- Видео 26
- Просмотров 27 298
A K
США
Добавлен 21 фев 2014
Rule of One (Some Personal Thoughts)
My personal observations on the Rule of One (qai'dat al-wahid), and why I am uncomfortable accepting it.
Просмотров: 24
Видео
Covers in Cars: Tera Mera Hai Pyar Amar (Ahmed J)
Просмотров 1836 месяцев назад
Covers in Cars: Tera Mera Hai Pyar Amar (Ahmed J)
Qur'ānic Reflections of a Layman (Ep 13) - Islam and Wealth, Reflection on Surah al-Fajr
Просмотров 146Год назад
Qur'ānic Reflections of a Layman (Ep 13) - Islam and Wealth, Reflection on Surah al-Fajr
Qur'ānic Reflections of a Layman - Ep 12 (Meat Consumption and a response to Veganism)
Просмотров 153Год назад
Qur'ānic Reflections of a Layman - Ep 12 (Meat Consumption and a response to Veganism)
Qur'ānic Reflections of a Layman - Ep 11 (how a corrupt society receives the truth)
Просмотров 58Год назад
Brief discussion on verses from Surah-Saad (Chapter 38).
Qur'ānic Reflections of a Layman - Ep 10 (7:143, Love in the Qur'ān)
Просмотров 142Год назад
A brief description of 7:143 and the love between the believer and God.
Qur'ānic Reflections of a Layman - Ep 9 (Jesus in the Qur'ān)
Просмотров 101Год назад
A brief analysis of the verses in the Qur'an about Jesus son of Mary, peace be upon him.
Qur'ānic Reflections of a Layman - Ep 7 (28:7, breast-feeding and parenting lessons)
Просмотров 1212 года назад
We discuss verse 28:7, which talks about the commands given to Ummi Musa.
Qur'ānic Reflections of a Layman - Ep 8 (Haqq vs Bātil, 13:17)
Просмотров 462 года назад
Qur'ānic Reflections of a Layman - Ep 8 (Haqq vs Bātil, 13:17)
Qur'ānic Reflections of a Layman - Ep 6, Qur'ānic Preservation
Просмотров 1052 года назад
Qur'ānic Reflections of a Layman - Ep 6, Qur'ānic Preservation
Qur'ānic Reflections of a Layman - Ep 5, The concept of Khalīfa (2:30)
Просмотров 892 года назад
Qur'ānic Reflections of a Layman - Ep 5, The concept of Khalīfa (2:30)
Qur'ānic Reflections of a Layman - Ep 4 ('ilm al-ghayb)
Просмотров 2332 года назад
Qur'ānic Reflections of a Layman - Ep 4 ('ilm al-ghayb)
Qur'ānic Reflections of a Layman - Ep 3 (2:158), the value of rituals
Просмотров 792 года назад
Qur'ānic Reflections of a Layman - Ep 3 (2:158), the value of rituals
Qur'ānic Reflections of a Layman - Ep 2 (kufr, shirk, nifāq, verse 2:6-7)
Просмотров 1672 года назад
Qur'ānic Reflections of a Layman - Ep 2 (kufr, shirk, nifāq, verse 2:6-7)
Qur'ānic Reflections of a Layman - Ep 1
Просмотров 1922 года назад
Qur'ānic Reflections of a Layman - Ep 1
Metaphysics of ibn 'Arabi (part 3) - a discussion on Wahdat al-Wujud with Dr. Mukhtar Ali
Просмотров 3,3 тыс.2 года назад
Metaphysics of ibn 'Arabi (part 3) - a discussion on Wahdat al-Wujud with Dr. Mukhtar Ali
Problems with the Contingency Argument - Part 2 (Is God the 'Cause' of the universe?)
Просмотров 5382 года назад
Problems with the Contingency Argument - Part 2 (Is God the 'Cause' of the universe?)
