutiny — and still does not. It's fairy tale material. Back in the 18th century, the ruthlessness of the Church was smoothed out and the racks of the inquisition were replaced by a bit of love, which some priests have taken a bit too far...

I will venture to say that religions are rackets. They hate when one of their members express a contrary view or stop believing. The religious chiefs call upon the heavy guns of sacrilege or blasphemy. They cannot afford to let someone think freely about life and question the existence of god, especially within the framework of the religious edifice.



While Christianity went through its awakening in the 18th century, Islam is at large still dealing with its demons. It has not yet fully emerged from the dark ages into the modern world, except in its acceptance of relative values such as greed and guns. Unfortunately, its fanaticism is reinforced by practice of repeat rather than with a greater understanding of belief outside its narrow framework, for peace of mind. Peace is the essence. Peace. P-E-A-C-E.

With religion, contrarily to what is claimed, we are not seeking peace. We are seeking a way to quietly conquer, covertly convert or rapidly destroy, including destroy the natural value of ourselves by non-acceptance of our natural construct — or destroy those who don't believe like we do.

In the end, it's not for me to stop you, or anyone, from believing what you will, but I reserve the right to demonstrate that you could be wrong. Or that I could be wrong. .

For me, evil does not exist and I know nothing about god because god does not exist. Only humans with a psycho-desire to harm, steal or kill exist. The thin line between god and evil in humans is often a gun. A fanatic is easily created.

We do not need god to live in peace. Simple.

Gus Leonisky

Your local non-believer.

Note: I believe ASIO is on this rant due to a few key words in my expression of this opinion piece.