Farkhad Musazov

22301857089_a7731689c7_oМеня зовут Фархад. Живу я в г. Бишкек, Кыргызстан. Увлекаюсь многими вещами, но в основном занимаюсь волонтерством и конечно же учусь. Творчеством как таковой не занимаюсь, могу только сказать что частенько практикую свои навыки письма на сайте kinopoisk.ru где пишу рецензии к различным фильмам.

My name is Farkhad. I am from Bishkek city, Kyrgyzstan. I am interesting in many things, but almost all time I dedicate to volunteerism and studying.


очерк “Delusion of Holiness”

синопсис

There are many notions about holiness. All cultures and religions have their own interpretations of it. For instance, to be closer to holiness status in Islam, people have to sacrifice a cow for religious purposes during some holidays, while Hinduism demands to respect and worship a cow. Muslims can freely eat beef but Hindu people restricted to eat cow. By comparing these religions to each other a holy person in Islam is sinful in Hinduism. The situation becomes nonsense because one person cannot be holy in one place and evil in other.   Being holy means that a person should follow certain rules and perform everything what his or her particular religion requires. However, this is a delusion because in the world there are so many religions and all of them have different requirements, which cannot be done by one person during his or her lifetime. Even Socrates and Euthyphro had a lot of dialogues about the topic of holiness in The Euthyphro. Based on their dialogue, Socrates argues that each God has his or her own idea about what is right and wrong. Thus, the understanding of holiness is different and contradicted. There is no common opinion about what is right and wrong in all religions, and because of it there is no holiness at all, since what one considers to be right other may consider as wrong; moreover, the concept of holiness is detrimental, as it makes people commit atrocious acts.

Furthermore, it is even impossible to be holy person in the whole world because different religions have different ideas about holiness. According to Euthyphro, “…holiness is anything that gods love, and sin is anything that gods hate” (p. 46). However, people who believe in Allah have to accomplish fivefold pray per day, while Hinduism demands to respect and live in harmony with the nature, and Christianity has its own requirements to achieve holiness. These religions have their own interpretations of being holy, while in reality they have different ways to express their holiness. Consequently, the idea of Euthyphro about holiness is wrong because the gods of Olympus do not share common notions about holiness as well as religions in present days. This example shows contradictions between religions and in case of Socrates and Euthyphro contradictions are represented by gods’ values. In present times some people misunderstand the conceptions of good and wrong. These contradictions show flaw in communities. Religion is uniting people but religions themselves are not united. Therefore, it separates people of different religions and discriminates the holiness.

Hence, the holiness is a delusion because religions make people commit bad actions. More precisely, some actions of religious people may be cruel morally. To take an example, the occasion in Afghanistan was about Farkhunda. She was wrongly convicted by society of Muslims. The accusation was that she burned Quran, while in fact, she did not. People did not believe her and all together they killed her in the street. Moreover, people who participated in this murdering believe that the Quran justifies their actions. Consequently, they consider their particular action as holy act in term of religion. Therefore, religions compared to each other cannot be good, since they have very rude and immoral influence on people.

Nonetheless, in order to be holy and benevolent, being good morally and honest with oneself is enough. In one of the last conversations, Socrates says to Euthyphro “…whether they are loved by Gods, hated by them, or whatever the hell Gods feel about them – we do not need to talk.” Socrates does not consider God’s opinion about holiness as relevant and does not believe that gods’ preferences can determine the holiness of a person.  The idea which is more important is morality of people’s souls. Even if any person commits bad actions or behaves wrong for religion, religion should not teach and call on people to kill anyone. The priority of each person should be honesty, moral principles, and the ideas of helping, supporting and respecting not only people, but also all living creatures and nature. If one is a holy, it is not necessary that he/she is a good person. However, a good person with his or her own moral principles and pure mind means to be holy.

Thus, sometimes people who chase the status of holiness become blind and they commit atrocious acts thinking that they are doing good deeds. As Socrates told Euthyphro, “…how can you be sure that all gods agree in endorsing your action?” (p. 47). In other words, Socrates tries to show to Euthyphro that there is no one concept of holiness. Since, to be a religious person means to follow particular rules that are holy and unbreakable, oftentimes people become ungovernable as a result. Due to religions’ interests immoral accidents happen in the whole world, such as acts of terrorisms, extremisms, etc. By considering the tragedy in USA in 11th of September, 2001, one can say that religions have bad impact on people. This catastrophe is one of the biggest acts of terrorism in the world. It took many lives of innocent people from the World Trade Center in that day. Another example is one of the biggest terrorist groups ISIS, which exists even now. ISIS murders many non-Muslims and Muslim people who have “wrong” perception of Islam. This organization is represented as an Islamic terrorist group and their perception of holy is to kill unfaithful people. Therefore, these examples show that religions are the core of separatisms, fears, etc. In present times, people from Western and European countries are afraid of Muslims because of the mentioned terrorist attacks.  Effect of religions may cause a fanaticism; people may act incapably and behave as herds, which are ruled by particular religious beliefs.

Notwithstanding on all mentioned arguments and examples, one might argue that religions do not create impiety, wickedness and crack in a society. Moreover, some people may contrariwise that religions are the core and fundamental source of moral knowledge and concepts of good and bad. However, this is a fallacy because there are people who do not believe in God, known as atheists. Holding the idea that religion gives fundamental knowledge about morality, atheists should automatically become sinful. Nevertheless, this idea is absurd because sometimes atheists do more moral actions, support others and contribute to society than some religious people. Besides, most atheists are scientists who give to society new discoveries and work for the human’s benefit. Therefore, an unholy atheist who does believe neither in God nor in religion is closer to the holy status because he/she is doing good things and does not expect the reward from God. Take an example of Mark Zuckerberg, who names himself an atheist but donates millions of dollars to charity and education. In contrast, there is Osama Bin Laden who names himself true Muslim but killed many people during his life. Therefore, religion or absence of it does not determine whether a person is bad or good.. Consequently, does not matter what is somebody’s religion about because religions do not define moral principles of a person.

            For the most part, religions have influence on people as well as a poison to which people are addicted. To be holy people must focus themselves self only to a certain religion, do whatever religion requires, and as a result, some people becomes a marionette of their religion. As shown in examples, even the gods of the Olympus cannot make a conclusion with each other of what is right and what is wrong.  Moreover, even in present times international religions have controversy and different opinions of holiness and being holy. Comparing two holy people of different religions, they will be sinful in front of each other. Holiness already does not have its importance and significance because people are afraid of any holy person since he/she may be much more dangerous than nonreligious person. Moreover, as well as religion unites people, it also makes cracks between people. Most Christian people are afraid of act of terrorism from Muslim people as well as Muslim people do not consider Christianity as holy as Islam.  People have to acknowledge the facts that being good and being religious are the different concepts. Not all religious people are good as well as not all nonreligious people are bad, but according to present days one religion may ensnarl many people to interact in wrong and immoral way. However, being morally good and have moral-ethic ideas is much better. People know that murdering is wrong, while supporting each other is right. Having these moral ideas no one will cruelly kill each other even if it is told so in some written texts in any holy books. Therefore, there is no holiness but moral principles of a person. The idea about holiness is not working because all kind of holy actions show that people from different religions are not the same; consequently, this becomes a trigger to dislike people from specific religions and it leads to evil actions.

Очень плохоПлохоУдовлетворительноХорошоОтлично (8 голосов, средний бал: 4,13 из 5)

Загрузка...