Problems with the Contingency Argument - part 1
Просмотров 8782 года назад
Problems with the Contingency Argument - part 1
Metaphysics of ibn 'Arabi - discussion with Dr Mukhtar Ali (part 2)
Просмотров 4,7 тыс.2 года назад
Metaphysics of ibn 'Arabi - discussion with Dr Mukhtar Ali (part 2)
Metaphysics of ibn 'Arabi - discussion with Dr Mukhtar Ali (part 1)
Просмотров 15 тыс.2 года назад
Metaphysics of ibn 'Arabi - discussion with Dr Mukhtar Ali (part 1)
Emanationism - it's Infinite Regress Problem
Просмотров 2323 года назад
Emanationism - it's Infinite Regress Problem
Rule of One (Qa'idat al-Wahid) - where did Ibn Sina go wrong?
Просмотров 2143 года назад
Rule of One (Qa'idat al-Wahid) - where did Ibn Sina go wrong?
❤
❤Anand
@@saraha3068 thank you !
@@saraha3068 btw, how do you know my name?
😂0⁰p ❤
Very insightful presentation of a very, very important topic Wahdatu-l-Wujud: quote ”It is to understand the difference between Allah/ God and His sacred Essence AND His Wujud, knowing that it's all ONE and at the same time there are things which apply to wujud that don't apply to His Being.”
MaShaAllah learned so much. May Allah increase his Tawfiq. One thing surprised me at the end when he said that Quran is a Mukashifa and is all over the place and not a systematic book with some sort of methodology. I am sure he didn't want to say it like that. It was wahi sometime brought by Gibraeil and sometime Allah revealed on his heart, It was never in a form a dream which he dictated.
I wonder how we became so stupid when we have such a rich understanding of life and creation a thousand years ago. Wujud forgave Ibrahim AS.
Re ”God Almighty in His full manifestation*, which is the essence, but this is non-manifest actually. ” - - better to say: *[God Almighty in His fullness, which is the essence] [ □ when describing anything about God's essence - which in any case is unknowable, it is not appropriate to use the word 'manifestation' because manifestation appears in the world of contingencies. From late Latin manifestatio(n-), from the verb manifestare ‘make public’.]
The “oneness of being “ unifies Sufi mysticism,gnostic Christianity,Zen Buddhism,Taoism,Kabbala.non religious people experience oneness,so we don’t need outdated belief systems.
A great discussion of a portion of Ibn Arabi's masterful contribution to Islam, BUT: How can the Kindle version of this book cost $60? The book itself is $240? That's insane.
There is another potential option, following the earlier conclusions to completion. That is, since God cannot be the cause of the world, since his being so would impose a limitation of one kind or another, it can be concluded that the world is not caused or is ‘not real’ (‘mithya’ in Sanskrit). However, since the world is experienced, it cannot be non-existent. Therefore, since it is both existent and unreal, its ontological status is similar to a dream, or ‘Maya’. It doesn’t require a platonic ‘first emanation’ for God to be the ‘creator’ of the illusory world, as the dream is ‘in’ His own mind. The dream is intellected, or ‘lit up’ and doesn’t require a further, intermediary, since the mind is not separate from the supremes intellect (seer, knower). God’s ‘energy’ is not a quality or attribute but is inherent like illumination is inherent to light, it is not a quality of light. Therefore, the world is ‘created’, not caused, and is not real since it is entirely dependent.
❤❤❤
Please do more interpretation I love your videos .. new subscriber here ❤
Many thanks for an excellent discussion and thank you @ak2872 for your lots of intelligent and thoughtful questions to Shaikh
The arguement does NOT argue from causation rather DEPENDANCY, eternallity or infinity of an entity does NOT undermine its dependance i referred to this with analogies in your previous video, please check the comment. Analogy: we have an eternal sun with its eternal rays, both the sun and the rays are eternal. however the rays are still bh virtue of the SUN ARE DEPENDANT UPON IT. One could even argue are caused by the sun APRIORI though both are eternal Analogy 2: we have the eternal pillow with the eternal ball resting upon, both are eternal. However THE INDENTATION ON THE PILLOW IS DEPENDANT UPON THE BALL BEING THERE and caused on apriori grounds also, the necassary being is a logical DEDCUTIVE conclusion logicallly following from the fact that absurdities cannot occur. And if we take this being out ofnthe equation. Absurdities such as a regress. Or others would occur. This is a MISREPRESENTATION of the arguement and not the arguement from ontologically and epistomological perimiters such as the one from ibn seena or thomas acquinas.
