What is Truth? with Firas Zahabi (2022-02-26) ​
Description ​
Firas Zahabi is the Head Trainer of the TriStar Gym in Montreal in Canada. He attended Concordia University where he graduated with a degree in Philosophy with a specialisation in the Ancient Greeks.
You Can Support My Work on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/Bloggingtheology
My Paypal Link: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/bloggingtheology?locale.x=en_GB
Summary of What is Truth? with Firas Zahabi ​
*This summary is AI generated - there may be inaccuracies. *
00:00:00-01:00:00 ​
Firas Zahabi discusses the concept of truth. He explains that there are different theories of truth, and that one must choose a theory based on its practical applications. He also discusses the law of non-contradiction, which states that a proposition cannot be both true and false at the same time.
00:00:00 Firas Zahabi discusses the concept of truth. He explains that there are different theories of truth, and that one must choose a theory based on its practical applications. He also discusses the law of non-contradiction, which states that a proposition cannot be both true and false at the same time.
- 00:05:00 Paul discusses the concepts of truth and falsehood with expert theoretical mathematician Firas Zahabi. Zahabi defines truth as something that is true in principle, while also noting that there can be truths that are contingent, meaning that they are dependent on future events. Zahabi goes on to discuss the concept of inductive reasoning, which is the process of drawing general conclusions from specific observations. He points out that while inductive reasoning is helpful in the field of mathematics and biology, it can be problematic when it comes to applying it to other fields, such as the study of the Quran. Finally, Zahabi addresses the issue of certainty, discussing the fact that while one truth may be more certain than another, there is no absolute certainty in the world.
- 00:10:00 Firas Zahabi discusses the concept of truth. He argues that there are three types of truths - mathematical truths, historical truths, and inductive truths - and that each has its own level of certainty. He goes on to say that historical truths mean nothing, and that what happened to JFK is still a mystery. He also points out that it is impossible to verify historical truths via repeatable, scientific experiments.
- 00:15:00 Firas Zahabi discusses the difference between truth and falsehood. He argues that only truth can be relied upon for faith, and that science is based on faith in the future behaving the same as the past.
- 00:20:00 Firas Zahabi discusses how religious faith is at the heart of science. He challenges anyone in the world to tell him that the foundation of science is not belief in the future behaving like the past. Zahabi also gives an example of how a force in nature, such as air resistance, can be inferred by observing a pattern.
- 00:25:00 Firas Zahabi discusses the concept of truth. He notes that there must be something that exists in order for there to be truth, and that this something is air resistance. He goes on to say that there is a pull from the earth, but that he never observed gravity. He then moves on to discuss philosophy of science, and how consensus is used to determine the nature of forces in the universe. He points out that atheists agree with him that gravity is not a force out there, but rather a pattern in regularity. He ends the video by emphasizing the concept of doubt, and how it can be used as proof of awareness.
- 00:30:00 Firas Zahabi discusses the different levels of truth and how intuition sustains all other truths. He also discusses the concept of the tabula rasa and how anything on the tabularaza (mind's table) must go through the senses in order to exist. He then discusses Abraham's experience with seeing the various elements of the universe and how this led him to believe in a single, all-powerful God.
- 00:35:00 Firas Zahabi discusses what he refers to as "the r7-1." He argues that the r7-1 is an idea that is not based in reality, and that even blind people can experience it. Ghazali (a medieval Islamic philosopher) disagrees with Zahabi, arguing that the r7-1 is a concept that is both physical and based in consciousness.
- 00:40:00 Discusses the idea of truth, and how it cannot be proven to be anything physical. It then introduces the thought experiment of a robotic Paul that follows and studies its human creator, recording what happens 99 out of 100 times. The presenter argues that thought experiments are a better way of arguing than logical arguments, and that robotic Paul is a better example of this than a human Paul.
- 00:45:00 explains that, just like humans, robots have subjective experiences, and that when a powerful lightning strike occurs, a robot like Paul 2.0 would experience fear and hope.
- 00:50:00 ventriloquist act performer Firas Zahabi discusses the difference between robots and humans, arguing that while robots can be made to mimic human behavior, humans have direct experience of their own consciousness. He goes on to say that while humans can use logic and scientific experimentation to understand aspects of the world, they cannot understand ultimate reality--that is, God--through these means. Zahabi argues that this is why Allah--who is beyond logic and science--points us to a primary way of knowing Him, through intuition.
- 00:55:00 azalea goes into detail about what truth is. She explains that there are different types of truth, including the allah light, which is also reflected. Ali, Firas Zahabi's assistant, then gives a short description of Thomas Huxley's atheist views. He says that, even though he is an atheist, he can still associate himself with allah because he has a direct connection to him. Finally, Razali discusses the essence of something, and how it is different for each person.
01:00:00-02:00:00 ​
discusses the concept of truth, and how humans are predisposed to believe things are true because they make sense. It also discusses how faith in science is just a form of faith, and that scientific truths are also historical. Finally, the video discusses the concept of fitra, or "the inner divine element within us," and how it is through understanding this that we can understand the truth about history.
01:00:00 "What is Truth? with Firas Zahabi" discusses the concept of truth and its many different aspects. Aristotle said that there is one thing that all knives have in common - their essence. Paul, the viewer, is asked to consider a knife that is drawn on paper. The knife has the same essence as a knife in reality, which is a piece of metal with a blade. If the knife is melted down and turned into a fork, its essence has been lost and it is no longer a knife. The same is true for all concepts in the mind - they are subjective and can change over time. The concept of truth is ultimately unchangeable and certain, as it is an objective reality that is shared by all humans.
- 01:05:00 Firas Zahabi discusses the concept of truth, noting that there is no one, objective "ship of theses." Rather, truth is subjective and depends on a person's perspective. He also points out that the idea of a "demon" conspiring to deceive the senses is a philosophical impossibility.
- 01:10:00 Firas Zahabi discusses what he believes is the truth. He points out that there can be no absolute truth because everything is constantly in flux. He also discusses the concept of "nucleus" and how it can be found within oneself. He says that all one's beliefs are innate, and that one's faith in scientific truths is also based on faith.
- 01:15:00 Discusses the concept of truth, and how humans are predisposed to believe things are true because they make sense. It also discusses how faith in science is just a form of faith, and that scientific truths are also historical. Finally, the video discusses the concept of fitra, or "the inner divine element within us," and how it is through understanding this that we can understand the truth about history.
- 01:20:00 Discusses the idea that there is a truth that is both theological and historical, and that this truth can be ascertained through one's cognitive faculties (fitra). also mentions the idea that humans are born Muslim, and that this religion is innate.
- 01:25:00 Firas Zahabi discusses the concept of "truth" and how it differs from what some Muslims believe. He points out that the concept of truth is innate and instinctive, and precedes reason. He also discusses the idea that there are two ways to arrive at truth: through reason and through intuition. Finally, he discusses the concept of consciousness and how it is encompassed in one's awareness.
- 01:30:00 In his YouTube video, "What is Truth? with Firas Zahabi," the author discusses the concept of truth and how it differs from what we experience in our everyday lives. He points out that the dream itself is not as real as the dreamer, and that we are metaphors in a dream so to speak. He goes on to say that there has to be an "unex" (an objective reality) in order to have any kind of truth at all, and that all human beings are metaphorically "all things that dunya is a metaphor." Finally, he explains that Allah is objectively true in a category by himself and this is known via direct experience.
- 01:35:00 Firas Zahabi discusses the idea of truth and how it has changed throughout history. He argues that a paradigm shift is necessary in order to understand consciousness and the mind-body connection, and that the Quran is a perfect fit for this paradigm because it emphasizes the role of mind over matter. He also discusses the concept of 'idols,' which he defines as "false gods" that we create in our minds. Finally, he discusses the laws of nature and how they are only approximations, and how by understanding this we can rid ourselves of false beliefs and illusions.
- 01:40:00 Discusses the concept of randomness and how it is an illusion of the mind. It argues that randomness exists as an expression that things are hard to calculate or get exact in this world, and is not a force out there.
- 01:45:00 Firas Zahabi discusses what he believes to be the truth: that there are no mistakes in the universe, that all events are determined, and that thoughts occur due to the random interactions of matter. He then goes on to discuss how an atheist would view this idea, and how it would contradict their beliefs in rational thought. Finally, he argues that an atheist would be forced to accept that they are just experiencing noise, or chaos, if materialism and chemistry were true.
- 01:50:00 Firas Zahabi discusses how the atheist's radical skepticism of theism is selective and not consistently applied. He argues that, if atheism were a principle across the board, it would be self-defeating.
- 01:55:00 Firas Zahabi discusses the idea of 'faith' and how it can be used to overcome logical reasoning. He discusses the example of a coin being flipped 100 times and how one can develop a trust in Allah based on repeated experiences. He then goes on to discuss the idea of 'universe cycles' and how one can know this without observing a universe in action. Finally, he discusses how atheists who believe in an 'end-of-the-universe' are hoping for a scenario where this happens and that they are not actually living in faith.
02:00:00-02:25:00 ​
Firas Zahabi discusses the concept of truth and how it relates to religious experience. He argues that all truth is a religious experience, and that the different theories of truth are all based on abstractions. He emphasizes the importance of first experiencing truth firsthand, through prayer and reflection.
02:00:00 The philosopher Thomas Nagel argues that for his own personal reasons, he does not want to believe in the existence of God. Other atheists have said the same. This is often not understood, as many atheists actually do not want God to exist for moral reasons or other reasons. This is a motivated atheism based on desire rather than an objective view.
- 02:05:00 Firas Zahabi discusses what he calls "the fitra," which is a direct experience that cannot be denied. He goes on to say that atheists rely on faith when trying to argue their position, and that they cannot simply assume things for the reasons they have given. He says that the only area where atheism has any real firepower is in the argument for the existence of God.
- 02:10:00 Firas Zahabi discusses the idea of truth, which is a concept that exists in the mind and is only verified by allah. He also argues that the truths that exist in the mind are eternal and unbreakable, and that they were created by allah.
- 02:15:00 According to Firas Zahabi, all we can be certain of is that there is a seen world, an observed world, and an unseen world. The muslim philosophers went beyond logic and said that we can be certain of this because we have direct experience of it. Schopenhauer almost reached mysticism but didn't quite, and it had a lot to do with the byproduct of their time. The scientists in the west hate their religion, but their forefathers were also mystics. Every road leads back to God, and even the pagans came first. There is no metaphor to Allah, he is only pure truth.
- 02:20:00 Firas Zahabi discusses the idea that all truth is a religious experience, and how the different theories of truth are all based on abstractions. He emphasizes the importance of first experiencing truth firsthand, through prayer and reflection.
- 02:25:00 Discusses what Truth is and how Muslims should approach the Quran. Gazari says that Muslims should harmonize the natural sciences and islam not reject either one. Paul says that when he goes to the grave, he doesn't believe in Allah, but he fears him. He also says that there is nothing that is going to scare him when he dies. He urges Muslims to go to the next level and understand the Quran on a deeper level.
Full transcript with timestamps: CLICK TO EXPAND
0:00:02 hello everyone and welcome to blogging
0:00:04 theology today i am delighted to talk to
0:00:08 phiris zahabi you are most welcome sir
0:00:13 thank you very much happy to be here i
0:00:14 gotta say i'm a huge fan of your show
0:00:16 i've watched so many of your episodes
0:00:18 and i find the way you deliver your
0:00:20 messages to be very unique and special
0:00:22 thank you very much for all your great
0:00:24 work absolutely love your channel that's
0:00:26 very generous of you alhamdulillah thank
0:00:27 you so much
0:00:29 pharas for those few who don't know who
0:00:31 he might be is the head trainer of the
0:00:33 tristar gym in montreal in canada which
0:00:36 apparently is completely snowed under at
0:00:38 the moment um
0:00:39 um
0:00:40 yeah um you attended as you know called
0:00:43 uh concordia university uh where he
0:00:45 graduated with a degree in philosophy
0:00:48 with a specialization in the ancient
0:00:50 greeks and boy does it show that you
0:00:52 graduated in philosophy i must say
0:00:55 you've got a huge following on social
0:00:58 media um you can look him up on twitter
0:01:01 youtube and instagram and there's lots
0:01:04 of amazing videos and podcasts featuring
0:01:06 you now
0:01:08 you've recently he gained much respect
0:01:10 not least from myself for your brilliant
0:01:12 destruction of stephen fry's complaining
0:01:15 and insulting god argument on the dean
0:01:19 show which is a must watch if you
0:01:21 haven't already seen it i'm really
0:01:23 serious it's very very good today pharas
0:01:26 will be discussing a very important
0:01:29 question
0:01:30 what is truth
0:01:33 what is true so what is it
0:01:36 that's one monstrous question
0:01:39 and you know instead of going to the
0:01:40 formal theories of truth you know we
0:01:42 have uh
0:01:44 correspondence theory pragmatism we have
0:01:46 of course um
0:01:48 a coherence theory
0:01:49 yeah it might be
0:01:51 we're gonna try to do it in a bit of a
0:01:52 funner way now i wanted to say that
0:01:55 yes i've studied greek philosophy but
0:01:56 i've also studied muslim philosophy and
0:01:58 british empiricism and i've
0:02:00 studied 2000 years of human thinking wow
0:02:03 for the last 20 years and i will tell
0:02:05 you i i study about
0:02:07 two to five hours a day on a regular
0:02:09 basis i'm a martial arts expert that's
0:02:10 what i do for a living eight hours a day
0:02:12 but after that in my free time
0:02:14 it's really always science history logic
0:02:17 philosophy you know so i'm constantly
0:02:20 studying this topic for the last 20
0:02:21 years so
0:02:22 um i'm gonna try to i'm gonna try to
0:02:24 verbalize it or put it in a way that's
0:02:26 uh a little bit more
0:02:28 palatable you know i think that's the
0:02:29 goal you know because
0:02:31 philosophy could be boring if you do it
0:02:33 formal like formal logic could be quite
0:02:35 boring
0:02:36 quite stale
0:02:37 so let's start with the thought
0:02:39 experiment okay so first thing i'm going
0:02:41 to do here is i'm going to grab a pen
0:02:42 here
0:02:43 okay paul
0:02:44 and i'm going to draw on my hand here
0:02:46 i'm going to show you what i'm drawing
0:02:48 my hand i'm going to draw here
0:02:50 a squared circle now i'm not drawing a
0:02:52 square and a circle
0:02:54 i'm drawing on the other side of my hand
0:02:56 you can't see paul okay i've drawn one
0:02:58 shape it's a single shape it's a square
0:03:01 and it's a circle at the same time okay
0:03:04 do you believe do you believe
0:03:06 that on the other side of my hand there
0:03:08 is a squared circle
0:03:09 uh no
0:03:11 no but why you haven't seen the other
0:03:13 side of my hand
0:03:14 because i i know enough about the
0:03:16 properties of squares and circles to
0:03:18 know that they are mutually incompatible
0:03:20 when it comes to presenting them
0:03:21 together as a single object
0:03:23 exactly there's no square circle
0:03:25 actually it'll be impossible for me to
0:03:26 draw you pretty much
0:03:28 okay yeah so you see you knew without
0:03:31 even looking that's called analytical
0:03:33 that's an analytical fact yeah
0:03:36 you know i try to convince my wife that
0:03:38 a man can be both married and a bachelor
0:03:42 she disagrees she's not formally trained
0:03:45 in logic she disagrees with me
0:03:47 now unfortunately she's correct
0:03:49 you cannot both be married and a
0:03:52 bachelor would you agree
0:03:54 no has there ever been a married
0:03:55 bachelor in history
0:03:57 no that hasn't by definition they
0:03:59 couldn't be
0:04:00 they couldn't be correct so this is what
0:04:02 we call analytical facts yep it's a fact
0:04:04 that a square a circle cannot there's no
0:04:08 squared circle actually if every human
0:04:10 being dies
0:04:12 and the universe implodes and the
0:04:14 universe is there will still be no
0:04:15 squared circles
0:04:17 actually before human beings ever
0:04:18 existed there were no squared circles
0:04:20 it's an eternal transcendent truth if
0:04:23 you were in a coma and you were dreaming
0:04:24 there would still be no squirt circles
0:04:26 in your dreams
0:04:28 if you discover
0:04:30 an alien civilization
0:04:32 trillions of light years away
0:04:34 there are still no squared circles and
0:04:36 we're certain of it these are analytical
0:04:37 truths
0:04:38 and unfortunately there are still no
0:04:40 unmarried bachelors there are no married
0:04:42 bachelors okay
0:04:44 this is what we call the law of
0:04:45 non-contradiction aristotle taught us
0:04:47 look there's this thing called the law
