Видео

❤

❤Anand

😂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mysticism,gnostic Christianity,Zen Buddhism,Taoism,Kabbala.non religious people experience oneness,so we don’t need outdated belief systems.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.

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.

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.

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.

JazakAllahu khairan

Contingency refers to the object/thing whose existence or non-existence wouldn't make amy difference.

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

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

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!

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.

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?

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.

Very well explained and concise. Really appreciate the relatable content with a summary at the end. ❤️

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!

This is incredibly beautiful! Besides instilling steady hope it is so much more profound ! Thank you!