If you're interested, you can add me on FB and we can have a deeper conversation if you have questions or concerns or think my thinking is flawed.
@@ak2872 ofcourrse we can, I'd like to point out that you may look into my other analogy as well regarding the pillow and the ball. Your a brother. And all respect is due as a fellow Muslim brother. And frankly. We DONT NEED the contingency arguement at all. The quran and sunnah is enough for us, however I think it is important to point out the discrepancies.
With all due respect, this is a representation of a SUPERFICIAL understanding of the arguement. The arguement from DEPENDANCY states. That there CANNOT be a world where contingent or dependant things depend upon dependant thing at an infinitum, which would lead to an infinite REGRESS of DEPENDANT things, which is an absurdity. And an ABSURDITY BY DEFINITION CANNOT EXIST. Ill give you an analogy for a vetter perception of what the arguement really is Analogy: we have an eternal sun with its eternal rays, both the sun and the rays are eternal. however the rays are still bh virtue of the SUN ARE DEPENDANT UPON IT. One could even argue are caused by the sun APRIORI though both are eternal Analogy 2: we have the eternal pillow with the eternal ball resting upon, both are eternal. However THE INDENTATION ON THE PILLOW IS DEPENDANT UPON THE BALL BEING THERE and caused on apriori grounds also, the necassary being is a logical DEDCUTIVE conclusion logicallly following from the fact that absurdities cannot occur. And if we take this being out ofnthe equation. Absurdities such as a regress. Or others would occur. This is a MISREPRESENTATION of the arguement and not the arguement from ontologically and epistomological perimiters such as the one from ibn seena or thomas acquinas.
Thanks for your reply. You are arguing on the basis of medieval understanding of science where you have sun that can be conceptually distinguished from its rays. It cannot. What is a sun without rays? A sun without rays is an entity that doesn't produce light, because if it did, it wouldn't be possible to logically or physically distinguish rays from the sun. A ray is a ray of light, and therefore it is impossible for a ray of light to depend on an entity that by definition doesn't have rays to begin with. In other words, the sun is as dependent on the rays as the rays are with the sun. There is no possibility of one existing conceptually or physically without the other. Is the square dependent on it's sides or are the sides dependant on the square? It completely depends on your perspective. I'm saying that the concept of dependency is totally arbitrary. There is another completely logical way to look at reality which is that it is made up of entirely co-dependent entities. At which point, the concept of a stable entity no longer remains. Think more because this isn't so straightforward.
The main issue is that you're stuck with a mental model of the universe that doesn't correspond to reality. Ibn Sina's understanding of nature was limited to his time and scientific understanding of nature. Yes, I see why the world SHOULD contain a necessary being based on your understanding of the world. But your understanding is flawed (or certainly not the only possible way to look at the world), as is your conclusion. For example, Ibn Sina considers that fire burns wood. But in fact, wood consumes fire and fire does not exist without wood (or other fuel).
Pls read up on codependent origination.
@@ak2872 what your referring to is a causation model of the arguement. Which is similar to the kalam cosmological arguemen but the thing is that those contentions don't apply here. Thomas acquinas later came on and WORKED on the arguement. And actually ibn tamiyyah said, that THE MORE THE QAUNTITY OF CONTINGENT THINGS increases the more CONTINGENT they become. Say you have a multiverse which is made up of contingent universes. Because it is multiverse of EVEN MORE CONTINGENT UNIVERSE IT REQUIRES MORE OF AN EXPLANATION now. I can cause a child. And he doesn't need me to exist now. HOWEVER the sun is emitting rays, and the rays actually DEPEND upon the sun for their existences. Your contention to the postulate of DEPENDANCY doesn't apply, and we self evidently KNOW that universe is co posed of these DEPENDANT things.
@@ayeshayasir8665 What is a sun without its rays. Describe that entity to me.
Gretings from poland. Great talk. I have zen background But I was lisining this as very known lesson. Great talk !!