0:04:48 of non-contradiction
0:04:50 it cannot the proposition cannot both be
0:04:52 true and false at the same time it has
0:04:54 to be one or the other
0:04:56 it can't be both a square and a circle
0:04:58 it's analytically true
0:05:00 now paul if i tell you look i'm drawing
0:05:02 on this side of my hand a flamingo
0:05:06 do you believe me
0:05:08 um in principle it's certainly possible
0:05:10 yes it's certainly possible it could be
0:05:13 it could not be okay i didn't want to
0:05:15 draw in my hand sorry for lying you to
0:05:17 paul i apologize for deceiving you
0:05:19 it's that's a contingent fact that's an
0:05:22 inductive fact that's an inductive
0:05:23 belief so we have math and biology let's
0:05:26 put it in two simple uh categories math
0:05:29 was true before me and you were born and
0:05:31 it's going to be true after me and
0:05:32 you're born flamingos may or may not
0:05:34 exist after me and you expire
0:05:37 humanity may expire and flamingos go on
0:05:40 and they may not it's contingent we
0:05:41 don't know we have to go out into the
0:05:43 world and see you ask me look i don't
0:05:45 know it could be yes it could be no
0:05:47 you'd have to flip your hand around and
0:05:48 go and see it that's what we call
0:05:50 we call contingent it's a contingent
0:05:52 truth okay now analytical truths we use
0:05:56 deductive reasoning
0:05:57 so think math yep and then you have
0:06:00 inductive truths think biology
0:06:03 is it the case that all frogs can swim
0:06:06 well it's not a mathematical it's not a
0:06:08 squared circle question it's not a
0:06:09 married bachelor question
0:06:11 it could be that all frogs swim and it
0:06:13 could be that some frogs don't swim
0:06:16 aristotle had to go out into the wild he
0:06:18 had to study every frog
0:06:20 and after seeing a thousand frogs and he
0:06:22 said all these thousand frogs can swim
0:06:24 do you think it's time now to generalize
0:06:26 that all frogs can swim
0:06:28 i'm not confident enough a thousand is
0:06:30 not enough maybe ten thousand maybe a
0:06:32 hundred thousand maybe i go and i meet
0:06:34 another uh scientist from across the
0:06:36 world and he says all the frogs i've
0:06:38 observed also all can swim and i share
0:06:40 notes with the scientific community and
0:06:42 we all come together and we say look
0:06:43 does anybody ever see a frog that
0:06:44 doesn't swim and we all say no they all
0:06:47 can swim
0:06:49 so inductive reasoning again biology
0:06:51 contingent things
0:06:53 they're always predicated on a
0:06:54 generalization we go from specific to
0:06:57 generalization
0:06:58 now we're going to say look me and my
0:07:00 scientists scientific friends we're
0:07:01 starting to be really confident that all
0:07:03 frogs can swim
0:07:06 all right we're going to write it down
0:07:07 in this book we're going to write down
0:07:08 here all frogs can swim we're going to
0:07:10 print it in the textbook we're going to
0:07:11 send it out to the universities
0:07:13 everybody now is going to read that all
0:07:15 frogs can swim it's an inductive fact
0:07:17 it's not a
0:07:18 mathematical fact it's not a
0:07:21 a priori fact like a squared circle like
0:07:24 we talked about this square has to have
0:07:26 four sides
0:07:28 if it has three sides it cannot be a
0:07:29 square okay so it's not analytical
0:07:32 it's inductive it's contingent
0:07:35 now it could happen in the future
0:07:38 that there's a species of frogs
0:07:40 that don't swim you know i once went to
0:07:42 a pet shop to buy a
0:07:44 turtle for my kids and there was a
0:07:45 species of turtle that they had that
0:07:46 doesn't swim and i was shocked i thought
0:07:48 that all turtles can swim no they told
0:07:51 me this one you cannot put him in a body
0:07:52 of water because i wanted to buy him an
0:07:53 aquarium they're like no no no no he'll
0:07:55 drown like a turtle there could be it's
0:07:59 not illogical that in the future there's
0:08:01 a species of frogs that doesn't swim
0:08:03 now we become
0:08:04 it becomes problematic because are we
0:08:06 still gonna name that a frog are we
0:08:08 gonna still us
0:08:09 are we still going to label that animal
0:08:11 as a frog
0:08:13 or has it become that it's a
0:08:14 prerequisite for it to be a frog it has
0:08:16 to know how it has to now be able to
0:08:19 swim so for instance we can call it a
0:08:21 toad or some other name we can come up
0:08:23 with a new name for it because we can
0:08:24 say look it's like a frog but not quite
0:08:26 because it doesn't swim
0:08:28 who says who draws the line here these
0:08:30 are inductive truths that are often
0:08:33 defined by the most influential thinkers
0:08:36 in our society
0:08:38 now the fatal flaw of inductive it's
0:08:40 called the inductive problem in
0:08:41 philosophy is that
0:08:42 when we're when we're doing
0:08:44 inductive logic we're always
0:08:46 generalizing
0:08:49 we're always generalizing we're looking
0:08:50 at a specific number of of um
0:08:54 of uh we're taking a we're taking a
0:08:56 certain number of frogs and then we're
0:08:58 generalizing that idea to all frogs okay
0:09:00 so we never have the totality of
0:09:02 evidence to be certain that all frogs
0:09:05 can swim i would have to know i would
0:09:07 have to observe every frog that ever
0:09:09 existed and ever will exist
0:09:12 now there are other problems to the
0:09:13 problem of induction but we'll leave it
0:09:14 there that's quite a bit already
0:09:16 however it's
0:09:18 mathematical truths
0:09:21 if all men are mortal see we started
0:09:23 with a general proposition
0:09:25 all men are mortal not some all
0:09:28 and socrates is a man therefore socrates
0:09:31 is mortal if it's true that all men are
0:09:33 mortal
0:09:34 and if it's true that socrates is a man
0:09:36 there could be no other possibility if
0:09:39 you brought in a thousand logicians they
0:09:40 would all write the same conclusion
0:09:43 if it is true
0:09:44 that all men are mortal and it is true
0:09:46 that socrates is a man then it could be
0:09:48 no other way he must be mortal
0:09:52 this is math versus biology okay now all
0:09:55 these truths are spoken about in the
0:09:56 quran we'll circle to that later
0:09:59 one truth is more certain than the other
0:10:02 mathematical truths are more certain
0:10:04 than inductive truth contingent truths
0:10:08 now let's go one rung below one rung
0:10:10 below is
0:10:12 historical truths now i hear a lot of
0:10:14 debates online i listen to quite a lot
0:10:15 of debates and it's amazing to me that
0:10:18 people still don't understand
0:10:22 and very intelligent interlocutors are
0:10:24 discussing historical truth historical
0:10:27 truths mean nothing
0:10:31 what happened to jfk do you know what
0:10:33 happened to jfk
0:10:34 how was he killed specifically
0:10:36 nobody knows what happened to jfk
0:10:38 exactly and we had video cameras
0:10:41 thousands of witnesses
0:10:44 you know on the grassy knoll there was a
0:10:46 man holding an umbrella and one of the
0:10:48 theories was that the man with the
0:10:49 umbrella had a
0:10:51 using the umbrella hiding a gun in the
0:10:53 umbrella shot jfk
0:10:56 now that man later came out and said no
0:10:58 i'm the man with the umbrella and he
0:10:59 says i was protesting
0:11:01 i was protesting against jfk and i
0:11:03 decided to open an umbrella on a sunny
0:11:05 day very strange thing a man opening an
0:11:07 umbrella on the grassy knoll on a sunny
0:11:09 day now some people still today believe
0:11:11 that no that guy's lying he came out
0:11:13 just to basically hide in plain sight
0:11:16 some people think there were three shots
0:11:18 fired some people think there were two
0:11:19 shots fired some people think it's
0:11:20 impossible i'm forgetting his name now
0:11:22 forgive me i just finished practice
0:11:24 but um the man that was uh be harvey was
0:11:27 old lee harvey
0:11:29 you know he was he was killed
0:11:30 immediately soon after he was
0:11:31 assassinated soon after
0:11:33 some people believe that it wasn't even
0:11:35 him that there's so many possibilities 9
0:11:38 11
0:11:39 is a highly documented event
0:11:43 the firemen that were on site said
0:11:46 now i don't believe this okay
0:11:48 so please no no conspiracy theories i
0:11:49 don't they said they heard bombs
0:11:52 when the building was coming down they
0:11:53 heard bombs
0:11:55 they heard explosions now i think it
0:11:57 could be and i don't want to delve into
0:11:59 conspiracy theories here i don't know
0:12:00 what happened on 911. it could be that
0:12:02 there were bombs and it could be that it
0:12:03 was just one floor hitting into another
0:12:05 yeah now they say no it was falling at
0:12:08 free fall speeds there are many
0:12:09 arguments yeah
0:12:11 we still don't know it's a historical
0:12:13 fact 911 is a historical fact not a
0:12:15 scientific fact it's a historical effect
0:12:18 911 there was a building 7 collapsed
0:12:21 people till today's argue over what
0:12:23 happened to building seven
0:12:25 now to make it a scientific fact we
0:12:27 would have to repeat the process all
0:12:29 over you know as a morbid idea as it is
0:12:31 now of course we wouldn't use human
0:12:32 beings i'm i'm talking about
0:12:34 colliding a a jet robotically of course
0:12:37 into a empty building and seeing will
0:12:39 the building fall will there why how
0:12:41 would you explain what people think they
0:12:43 heard
0:12:46 you cannot repeat
0:12:48 ancient history there are too many
0:12:50 unknown variables ancient history is
0:12:52 full of biases and mysteries when the
0:12:55 quran tells you and we all those who say
0:12:57 they know what happened to christ
0:12:59 aren't full of doubt
0:13:00 allah is telling you that historical
0:13:04 facts you know historians say oh it's a
0:13:07 fact that jesus was crucified yeah
0:13:09 historical fact which is the weakest
0:13:10 type of fact
0:13:13 how many historical facts are untrue
0:13:16 many over time will be overturned new
0:13:18 evidence tomorrow we can have new
0:13:20 evidence that overturns what happened in
0:13:22 jfk you know for instance i'll give you
0:13:23 a great for instance uh
0:13:25 uh
0:13:26 uh bonaparte oh yeah
0:13:28 uh
0:13:30 what's his first name again i can't
0:13:31 believe i'm freaking out
0:13:32 napoleon border parts excuse me i'm blow
0:13:34 blood sugar i just finished wrestling
0:13:35 for three hours
0:13:37 napoleon bonaparte
0:13:39 after i don't know how many hundreds of
0:13:41 years he was dead they sold his hair to
0:13:44 one uh there's a collector of a
0:13:45 bonaparte uh
0:13:47 a famous collector he loves uh napoleon
0:13:49 bonaparte collects everything about
0:13:50 napoleon bonaparte he bought his hair in
0:13:52 an auction he bought napoleon's hair in
0:13:53 an awkward macabre yeah
0:13:55 and then they tested his hair and they
0:13:56 found out hey you know he was poisoned
0:13:58 rewrite history
0:14:00 napoleon bonaparte was poisoned he
0:14:03 didn't die from uh from a malady no no
0:14:05 no no this was a little deliberate
0:14:06 assassination now
0:14:08 is it napoleon's hair i don't know do
0:14:10 you know were you there when they cut it
0:14:12 these are things that are they're always
0:14:14 question marks and unknown variables
0:14:17 history
0:14:18 history is written by the champions
0:14:21 history
0:14:22 let me ask you something uh
0:14:24 uh paul what is a rumor a rumor
0:14:27 is an unverified belief
0:14:32 history is full of rumors you know they
0:14:34 did a study on twitter rumors spread
0:14:36 faster than truths
0:14:39 just because it's widely held and widely
0:14:41 believed
0:14:42 doesn't make it a scientific fact or a
0:14:45 logical fact you earlier knew that i
0:14:47 didn't draw a squared circle
0:14:49 you earlier said hey it may be a
0:14:51 flamingo on your hand may not be
0:14:54 a historical historical fact is even
0:14:56 lower than that a historical fact is
0:15:00 almost meaningless if you want me to
0:15:02 base my beliefs on his on history
0:15:05 you're asking me if if you're telling me
0:15:07 you know
0:15:08 the quran is telling you
0:15:11 base your religion on the most secure
0:15:14 and trustworthy thing and we're going to
0:15:16 get to it we haven't even gotten to it
0:15:17 yet
0:15:18 not on the loosest weakest
0:15:22 if you build your faith on something
0:15:24 weak you know
0:15:25 descartes said it beautifully he said
0:15:26 look if i'm building an itzy fist a
0:15:27 building i'm building a structure
0:15:30 the first foundational block
0:15:33 must be indestructible yeah
0:15:35 if i build an it's
0:15:37 a structure up high to the sky if the
0:15:40 first block is not the strongest it'll
0:15:42 collapse once there's a crack in the
0:15:43 foundation the whole thing will come
0:15:45 down
0:15:47 we have to find an undoubtable truth we
0:15:50 have to have contact with naked truth
0:15:53 direct contact with truth islam is about
0:15:55 direct contact with truth we're going to
0:15:58 talk we're going to get slowly there
0:16:00 in the bible paul tells us
0:16:02 if christ didn't die
0:16:04 and wasn't resurrected your faith is in
0:16:06 vain all your prayers all your
0:16:08 sacrifices all your fasting
0:16:10 throw it by the wayside now i think it's
0:16:12 technically wrong there okay but that's
0:16:14 a different topic now
0:16:16 he's telling you look you have to figure
0:16:18 out what happened to jesus christ 2000
0:16:20 years ago
0:16:21 this is what we call abduction you know
0:16:23 sherlock holmes you guys are big
0:16:24 sherlock holmes fans i assume i don't
0:16:26 want to go
0:16:27 here i don't want to journalize here but
0:16:29 i live just down the road in baker
0:16:30 street he's just a mile away from down
0:16:32 the road
0:16:34 he's using abduction sherlock holmes
0:16:37 now sherlock holmes might walk into a
0:16:39 room and say look i know the murderer
0:16:40 weapon is in that second drawer right
0:16:41 there how does he know well he looked
0:16:43 around the room he deduced certain
0:16:44 things this is abduction now and he says
0:16:46 look at murder weapons is the second
0:16:48 drawer and the butler did it you know
0:16:50 how it works right you're quite familiar
0:16:52 with shoulder crops absolutely you're
0:16:53 asking me now to use abduction now
0:16:56 abduction is even lower
0:16:59 it's even lower than induction
0:17:01 you're asking me to found my beliefs on
0:17:05 something weak the quran is telling you
0:17:07 no
0:17:09 go back to the fitra go back to the
0:17:11 natural disposition the natural religion
0:17:13 now i'll tell you something there are
0:17:15 people who believe in god i don't
0:17:16 believe in god i know god my i've went
0:17:18 from belief to certainty
0:17:21 and every muslim and you can't be muslim
0:17:23 with belief that's okay it's halal it's
0:17:25 not wrong you're a believer
0:17:26 we talk about what believer means
0:17:28 actually
0:17:31 because i'll tell you anyway that's a
0:17:33 different type i don't want to go into
0:17:33 tangent but
0:17:35 you can get to knowledge
0:17:37 naked truth direct knowledge
0:17:39 so we said there's mathematical facts
0:17:42 i'm i'm using math here as a
0:17:44 as an analogy okay
0:17:47 we we say the word analytic or a priori
0:17:49 then a posteriori or contingent truths
0:17:52 or a sin a pro a synthetic a priori
0:17:56 statement
0:17:57 but we're not we're not going to go down
0:17:59 the area that's a different topic
0:18:01 topic interesting topic but a different
0:18:02 one yeah i want to keep it simple
0:18:04 crystal clear that's the goal here to
0:18:05 keep the crystal
0:18:07 crystal crystal clear
0:18:09 and then we have these historical truths
0:18:12 basically you get to do the scientific
0:18:13 experiment but you never get to observe
0:18:15 it directly and you can never repeat it
0:18:17 don't forget history
0:18:19 excuse me science
0:18:22 when you ask when you put a room of
0:18:23 philosophers elite philosophers in the
0:18:25 room
0:18:26 philosophers of science you put them in
0:18:27 a room and you ask them what is this
0:18:29 thing called science what is this thing
0:18:31 natural science what is it we all agree
0:18:34 at the end
0:18:36 that science
0:18:38 and i challenge anybody in the world
0:18:40 any phd in the philosophy of science
0:18:44 challenged me to say what i'm about to
0:18:45 say next is incorrect i challenge
0:18:47 anybody in the world not the layman on
0:18:49 the side who's read a book or two no no
0:18:51 bring me a phd to disagree with me
0:18:54 bring me a world-class philosopher of
0:18:56 science and you tell me what i'm about
0:18:58 to say next is wrong i'm going to give
0:19:00 you a proposition and this proposition
0:19:02 we have consensus we have consensus all
0:19:05 of us agree
0:19:06 all of us all elite philosophers this is
0:19:08 what we call small circle philosophy
0:19:09 only the elite
0:19:11 thinkers got to this level most of them
0:19:12 they got they like philosophy to a
0:19:14 certain degree they never went to they
0:19:15 never got to black belt they never got
0:19:17 to this level okay this is what we call
0:19:18 small circle
0:19:22 science
0:19:23 is the faith
0:19:24 that the future will behave like the
0:19:26 past
0:19:27 science is a type of faith
0:19:30 that the future
0:19:31 will behave like the past
0:19:34 the inventor of the scientific method
0:19:36 the modern scientific method
0:19:40 excuse me
0:19:41 my blood sugars though um
0:19:46 yes i i know you mean as well i've
0:19:48 forgotten his name as well
0:19:49 uh
0:20:01 excuse me
0:20:02 here are the parameters here's how i did
0:20:04 it here was my hypothesis here's the
0:20:06 test i try to remove all subjectivity
0:20:08 here's the test it's repeatable you see
0:20:10 for yourself he famously wrote see for
0:20:12 yourself that means you could do it at
0:20:14 home yourself in your lab
0:20:17 verify what i did
0:20:19 yeah and we observe nature nature has
0:20:22 these patterns and regularities
0:20:25 and we say look we've noticed these
0:20:26 patterns and regularities and we predict
0:20:28 that it will happen again in the future
0:20:31 that's what science is science boils
0:20:33 down to the faith
0:20:35 that the future will depend will behave
0:20:38 like the past
0:20:40 i challenge anybody in the world to tell
0:20:42 me that this is not the foundation
0:20:44 of
0:20:45 science now for instance
0:20:48 you see the sun rise every morning and
0:20:49 you see it set every night yes or no yes
0:20:52 and you've seen that so many times and
0:20:54 now you have a faith that tomorrow it
0:20:55 will rise and tomorrow it will set and
0:20:57 you've never seen it any other way yep
0:21:00 you have this faith
0:21:02 this regularity is so
0:21:05 automatic it's so
0:21:07 believed because your ancestors saw it
0:21:09 also and it never changed
0:21:11 and it's such a it's such an easy thing
0:21:14 to believe because nobody questions it
0:21:15 tomorrow will be just another day where
0:21:17 the sun rises
0:21:18 now suppose
0:21:20 you have all your faculties but i erase
0:21:21 your memory i erase your memory about
0:21:24 sunrises and sunsets everything else
0:21:27 about you is the same
0:21:28 tomorrow when you wake up and you see
0:21:30 the sun rise you're going to be shocked
0:21:31 you're going to be amazed and when
0:21:33 you're going to see it set you're going
0:21:34 to be amazed
