The absolute was invented when Egypt moved away from polytheistic society with the leadership of Faraoh Akhenaton towards monotheistic where one God would rule supreme and "absolute" and all other Gods would be done away with. Akhenaton did not succeed (interestingly enough - Sigmund Freud has a less known work where he hypothesizes that Akhenaton was in fact Moses who led the Israelites out of Egypt and enforced the idea of one supreme and absolute God, the lives of Moses and Akhenaton have interesting parallels but historians do not agree on many points so that the identities could be officially merged).

Later on the search of Hebrews for the absolute God wasconverted to and followed by Judeo-Christian theology and Islam. In each case supreme and absolute power could not be argued with and it can be quite easily observed that the search for absolute permeated the whole of western thinking where philosophers, scientists and artists have been seeking such paradoxes as absolute beauty, absolute justice or even the absolute freezing point which actually produces an interesting allegory as theory suggests that should such a temperature be reached the matter collapses and therefore moves and heat is generated and the point could in no way be maintained.

Buddhists and Asian thinkers on the other hand view everything with relativity, including the absolute which for the first time makes sense when viewed through Buddhist paradoxes. Absolute can only be an absolute in relation with relativity but in such case, how absolute is the absolute if it can be compared? (This would be one very typical Buddhist paradox - somewhat similar to renaissance era question whether an all-powerful God can create such a big stone that he cannot himself lift it?).

To get back to the original setting, it is ok if you dream and think the dreams and thoughts of the absolute. I just hope they are relatively enjoyable.

Once you (generic) attempt to explain what is essentially unexplainable, you are hovering on hubris. The Absolute is unfathomable and formless. Words do not suffice.

"Crack the heart of any atom; from its midst you will see a sun shining. If you give all you have to Love…." 

Sayed Ahmad Hatif

Exactly. That's why the idea of someone thinking their own thoughts or dreaming their own dreams seemed too straightforward to me, especially in light of the following Buddhist ideas about one's self:

On cognitive dissonance: http://www.salon.com/2012/01/08/so_what_if_america_is_the_most_religious_nation/

"Polls consistently tell us that America is the most religious nation in the industrialized world. More that 90 percent of our population say they believe in God, and that they pray regularly. The figure may even be higher when adding the majority of Americans who claim to be atheists but pray, one-third of them often, according to a Baylor University survey. ...

But does professing religious beliefs translate into acting in accord with religious principles? Isn’t behavior the true test? In his New Testament epistle, James expressed the Christian view that “faith without works is dead.” Similarly, Judaism calls for “mitzvahs” — good deeds. And Islam requires acts of charity. Poet Ralph Waldo Emerson offered this challenging formula for sincerity: “Go put your creed into your deed.”

There is a Buddhist thought that "...The world would be a better place if more people would sit down and not do so much." Please note that this does not imply passivity but rather calming down, finding out what is truly important by contemplation and meditation rather than being a devout follower of some dogma and doubling the speed while losing direction. I prefer to think that the Christians challenging other people's faith is one such aberration and yet here I am challenging their challenging and fulfilling their biblical prophesy that men will reap as they sow.

Referring to the article, there may have been an error; atheists who pray are an oxymoron (I do not refer to them as oxes or morons however) and they may have wished to use the term "agnostics" when they mentioned those who pray regularly. Doubtful agnostics leave the door of religion just that much ajar that there may be some religious communication whereas the devout atheists tend to avoid religion or religious practices altogether.

Since my article was about the discrepancy between the predominantly Christian society and very unchristian phenomena it harbors, your invitation to just calm down would certainly not be understood for example by the Occupy movement which wants to do away with social hypocrisy...

I understand.

This recent post should be read in conjunction with an earlier one, though:

But coming back to the bridging and this fundamental observation:

I'd like to mention yet another largely forgotten common underlying aspect of religions:

As director of Al-Azhar University, the world's oldest surviving university, Grand Sheikh of Islam Tantawi ... emphasizes the spiritual element of knowledge. ... Tantawi holds that there are common beliefs in religions that provide room for cooperation and negotiation. For example, bringing man out of darkness into light is a concept that most religions share. We all benefit from this enlightenment. (http://www.dailystar.com.lb/ArticlePrint.aspx?id=92115&mode=print)

How to Integrate Europe’s Muslims 

"[snip]The failure of Islamic integration in Europe is often attributed — especially by right-wing parties — to an excess of tolerance toward the large-scale Muslim immigration that began in the mid-1970s. By recognizing Muslim religious requirements, the argument goes, countries like France, Britain and the Netherlands have unwittingly hindered assimilation and even, in some cases, fostered radicalism. But the unrest in gritty European suburbs stems not from religious difference, but from anomie.

Europeans should not be afraid to allow Muslim students to take classes on Islam in state-financed schools and universities. The recognition and accommodation of Islamic religious practices, from clothing to language to education, does not mean capitulation to fundamentalism. On the contrary, only by strengthening the democratic rights of Muslim citizens to form associations, join political parties and engage in other aspects of civic life can Europe integrate immigrants and give full meaning to the abstract promise of religious liberty. …"

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/24/opinion/how-to-integrate-europes-muslims.html?ref=europe