Mukhtar Ali is a good orator and has a profound knowledge abt Islam. How ever I disagree with him when he says that certain laws of sharia cannot be applied today as Islamic prophet muhammad says in hadiths that the quran and sharia is to be applied until judgment day. Dr.muktar also says many sahi hadhits were written 100 yrs after prophet muhammad s death then even fasting and the islamic style/way of prayer has to be discarded bcuz such ways r only mentioned in sahe hadeets
It’s beautiful. Criticisms of this? Tawba Tawba. It’s so very beautiful.
Could my mother not exist, well according to your argument i can't answer because if my mother didn't exist i would not either and my mind is incapable of reaching that conclusion. That's not a logical argument. Btw i asked my mom about that, she said yes she made a choice.
Anand bhai, you deleted our thread on FB, which is a shame. I shall leave a short note that you are forgetting the counterfactual thinking that underlies the argument.
Inshallah. I deleted it because it's best to talk over audio about such things.
It would have far much better if the interviwer talk less, and let the interviwee talk more. It got to a pint that irritated me. Some one commented earlier that there's too much talk in circles. We appreciate this discussion, but we want to know what the interviewee has to say, not the interviewer.
Sir but the wealth creation in today's world is mostly questionable.....most of the wealth created is through fiat printer....printing money out of thin air and handing over to ppl who further ur agenda🙂.... I had contacred u before....until we have sound money we will have this problems...sound money ia like gold standard where money can't be created out of nothing....in that case everyone will start equal in thw world...in today's world with 60% of tradw happening in dollar, the whole thing is lopsided,...BITCOIN ONLY FIXES THIS
This is the exact way i debate vegans!! Also vegans don't have an issue with insecticides and pesticides
There is no greater proof of our decline as an ummah in the vilification of Ibn Arabi. The genius of our ummah.
Brother, I don't think you understand what we mean by " imagine ". This is a concept from abstraction and is ontological. Let's reword it to make it sound different: -The current state and modality of the universe is not neccasary and didn't have to exist and could have been another way. When we say " conceieve " , we mean that it is possible for such thing to happen or such thing isn't logically absurd. Just like how it is " conceivable " that you wouldn't exist. You might respond with the laws of physics or determinism determined the way it is. But, that isn't relevant as the laws of physics themselves are contingent and didn't have to be the way they are from a metaphysical standpoint.
Lol, he doesn't even understand the argument.
@@Drigger95 exactly he does not even know what the hell we are reffering to!!
JazakAllahu khairan
Contingency refers to the object/thing whose existence or non-existence wouldn't make amy difference.
Do you know of any such object, whose existence would make no difference?
@@ak2872 for example us or the matter which is by nature dependent/contingent.
@@imrazaaa does that matter make no difference? Unless you deny physics, we know that every piece of matter exerts force on others. If you remove it, you create a difference ...
@A K @A K I was referring contingency in terms of dependency. Let me elaborate how I understood your understanding of contingency. Fırst of all by possible existence you understand that in order it to exist it should be imaginable by the mind which leads to the conclusion that this mind is necessary being which we are not. Secondly, if we take the example you used of squared circle, yes it makes sense to conclude that it is impossible existence but for God we can't conclude it. Lets take the example of morality, would it be possible to imagine that in another possibile universe the rape/murder is not prohibited, for example we can understand it from incest marriage which took place between Adam's sons and daughters as much as I know. Everything True is from God the most high and mistake is mine.
@@ak2872 Brother, I don't think you understand what we mean by " imagine ". This is a concept from abstraction and is ontological. Let's reword it to make it sound different: -The current state and modality of the universe is not neccasary and didn't have to exist and could have been another way. When we say " conceieve " , we mean that it is possible for such thing to happen or such thing isn't logically absurd. Just like how it is " conceivable " that you wouldn't exist. You might respond with the laws of physics or determinism determined the way it is. But, that isn't relevant as the laws of physics themselves are contingent and didn't have to be the way they are from a metaphysical standpoint
Many thanks for your effort . I really learnt a lot from your video. My only comment would be: The bedrock basis of the issue is a metaphysical principle which state that "Nothing can come out of nothing". Our daily experience proves this to be necessarily true. On this basis the contingency argument develop its premise that 'every contingent thing cannot exist on its own and require a cause to render its existence' whereas in Kalam cosmological argument, the premise goes as 'something to have a beginning must have a cause'. Bother premises rest on the same metaphysical principle mentioned above. However, the contingency argument emphasize/rely on being itself therefore it is also known as an ontological argument. Using this argument one does not need another proof to discuss the worldview where there are degrees of existence such as our physical material world, world of imagination, world of spirits etc. Thus the contingency argument fit perfectly well with Ibn Sina's theory of emanation on how existence comes to be.