0:21:35 and then after a few hundred
0:21:38 cycles you'll be like hey it's just
0:21:39 another day
0:21:40 i expect it to rise tomorrow and i
0:21:42 expect it to set
0:21:43 there is no logical necessity for it to
0:21:46 rise and set this is also in the quran
0:21:48 the quran tells you see the night and
0:21:50 the day the cycle of night and day for
0:21:52 those who think there's a sign in there
0:21:54 for you
0:21:56 because ultimately and i'm going to make
0:21:58 this point later inshallah
0:22:00 all
0:22:02 beliefs
0:22:03 all either analytical or contingent the
0:22:06 ones we talked about math and biology
0:22:08 are all a type of
0:22:11 religious faith
0:22:12 truth is a religious experience i'm
0:22:14 going to get to that in a little bit
0:22:16 naked truth
0:22:18 is a type of religious experience like
0:22:20 it or not that's why i always tell
0:22:21 people there's no such thing as an
0:22:22 atheist i don't believe in all atheists
0:22:24 have a god all of them
0:22:26 if you sit me in a room with an atheist
0:22:28 and let me cross-examine him i will find
0:22:30 you what god he believes in
0:22:32 so for instance i asked him like you
0:22:34 know what's the process of these cycles
0:22:36 they're going to say nature now when i
0:22:37 say nature
0:22:39 i'm asking you is nature a thing out
0:22:41 there no nature look if i ask you what
0:22:43 is nature you're gonna say look look at
0:22:45 that rose over there
0:22:47 that's nature okay well if i kill all if
0:22:49 i destroy all roses in the world is
0:22:51 nature destroyed you're gonna say no
0:22:52 nature is also that river it's also the
0:22:54 water cycle it's also the stars in the
0:22:56 sky it's also
0:22:59 what's in the earth it's also how the
0:23:01 volcanic
0:23:02 cycles
0:23:04 the word nature is just a way for us
0:23:07 it's what we call a philosophy it's a
0:23:08 universal it's a way for us to address
0:23:11 the collective of things
0:23:12 it's made of particular things i look at
0:23:15 a plant i look at the the the
0:23:18 the clouds in the sky
0:23:20 all these things whatever when i want to
0:23:22 refer to this collective
0:23:24 i say the word nature
0:23:26 now nature is not a force out there
0:23:28 that's why they we mistakenly take the
0:23:31 word nature
0:23:32 as as something being a force
0:23:35 it is not a force
0:23:37 nature is something we refer to
0:23:40 is a category so it's a universal
0:23:42 philosopher as we say
0:23:44 not nominalist philosophers muslims we
0:23:46 are nominalists know it or not we are
0:23:48 nominalists nature is not a thing out
0:23:51 there nature is a category in here
0:23:54 it's a projection of the mind it's a way
0:23:56 we address the world
0:23:58 so when i ask you what creates the water
0:24:00 cycle
0:24:01 you're going to point to another god
0:24:02 you're going gonna say oh there's
0:24:04 evaporation there's gravity et cetera
0:24:06 gravity again is another force that's
0:24:09 never observed in nature what you
0:24:11 observed was a pattern
0:24:13 that pattern you inferred a force so for
0:24:16 instance i'll give you a great for
0:24:17 instance okay so
0:24:19 if i kick a soccer ball
0:24:22 the soccer ball was still and i came to
0:24:24 it and i kicked it and and isaac said
0:24:26 isaac newton said
0:24:28 an object will stay at rest until a
0:24:30 force is acted upon it we all know this
0:24:32 three laws of motion and that one was
0:24:34 pretty easy you know i think everybody
0:24:36 would agree the genius of isaac newton
0:24:38 was that he said an object will stay in
0:24:41 motion
0:24:43 until a force acts upon it because when
0:24:44 you kick a soccer ball
0:24:46 it doesn't go on forever it goes it it
0:24:49 hits air resistance we didn't know it
0:24:50 was
0:24:51 it was slowing down and hitting the
0:24:52 ground because of air resistance isaac
0:24:54 newton had to figure that out why is the
0:24:56 soccer ball not going on into eternity
0:24:59 moving forward into it he said you know
0:25:00 what there must be
0:25:01 air resistance
0:25:03 there is a pull from the earth the mass
0:25:05 of the earth but he did never he never
0:25:07 observed gravity
0:25:09 he inferred gravity okay this is again
0:25:12 in philosophy of science we have
0:25:13 consensus
0:25:14 gravity is inferred gravity is not a
0:25:17 force out there it is not a force out
0:25:20 there a god out there a ghost out there
0:25:22 a demon out there that is moving things
0:25:24 around in the universe no no no no
0:25:26 we saw things moved and then we inferred
0:25:29 a force we saw motion
0:25:31 we saw patterns and regularities in
0:25:33 nature and then we inferred a force
0:25:37 now
0:25:38 in islam i really believe that
0:25:41 a highly educated muslim and muslim
0:25:43 philosophy not theology philosophy
0:25:45 because the difference between theology
0:25:47 and philosophy is theologians
0:25:49 start with the idea of god they already
0:25:51 believe in god
0:25:55 they already believe in god that's
0:25:57 theology
0:25:58 yeah philosophy
0:26:00 philosophy or religion we have to prove
0:26:02 god and then we'll do theology
0:26:06 now
0:26:07 there are no gods
0:26:09 except god allah
0:26:12 is
0:26:13 philosophy of religion it started with
0:26:15 the negation
0:26:17 it didn't start with acceptance it
0:26:19 started with a doubt
0:26:20 we reject all these gods nature
0:26:23 randomness gravity these are all gods
0:26:26 that are not out there if you read kant
0:26:28 you read ghazali you realize they are
0:26:30 projections of the mind now these are
0:26:31 not my personal philosophies okay
0:26:33 british empiricists also came to this
0:26:35 exact same conclusion they came to this
0:26:37 exact same conclusion atheists agree
0:26:41 with us
0:26:42 that gravity is not out there
0:26:45 it's a pattern in regularity and we
0:26:46 bookmarked that pattern irregularity and
0:26:48 we called it gravity
0:26:50 that word gravity over time for those
0:26:53 who are not experts in epistemology they
0:26:55 came to believe it as a force and i
0:26:57 consider that to be an idolatry it's a
0:26:59 minor shirk it's a minor
0:27:01 it's a type of idolatry
0:27:03 you know in the quran it says
0:27:04 the quran it says see that bird in the
0:27:07 sky flapping its wings none but allah
0:27:09 holds it up now what does that mean if i
0:27:11 took a bird the arab's move i took a
0:27:12 bird i broke its wing it's not flying
0:27:14 anymore how come allah is not holding it
0:27:15 up
0:27:17 they knew that if you if there was a
0:27:20 gust of wind it would lift the sand they
0:27:22 knew that wind lifts sand what allah is
0:27:25 trying to what the quran is saying is
0:27:27 all these patterns and regularities
0:27:30 there are no forces out there there are
0:27:32 no other deities there's only one force
0:27:35 every motion in every pattern and
0:27:37 regularity you observe
0:27:39 is created by allah
0:27:42 there is only one force there is only
0:27:44 one force now i love how atheists try to
0:27:47 lecture us about occam's razor they're
0:27:49 the they're guilty
0:27:50 they are guilty muslims muslims are
0:27:54 should be should be the masters of
0:27:55 occam's razor islam is telling you
0:27:58 there are no deity save this one god we
0:28:01 couldn't muslims skeptics
0:28:05 was such a skeptic he didn't believe
0:28:07 anything he said you know
0:28:09 isn't it weird all the christians are
0:28:10 they're born christian they die
0:28:12 christian the muslims are born aren't we
0:28:13 indoctrinated it's all doctrine he asked
0:28:15 these questions
0:28:18 there's a point of doubt if you're if
0:28:20 you're an expert in doubt you doubt so
0:28:22 much you doubt existence you you doubt
0:28:24 the i
0:28:25 you doubt the self that even the
0:28:28 what is the self you know uh david hume
0:28:30 said look there is no i there is no self
0:28:33 maybe we'll get to that later in this
0:28:35 conversation but philosophers we can't
0:28:36 even put
0:28:38 we can't even put
0:28:40 the ego in a test pool we cannot put the
0:28:42 i what is the what is the essence of
0:28:44 something you know
0:28:47 if you
0:28:48 what is the essence of a human being we
0:28:50 cannot even define it
0:28:53 it seems that the whole dunya is
0:28:55 subjective
0:28:56 until except this one thing skeptics we
0:28:59 find this one thing and when we graduate
0:29:00 to this one thing
0:29:02 oftentimes will be called mystics
0:29:05 there's this one thing now where doubt
0:29:06 is proof you can no longer doubt
0:29:10 doubt actually becomes a type of proof
0:29:13 you've come now to this point of
0:29:14 awareness
0:29:16 this point of awareness
0:29:18 this death of all paradigms
0:29:20 is simply expressed
0:29:22 as
0:29:24 and you have direct
0:29:26 you have direct experience with this
0:29:28 this is what the quran is telling you
0:29:30 the quran is a reminder of your natural
0:29:33 born religion
0:29:34 now i want to remind you of a time
0:29:38 before you were born
0:29:40 where you didn't know your name you had
0:29:42 no idea of your ego they say the ego is
0:29:44 developed about one year of age
0:29:46 and you didn't know that dunya you
0:29:48 didn't taste anything sweet or warm or
0:29:51 you had no experiences with the dunya
0:29:53 you only had this
0:29:54 awareness
0:29:56 this is very early in your development
0:29:59 you were born with this fitrah you were
0:30:01 incubated in this fitrah and the quran
0:30:03 is telling you go back
0:30:06 you know in the bible there's many
0:30:08 things
0:30:09 that are argued that jesus said did not
0:30:11 say i think one is very possible that he
0:30:13 said he says look be born again what
0:30:14 does it mean be born again go back to
0:30:16 the fitra
0:30:19 go back to your natural religion and
0:30:21 this is the next point we're going to
0:30:22 talk about inshallah intuition we're
0:30:24 going to graduate from
0:30:26 historical truth
0:30:28 to inductive truths
0:30:30 to mathematical truths a prior truth and
0:30:32 we're going to touch finally
0:30:35 intuition
0:30:36 the mother of all truths and actually
0:30:38 intuition
0:30:41 it
0:30:42 it sustains all the other truths
0:30:45 all the other truths
0:30:47 depend on intuition
0:30:50 so we're going to talk now about
0:30:52 the tabula rasa okay
0:30:56 john locke said look you paul are a
0:30:58 blank slate you're this virgin sheet of
0:31:00 paper
0:31:02 anything in this your mind is this
0:31:04 virgin sheet of paper if you tasted
0:31:06 honey now you know about honey let's
0:31:08 write down honey
0:31:10 paul now knows about sweetness honey
0:31:13 liquids
0:31:14 then paul ate an apple okay now he knows
0:31:16 the color red he knows the crunch of an
0:31:19 apple he knows the sound an apple makes
0:31:21 when you crunch into it
0:31:22 okay paul now today he rode a bike okay
0:31:24 he knows about pedaling
0:31:26 he knows about turning left and right
0:31:28 all this information now is being
0:31:30 written on the tabulariza this is your
0:31:32 mind okay
0:31:35 and now
0:31:37 we're going to talk about your tabula
0:31:39 rasa once anything on the tabularaza had
0:31:42 to go through your senses john locke
0:31:43 says
0:31:45 so if you were blind your whole life you
0:31:47 would never have anything about the
0:31:49 color red on your tabular rasa
0:31:52 your tabula rasa has no
0:31:55 experience with the color red
0:31:57 if you were a supremely intelligent
0:31:59 being and you were blind no matter how
0:32:00 much i tell you about the color red you
0:32:02 can never imagine it
0:32:05 to you this is an alien subject
0:32:09 it is unknown
0:32:10 and you cannot imagine it yeah
0:32:14 now you paul
0:32:17 you've seen the color red
0:32:19 you've seen a man you've seen men you've
0:32:22 seen human beings you've seen reindeer
0:32:25 you've seen reindeer yes or no
0:32:30 yeah have you seen this have you ever
0:32:32 seen a sled
0:32:33 yes
0:32:35 have you ever seen a bird fly in the sky
0:32:37 absolutely
0:32:38 okay these are all things you experience
0:32:40 they're all in your table
0:32:41 they were in the senses sight smell
0:32:44 taste touch
0:32:45 hearing
0:32:46 and now they're all on
0:32:48 tabula rasa now once they're in the mind
0:32:50 paul
0:32:51 you can jumble them up as much as you
0:32:52 want
0:32:54 now you can invent santa claus you saw a
0:32:56 man
0:32:57 you saw a bird fly you saw a sled you
0:32:59 saw a reindeer now you can jumble up
0:33:01 santa claus
0:33:04 the santa claus exist could be could not
0:33:06 be things that are jumbled up in the
0:33:08 mine may or may not exist
0:33:11 however the simple experiences have to
0:33:13 exist the color red has to exist man has
0:33:16 to exist reindeer have to exist
0:33:19 flight has to exist
0:33:21 if you were blind paul you would never
0:33:23 know the color red no matter how logical
0:33:25 you are
0:33:26 you need it to have it you need to have
0:33:28 it in the senses
0:33:35 in the quran it says abraham he saw the
0:33:37 stars
0:33:39 and he said this is my god
0:33:41 and then the star said and he says no
0:33:43 my god doesn't set
0:33:45 then he saw the moon the light was even
0:33:47 greater and he said this is my god now
0:33:50 again i believe he was doing this in
0:33:51 jest
0:33:52 maybe he's because i'm
0:33:54 i'm too uncomfortable with thinking that
0:33:56 abraham alayhi salam was ever
0:33:58 a worshiper of stars or moons i think he
0:34:00 was doing it in jess because the pagans
0:34:02 worship star's moons
0:34:03 exactly that's a separate topic okay i
0:34:05 think he was doing it in jest okay so
0:34:06 but it's in the quran yeah
0:34:08 he says i see the moon i worship the
0:34:11 moon the moon's light is even greater
0:34:14 i worship the moon then the moon sets
0:34:16 and says no
0:34:17 then he sees the sun and the sun's light
0:34:20 is even greater says i worship
0:34:23 i worship the sun
0:34:25 and then the sun sets and he says no
0:34:27 he realized that he was jumbling up he
0:34:29 had this idea of god this fitra this
0:34:31 innate belief of god and then he saw
0:34:34 these wondrous things in the world and
0:34:35 he joined them together with god just
0:34:37 like the greeks say zeus is the god of
0:34:39 lightning they took the belief of allah
0:34:41 and they jumbled it with the
0:34:43 idea of lightning because lightning
0:34:45 comes from above and it's so powerful
0:34:47 and scary and and and marvelous
0:34:50 they connected ideas together
0:34:54 that's why when i when i speak to an
0:34:56 atheist i tell them you already believe
0:34:58 in allah you already believe in god
0:35:01 i'll prove it to you now i want you to
0:35:03 imagine in your mind
0:35:05 the r7-1 i want you to look at it
0:35:08 in your mind
0:35:09 not the not the letter r not the number
0:35:11 seven the object i'm referring to
0:35:16 i want you to flip it upside down i want
0:35:18 you to turn it around i want you to
0:35:19 picture a yellow version of it now
0:35:22 now i'll picture a blue version of it
0:35:24 everybody's wondering what's this r7-1 i
0:35:26 have no experience of art i never went
0:35:28 out in the world what's he referring to
0:35:31 because i made it up there's no such
0:35:33 thing as r7-1 i'm not i'm not this sound
0:35:36 i made r7 that is not labeling it to
0:35:38 anything in the dunya nothing i made it
0:35:40 up
0:35:41 if it's that's how a blind man feels
0:35:44 when you talk to him about the color red
0:35:45 he's like what is this guy talking about
0:35:47 i've never seen an r7-1 i want you to
0:35:50 see what a blind man
0:35:52 experiences
0:35:55 he doesn't know what when you say red he
0:35:57 doesn't understand what you're saying
0:36:00 okay
0:36:01 now ebon tufao actually gives a
0:36:03 beautiful allegory about this
0:36:05 but this is a maybe a story for another
0:36:07 day
0:36:09 when i talk to you about allah you know
0:36:11 exactly what i'm talking about
0:36:13 you say i reject this idea
0:36:16 you want to reject an idea but you
0:36:18 confirmed it by telling me you don't
0:36:20 believe in it you already you didn't say
0:36:22 that what's allah what's god what is
0:36:24 this thing god no this is not your
0:36:26 reaction no no no no no
0:36:28 you told me you know you know what i
0:36:30 don't like this idea i haven't seen it i
0:36:32 haven't i want to put it in a test tube
0:36:34 before i believe in it
0:36:36 let me say that
0:36:39 now here's here's what ghazali would
0:36:40 tell john locke
0:36:42 remember
0:36:44 every idea we had in the tabular raza
0:36:47 was once in your senses here's the the
0:36:49 fatal flaw atheists makes
0:36:52 they say look where is it in the tabula
0:36:54 rasa allah where is god i want to hold
0:36:56 his hand i want to touch
0:36:58 i want to feel
0:37:01 but here's what ghazali would tell john
0:37:03 locke he says what about this tabula
0:37:05 rasa
0:37:06 it's also a compounded idea
0:37:09 you took virgin
0:37:11 sheet of paper
0:37:12 that's something from the dunya that's
0:37:14 something from the world you saw
0:37:16 and now you mingled it with our
0:37:18 consciousness you mingled it again with
0:37:20 the
0:37:21 the tabula raza itself
0:37:23 was once in the senses
0:37:27 what is the tabula rasa without the
0:37:30 white sheet of paper
0:37:31 what are you referring to
0:37:33 he just admitted to you
0:37:35 he just admitted to you what every
0:37:37 atheist should admit to himself
0:37:40 within us all
0:37:42 there's this point of awareness
0:37:45 and this point of awareness is actually
0:37:46 not within us we are within it
0:37:50 we are within it
0:37:54 the mind not my mind the mind
0:37:56 consciousness not the contents of
0:37:58 consciousness this is where
0:38:00 abraham ali salam
0:38:02 discovered his fault
0:38:05 he was worshiping the contents of
0:38:06 consciousness
0:38:09 and he realized no this is
0:38:12 this is nested in consciousness as am i
0:38:15 nested in consciousness
0:38:17 you know i asked i ask atheist
0:38:19 materialist philosophers prove to me
0:38:23 materialism because i believe that
0:38:24 materialism
0:38:25 i believe that
0:38:27 all our beliefs and physical world is
0:38:28 also another deity nobody's ever proved
0:38:31 the physical world okay if you're
0:38:32 familiar with a great thinker english
0:38:34 thinker george berkeley you should
0:38:35 familiarize yourself with him yeah
0:38:37 idealism i'd
0:38:39 i'll tell you excuse me
0:38:41 i'm going to tell i'm gonna throw out
0:38:42 another challenge to anybody
0:38:45 who can refute idealism idealism is
0:38:47 considered in philosophy irrefutable
0:38:50 it is irrefutable
0:38:52 hard to accept because it's so
0:38:57 it's
0:38:58 so i don't know how to say but it's so
0:39:02 special it's so shocking
0:39:05 that people have an emotional reaction
0:39:07 people who who swear that they're
0:39:09 they're logical human beings that they
0:39:10 only follow the evidence once you take
0:39:12 them here they're to like they're going
0:39:13 to have an emotional reaction
0:39:15 it's too
0:39:17 powerful it's too emotionally
0:39:18 stimulating for people to even look at
0:39:21 it
0:39:22 so anyways i don't want to go off on a
0:39:23 tangent here but
0:39:24 i can i can guarantee you there's never
0:39:26 been a human being on the face of the
0:39:27 earth that has refuted
0:39:30 idealism idealism is considered
0:39:32 irrefutable you could take that to the
0:39:33 bank okay
0:39:38 now we're talking about
