In response to:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mukto-mona/message/15141

I read briefly the current response of Mr. Choudhury on the existence of soul.  He has responded to my comments and Mr. Syed Kamran Mirza's comments in one writing.  Many of the things he responded were not written by me at all.  He wrote in a fashion that could be mistaken by a reader as the responses to my writings.  For this, I've posted my comments again (please see beloow) for making it clear to the readers.  Mr. Choudhury could have written separately.  However, he has lumped everything in one writing in his usual fashion. 

 

I would like to exchange views/comments and would also like to debate for getting the ultimate truth.  But, I amn't interested about doing sophistry.  I would like to know from Mr. Choudhury about my earlier comments. Which parts are irrelevant?  Which comments are childish?  Which comment isn't appropriate in response to your original essay?  I hope Mr. Choudhury will clearly answer and help me identify any irrelevant writing in my comments to his essay on the existence of soul.  I request the readers to comment on the relevance/irrelevance of my comments to Mr. Choudhury's original essay on the existence of soul.

 

Shabbir Ahmed

 

 

 

 

******************************************************************************************************

 

My earlier comments to the originial essay of Mr. Choudhury on the existence of Soul.

 

 

 

By: Shabbir Ahmed

 

 

I read the whole article written by Mr. Chowdhury on the existence of soul.  It is an extensive essay by Mr. Chowdhury with his ideas to justify the existence of soul.  There are eleven sections starting from "1. My Wishes" to "11.  Conclusion: "Soul does Exist.""  A good portion of the essay doesn't contain anything new.  Mr. Chowdhury stated many things from his earlier postings.  He responded and proposed me to read his essay in response to my short write-up on the contradictions of the concept of an unseen Creator.  He wanted me to read his essay to resolve the contradictions on the concept of God, which I mentioned very briefly from the writings/analysis of Einstein and Bertrand Russell.  It appears to me that Mr. Chowdhury doesn't care about the rational analysis of great freethinkers/scientists.  He doesn't care as well about the analytical questions and concerns on the contradictions of the concepts of an All-Powerful entity.  He cares only about what are written in his scriptures. 

 

He doesn't like to answer the questions directly.  He doesn't pay heed to resolve the contradictions.  How can he resolve?  After all, he himself is within the sphere of complete contradictions.  For example, he says "Any time a human being is or will be born, the time of his/her death would be fixed."  Again, he says that he extended his life say about twenty years by doing quadruple by-pass surgery.  In another place, he writes, "From this, it appears that I could extend my life to a certain period of time as I am still alive and Mr. Shahidullah being 10 years younger than me could not extend his life and died suddenly."  If it's fixed by the Almighty then how could Mr. Chowdhury extend it?  In section "7. Aging of Biological Cells and Longevity," he mentions, "Even though many parts of human beings are following the commandments of "God" without failure, these are the "cells", kidney, lungs, etc.  The human beings cannot control their actions but they follow God's commandments and submit to Him i. e. follow "Islam"" (his exact writing is quoted).  How are the human body parts following the commandments of God without failure?  He mentions about his by-pass surgery?  Didn't some cells/systems fail in his body?  Mr. Chowdhury's essay is full of contradictory remarks.  But, I should admit that I've gotten a new information from him about the cells, kidneys, etc. following Islam!  How ridiculous it is!  A person may be a devout Hindu, but his body parts are following Islam!

 

In Mr. Chowdury's writings, he tries to equate "self" with "soul."  The meaning of "self" is "a person regarded as an individual apart from everyone else," which is nothing but individualism.  But, the meaning of "soul" is "the spiritual part of a person believed to give life to the body."  How does "self " relate to or equal to "soul?"  The animals living in the forests have their individualism.  Does this mean that they have souls?  Mr. Chowdhury doesn't believe in the existence of souls in animals.  According to him, Allah gives souls in human beings on the 120th day after the embryos are formed.  Prior to this, the biological growth takes place without any soul or sprit.  Does this mean that the life starts after 120 days in a human embryo?  This special "soul" is not given to any other animals (according to Mr. Chowdhury).  Therefore, all the other animals are soulless living beings because they don't have "intellect" or "aql" (according to Mr. Chowdhury).  There are many retarded children born without any "intellect" or "aql."  The scientists/doctors are working hard to rectify/correct these problems even before they are born.  In USA, the doctors can do tests prior to the birth and can detect any such problem so that the birth of such children can be prevented.  Are these babies soulless because they don't have intellect or "aql" as mentioned by Mr. Chowdhury?  I would request Mr. Chowdhury to write his essays with some rational basis.  As it appears, he just believes in these things because these are written in primitive scriptures.  Such faith-based writings cannot satisfy the logical scrutiny and analysis of a rational thinker. 

 

In the section "3. Aspect of Soul," he writes about the soul of a one-year old baby, ".. his "Self" or "Nafs" is not developed to that extent to understand …"  Mr. Chowdhury equates "self," "Nafs," etc. with "Soul."  My question is:  does the soul need time to develop?  Is their any time-varying soul-function?  Does his creator describe the growth-rate of the soul?  Here again I must admit that I have gotten a new information about the time-varying aspect of soul.  I would like to know more about this time-varying soul-function! 

 

Quite unnecessarily, Mr. Chowdhury gives information on his areas of expertise while he is writing on the existence of soul.  He is a mechanical/agricultural engineer with over thirty years of teaching experience having research findings published in scientific journals and are referenced by other scientists.  It is good to know about his background.  In general, the individuals with research and publications background write essays maintaining clarity and brevity.  Unnecessary jargon and repeat of statements are carefully and cautiously avoided in the writings.  Brevity is also important and carefully maintained by the scientists when they write their findings.  I'm sure Mr. Chowdhury knows about it because he went through the processes of publications in the peer-reviewed journals.  For his information, I would like to mention that some of the mathematical proofs are sometimes done more than one time by more than one mathematician.  This is done only to reduce the steps involved in the proofs so that the brevity can be enhanced.  I have read his conclusion.  This is about more than two pages.  In conclusion, generally the findings are summarized without giving any description.  But, in Mr. Chowdhury's essay, I find description of the things that already he described in his earlier sections. Considering the background of Mr. Chowdhury, I would say that the essay he has written has failed to avoid repeat of statements and has failed to maintain clarity and brevity.  Only a circle of wishful believers will accept his writing unquestionably.  In faith-based world, any weird logic can be justified if these are mentioned from the scriptures. 

 

Mr. Chowdhury wants to leave this forum because he was attacked with words like nonsensical, illogical, etc.  I personally try not to use words that can hurt anyone personally.  But, of course, I try to use strong words to put forward my opinion.  I've observed use of strong words against freethinkers.  But, I think many of the freethinkers-secularists take these with good sprits.  I hope that Mr. Chowdhury will stay in the forums like Mukto-Mona and Vinnomot.  He can enhance his capabilities to question and analyze rationally.  After all, there are many powerful rational writers like Mr. Aparthib Zaman, Mr. Avijit Roy, Mr. Syed Kamran Mirza, Mr. Abul Kasem, and others, who write eloquently with valid questions, analyses, and answers.  I'm sure Mr. Chowdhury may enhance his knowledge by reading their essays.