I think wahdat Al wujud also mean laa illaha illalah
No.
The water / wealth stagnation analogy is so befitting and beautiful Aanand. Thank you so much for making these videos and sharing them.
Barak Allahu fikom Aanand Beautiful
Allah yabarik fik
After a long time. And also Surah Fajr is one of my favorite Surahs❤️
Great video, thanks for the book recommendation.
Amazing reflection❤️ Benefitted a lot. Jazakallahu khairan khaseera. Romba nandri.
I always felt alone in these subjects because people around dont understand me.. Now I found these gentlemen I am no more alone alhamdulillah
sounds like ismaili neoplatonism
Very Nice!
@@asheikh01 thank you
Dear Brother Can I get your email address
Deep. Ma shaa Allah
Loved the way you concluded.
Interesting! It’s pretty much the same way that people think in many polytheistic cultures even today.
Great thoughts, explanations and reflections about Isa / Jesus. I especially appreciate the timing of this around Christmas to understand and relate the Quranic knowledge to our world today. Please have more videos that help us understand with reference to current events, or cultural significance.
Thank you! Will keep that in mind for next time iA.
This is so beautiful! To me, what's more interesting is the reply of God. Obviously, when God wants us to turn towards Him, it is not the same "want" that humans have. Thanks Aanand! This draws so many beautiful connections and parallels in my mind.
Is he mentioned as Ruh….meaning as “messenger “??? Or “Spirit “???
The book that I recommend is Todd Lawson's "The Crucifixion in the Qur'an." Apologies for the background noise in the middle of the video, not sure how that happened.
If it doesn't make sense to call God the creator, then who is the creator of the universe?
The video doesn't say that God isn't the creator. It's about describing God as the cause ('illa in Arabic). Cause and creation aren't the same thing.
Your point was a mind can not imagine the non existence of the universe because it's intails the non existence of it's own In other words i can't imagine that universe can not exist because if i imagine that i myself is not going to exist in first place to imagine that But that means if i imagine my parents dose not exist that also going to intails that i didn't exist to think that. So what is universe then are you saying that universe is not contingent because of your above arguments Or You are saying universe is still contingent but that arguments dr.shoeb given in his video is not good.
The idea is that you cannot remove or change any ONE thing from the universe without changing or removing EVERYTHING. Therefore, it is impossible for US to ascertain what the notion of contingency entails. Except in a very superfluous way.
@@ak2872 "The idea is that you cannot remove or change any ONE thing from the universe without changing or removing EVERYTHING" Yes you can. You can remove a galaxy from the universe and it wouldn't change the universe in any way shape or form.
@@Ikhlashasib10 thats right. Im still not getting what that guy is confused about. its a common sense thing that we cannot have an infinite regress of depend things. we need a place where it all comes to a stop for it to make sense
@@mzkhan93 dependency is a mental construct. The contingency argument is an elaborate way of saying "I (as in my mind) exist."
@@ak2872 let’s complete the sentence. I exist BECAUSE of the thing that I was depended on.
Very well explained and concise. Really appreciate the relatable content with a summary at the end. ❤️
Thanks Ali!
The commandment "If you are scared, cast him into the river" can be perceived in a metaphorical sense too, right? I think the priority order of these 4 commandments is extremely crucial, and bears so much relevance to parenting at all times. "Secret" it is! The layers of wisdom beneath every word and its choice is out there potentially accessible to all, and yet attained only when one is ready for it! Beautiful!
Thanks for the kind comments! Qur'ān can be read literally or metaphorically of course. Every one walks away from the book with something to take home! 😊
This is incredibly beautiful! Besides instilling steady hope it is so much more profound ! Thank you!