0:39:42 philosophers they say look
0:39:44 aspect philosophers show me how phys
0:39:46 physical things exist
0:39:48 how is the mind dependent on the brain
0:39:50 because they say the brain if you tinker
0:39:52 with it it
0:39:54 changes the mind i say no i say the
0:39:56 brain is dependent on the mind they say
0:39:57 no the the mind the mind is dependent on
0:40:00 the brain we have this feud so i tell
0:40:01 them okay prove to me that the mind is
0:40:03 dependent on the brain they say well
0:40:05 look the brain
0:40:08 is physical and if i tinker with it it
0:40:10 changes the mind
0:40:12 now i say prove to me that the brain is
0:40:14 physical
0:40:16 there is no way to prove that the brain
0:40:18 is physical
0:40:21 let me give you a a a glaring
0:40:24 example of this a glaring example that i
0:40:27 think i have to quote so many thinkers
0:40:30 came to this conclusion okay it's not me
0:40:31 okay i'm not the brilliant guy who
0:40:32 figured all this out not at all i'm far
0:40:34 from it
0:40:35 i think berkeley
0:40:37 gave the best example
0:40:40 and
0:40:41 i'm going to use his example because i
0:40:42 think he said it best
0:40:44 picture a triangle okay berkeley asks us
0:40:46 picture triangle now remember triangle
0:40:48 is mathematics it's look it's euclidean
0:40:51 geometry it's been a 2000 years and
0:40:53 nobody's ever found a flaw in euclidean
0:40:55 geometry
0:40:57 a triangle has to have two sides excuse
0:40:59 me three sides three corners
0:41:01 the the inside of the angles have to add
0:41:04 up to 180 degrees we know exactly what a
0:41:06 triangle is
0:41:07 it's purely objective
0:41:09 correct
0:41:12 now i want you to think of a triangle
0:41:13 but without any subjectivity no color
0:41:18 can you do it no
0:41:20 it's impossible it's always a green
0:41:22 triangle a blue triangle a black
0:41:24 triangle a white triangle you can't get
0:41:25 away from subjectivity now remove what's
0:41:28 subjective about it what are you left
0:41:30 with
0:41:31 ideas in the mind
0:41:33 there's nothing left so you're saying
0:41:36 you're calling something that's
0:41:37 objective a color
0:41:40 sorry you're calling something that's
0:41:41 subjective a color
0:41:44 that the triangle is made of a color
0:41:45 right the green is subjective
0:41:47 and then you're superimposing your
0:41:49 objective ideas on that subjective
0:41:51 things so even objectivity even
0:41:53 objectivity is reliant on subjectivity
0:41:58 now let's define objectivity and
0:41:59 subjectivity to our i know i'm i'm sure
0:42:02 you're aware of the differences but
0:42:04 descartes said it best so i'm going to
0:42:06 quote him think of an orange
0:42:08 if i were to weigh an orange you and me
0:42:10 would come to the same conclusion
0:42:13 if we measured its circumference me and
0:42:15 you would come to the same conclusion
0:42:17 yes or no yes
0:42:19 now if i asked you
0:42:20 is an orange tasty
0:42:22 you would say what maybe yes maybe no
0:42:25 that's subjective it depends on you
0:42:28 it could have been otherwise
0:42:31 it could be an answer yes it could be an
0:42:32 answer no remember we talked about math
0:42:34 and then biology and one is necessary
0:42:36 and one is contingent one may or may not
0:42:38 be
0:42:39 all your necessary truths are actually
0:42:41 dependent on these subjective
0:42:44 elements
0:42:46 so every time we find something with a
0:42:48 doubt we remove it
0:42:50 skeptics we become mystics
0:42:52 when we've gone so far that we've gotten
0:42:54 to a place
0:42:57 where there's no more removing
0:43:00 you can't know there's just this
0:43:02 awareness that's why i always tell
0:43:03 people allah is not something you see
0:43:05 with your eye allah is what gives you
0:43:07 seeing
0:43:09 in science they call it the hard problem
0:43:11 of consciousness they wash their hands
0:43:12 of it they say once we get here we stop
0:43:16 this is the hard problem we have no idea
0:43:18 we give up
0:43:20 they call it the heart problem of
0:43:21 consciousness the easy problem oh the
0:43:23 wiring is in your brain
0:43:26 the electrodes the blood flow the gray
0:43:28 matter one brain state transforming into
0:43:30 another that's the easy part the flesh
0:43:33 you know the quran talks about them they
0:43:34 say they only know the appearance of
0:43:36 things
0:43:37 they never think about their themselves
0:43:40 they never think about
0:43:42 themselves now
0:43:43 my uh
0:43:44 my philosophy is popular for making
0:43:46 things simple okay so i'm gonna try to
0:43:48 make things extra simple we're gonna
0:43:50 talk about intuition now but
0:43:52 if you don't mind please
0:43:56 we're going to instead of giving a
0:43:57 boring lecture i'm going to give i'm
0:43:58 going to give you a thought experiment
0:44:00 inshallah
0:44:02 i think that thought experiments are are
0:44:03 much better than logical arguments
0:44:07 suppose we're going to build a paul 2.0
0:44:09 we're going to build a robot
0:44:11 okay humor me for a second
0:44:13 instead of bones he's going to have
0:44:14 steel
0:44:16 as a skeleton
0:44:17 instead of skin he's going to have sheet
0:44:19 metal instead of a heart he's going to
0:44:20 have a pump instead of blood he's gonna
0:44:22 have an oil that goes through his system
0:44:26 instead of a brain he's gonna have a
0:44:27 computer instead of an eye he's gonna
0:44:28 have a camera instead of an ear he's
0:44:29 gonna have a recorder etcetera etcetera
0:44:31 etcetera much better
0:44:35 now paul 2.0
0:44:38 he has a program it's if this then that
0:44:43 now he's studying
0:44:44 the blood and flesh
0:44:46 paul
0:44:47 he's following you around paul 2.0
0:44:49 robotic paul he's following you every
0:44:51 day
0:44:52 and he studies you
0:44:54 and he sees if paul wakes up then he
0:44:56 drinks coffee
0:44:58 99 times out of 100. so when i wake up
0:45:00 99 times out of 100 i run the algorithm
0:45:03 if it's 8 am
0:45:05 then then coffee
0:45:08 if between 8 a.m and 10 a.m coffee
0:45:11 he figures out an algorithm if this then
0:45:13 that
0:45:15 if this then that if it rains paul gets
0:45:17 an umbrella so paul 2.0 if this then
0:45:20 that he puts on his umbrella
0:45:22 he's following you every day and he's
0:45:24 copying you every day and he's getting
0:45:25 more and more like you every day till
0:45:27 the point where
0:45:29 we can't differentiate between you and
0:45:30 him he's so sophisticated paul
0:45:34 paul 2.0 is so sophisticated his
0:45:37 algorithm for if this than that
0:45:39 is so sophisticated it even makes
0:45:42 exceptions for when you're in a bad mood
0:45:46 if paul is like this then that he
0:45:48 figured you out so he's copying you
0:45:51 so
0:45:52 well
0:45:54 now paul 2.0 is so interested in knowing
0:45:56 everything about you
0:45:59 he's following you he's copying you he's
0:46:02 doing everything exactly like you
0:46:05 is paul 2.0 human no
0:46:09 why but he's exactly like you
0:46:11 in every way he's still not human
0:46:14 he's only if this than that now here's
0:46:17 another question i want to ask you
0:46:19 does does paul 2.0 have any subjective
0:46:22 experience
0:46:23 does he know the taste of an orange
0:46:26 he
0:46:26 he followed you around he said
0:46:29 if you know he knows more about you than
0:46:30 you know about yourself did you know
0:46:32 paul that if it's a rainy day
0:46:35 in february
0:46:36 and it's between this and that
0:46:37 temperature you go to the fridge and you
0:46:39 eat an orange you don't even know that
0:46:41 about yourself but paul 2.0 says you
0:46:42 know what the statistical probability
0:46:44 that paul's going to go to an or get an
0:46:45 orange right now he knows everything
0:46:46 about you
0:46:47 and if this then that and he goes and he
0:46:49 gets that orange and he eats it and
0:46:50 you're eating an orange in your
0:46:51 apartment and he's eating an orange in
0:46:52 his apartment and he just knows that hey
0:46:54 this is what happened in the past and i
0:46:56 predict it's going to happen again in
0:46:57 the future he's using the scientific
0:46:58 method to understand everything about
0:46:59 you
0:47:01 yet you when you eat an orange you say
0:47:03 mmm delicious
0:47:05 so he repeats when paul eats an orange
0:47:07 if this then that he says um delicious
0:47:09 now he has no understanding of what
0:47:11 delicious he has no subjective
0:47:13 experience of delicious yes or no
0:47:17 absolutely correct
0:47:20 this robot only is
0:47:22 appears to be paul
0:47:25 he's only paul in appearance
0:47:29 now one day there's a lightning strike
0:47:32 and you
0:47:33 you jump in fear there's a powerful
0:47:35 lightning strike you're walking in the
0:47:36 street and it's raining and
0:47:39 powerful lightning strike it strikes
0:47:40 fear in your heart
0:47:42 and paul 2.0 sees you and he says look
0:47:45 lightning if lightning strike at this
0:47:47 many decibels at this distance then paul
0:47:50 shakes like this
0:47:52 he didn't experience your fear
0:47:56 did he experience your fear no
0:47:59 no he didn't
0:48:01 he said if this then that so every time
0:48:03 there's a lightning strike at that
0:48:04 amount of decibels at that distance at
0:48:05 this he shakes he doesn't know why you
0:48:08 shake he has no idea but he shakes he
0:48:09 stutters in fear
0:48:13 he has no subjective experience
0:48:17 this is very important this is a crucial
0:48:19 point here
0:48:20 the quran tells us
0:48:23 that when you see lightning
0:48:26 you're filled with hope
0:48:27 and or fear why fear because you might
0:48:30 die from lightning hope because it's
0:48:32 going to rain and your crops will grow
0:48:34 some people when they see lightning
0:48:37 they'll come to tears they're happy hey
0:48:38 we're going to survive this season
0:48:42 lightning will strike fear and some and
0:48:44 hope in others
0:48:46 that sensation
0:48:47 of hope and fear allah is asking you
0:48:51 to reflect on it in the quran he says
0:48:52 look you were dust
0:48:55 you were dust
0:48:56 and behold now you're human
0:48:59 soon after you become a human
0:49:01 now you said to me that robot is not
0:49:03 human
0:49:04 i'm asking you
0:49:06 he's also dust you know this science
0:49:08 tells us we're all stardust the
0:49:10 elementary part the
0:49:11 everything in the universe all tangible
0:49:13 things
0:49:14 are stardust ultimately
0:49:17 we all come from exploding stars we are
0:49:19 dust the quran says we are dust the
0:49:21 scientists the atheist tells us atheist
0:49:23 materialist tells us we are dust we
0:49:25 agree we're in agreement
0:49:27 are we not does anybody say no we're not
0:49:30 dust
0:49:31 we all agree that we come from dust
0:49:35 the robot is also dust just like you yes
0:49:38 or no yes ultimately these things that
0:49:40 came out of the earth
0:49:42 or from comets out of the sky ultimately
0:49:44 we all came come from a byproduct of the
0:49:46 sun or stars exploding stars
0:49:50 the table of elements are stardust we're
0:49:53 all made up of table of elements that's
0:49:54 the appearance of things
0:49:57 you know that that you know if i if i
0:49:59 have a what do you call those uh a
0:50:01 ventriloquist act you know the the guy
0:50:03 who sits up puts a puppet on his hand
0:50:06 now he's talking with his lips and he
0:50:08 could fool the kids right and the kids
0:50:09 will think hey that puppet has a mind
0:50:12 we project our mind onto this robot this
0:50:14 this paul 2.0 we think hey he's
0:50:16 conscious but he's not he's really if
0:50:18 this than that
0:50:21 the quran is telling you look you went
0:50:22 from dust to human you agreed that that
0:50:25 robot was not human early on
0:50:28 correct correct something is missing
0:50:30 what is this thing that he's missing
0:50:33 now allah tells us in the quran he
0:50:34 created adam from dust and then he blows
0:50:36 he breathes into him his ruach
0:50:40 that rule that consciousness that thing
0:50:41 inside us you have direct experience
0:50:44 you're not using logic you're not using
0:50:46 the scientific method you're definitely
0:50:47 not using the historical method
0:50:50 to know about your own consciousness now
0:50:52 for instance i'll give you another for
0:50:53 instance now to make this even more
0:50:55 clear
0:50:56 paul 2.0 he invents a nano robot
0:51:01 it's such a small tiny robot it actually
0:51:02 goes into your ear it seeps through the
0:51:04 canal it's so tiny you can pass between
0:51:06 the
0:51:07 the
0:51:08 the smallest cells of your body and this
0:51:10 little nanorobot goes into the brain
0:51:12 this is a lightness example
0:51:15 and it observes everything about your
0:51:16 brain
0:51:17 it sees blood flow it sees neurons
0:51:19 firing it sees gray matter it sees that
0:51:21 the sequences it's relaying all this
0:51:22 information back to paul 2.0
0:51:25 but paul 2.0 never sees consciousness no
0:51:27 matter how logical he is
0:51:30 and don't forget he's downloaded all the
0:51:32 logical
0:51:34 rules of of the history of all logicians
0:51:36 he knows he's a master of logic greater
0:51:38 than any human he's deep blue okay the
0:51:40 blue the
0:51:42 the the program that beat kasparov yeah
0:51:45 he has every logical argument that has
0:51:47 ever been uttered he has every
0:51:48 scientific he has the database of every
0:51:50 scientific experiment that's ever been
0:51:52 published
0:51:54 yet still paul 2.0 knows nothing about
0:51:56 your consciousness nothing
0:52:00 he needs intuition to have experience
0:52:05 of consciousness
0:52:06 he has no intuition
0:52:08 he has no rule
0:52:11 rule
0:52:12 is is
0:52:13 transcendent
0:52:14 it is outside the test tube it is beyond
0:52:16 logic even logic cannot encompass allah
0:52:21 you know some people say i've heard even
0:52:22 muslims say that allah could only do
0:52:24 what is logically possible i personally
0:52:26 disagree i think allah is
0:52:27 above logic we'll talk about this
0:52:29 another time inshallah maybe we'll have
0:52:30 time later on
0:52:32 but there is no
0:52:33 principle of sufficient reason psr that
0:52:36 encompass allah is above logic and i'll
0:52:39 explain to you why later this is the
0:52:40 case
0:52:41 your logic cannot grasp allah your logic
0:52:44 can only point to allah and i believe
0:52:46 there you know
0:52:47 the the muslim thinkers say they're two
0:52:49 ways to allah one logic you study the
0:52:51 world yes there's logic and you could
0:52:53 point to allah and you could say look
0:52:54 the world it would be an infinite
0:52:56 regress you there are logical arguments
0:52:58 there are arguments that hold water but
0:53:00 this is the secondary way to know allah
0:53:02 there is a primary way to know allah
0:53:05 there is a primary way
0:53:07 and allah points to it in the quran he
0:53:09 tells you
0:53:11 you are from dust
0:53:14 and behold now
0:53:16 you are human
0:53:18 now in philosophy
0:53:20 we have this uh
0:53:21 uh fallacy we sometimes refer to as
0:53:24 mystery therefore magic if it's a
0:53:26 mystery it must be magic
0:53:28 this is not the logical leap we're
0:53:30 making you know why it's the logical
0:53:32 leap that a robot paul 2.0 would make
0:53:35 because he's trying to use logic
0:53:37 and scientific experiment to figure out
0:53:40 everything about you
0:53:44 he doesn't have direct experience with
0:53:46 consciousness allah is asking you about
0:53:48 something you know directly
0:53:51 you told me earlier that that robot was
0:53:53 not dust is not human what is human
0:53:56 so you know what if i made a if i made
0:53:58 it a
0:53:59 1 million paul 2.0
0:54:02 there a dime a dozen and i crushed one
0:54:04 and i cubed one and i destroyed it you
0:54:06 wouldn't you wouldn't have a funeral for
0:54:07 him nothing special about him
0:54:09 there's another one
0:54:10 however there are billions of human
0:54:12 beings eight billion if i killed one you
0:54:14 would be very upset with me
0:54:17 why i destroyed something
0:54:21 that's irreplaceable
0:54:25 not the body there's something else
0:54:27 there's a there's not not the dust what
0:54:29 is that something else i desecrated
0:54:31 something so sacred
0:54:34 that if i if i killed the organic paul
0:54:37 2.0 it would be very different than if i
0:54:38 killed the
0:54:40 excuse me the the organic paul then if i
0:54:42 killed the paul 2.0
0:54:44 allah is telling you you have this
0:54:46 direct
0:54:47 experience
0:54:49 it's not mystery therefore magic no no
0:54:51 you have access to this naked truth
0:54:53 direct access
0:54:56 this
0:54:57 light you know allah he calls himself
0:54:58 the light in the ayat nur
0:55:01 azalea goes quite deep into this
0:55:04 the allah light
0:55:07 now there's a lot of
0:55:08 different types here i'm not actually i
0:55:10 don't want to give expert thefts i'm
0:55:11 going to rely on his ali here
0:55:13 but the light is also reflected
0:55:16 the light is also reflected
0:55:18 now
0:55:19 you know the light is a nook it's in a
0:55:21 lamp and in a nook they say the nook is
0:55:23 the chest of the believer and the lamp
0:55:25 is the heart of the believer and allah
0:55:26 is the light inside the heart
0:55:29 and the lamp the the glass of the lamp
0:55:32 it it reflects that light
0:55:34 the purer your heart the more you
0:55:36 reflect the light of allah
0:55:38 this is a an analogy for your
0:55:40 consciousness your consciousness is a
0:55:42 borrowed light
0:55:44 allah shines this kind this is what it
0:55:46 felt
0:55:47 he teaches
0:55:48 allah shines his
0:55:50 consciousness and we reflect it
0:55:53 we are not we are not
0:55:55 we are not one with god we are not gods
0:55:58 we have no share in divinity this is
0:56:00 clear
0:56:01 however
0:56:03 we are we are
0:56:05 observers eyewitnesses of the light of
0:56:08 allah
0:56:09 this consciousness
0:56:11 let me give you a a
0:56:15 thomas huxley example thomas huxley
0:56:18 darwin's bulldog
0:56:20 darwin's bulldog not an atheist an
0:56:23 agnostic and for this reason he's an
0:56:25 agnostic for this reason
0:56:27 he says look
0:56:28 if i rub a lamp and a magic genie came
0:56:31 out
0:56:33 that's the equivalent of this physical
0:56:35 brain
0:56:37 agitating itself and the mind
0:56:39 come out
0:56:41 they're equivalent
0:56:43 very quick that's why he said i can't be
0:56:45 he cannot be atheist he cannot say he's
0:56:47 going to say look i can't talk about
0:56:48 what i don't know that's it i'm going
0:56:50 agnostic
0:56:54 there's a fitra that you have direct
0:56:56 access to that the quran when it talks
0:56:59 to you about it
0:57:01 if you read the quran in this light
0:57:03 you'll have a whole different
0:57:04 interpretation
0:57:06 sujud when a when a muslim puts his head
0:57:08 on the floor
0:57:10 and it's abraham does it in the bible
0:57:12 ali sallam jesus alaihis-salam does it
0:57:13 in the bible and of course all the
0:57:15 prophets did it this is an this is a
0:57:19 physical
0:57:21 expression of
0:57:24 i when you when you prostrate your head
0:57:26 is lower than the heart because ali
0:57:27 tells us your head is now lower than the
0:57:29 heart not the heart not the lump of
0:57:30 flesh
0:57:32 that innate sense that thing that robot
0:57:34 2.0 paul 2.0 doesn't have
0:57:37 is a gift from allah it's a direct
0:57:40 connection to allah you're saying allah
0:57:42 i didn't deduce you logically i didn't
0:57:44 scientifically grasp you i didn't put
0:57:47 you in a test tube but now i know about
0:57:48 you no
0:57:49 even the most layman even the man who
0:57:51 never understood logic he knew about
0:57:53 allah
0:57:55 it's a grace you know about allah via
0:57:58 grace
0:57:59 via mercy the greatest thing the
0:58:02 greatest gift you ever had
0:58:05 was the fitra
0:58:07 and this is why allah is
0:58:09 Music
0:58:11 this is a mercy
0:58:12 you have the answer to your test already
0:58:15 you have it
0:58:17 that's why i tell people i don't believe
0:58:19 in atheists you only take this fitra and
0:58:21 you project it somewhere else you always
0:58:23 mix it with somewhere else if you let me
0:58:24 cross examine you long enough i will
0:58:26 show you you believe in some type of
0:58:28 faulty god the quran is telling you look
0:58:30 you already have the answer don't
0:58:32 partner the answer with anything out
0:58:34 there
0:58:35 and the height of arrogance is to say
0:58:38 man is allah
0:58:40 i'm gonna associate myself with allah
0:58:42 i'm gonna say i'm one with allah this is
0:58:44 the height of arrogance now you've made
0:58:45 yourself the furthest from allah
0:58:47 because the pharaoh he said he was a god
0:58:50 the pharaoh
0:58:51 this is the worst because you're you're
0:58:53 at the polar opposite of where you
0:58:55 should be
0:58:58 you didn't create this fitra you didn't
0:59:00 grasp it with your logic you didn't
0:59:02 figure it out you didn't solve a mystery
0:59:04 you're not the sherlock holmes who
0:59:05 figured it out no
0:59:07 it's an open secret every human being
0:59:09 knows
0:59:11 the word kuffar means hey you covered
0:59:14 this belief this is what originally
0:59:15 means you covered this belief this
0:59:17 innate belief that's when people tell me
0:59:19 how do you why do you believe in god
0:59:20 innate
0:59:21 yeah
0:59:22 everywhere the quran says
0:59:26 every everywhere you look you'll see the
0:59:28 face of allah when all have perished
0:59:30 there will remain the face of allah
0:59:33 razali he called if you understand what
0:59:35 this verse says
0:59:38 though those who have arrived
0:59:41 those who have arrived who are those who
0:59:43 have arrived
0:59:45 well
0:59:47 Music
0:59:48 it's a bit of a complicated story
0:59:51 but let's get into
0:59:54 let's get into it
0:59:56 let's talk about the essence
0:59:58 the essence of something
1:00:01 aristotle said look at all these knives
1:00:03 they all have one thing in common that
1:00:04 one thing is their essence
1:00:07 if i draw you a knife on a piece of
1:00:09 paper paul you're going to be like hey
1:00:11 you know what
1:00:12 i noticed that's a knife
1:00:14 why it's a piece of paper it's a drawing
1:00:16 it has the essence of a knife it
1:00:18 represents knives it shares in the
1:00:20 essence of knives
1:00:22 now if i take a knife
1:00:24 out of plastic or wood or steel or
1:00:26 whatever you're like that's a knife
1:00:30 now if i change its essence
1:00:32 if i take a steel knife and i melt it
1:00:33 down and i turn it into a fork you're
1:00:35 like it's no longer a knife it's lost
1:00:36 its essence the same bundle of metal is
1:00:39 no longer a knife you recognize that the
1:00:42 essence of knife
1:00:44 is no longer in that object it's no
1:00:46 longer a knife
1:00:47 you agree yep absolutely
1:00:50 a knife is a concept in the mind and
1:00:52 it's a thing out there in the world
1:00:55 because there are many knives if i told
1:00:57 you how much does a knife weigh you'll
1:00:59 be like that depends that's subjective
1:01:01 it could be this weight that weight
1:01:03 actually could be any weight
1:01:04 if i told you how long is the knife well
1:01:06 it all depends it's subjective again
1:01:09 because i'm referring when i say knife
1:01:10 i'm referring to a concept
1:01:13 i'm referring to a type of ghost
1:01:16 there are objects out there
1:01:18 that we label knives
1:01:19 but knife is the essence of nice is
1:01:21 really a concept that's dependent on our
1:01:23 minds
1:01:26 now how about this what if i told you i
1:01:28 had a divine knife
1:01:31 there's only one knife like this in the
1:01:32 world there are no other knives there
1:01:34 will never be another knife
1:01:37 there will never be another knife ball
1:01:38 and this knife is never changing it
1:01:41 doesn't change
1:01:42 it doesn't go through stages
1:01:45 it is the way it is it always was that
1:01:47 way and it will forever be that way
1:01:50 and there will never be another one you
1:01:51 see your concept of knives because there
1:01:53 are many knives
1:01:55 you've made a collage in your mind
1:01:56 knives represent this idea
1:02:01 there are many human beings
1:02:05 so you have you have an idea in your
1:02:07 mind uh archetype of what a human being
1:02:09 is that's the essence of human being all
1:02:10 human beings share in this archetype
1:02:14 allah has no archetype
1:02:18 allah is singular always was always will
1:02:21 be
1:02:22 if there was a divine knife paul
1:02:24 now when i say divine knife there are no
1:02:26 other knives there can never be another
1:02:28 knife
1:02:29 if i told you how much is that knife way
1:02:31 whatever i say about that knife now if
1:02:33 it's true it's objective it's no longer
1:02:35 subjective
1:02:38 we've reached now objectivity we've
1:02:40 reached something we could say this is
1:02:41 true
1:02:42 we cannot deny it
1:02:44 it's certain
1:02:47 we would have arrived as azeli says
1:02:50 because razeli was dying he was looking
1:02:52 for truth
1:02:53 that's
1:02:54 unquestionable
1:02:58 no philosopher is going to come a
1:02:59 thousand years from now and question it
1:03:00 and raise a doubt no no no he wants
1:03:03 absolute truth
1:03:06 allah is al-haq and we're going to get
1:03:08 there inshaallah
1:03:10 there is for him for the truth to be
1:03:13 it cannot be a concept it cannot be an
1:03:15 archetype archetypes vary they are
1:03:17 subjective
1:03:19 you paul
1:03:20 you paul exists as flesh as part flesh
1:03:24 and part metaphor
1:03:26 i'll give you a quote you an atheist
1:03:28 david hume he says look human beings
1:03:30 paul's mind
1:03:32 is just a chain think about it as a
1:03:33 chain one link after another your mind
1:03:36 goes through stages
1:03:38 your mind is not the same as you when
1:03:39 you were when you were five years old
1:03:41 your mind has changed over time and it
1:03:42 will change over time
1:03:44 it's not this one thing where there's a
1:03:46 nucleus and i can point to it and i can
1:03:48 hold it and i can put it in a test tube
1:03:49 and i can weigh it and i can know
1:03:50 something objective about it actually
1:03:52 everything about your mind is objective
1:03:54 excuse me
1:03:55 subjective
1:03:57 i cannot put it in a test tube i cannot
1:03:59 directly point at it i don't even know
1:04:01 where it is in space and time
1:04:04 your mind is this concept and your mind
1:04:06 is shared with other minds and there's
1:04:08 it's an archetype it's part concept
1:04:10 oftentimes i like to point to
1:04:12 the ship of thesis i'll give you the
1:04:14 ship of thesis you have you ever heard
1:04:16 of it the ship of thesis no don't have
1:04:18 no
1:04:19 picture picture a ship it has 99 parts
1:04:24 it's a man the man who owns it his name
1:04:25 is thesis
1:04:28 every day he has to change a part
1:04:31 he replaces a part every day
1:04:34 after 10 days that ship
1:04:36 has 89 original parts 10 parts that are
1:04:40 new
1:04:43 those 10 parts he puts it in a warehouse
1:04:44 somewhere
1:04:45 after 99 days he's changed all 99 parts
1:04:49 and he's been sailing for 99 days back
1:04:50 and forth and we see him every day oh
1:04:53 there's there's a ship of thesis we wave
1:04:54 to him
1:04:56 and then one day somebody goes into that
1:04:58 warehouse and takes those 99 original
1:04:59 parts and rebuilds the ship of thesis
1:05:02 now which one is the original ship of
1:05:04 thesis
1:05:06 it all depends how your outlook it's
1:05:08 subjective
1:05:10 there's no concrete
1:05:12 objective ship of thesis
1:05:15 there's no objective answer why
1:05:17 because we're talking about a
1:05:18 multiplicity of things
1:05:21 ship of theses was part
1:05:24 part object part concept
1:05:27 allah is not part concept allah is not
1:05:30 part of a quran when the quran is
1:05:32 telling you allah is one allah is
1:05:33 telling you i am literal
1:05:35 you paul
1:05:36 are metaphor not allah is a metaphor you
1:05:39 paul and me and the dunya is metaphor
1:05:42 hazari told us all is metaphor except
1:05:45 allah accept allah
1:05:48 allah is literal he's in a category to
1:05:50 himself
1:05:52 he always was that's what it takes to be
1:05:54 objective only god can be true
1:05:57 everything else is trying to be true
1:06:01 everything else is trying to mimic
1:06:03 or reach this thing called true and we
1:06:05 can never do it there is nothing else
1:06:07 actually there is nothing else
1:06:10 that is true in this sense there is
1:06:12 nothing else
1:06:16 is a direct truism
1:06:19 it's undeniable
1:06:21 it always will be true and forever
1:06:24 unchanging it is never even adam when he
1:06:26 was alone he was not objectively true
1:06:28 because adam was in transition
1:06:30 always he was learning he was growing he
1:06:33 was decaying he was going through a
1:06:35 process
1:06:38 he is
1:06:39 he was finite in some sense
1:06:43 he was limited in some sense he is part
1:06:46 concept we are part concept the whole
1:06:48 world and when you come to this
1:06:49 realization gazelle tells you now you've
1:06:51 arrived
1:06:52 now you've understood now
1:06:54 descartes
1:06:57 he wrote a book called the meditations
1:06:58 and in my opinion he studied hazel for
1:07:00 certain
1:07:01 interesting yeah for certain for sure
1:07:03 there's no doubt okay
1:07:05 i consider myself to be an expert in
1:07:07 descartes
1:07:08 yeah i noticed when i i noticed when i
1:07:10 read gaza this uh hang on this sounds
1:07:12 remarkably like renee descartes you know
1:07:14 who's writing five centuries later but
1:07:16 yeah
1:07:17 absolutely so
1:07:19 descartes says look
1:07:26 um sorry i
1:07:28 skipped all right
1:07:29 what was your second one sorry after
1:07:31 wrestling so much i my blood sugar
1:07:33 dropped so what were you talking about
1:07:34 oh you took my uh renee daycare and oh
1:07:37 yes he says uh uh excuse me sorry
1:07:40 rene descartes said something he said
1:07:42 look i want to build this uh structure
1:07:44 and i want the
1:07:45 first block don't forget he was a he was
1:07:46 a brilliant mathematician he was a
1:07:48 brilliant scientist he was a he was a
1:07:50 genius there's no doubt and i'm not
1:07:51 using that term loosely he was a genius
1:07:54 absolutely he like rasali asked how do i
1:07:58 know i'm not dreaming
1:08:00 exactly
1:08:02 how do i know i'm not dreaming which by
1:08:04 the way nobody in philosophy has ever
1:08:05 come up with a good answer nobody
1:08:08 by the way but that's a topic for
1:08:10 another day a very interesting topic
1:08:11 actually very
1:08:12 heavily rooted also in the quran
1:08:15 very important in the quran
1:08:17 now descartes says look i want to build
1:08:19 this perfect structure the first block
1:08:20 must be
1:08:22 indestructible i'm gonna doubt
1:08:24 everything i know about science math
1:08:25 history everything i'm gonna and until i
1:08:27 find this one thing the nucleus it's
1:08:29 gotta be so perfect
1:08:31 it's gonna be so perfect and then i'm
1:08:32 gonna bring back science math history
1:08:34 and this thing is gonna ensure that the
1:08:36 rest is true yeah and he reflected and
1:08:39 he reflected and he reflected and he
1:08:40 threw one thing out after another and he
1:08:42 was almost he he came by a hair
1:08:45 tulla
1:08:46 he came by a hair
1:08:49 he said you know what
1:08:51 i this is what he said he said i think
1:08:53 therefore i am if i have thoughts i must
1:08:56 exist a prerequisite for having thoughts
1:08:58 is existence therefore
1:09:00 i am
1:09:03 even if there was a
1:09:05 demon out there trying to even if i was
1:09:07 dreaming right now i would still exist i
1:09:09 would know i i think therefore i am
1:09:10 would still be true it's transcendent he
1:09:13 said
1:09:14 even if there was a demon out there that
1:09:16 if every time i touched something hot he
1:09:17 made me feel it was cold he tricked my
1:09:19 senses somehow some way ice is actually
1:09:21 really hot and fire is actually really
1:09:23 cold you're just being tricked by this
1:09:24 demon even if that was the case not that
1:09:26 he believed in such a demon he was just
1:09:28 saying even if that's the case
1:09:30 i think therefore i am is still true
1:09:34 now
1:09:35 philosophers we objected to this and
1:09:37 famously nietzsche objected to this he
1:09:39 says
1:09:40 i am
1:09:42 excuse me i think is a presupposition
1:09:45 you have never proven that part yet
1:09:48 thoughts are happening to you you didn't
1:09:49 prove that you're the one thinking
1:09:52 and we found the flaw in his supposed at
1:09:55 the time perfect
1:09:58 truism
1:10:00 his one unimpensable truth was
1:10:02 penetrated it was broken it shattered
1:10:06 he he was a presupposition i want no
1:10:08 presuppositions paul
1:10:10 i want to be presupposition free
1:10:14 i don't want any rose-tinted glasses
1:10:16 where is this nucleus where is it we're
1:10:18 looking for it we're digging we're
1:10:19 digging we're digging and we came to
1:10:21 this point of awareness
1:10:23 now take away this point because that's
1:10:25 presupposition
1:10:27 and what is there left
1:10:29 there's this one thing
1:10:31 left
1:10:34 you can't deny awareness
1:10:36 you can deny that this thing called paul
1:10:38 is having this awareness you don't know
1:10:39 this paul thing you would never put in a
1:10:41 testament we said paul is a concept paul
1:10:43 is a metaphor
1:10:45 it's all what is this thing we have
1:10:48 direct contact with naked truth
1:10:51 this one awareness this one awareness
1:10:53 paul has always been always will be it's
1:10:55 eternal it cannot be grasped by your
1:10:57 hands nor your mathematics nor your
1:10:58 logic cannot be put in the test tube yet
1:11:00 however it is blindingly obvious and you
1:11:03 cannot look away from it when everything
1:11:05 has perished there will remain the face
1:11:07 of allah this thing out there and allah
1:11:10 refers to himself as a thing in the
1:11:11 quran so it's not it's okay to say allah
1:11:13 is a thing
1:11:14 this thing out there everything is
1:11:17 nested within it nothing encompasses it
1:11:19 and it encompasses everything now you
1:11:22 understand when you reread the
1:11:24 surat class
1:11:26 you will understand that allah is giving
1:11:28 you
1:11:29 his exact
1:11:31 description
1:11:33 it's a natural religion i verify the
1:11:35 quran by what's innate in me
1:11:38 when i read the quran i can verify now
1:11:41 now that i have discovered this nucleus
1:11:43 the death of all paradigms which is
1:11:45 expressed as
1:11:47 now i can go back into the world and i
1:11:49 can bring back
1:11:51 mathematical logic scientific logic
1:11:53 historical logic
1:11:55 now look i tell you
1:11:57 you told me earlier when we first spoke
1:11:59 that you didn't believe i drew a squared
1:12:02 circle
1:12:03 you didn't believe it paul but you know
1:12:05 what that had a lot to do with faith
1:12:09 it had a lot to do with this is a you
1:12:11 didn't believe it is it's a gift from
1:12:13 allah let me tell you why
1:12:16 aristotle said
1:12:20 guys i have to teach you all this the
1:12:22 law of non-contradiction this is
1:12:23 aristotle said
1:12:24 it cannot both be the case
1:12:27 that a proposition is both true and
1:12:29 false at the same time
1:12:32 imagine
1:12:34 imagine
1:12:35 i said to you i don't believe in the law
1:12:37 of non-contradiction
1:12:39 and i tell you paul i love coffee and
1:12:41 then you offer me a coffee and i say
1:12:42 what are you talking about i don't drink
1:12:43 coffee i hate coffee
1:12:45 it's both true that i love coffee and
1:12:46 that i hate coffee
1:12:48 you become
1:12:49 mad interactive with me that's what
1:12:50 aristotle says if somebody doesn't
1:12:52 accept the law of non-contradiction i
1:12:53 refuse to debate with it i refuse to
1:12:55 speak with him
1:12:57 if you ask me here are you taller than
1:12:59 six feet tall i say yes
1:13:01 and then you tell me do you like
1:13:03 basketball no i'm too short i'm i'm not
1:13:05 six feet tall if i was six feet tall i
1:13:07 would like it i keep contradicting
1:13:08 myself
1:13:10 then you would aristotle just washes his
1:13:12 hands from you he says look i won't if
1:13:14 you don't accept the law of
1:13:15 non-contradiction i won't debate i won't
1:13:17 speak with you i won't interact with you
1:13:18 etc now ask your paul how do you know
1:13:21 the law of non-contradiction
1:13:22 you actually have an innate belief
1:13:25 for you cannot explain the law of not
1:13:27 now he says it's self-evident i can't
1:13:29 explain it i just accept it it's an
1:13:30 axiom
1:13:32 you're innate you're you know the law of
1:13:34 non-contradiction innately what's what
1:13:37 supports the law of non-contradiction
1:13:39 your innate belief there's a there's a
1:13:40 great video about a young girl
1:13:42 i think she's like four or five years
1:13:43 old and they're talking to her about
1:13:44 jesus and they're like and then jesus
1:13:46 learned about god and then she objects
1:13:48 she says wait a second jesus is god how
1:13:50 can he learn about god
1:13:53 her intuition
1:13:55 is telling her you told me p and now
1:13:57 you're saying not p
1:13:59 proposition is true and untrue at the
1:14:01 same time she she went back she said no
1:14:03 wait a second her fitnah was shining
1:14:05 Music
1:14:07 she was never taught the law of
1:14:08 non-contradiction
1:14:10 but her intuition is telling her
1:14:13 because where is the law of
1:14:14 non-contradiction written
1:14:17 we discovered it within ourselves
1:14:19 it's innate
1:14:21 all your beliefs paul in the end are
1:14:23 innate
1:14:25 your belief in the law of
1:14:26 non-contradiction
1:14:28 we say self-explanatory what does that
1:14:30 mean
1:14:30 what does it mean self-explanatory
1:14:33 don't ask what does it mean
1:14:35 it means hey i have this deep inner
1:14:37 faith that this is true i'm drawn to it
1:14:39 it's my natural disposition
1:14:42 now look at your faith in science
1:14:44 science we said earlier we put it in a
1:14:46 nutshell
1:14:47 because remember we said math okay
1:14:49 mathematical truth law of
1:14:50 non-contradiction you know that innately
1:14:52 paul
1:14:53 it's a gift from allah
1:14:54 we cannot i cannot explain to you this
1:14:56 axiom we go by faith
1:15:00 it's self-evident to us because we are
1:15:02 predisposed for it to be self-evident
1:15:04 animals in the animal kingdom they have
1:15:06 no idea of the law of non-contradiction
1:15:08 that child when they were telling her
1:15:10 jesus learned about god she said wait a
1:15:12 second
1:15:13 he is god you told me he is god he's
1:15:16 this proposition is true how could this
1:15:18 one now be true they don't her in her
1:15:20 fit that are shining
1:15:24 now what about your faith in science
1:15:26 science is the faith that the future
1:15:28 will behave like the past allah is
1:15:30 telling you look at the cycles of night
1:15:31 and day
1:15:33 you're so certain of this cycle
1:15:36 but it's really just a faith
1:15:38 actually if i object to science
1:15:41 the scientific world starts to they
1:15:42 start to attack me personally they hate
1:15:45 me not only they don't like me they hate
1:15:47 me i'm not a listen i'm the biggest
1:15:49 believer in science i have a strong
1:15:50 faith in science but my faith in science
1:15:52 is
1:15:53 i have a faith that the future will
1:15:54 behave like the past i understand
1:15:55 science philosophically
1:15:57 philosopher first developed the
1:15:59 scientific method
1:16:00 not just
1:16:02 some scientists follow the scientific
1:16:04 method blindly they're trained in that
1:16:05 method they don't understand the inner
1:16:07 workings of that method
1:16:10 and i'm very open to have a discussion
1:16:12 with any scientific expert out there
1:16:14 anybody in the world
1:16:16 bring me i'll have a nice civil
1:16:17 discussion and let's look at the the
1:16:19 inner workings of science how was it
1:16:21 developed why is it the way it is we
1:16:23 could talk about from we can we could
1:16:25 talk about from socrates from the
1:16:27 pre-socratics all the way to
1:16:30 uh
1:16:32 uh
1:16:33 popper okay we can go from pre-socratics
1:16:36 to popper i'm more than happy to
1:16:40 your faith in the cycle your faith in
1:16:43 science
1:16:46 is you have a you have this deep fitra
1:16:48 your fitra is telling you the future is
1:16:49 going to behave like the past allah is
1:16:50 telling you look you came from death
1:16:54 paul when you if i tell you
1:16:56 i woke up at 7 00 p.m not 6 59 p.m
1:16:59 excuse me if i tell you i woke up at 7
1:17:00 a.m and not 6 59 a.m
1:17:06 that means that 6 59 a.m i was what
1:17:09 asleep
1:17:10 i was asleep i cannot wake up at 7 if i
1:17:13 was already woke at 6 59 correct correct
1:17:17 if i tell you i grew taller i used to be
1:17:19 five foot seven and i grew to five foot
1:17:21 ten
1:17:22 if i tell you i grew that means before i
1:17:24 was shorter
1:17:28 if i tell you i got stronger that means
1:17:29 before i was weaker
1:17:31 if i tell you i now run faster it's
1:17:33 because i used to run slower
1:17:35 correct correct
1:17:37 one thing is generated by the other if i
1:17:39 told you i die i'm dying it's because
1:17:42 i'm alive i when i die i had to be alive
1:17:45 to die
1:17:46 correct
1:17:48 when i was born when i came to life what
1:17:50 was i before
1:17:54 in a state of non-existence
1:17:56 whatever it is you want to call it paul
1:17:58 that's what i tell atheists whatever you
1:17:59 want to call it but you weren't alive
1:18:01 you came from death you came from
1:18:04 non-existence allah is telling in the
1:18:05 quran like i brought you once from the
1:18:07 dust
1:18:08 i'm going to send you back to the dust
1:18:10 and the cycle will repeat your fitra is
1:18:13 screaming yes this is true
1:18:15 this miracle happened already you know
1:18:17 if we were a picture of this thought
1:18:19 experiment imagine i'm sitting with
1:18:22 uh we're just observing the world as
1:18:24 intellects
1:18:26 we're not in the world which observing
1:18:27 the dunya as intellects and we're seeing
1:18:29 the causal chain of things happen and
1:18:32 we predict that some of us predict that
1:18:34 life one day will come to be and some
1:18:35 say no there's just dead matter in the
1:18:37 world there's just chemistry and physics
1:18:39 there is no life
1:18:40 there is no uh genie in the bottle and
1:18:43 then one day lo and behold there's human
1:18:46 beings not robots human beings not
1:18:48 sticks and stones not physics physics
1:18:50 and chemistry this thing where
1:18:53 you and me we have this divine
1:18:56 element within us the fingerprint of god
1:18:58 or the sign of god within us
1:19:00 not that we share in divinity at all i
1:19:02 don't believe we are one with god some
1:19:04 people say we're one with god no it's
1:19:05 not one where allah is one and we
1:19:07 observe him
1:19:09 we are passive observers of the truth we
1:19:12 are metaphors that are observing the
1:19:14 literal truth
1:19:17 so
1:19:19 in this
1:19:21 in this paradigm
1:19:24 where scientific truths are also a type
1:19:27 of faith that the future will behave
1:19:28 like the past yeah historical truth are
1:19:30 also historical here's the thing with
1:19:32 the quran okay when it comes to history
1:19:34 the quran says something
1:19:36 he he really gives a beautiful
1:19:38 explanation of the quran now look look
1:19:39 at the quran okay
1:19:42 the quran tells you you weren't there
1:19:44 when the his stories of muhammad ali
1:19:46 would not know the stories of the past
1:19:48 if allah didn't inform him it says in
1:19:50 the quran you would not have known you
1:19:52 don't know history you don't have
1:19:54 supreme uh sherlock holmes level of
1:19:56 abduction and you figured out what
1:19:58 happened in the past no no no we had to
1:19:59 inform you
1:20:00 however when the quran says something
1:20:02 about history azalea is asking how do we
1:20:04 know it's true how does the fitra tell
1:20:06 us that's true well think about the
1:20:08 story of
1:20:09 because remember when we read the quran
1:20:11 we're supposed to do it through the lens
1:20:12 of the fitra then everything makes sense
1:20:16 so for instance notice uh the story of
1:20:19 jesus jesus salaam he makes birds of
1:20:21 clay he breathes into them and they
1:20:24 become alive
1:20:26 now that's happened in the in history
1:20:30 but it's more than
1:20:31 it's not just the story that happened in
1:20:33 the time and place it's also there's a
1:20:35 theological truth
1:20:38 like allah he made adam through clay and
1:20:40 breathed into him his rule and he made
1:20:42 him alive
1:20:43 jesus sort of does that with the birds
1:20:47 but the quran tells you by permission of
1:20:49 allah yeah
1:20:51 so jesus is not god that there's a
1:20:53 theological i can confirm you that truth
1:20:55 right now even though i wasn't a witness
1:20:57 to that event
1:20:58 and said
1:21:00 it's true theologically
1:21:02 it's also true historically but you can
1:21:05 only affirm the theological truth of
1:21:07 course we take
1:21:08 the historical truth by way of
1:21:11 authority the quran is telling us we
1:21:12 accept the authority of the quran of
1:21:14 course
1:21:15 but also there's a theological truth
1:21:16 that my fitrah can now
1:21:19 can now
1:21:21 verify can now acknowledge there's a
1:21:24 theological truth the whole quran the
1:21:26 whole quran is speaking to you
1:21:28 through your inductive reasoning through
1:21:30 your
1:21:31 analytical reasoning but most of all
1:21:33 through your intuitive
1:21:35 direct experience of the fitra
1:21:39 which atheists would refer to probably
1:21:41 as the heart problem of consciousness
1:21:47 sorry for my rant paul i uh
1:21:49 i sometimes get on the roll
1:21:51 absolutely feel free to shut me up
1:21:53 feel free to shut me up when i talk
1:21:54 another
1:21:59 thank you uh thank you for that so the
1:22:01 fitra is the the key cognitive faculty
1:22:04 it's the way we perceive the world it's
1:22:06 a god-given faculty
1:22:07 it's through that we uh appreciate it
1:22:10 can i ask you
1:22:11 i'm sorry can we just pause for one
1:22:12 second i gotta go check on my
1:22:19 yes so uh thank you for that as i was
1:22:22 just saying um if i've understood you uh
1:22:24 correctly that the fitra this concept in
1:22:27 the quran and the the sunnah
1:22:28 is like a cognitive faculty it's a way a
1:22:31 god-given way that we apprehend
1:22:33 the world the truth of our existence as
1:22:35 created beings and uh right and wrong
1:22:38 the sense of justice and justice even
1:22:41 the sense of this law of
1:22:42 non-contradiction which you say is just
1:22:44 because it's kind of not written there
1:22:45 in the universe it's not anywhere out
1:22:47 there is it as you say it's but it's in
1:22:49 our nature it's innate it's in our fitra
1:22:51 and another evidence of our created
1:22:54 status as creatures of god if i've
1:22:56 understood you correctly and i
1:22:57 and you seem to locate that as the
1:23:00 the surest route to
1:23:02 certainty epistemological certainty
1:23:04 epistemology being obviously the unders
1:23:06 uh the theory of knowledge how we how we
1:23:08 as human beings understand things how we
1:23:11 come to know things
1:23:12 that that's the surest route to uh
1:23:15 um knowledge of the truth about
1:23:17 ourselves and life god in the universe
1:23:20 um is that broadly what you're saying
1:23:23 i would say brother yes yes very good
1:23:25 accurate description it's something you
1:23:27 know directly
1:23:29 yes remember it's it's the missing
1:23:30 ingredient remember we talked about paul
1:23:32 2.0 he's missing an ingredient
1:23:36 absolutely absolutely that ingredient
1:23:38 that ingredient you have direct
1:23:41 experience with this ingredient
1:23:45 john sterl says turn on cyril he says
1:23:47 can you imagine a zombie
1:23:50 we say yeah he says that's proof of your
1:23:52 consciousness because
1:23:54 a zombie is human being minus
1:23:56 consciousness
1:23:57 mind is that thing
1:23:59 that thing
1:24:02 it doesn't belong to you
1:24:05 it doesn't belong to you
1:24:07 when you say allahu akbar when you pray
1:24:09 you say allah you're this is a the
1:24:11 gesture is i'm taking the dunya and i'm
1:24:13 chucking it behind me
1:24:15 yeah quite quite literally and the
1:24:17 the self is the dunya the i
1:24:20 the me
1:24:22 this thing
1:24:23 i am me my personality it's all metaphor
1:24:27 when i was in the womb i was incubated
1:24:29 in the fitrah i didn't know my name i
1:24:32 didn't develop an ego yet i hadn't known
1:24:34 the dunya
1:24:35 all i knew was this awareness and i was
1:24:38 that's why the prophet alaihis tells us
1:24:40 all children were born muslim before the
1:24:43 quran the quran tells you tell the
1:24:45 christians
1:24:46 tell the people of the book
1:24:48 that abraham was upon the truth before
1:24:50 the scriptures
1:24:53 you were born with a natural religion
1:24:55 you don't need
1:24:56 somebody to tell you about allah
1:24:59 now of course there's many things about
1:25:00 our deen we were taught and informed
1:25:02 absolutely yes
1:25:04 but to verify your deen to verify the
1:25:07 truth
1:25:08 when you read the quran the quran the
1:25:10 islam is a natural religion and a
1:25:12 revealed religion this is what the quran
1:25:14 is teaching us
1:25:17 you're making a point here it seems that
1:25:19 uh some calam theologians seem to say
1:25:23 when we talk about before we talk about
1:25:24 god we've got to establish his existence
1:25:26 by the exercise of reason by logical
1:25:28 proofs whatever they may be but you're
1:25:31 saying no actually this belief is prior
1:25:34 to reason it is instinctive it gives us
1:25:36 that direct apprehension of the divine
1:25:39 and so you're you're more in agreement
1:25:41 with actually ibn samir than kalam theo
1:25:44 theology in that sense because his
1:25:45 immaterial had a huge emphasis on the
1:25:48 fifth uh in his writing he hugely
1:25:50 elaborated this uh perhaps more than any
1:25:52 other um muslim theologian uh but in
1:25:55 that sense you're uh you're with him
1:25:57 rather than the the more formal well we
1:25:59 got to demonstrate god's existence
1:26:01 rationally before we can speak about
1:26:03 prophets revelation and so on and but i
1:26:06 agree with you that is the quran's
1:26:08 teaching in surah 30 verse 30 i think it
1:26:11 is
1:26:12 i i believe that there are two ways to
1:26:13 allah reason rationale
1:26:16 and it's not haram i don't believe it's
1:26:17 haram and i want to make a point to make
1:26:19 sure that muslims should never state
1:26:21 philosophy is haram
1:26:22 never this it's a great
1:26:25 misconception you know when ghazali
1:26:26 wrote the destruction of the
1:26:28 philosophers or the foot it means the
1:26:30 slip up he didn't say philosophy is
1:26:32 haram he's talking about the blind
1:26:34 followers of aristotle yeah to blindly
1:26:37 follow somebody is haram yes not reason
1:26:40 philosophy is just a word for
1:26:41 formal logic if you say philosophy is
1:26:43 talam say arithmetic is
1:26:45 say mathematics is haram then go all the
1:26:47 way say geometries
1:26:50 read the quran carefully the quran tells
1:26:52 you use your logic use your reason
1:26:54 contemplate think deeply muslims don't
1:26:56 think deeply enough that's the true
1:26:57 issue they don't read the quran and they
1:26:59 don't contemplate it enough they read
1:27:00 the quran and they just verbalize it
1:27:03 no no no it's okay to have a spiritual
1:27:06 experience
1:27:07 islam is about spirituality islam is
1:27:10 about
1:27:11 an innate inner experience there is no
1:27:14 greater experience there is no greater
1:27:16 human experience there is no greater if
1:27:19 you came in the world and you did
1:27:21 everything but have this one experience
1:27:22 you've wasted your time sorry one second
1:27:24 my daughter
1:27:26 come say hello
1:27:30 you lost your tooth yes come say hi to
1:27:32 paul come say hi to paul
1:27:35 hi paul
1:27:36 says hello
1:27:40 oh
1:27:41 oh
1:27:43 yeah let's go play
1:27:51 Laughter
1:27:57 how sweet
1:28:00 that's my precious there
1:28:02 he is precious yeah
1:28:04 thank you so yeah we're saying uh
1:28:06 forgive me i forget don't worry that was
1:28:08 much more important yeah
1:28:10 i know you're
1:28:12 having experience uh that was the only
1:28:14 experience we had in life um yes yes
1:28:16 this is this is the most important thing
1:28:18 it's an open secret you know angela says
1:28:21 it's a secret of secrets it's like this
1:28:23 thing it's it's it's there we all see it
1:28:25 however
1:28:27 because we can't grasp it we can't point
1:28:28 to it you know everything in the world
1:28:30 you ever learned paul when you were a
1:28:32 kid we showed you a dog we said the word
1:28:34 dog every time you saw that object we
1:28:36 pointed to it you associated the word
1:28:38 dog with a four-legged animal
1:28:40 everything you learned about the dunya
1:28:41 when we showed you the color red we made
1:28:43 the sound red we say paul we call this
1:28:45 red and every time we saw you read
1:28:47 object we said the word red you
1:28:48 associated the word red with this color
1:28:51 everything in the universe
1:28:54 everything you've learned except one
1:28:55 thing
1:28:58 when we talk to you about consciousness
1:28:59 the mind there was we didn't point to
1:29:00 anything
1:29:03 this is what sometimes philosophers
1:29:04 refer to as the beetle in the box you
1:29:06 have a box and nobody can look inside
1:29:08 your box you open the box you see a
1:29:09 beetle i have a box nobody can look
1:29:11 inside it i open it i have a beetle and
1:29:13 everybody's got this box but nobody we
1:29:15 can't look into each other's boxes
1:29:16 that's that's the mind right
1:29:18 this open secret the secret of secrets
1:29:21 you paul are directly experiencing the
1:29:24 mind but i never pointed to it
1:29:26 i never put in a test tube i never
1:29:27 deduced it logically
1:29:29 allah is beyond this grasp allah tells
1:29:32 you reflect on your hearing and your
1:29:34 seeing reflect on your senses allah is
1:29:36 not something you see with the eye allah
1:29:37 gave you seeing
1:29:39 allah is the one who gives seeing allah
1:29:41 is the awareness
1:29:42 allah is the all-aware actually
1:29:45 everything you've ever said or done is
1:29:47 encompassed in this awareness you think
1:29:49 you've escaped you think you've done and
1:29:51 nothing is nothing is ever lost it's
1:29:53 always in this one awareness
1:29:56 you know think about somebody who's
1:29:57 dreaming okay
1:30:00 the
1:30:02 the dream
1:30:03 the dream itself is not as real as the
1:30:06 dreamer
1:30:07 it's a byproduct of the dreamer
1:30:10 we are metaphors in a dream so to speak
1:30:14 so to speak we are contingent things
1:30:17 there but there has to be an unex you
1:30:19 know there has to be one thing that is
1:30:22 objective
1:30:24 there has to be a one thing that is
1:30:26 objective
1:30:28 and we are all metaphor this is what
1:30:30 gazelle ultimately reaches in in the in
1:30:32 the
1:30:33 in the
1:30:34 in the
1:30:36 niche of lights he ends up telling
1:30:38 revealing his his conclusions
1:30:41 that in the end all human beings are
1:30:43 metaphor all things that dunya is a
1:30:45 metaphor every ultimately speaking
1:30:47 ultimately and allah is objective in a
1:30:49 category by himself and this is known
1:30:51 via direct experience but only once you
1:30:53 strip every idol
1:30:56 see islam yes it
1:30:59 it destroyed the idols yes
1:31:01 the meccan idols yes but we had to keep
1:31:03 going that was a direction there are
1:31:04 many more idols to slay there are many
1:31:06 more idols of the mind of projection
1:31:08 etcetera if you read kant if you
1:31:09 graduate to kant you know can't he wrote
1:31:11 on his thesis
1:31:15 i guarantee you he read muslim
1:31:17 philosophy
1:31:18 because gazelli
1:31:20 and many other muslim takers not just
1:31:22 gazelli they understood these things as
1:31:26 projections of the mind
1:31:28 and you know i did a little i tried to
1:31:30 research why would can't write bismillah
1:31:32 why would he write the the
1:31:34 the opening sentence of every verse in
1:31:36 the quran save one why would he write
1:31:38 something so muslim unmistakably muslim
1:31:41 and i i you know as i did my research i
1:31:43 realized that he was contemporaries with
1:31:45 gote and he might have been very
1:31:47 influenced by gote gate was the german
1:31:49 shakespeare and he
1:31:51 loves the quran
1:31:54 he says actually it's our duty to
1:31:55 believe in the quran he actually wrote a
1:31:56 poem about the prophet an amazing poem
1:31:58 about how the po how the prophet is a
1:32:00 gushing spring on a mountain meaning
1:32:02 he's unstoppable and everything benefits
1:32:05 from him trickling down the mountain and
1:32:06 it's
1:32:07 try to stop a gushing spring try to
1:32:09 reverse that it's impossible his
1:32:10 momentum is irresistible he gives a
1:32:13 beautiful poem about the prophet
1:32:16 and this in my opinion probably got kant
1:32:19 interested in muslim philosophy and of
1:32:21 course his
1:32:22 his ideas
1:32:25 reflect a lot of what muslim thinkers
1:32:27 said in the past
1:32:30 these are things are projection of the
1:32:32 mind essentially i didn't realize he was
1:32:33 a contempt haven't connected him with
1:32:35 goethe and uh i'd often wondered why the
1:32:37 in his phd thesis right at the top it
1:32:39 should have in arabic the bismillah
1:32:42 is really
1:32:43 jarring until you perhaps look into his
1:32:45 you know what he would have known goethe
1:32:47 as you say who some people think was
1:32:48 actually a muslim a closet muslim anyway
1:32:51 yes yeah i think there's no doubt he was
1:32:52 muslim even though he was highly frowned
1:32:54 upon to be muslim it's not extremely
1:32:56 hard
1:32:57 yeah so he was without a doubt
1:32:59 he was without a doubt in my opinion
1:33:02 yeah i have no doubt he was muslim yeah
1:33:04 but many people say that he was the
1:33:06 evidence yeah
1:33:07 do you have any type of popular
1:33:09 objections you think atheists would
1:33:10 bring about about
1:33:12 to what we've said
1:33:14 well um there's a great deal i mean i'm
1:33:17 basically in sympathy with the idealist
1:33:19 perspective which i think is where
1:33:20 you're coming from so you mentioned
1:33:21 bishop berkeley
1:33:22 uh and and that tradition of idealism um
1:33:26 which we see up to people today people
1:33:28 like professor keith ward who i've
1:33:29 spoken to on my channel from oxford
1:33:31 he's one of the leading exponents of
1:33:33 idealism and um
1:33:35 you know they use they used to be
1:33:36 mainstream uh actually this used to be
1:33:38 the the dominant paradigm in philosophy
1:33:40 in universities in the west um it's not
1:33:42 now material when i studied philosophy
1:33:44 university
1:33:45 um in london you know analytical
1:33:48 materialism was the norm you know
1:33:50 religion was certainly never mentioned
1:33:53 and consciousness was an epic phenomena
1:33:55 it was a a byproduct of a physical brain
1:33:58 and i remember doing a class on the
1:34:00 philosophy of mind at ucl university
1:34:02 college in london here and um
1:34:04 and you know it was all about how do we
1:34:06 apprehend a patch of pink you know that
1:34:09 was the example he gave and it was like
1:34:11 really difficult to describe how the
1:34:13 mind could comprehend pink i thought
1:34:15 dude you if you have a problem with that
1:34:16 how are you going to get how are you
1:34:18 going to understand you know
1:34:20 barks mass in b minor at that time i was
1:34:22 a christian barks mass in b minor or
1:34:24 great works of art you know you you
1:34:27 don't stand a chance with your paradigm
1:34:30 which was materialist reductionist it
1:34:33 it has roots in the material processes
1:34:36 of the brain and even then as a
1:34:37 christian i understood that this was not
1:34:39 going to work and we needed a paradigm
1:34:41 shift which funnily enough is the name
1:34:43 of
1:34:44 thomas kuhn's book the structure of
1:34:46 scientific revolutions which i think you
1:34:47 referred to in a previous video
1:34:49 important book very important book um
1:34:51 he's a he's a guy at um mit i think a
1:34:54 philosopher that professor of philosophy
1:34:56 of religion and this whole thing of
1:34:57 struc of paradigm shifts the complete
1:34:59 revolutions in our world views that
1:35:01 we've been through in science whether it
1:35:03 be from uh newton from aristotle to
1:35:05 newton to einstein to whatever's going
1:35:08 to come next
1:35:09 we go through these revolutions
1:35:11 the reason i mention that is because
1:35:13 even then as an undergraduate sitting in
1:35:14 my philosophy of mine class i thought we
1:35:17 need a paradigm shift this ain't working
1:35:19 you can't pull yourself up by the
1:35:21 bootstraps
1:35:23 if you're trying to understand
1:35:24 consciousness like that you need to have
1:35:25 a top-down approach to use a different
1:35:27 metaphor
1:35:29 which gives priority to mind to
1:35:32 consciousness
1:35:33 um
1:35:34 as the origin of
1:35:36 the physical
1:35:38 which ultimately of course means the
1:35:39 mind the divine the god himself
1:35:42 um so i i'm completely idealist i'm i'm
1:35:45 with you on that and um which is why i
1:35:47 think the the the quran as you rightly
1:35:49 say it
1:35:50 is fits uh perfectly with the natural
1:35:53 disposition the heart that with our
1:35:56 hearts it's not how did allah say what
1:35:58 did how did allah create the world he
1:36:01 said be
1:36:03 he created with the word
1:36:06 be
1:36:08 he wasn't taking this lump of this or
1:36:11 this slump of that he said a word
1:36:14 what do words what what are words
1:36:18 what are words words are things of mind
1:36:22 be
1:36:25 is a word
1:36:27 think about that
1:36:28 allah started the dunya with a word
1:36:32 the first thing he created is a pen
1:36:34 to me i understand it as symbolizing
1:36:36 determinism which you could talk about
1:36:38 it maybe also as well if you wish
1:36:41 but a pen
1:36:43 this is
1:36:44 this is activity of the mind
1:36:48 allah said be
1:36:50 there are three possibilities either the
1:36:53 whole world is just
1:36:54 atoms in the void okay now the void we
1:36:57 can debate exactly what i mean some some
1:36:59 scientists when they say void they don't
1:37:00 actually mean emptiness they mean like
1:37:02 this that's another topic for another
1:37:03 day let's not get on a tangent there's
1:37:05 either just
1:37:07 chemistry and physics material stuff or
1:37:11 there's only idea
1:37:13 or there's a dualism the two
1:37:15 there's part physics and part idea
1:37:19 now me i like what the
1:37:21 ivan arabi says he says look i'm not
1:37:22 going to ask i'm not going to try to
1:37:23 figure that out i'm just going to say
1:37:24 they're seen and unseen
1:37:27 there's the observed world and then
1:37:29 there's this inner world of the mind i'm
1:37:30 not going to say which if it's actually
1:37:32 physical because the thing is
1:37:34 physical the word physical or
1:37:36 materialism is another god it's another
1:37:38 false god so for instance
1:37:41 you see this pen
1:37:43 and you see this coffee cup
1:37:45 what do they have in common
1:37:47 well you're gonna your mind's gonna tell
1:37:48 you look connect the two they're made of
1:37:50 this stuff
1:37:53 and this cell phone and every object is
1:37:55 made of this stuff and we're gonna call
1:37:56 it materialism material
1:37:58 that's another ghost you just invented
1:38:00 that that's just another concept it's
1:38:01 another metaphor it's not out there in
1:38:03 the world
1:38:04 it's again another ghost in the mind
1:38:07 when we say kill all the idols we're
1:38:09 talking about the idols in the world and
1:38:11 the ones in the mind and then you will
1:38:12 have an experience
1:38:14 because you just erected another god
1:38:16 think about do forests exist
1:38:19 forest is just a word for a number of
1:38:21 trees that i can't count
1:38:23 forest is a universal forest just means
1:38:26 hey there's a bunch of trees out there i
1:38:27 don't know the exact number
1:38:31 there's not something forest i can grab
1:38:33 and put in my hand no it's just an
1:38:34 expression but we take them as literal
1:38:36 things out there that's why the cronies
1:38:38 keep telling you do you think these
1:38:40 things can harm you or benefit you
1:38:42 you're projecting them on to the world
1:38:48 sorry yeah one of one of the examples
1:38:50 um
1:38:51 about the laws of nature the laws of
1:38:53 physics the laws of nature
1:38:55 and you say well
1:38:57 these are actually exist they're not
1:38:58 actual laws
1:39:00 these are placeholders i think
1:39:03 they're inferred i would say i like to
1:39:04 refer to them as as uh bookmarks we
1:39:07 bookmark a certain pattern is
1:39:09 irregularity and we bookmarked that look
1:39:11 that happened in the past many times and
1:39:13 now we're bookmarking it yeah and when
1:39:15 we see it again in the future we're
1:39:16 going to refer to it
1:39:17 via that bookmark okay we're marking it
1:39:19 we're giving it a name we're inferring
1:39:21 there's a law that's doing that the
1:39:23 truth of the matter is
1:39:27 gravity randomness
1:39:29 every force it's never been observed
1:39:32 you're observing a pattern yeah and then
1:39:35 you're labeling that pattern and then
1:39:36 you dream up a god that's behind that
1:39:38 pattern so let me give you a for
1:39:39 instance okay
1:39:41 let me give you a for instance imagine i
1:39:43 take a book and you know you fan through
1:39:45 the pages you see a cartoon i draw a
1:39:47 cartoon i draw i draw a picture throwing
1:39:49 a pitch
1:39:51 on each page he's going through the
1:39:53 sequence and then when i flip you know
1:39:54 when you flip through the book you see
1:39:55 like a cartoon in action you know how
1:39:56 cartoons work right they draw one
1:39:58 picture then they draw another picture
1:39:59 and they swipe the picture so fast that
1:40:01 you think there's actual motion
1:40:06 now imagine i put you in the library and
1:40:08 there's
1:40:09 billions of books and you flip through
1:40:11 the pages and you're watching a cartoon
1:40:13 over and over again you're watching
1:40:14 cartoons you're watching cartoons and
1:40:15 you're seeing you're studying these
1:40:16 cards and you're like hey the guy who
1:40:18 wrote this all these books
1:40:20 he's following certain patterns he never
1:40:22 breaks these patterns
1:40:26 and here when he once when somebody
1:40:28 throws something
1:40:29 it falls down to the earth you discover
1:40:31 gravity discover this pattern called
1:40:32 gravity
1:40:34 but to you it's just one image after
1:40:35 another it's just a cartoon there's no
1:40:37 actual law out there in the book no no
1:40:39 no you're just saying look he this this
1:40:41 this designer
1:40:43 this author
1:40:44 this artist
1:40:47 he has this signature in his
1:40:50 designs every book i've read all his
1:40:52 books i've studied them closely if you
1:40:54 give me a new edition of his book i can
1:40:56 tell you look exactly what he's going to
1:40:57 do in this book
1:40:59 i know that as the story goes he won't
1:41:01 break these laws he's never has in the
1:41:02 past this is what allah tells you in the
1:41:04 quran i never change my rules my
1:41:06 patterns
1:41:07 says in the quran allah tell you these
1:41:09 are patterns and i never changed them
1:41:10 but you took them as some other god is
1:41:12 doing them some other deity out there
1:41:15 some other thing that you never observed
1:41:17 you projected it
1:41:20 so if imagine you're in this library and
1:41:23 you're studying this author's work and
1:41:24 you're seeing these patterns over and
1:41:25 over again you would discover every
1:41:27 pattern every law of physics it's all
1:41:29 written in the book but you would never
1:41:30 take it literally
1:41:32 yeah
1:41:34 you would never take it literally you're
1:41:35 like no that's just the way he designs
1:41:36 things that's how the muslim sees the
1:41:37 dunya
1:41:39 yes there are these laws but these laws
1:41:40 are from allah allah controls these laws
1:41:42 allah makes them creates them as such
1:41:45 there's not some alien
1:41:48 force
1:41:49 so for instance i like to give the
1:41:50 catapult experiment i don't know if
1:41:51 you've heard it before but basically
1:41:53 imagine i fire a catapult you know a
1:41:55 catapult like
1:41:56 yeah yeah fire is a projectile
1:41:58 and the projectile lands on a point and
1:42:00 we mark that point as point a
1:42:03 and then we're going to reset the
1:42:04 catapult but this time when we reset the
1:42:06 catapult we're going to do a divine
1:42:08 reset
1:42:09 a perfect control we're going to reset
1:42:12 every blade of grass we're going to
1:42:14 reset every molecule of air we're going
1:42:15 to reset every heavenly body
1:42:18 we're going to
1:42:19 reset every speck of dust
1:42:22 a perfect reset
1:42:24 i'm talking about a divine reset
1:42:26 and we fire the catapult again
1:42:28 is it going to point land on point a or
1:42:31 will it land somewhere else
1:42:33 on a different point
1:42:35 new land exactly the same place
1:42:36 presumably
1:42:37 well if you're if you're a believer in
1:42:39 the throne in physics you'll say yes it
1:42:40 lands at the same point
1:42:42 now where is this randomness force where
1:42:44 is this mysterious force that floats
1:42:46 around in the universe that's affecting
1:42:47 things
1:42:49 you tell me that there's a this random
1:42:51 it's that's because of random no where
1:42:53 is this force randomness is an
1:42:55 expression
1:42:57 that's taken literally
1:42:59 randomness doesn't exist out there
1:43:01 randomness exists in here
1:43:04 you're not able to give me a perfect
1:43:05 reset
1:43:07 you're not able to factor in all the
1:43:10 possible differences every gust of wind
1:43:12 or every deflection of
1:43:14 heavenly bodies slightly pulling in this
1:43:16 direction now and it's slightly you
1:43:18 cannot compute all these variables so
1:43:20 for you it seems there's a force out
1:43:22 there random that's random but actually
1:43:24 it's not there's no actual force
1:43:26 randomness is a expression
1:43:30 randomness exists as an expression that
1:43:32 things are hard to calculate or
1:43:35 get exact in this dunya
1:43:37 in this world
1:43:39 it's not a force out there
1:43:42 it's not a force out there now look
1:43:43 there are other opinions on this
1:43:45 catapult experiment but it will be quite
1:43:46 a tangent but generally speaking
1:43:50 99 of people will agree that it lands on
1:43:52 the same point just like you trust the
1:43:55 laws of physics just like you trust
1:43:56 newtonian physics
1:44:00 you trust that randomness doesn't exist
1:44:04 as as much as newtonian physics is true
1:44:07 as much as scientific physics is as much
1:44:10 as science is true
1:44:11 that's how true randomness doesn't exist
1:44:14 it's a it's equivalent they come hand in
1:44:16 hand randomness is a byproduct it's an
1:44:19 illusion of the mind it's another deity
1:44:22 it's another obstacle between you and
1:44:24 direct observation of allah me
1:44:27 personally have no i have no objection
1:44:29 to science at all i have no objection
1:44:31 even to evolution
1:44:33 at all and i i ask any muslim to bring
1:44:35 me what objections they actually have
1:44:37 except their their claim for randomness
1:44:41 the quran calls allah the selector when
1:44:44 when neil degrasse tyson tells me that
1:44:46 one bear had a genetic mutation
1:44:50 and that bear was born white
1:44:52 that whiteness of his helped him be
1:44:53 camouflaged in the arctic hence the
1:44:56 polar bear later on i'm giving you in a
1:44:58 nutshell his explanation hence the polar
1:45:00 bear had a hunting advantage because
1:45:02 he's white he's hiding in the snow and
1:45:03 therefore he thrived in nature in the in
1:45:06 the arctic areas that's how we went from
1:45:08 brown bear to white bear polar bear
1:45:12 he says it's a random mutation
1:45:16 that's that's his interpretation i'll
1:45:18 interpret the same facts i'll i will
1:45:21 notice the mutation i will say it's
1:45:23 purposeful allah selected that mutation
1:45:26 allah is the selector allah selects
1:45:28 which animal is mutated
1:45:31 for his benefit and which one is mutated
1:45:33 to die which one will thrive which one
1:45:35 will die and there's a wisdom between
1:45:36 both
1:45:38 his interpretation
1:45:40 is that it's a copying mistake
1:45:44 i tell i will tell you the question if
1:45:46 you believe in a blind process blind
1:45:48 processes don't make mistakes
1:45:52 that's a human interpretation you would
1:45:54 say look it's supposed to be like this
1:45:56 like a human said you can't get an
1:45:58 ought from an is
1:46:00 it should have been it ought to have
1:46:01 been no no now you're talking you're
1:46:02 invoking god now
1:46:04 hume told atheists look be careful don't
1:46:06 say ut to be
1:46:08 it is this way don't take ut once you
1:46:11 say uh
1:46:11 you're you're bringing us in theology
1:46:14 you neil degrasse tyson saying look
1:46:16 it mutated it's a mistake that actually
1:46:19 turned out to be good
1:46:20 that's human interpretation
1:46:22 i don't see it as a mistake
1:46:24 i'm a hard determinist
1:46:27 if you're a hard determinist which is
1:46:29 the most hardcore sign the most hardcore
1:46:31 atheists are deterministic
1:46:32 in philosophy we say you either agree
1:46:34 with determinism or you don't understand
1:46:36 it
1:46:38 there is no alternate option it's not a
1:46:41 mistake it's not a muta it's not a
1:46:44 random mutation there's no randomness
1:46:45 this was the design of allah this is how
1:46:48 allah chose for it to be
1:46:50 you are projecting randomness you are
1:46:52 projecting the word mistake this is your
1:46:54 faulty interpretation
1:46:56 there are no random events and there are
1:46:58 no mistakes in the universe there are no
1:47:00 random events and there are no mistakes
1:47:02 now let me give you the death blow to
1:47:04 all
1:47:05 those who say
1:47:08 that there are random events
1:47:10 and that the world is just a cosmic
1:47:12 sneeze
1:47:14 i'm going to give you the death blow
1:47:15 right now okay
1:47:18 if you understand this argument you will
1:47:20 never believe
1:47:22 that we are a cosmic sneeze
1:47:28 this is i want to applaud thomas huxley
1:47:30 for coming also for also reaching this
1:47:32 conclusion an atheist is still atheist
1:47:34 today even though he says look it
1:47:35 doesn't make sense
1:47:37 what i'm saying doesn't but i he says he
1:47:39 pledges
1:47:40 he pledges to be an atheist for the rest
1:47:42 of his life
1:47:43 for whatever reason
1:47:44 he's never going to change his mind but
1:47:45 even he agrees that this doesn't make
1:47:47 sense
1:47:49 if it's true
1:47:53 that all there is
1:47:55 is
1:47:56 chaos
1:47:57 matter and chaos
1:47:59 random events
1:48:02 mishmash of bump things bumping into
1:48:05 each other
1:48:06 and by the law of big numbers we came to
1:48:08 be
1:48:11 just one universe after another being
1:48:12 created and so happened that we are in
1:48:14 the goldilocks zone and we
1:48:16 so happen to be in the perfect
1:48:17 environment and somehow you have to
1:48:19 grant them some some magic life happened
1:48:22 let's even give them one miracle
1:48:24 let's turn our eyes and say look we'll
1:48:25 even give you one miracle you went from
1:48:27 non-living to living we don't know how
1:48:30 biogenesis happened let's even give them
1:48:32 a miracle and not say that it's a
1:48:34 miracle let's turn the blind eye to the
1:48:35 miracle
1:48:37 let's say they went from paul 2.0 it's
1:48:40 the pinocchio story some magic fairy
1:48:41 came to paul 2.0 and granted him he's a
1:48:43 real man now he's a real boy he has that
1:48:46 thing and we'll turn the blind eye to
1:48:48 that miracle that we granted them things
1:48:50 are just chaos
1:48:52 well guess what
1:48:54 the processes in your mind would also be
1:48:57 random events
1:48:59 the mind is also
1:49:01 if you're telling me materialism is true
1:49:04 and chemistry is true the world is just
1:49:06 chemistry and physics
1:49:07 things bumping into each other around
1:49:09 them why are you having rational
1:49:11 thoughts
1:49:12 your rational thoughts and i love the
1:49:14 fact that thomas
1:49:15 accepts this
1:49:17 he accepts this and he admits to it
1:49:20 because it would mean that all my
1:49:22 thoughts are happening to me i'm not
1:49:24 having thoughts they're happening to me
1:49:27 just like i was born i didn't choose to
1:49:28 be born my parents met and they were
1:49:30 they were they were created by their
1:49:32 parents meeting and they were created by
1:49:34 some cosmic event some cosmic sneeze
1:49:36 it's all one giant random event after
1:49:38 another
1:49:40 but yet you have perfectly ordered
1:49:42 thoughts
1:49:44 you have logical conclusions all my
1:49:46 logical thinking why should i believe
1:49:47 these logical things it's just we're
1:49:49 just making noise
1:49:52 this is all our whole talk right now was
1:49:54 just cosmic noise
1:49:57 cosmic nonsense
1:50:00 all your objections and all your counter
1:50:01 arguments is just
1:50:03 gibber jabber
1:50:05 it destroys the
1:50:07 integrity and reliability of the
1:50:09 scientific method of the law of
1:50:11 non-contradiction of logic of
1:50:13 self-defeating it it completely subverts
1:50:16 everything if you go down that
1:50:17 materialist path for the reasons you've
1:50:19 eloquently outlined exactly it's
1:50:21 self-defeating yeah you've used reason
1:50:24 to say that reason is untrue
1:50:27 and again our fit that says this can't
1:50:28 be the case
1:50:30 yeah our god given we reject this this
1:50:32 is this is
1:50:33 this is a this is the wrong path we have
1:50:35 a fitra within us
1:50:37 and even the atheists have a fitrah and
1:50:39 they follow the fitra when i ask them
1:50:41 why do you believe in law of
1:50:42 non-contradiction he can't explain he
1:50:44 believes it
1:50:45 this is an innate belief
1:50:48 and look at all those who believe who
1:50:50 follow this innate belief that's who put
1:50:53 that's who created medicine engineering
1:50:56 who created all the the good in the
1:50:58 world we had to accept these innate
1:50:59 beliefs
1:51:02 we had to accept these innate beliefs
1:51:03 these gifts from god
1:51:06 we know them directly we see a
1:51:08 contradiction and we reject it
1:51:11 but it's an innate inner experience now
1:51:13 if you tell me that's from a random
1:51:14 event that means everything i'm saying
1:51:16 or doing is jibber jabber it's all a
1:51:20 cosmic
1:51:21 sneeze it's all just
1:51:24 nonsense but we're having a direct
1:51:26 experience
1:51:28 that is true that things are true and
1:51:30 not true we're having a direct
1:51:32 experience you there's no interpreter
1:51:34 between us
1:51:36 and this experience of uh truth this
1:51:39 innate experience of truth there is no
1:51:41 interpreter i think so
1:51:45 i was just going to say that the the
1:51:46 radical skepticism that the atheist
1:51:49 uh focuses
1:51:50 uh on on theism the belief in god
1:51:54 is actually not extended consistently
1:51:56 across the board if he applied his
1:51:57 radical skepticism um to
1:52:00 rationality to science itself to logic
1:52:03 and so on which he doesn't do
1:52:05 it would as you say it would destroy
1:52:07 everything so
1:52:08 the kind of radical skepticism from
1:52:09 atheism is highly selective it's
1:52:12 targeted in one particular area it's not
1:52:14 consistently applied as a methodology as
1:52:17 an epistemology which it should be if it
1:52:19 was a principle
1:52:21 across the board because it would it
1:52:22 would be as you have just said
1:52:24 self-defeating the their their almost
1:52:27 religious or their religious faith in
1:52:29 science would be destroyed and that's
1:52:31 what science atheists believe in science
1:52:33 like some kind of god
1:52:35 to give them all the answers to life the
1:52:37 universe and everything but that would
1:52:38 be fatally undermined if they were to
1:52:41 apply their skepticism across the board
1:52:44 which they don't so that there's an
1:52:46 inconsistency there which uh speaks of
1:52:49 its um incoherence that it's not a
1:52:51 coherent worldview i would suggest
1:52:55 i i totally agree and the thing is you
1:52:56 know science is
1:52:59 it's the new power of the day
1:53:02 science is very influential why because
1:53:03 it's pragmatic it puts a roof over our
1:53:05 head
1:53:06 it puts our enemies in the grave
1:53:08 and it puts
1:53:09 it puts all it gives us the resource
1:53:11 science is great because it's efficient
1:53:13 it it helped us survive and thrive
1:53:17 so they love the dunya so much
1:53:19 they'd say give me more of that they're
1:53:21 not lovers of truth
1:53:23 if they were lovers of truth paul they
1:53:26 would cross-examine science they just
1:53:28 want to just give me that thing that
1:53:30 puts money in my bank account and a roof
1:53:31 over my head and food in my belly
1:53:34 give me that thing that's all it's a
1:53:36 power grab that's why allah tells them
1:53:37 he criticized them you love the dunya
1:53:40 you love the dunya scientists love the
1:53:41 dunya more
1:53:43 more than anybody else
1:53:45 and then they claim oh we love truth no
1:53:47 no if you love truth you would have
1:53:48 become a philosopher you would have
1:53:50 asked hey tell me where did science come
1:53:52 from what are these why is science the
1:53:54 way that you would have asked these
1:53:55 questions
1:53:57 you would have graduated to mystic
1:54:00 you would have had a religious
1:54:01 experience because ultimate truth paul
1:54:03 if you continue you go beyond science
1:54:05 you go beyond logic and you reach the
1:54:06 highest of highs
1:54:09 the highest of highs you reach the veil
1:54:11 of allah you reach the veil of allah you
1:54:13 don't reach allah you reach the veil of
1:54:15 allah you reach the
1:54:18 the
1:54:18 the sign of allah that put allah put a
1:54:20 sign in all of us
1:54:24 allah gave us
1:54:25 a window
1:54:29 allah gave us a window
1:54:31 into direct experience
1:54:33 of
1:54:34 himself if you love truth so much you
1:54:37 climb all the way and you climb that's
1:54:39 why
1:54:40 it's such a beautiful statement it's
1:54:42 negating it negated everything it
1:54:44 doubted every step of the way it reached
1:54:46 all the way to the highest where now
1:54:48 you're in a point of awareness and this
1:54:49 point of awareness encompasses
1:54:51 everything now you can bring back all
1:54:53 the other logics because all the other
1:54:55 logics depend on this secretly remember
1:54:57 we said the law of non-contradiction
1:54:58 it's known innately the science is known
1:55:01 it's the faith that the future will
1:55:02 behave like the past you have an
1:55:04 unbelievable faith that tomorrow the sun
1:55:05 will rise if tomorrow i told you the sun
1:55:07 wouldn't rise you wouldn't believe me in
1:55:09 the least
1:55:11 your faith in this the fact that the sun
1:55:12 will rise tomorrow is so strong allah
1:55:14 you contemplate on that how do you think
1:55:16 you know that i put within you a trust
1:55:20 that if something happens over and over
1:55:21 again you develop a security and a peace
1:55:26 you don't live in a random world where
1:55:27 random things happen
1:55:29 you live in an ordered world
1:55:31 and that calmed you and you know it
1:55:32 innately and you trust paul you you have
1:55:35 no logical reason to believe that the
1:55:36 sun rises tomorrow hume the atheist
1:55:38 wrote a whole a whole essay on this
1:55:40 saying i have no good reason to believe
1:55:42 that the sun rises tomorrow i have no
1:55:44 good logical reason i'm doing it on
1:55:46 animal faith
1:55:49 but yet you you're so certain that
1:55:51 tomorrow you're going to see the sun
1:55:52 rise again that's how certain you should
1:55:54 be in your fitrah
1:55:56 and you only know this because of your
1:55:58 fitrah
1:56:00 not because of your
1:56:01 your deductive powers
1:56:06 you know philosophers we say when you
1:56:07 flip a coin the odds of it landing on
1:56:09 heads is one out of infinity
1:56:12 now when i flip a coin and i put it on
1:56:14 heads tails heads tails i do it 100
1:56:17 times 50 times on tails 50 times on 100.
1:56:19 now you have an experience with with
1:56:22 flipping coins you start to say hey you
1:56:24 know what it can only land on one side
1:56:25 or the
1:56:26 other your your reasoning backwards
1:56:30 however if i erase your your memory
1:56:32 about
1:56:33 flying objects being thrown in the air
1:56:36 and you're seeing a coin being flipped
1:56:37 for the first time
1:56:40 and now i flip the coin it turns to a
1:56:41 butterfly
1:56:43 and i flip another coin turn so every
1:56:44 time and now you see a coin being
1:56:46 flipped it turned into a butterfly you
1:56:48 could it's not an impossibility this is
1:56:50 what we call in philosophy possible
1:56:52 worlds there could be a world out there
1:56:54 that every time you flip a coin turns
1:56:55 into a butterfly and we would have
1:56:56 reason
1:56:57 of course butterflies comes from flipped
1:56:59 coins that's exactly how we know
1:57:02 the dunya
1:57:03 it now i'm giving you a pretty wild
1:57:05 example but we know that dunya
1:57:08 says you see a cotton ball touch a flame
1:57:10 and then you see combustion we didn't
1:57:12 deduce logically combustion we had to
1:57:14 see cotton ball flame combustion we
1:57:17 repeat it cotton ball flame combustion
1:57:20 the first time a human being touched a
1:57:21 flame he burned himself
1:57:24 he knew now fire burns
1:57:26 before that he didn't know he could not
1:57:28 have deduced it logically it's
1:57:30 impossible believe me i can tell you
1:57:32 take this to the bank i'm a i've been
1:57:34 studying epistemology for 20 years i
1:57:36 don't care if you're aristotle and
1:57:37 einstein or what you cannot deduce that
1:57:40 fire burns
1:57:42 until you've burned yourself you know we
1:57:44 say our kid's never going to learn until
1:57:45 he touches the hot pot he'll never
1:57:46 believe us
1:57:50 it's not deducible rationally
1:57:56 but unless you're relying on someone
1:57:57 else's experience and history of being
1:58:00 burned by fire which is it's just the
1:58:02 same thing but extend it to another
1:58:03 person i have to have faith that he's
1:58:04 telling me the truth exactly it's always
1:58:07 based on experience
1:58:09 now the dunya is perfectly ordered
1:58:13 the world is perfectly ordered things
1:58:15 happen in a cycle allah tells you in the
1:58:17 quran all the time look at the cycle the
1:58:19 the earth the grass dies the rain comes
1:58:22 it rains and the earth the grass revives
1:58:24 again
1:58:25 like that i'm going to bring you back to
1:58:26 life
1:58:27 the cycle
1:58:29 notice the cycles in nature
1:58:31 why are you so different why do you
1:58:32 think when you die you're not going to
1:58:34 cycle back to us why
1:58:36 you what you came from the dust you're
1:58:37 going to go back into the desk you think
1:58:39 you're not going to cycle again all
1:58:41 these cycles are happening around you
1:58:45 of life and death
1:58:47 the water all the the whole world is a
1:58:49 cycle after another you see a whole egg
1:58:52 and then you see a scrambled egg and you
1:58:53 ate breakfast and then tomorrow you have
1:58:55 another egg
1:58:56 and this cycle of eggs from whole to
1:58:58 scramble from whole to scramble
1:59:01 you're seeing cycles all around you
1:59:03 every which way
1:59:05 but yet you think that the atheist that
1:59:07 tells oh when you die it's ultimate end
1:59:08 what a foolish thing to say how do you
1:59:10 know
1:59:11 what a universe
1:59:13 a universe in maximum entropy when the
1:59:15 universe is completely destroyed
1:59:18 how do you know what maximum entropy
1:59:20 does to a universe you've never observed
1:59:23 a universe in maximum entropy
1:59:26 when the universe reaches maximum
1:59:28 entropy whatever that may be
1:59:32 how do you know it doesn't start all
1:59:33 over again
1:59:35 you don't know you're hoping it doesn't
1:59:37 start all over again
1:59:39 guys like
1:59:40 famous i don't even want to mention
1:59:42 their name i don't want to make them
1:59:42 more popular in there but atheists when
1:59:44 they say that oh we believe that when we
1:59:46 die it's all over
1:59:49 you're wishing it's all over why because
1:59:52 they love the dunya they want to have
1:59:53 this dunya and not worry about the
1:59:55 consequences
1:59:58 there are leading philosophers i think
2:00:00 it's thomas nakel as a
2:00:02 professor of philosophy uh has said on
2:00:04 record that he he doesn't want god to
2:00:07 exist
2:00:08 uh for his own personal reasons he's
2:00:10 actually desires that the non-existence
2:00:13 of god uh and there are other atheists
2:00:15 have said the same that these are not
2:00:16 people who reach this conclusion through
2:00:18 abstract reasoning they have a profound
2:00:20 need and desire
2:00:22 for god not to exist and they choose not
2:00:24 to believe in his existence
2:00:26 um for their own personal reasons um
2:00:30 moral reasons or other reasons so um and
2:00:33 this is often not not understood that
2:00:35 many atheists actually don't want god to
2:00:37 exist
2:00:38 uh because it will be inconvenient it
2:00:39 would
2:00:40 uh entail moral obligations they don't
2:00:42 want to undertake and so on so it's a a
2:00:46 motivated atheism based on desire rather
2:00:49 than
2:00:49 a more objective
2:00:51 view they want to be the center of
2:00:53 attention when you're an atheist you're
2:00:55 you're the center of your own universe
2:00:57 when you're a theist allah is the center
2:00:59 of the existence yes
2:01:02 it's a type of selfishness
2:01:06 i always tell people the quran tells us
2:01:08 you choose hell allah casts you in hell
2:01:10 yes but you chose hell
2:01:12 you chose to be separated from allah and
2:01:14 being separated from allah is the
2:01:16 greatest hell
2:01:17 if i separated you from your loved ones
2:01:19 you'd think that's hell you're wrong
2:01:21 wait till we separate you from allah
2:01:23 then you will know from what's hell then
2:01:25 you will know what hell is because if
2:01:27 you think being separated from your
2:01:28 loved ones is difficult wait
2:01:30 wait until allah he removes from you all
2:01:32 his mercy
2:01:34 this is the narrative of the quran
2:01:37 allah is the center of our attention
2:01:40 they make atheists want to make
2:01:41 themselves
2:01:43 the pharaoh made himself the center of
2:01:45 attention
2:01:48 so there are theological truths also we
2:01:50 didn't touch on that okay but there are
2:01:51 things the quran is telling you there
2:01:53 are theological truths and you can be
2:01:55 certain of those via your intuition
2:01:58 the story of noah you know
2:02:01 will tell you look it's literally true i
2:02:02 agree with it it's literally true but
2:02:04 there are also
2:02:05 theological truths that we can verify
2:02:08 the historical truth i take it on faith
2:02:11 i'm not even interested in go out
2:02:13 archaeology and try to figure it out i'm
2:02:14 not even interested in that i don't
2:02:15 think it's maybe i don't have the powers
2:02:17 of abduction i don't think even all of
2:02:19 humanity can figure it out we don't know
2:02:21 what happened in the past i think there
2:02:22 are many things we assumed that happened
2:02:23 in the past but we're actually wrong and
2:02:25 you know we're gonna have another
2:02:26 scientific revolution like we've had
2:02:27 many
2:02:30 and lo and behold i'm going to be
2:02:31 surprised like the rest of us
2:02:33 i don't have such a high regard for
2:02:35 human intellect i think human intellect
2:02:37 is great it's a valiant pursuit but i
2:02:39 don't trust even my own logic
2:02:42 aristotle and plato they didn't agree
2:02:45 schopenhauer and heisenberg they didn't
2:02:47 agree
2:02:48 einstein didn't agree
2:02:50 that isaac newton's time is an arrow in
2:02:52 one direction he didn't agree if he did
2:02:54 if he didn't disagree if he didn't
2:02:55 challenge isaac newton he would have
2:02:57 never discovered the relative year of
2:02:59 time theory of relativity
2:03:01 we experts don't agree do you trust your
2:03:04 math if you had this long complicated
2:03:06 mathematical problem would you wouldn't
2:03:08 you want your your ass your your
2:03:10 fellow mathematicians to cross-examine
2:03:12 you check my math you know you can make
2:03:15 errors in logic i don't trust my logic i
2:03:17 don't trust i don't trust my own
2:03:19 intellect
2:03:21 i believe that my intellect i'm not a
2:03:22 perfect logician
2:03:25 i'd have to be god to be a perfect
2:03:26 logician i try my best to reason
2:03:30 but ultimately
2:03:32 i have the answer
2:03:34 i have a cheat sheet i was all of us are
2:03:36 blessed with the answer it's innate
2:03:39 your innate intuition cannot be wrong it
2:03:42 cannot be wrong like for instance if you
2:03:45 stub your toe you're walking into a dark
2:03:46 room and you stub your toe you don't
2:03:47 know if you stubbed it on the chair the
2:03:49 library the i don't know whatever
2:03:51 furniture you have uh your a child's toy
2:03:54 whatever but you know you're in pain
2:03:57 that's a direct experience see the quran
2:03:59 says
2:04:00 allah when he cast you in hell says here
2:04:02 is for what you used to deny now you
2:04:03 cannot deny pain
2:04:05 then pain is direct
2:04:08 no philosopher ever burned himself and
2:04:10 said hmm
2:04:11 is pain real no we never ask that
2:04:13 question
2:04:14 we ask every question but we never
2:04:17 question direct experience
2:04:21 philosophers we even question does one
2:04:23 plus one really equal two you know we
2:04:25 actually have these discussions and it
2:04:27 might sound like we're crazy we maybe we
2:04:29 may be crazy
2:04:31 we doubt everything
2:04:33 but when we burn ourselves with fire we
2:04:35 don't say oh maybe i didn't feel pain
2:04:37 and it was an illusion no no no no
2:04:39 this is the ultimate truth that's why
2:04:41 hell and heaven are the ultimate
2:04:43 hell and paradise are the ultimate
2:04:45 truths
2:04:48 this is direct it this it's no illusion
2:04:51 we see the world backwards we see people
2:04:54 say oh god good and evil that's all
2:04:55 metaphor no wrong
2:04:57 allah is literal and we are the metaphor
2:05:01 we are the metaphor we are the ones who
2:05:03 are part concept
2:05:06 like we were talking about earlier about
2:05:08 the divine what is a knife you know if
2:05:10 you read the 40 books of plato it's a
2:05:11 lot of it is what is the essence of
2:05:13 something and we can never find what the
2:05:14 essence of anything is what is the
2:05:16 essence of a cup we never really grasp
2:05:19 it it's all this metaphor
2:05:21 it's always something so elusive
2:05:25 yet there is this one thing we have all
2:05:26 innate experiences this fitra
2:05:29 this direct experience
2:05:31 that cannot be denied it cannot be
2:05:33 interpreted and everybody loves to take
2:05:35 it and mix it with something else that's
2:05:36 what the quran is constantly telling you
2:05:38 do not partner allah with anything
2:05:42 and that that by the way is the problem
2:05:44 with a lot of atheists i've spoken to
2:05:45 and read about is that they assume
2:05:48 so much
2:05:50 uh as as given as objective they assume
2:05:52 for example that solipsism is false so
2:05:54 they're not just
2:05:55 their own individual unique
2:05:56 consciousness and everyone else's
2:05:58 illusion they they assume the existence
2:05:59 of an external world they assume the
2:06:01 existence uh the reliability of reason
2:06:04 as i say they assume the existence of i
2:06:07 can go online a whole list of things
2:06:08 which they
2:06:09 they assume itself evidently are just
2:06:13 true
2:06:14 and then from that they launch their
2:06:16 attack and i'm saying but you you
2:06:18 haven't established that
2:06:21 minds independent
2:06:23 minds independently of your own even
2:06:25 exist you have not given me proof that
2:06:27 the external world exists you've not
2:06:30 shown me why reason must necessarily be
2:06:33 true and accurate when it is working but
2:06:35 all these things are just
2:06:36 um taken as self-evident and axiomatic
2:06:40 and then from that they move and i'm
2:06:42 saying so you can't assume all this for
2:06:44 the reasons you said earlier on you you
2:06:47 you you basically this is um
2:06:49 you're asking for an epistemological
2:06:51 blank check here you could write
2:06:52 whatever you want on it and although you
2:06:54 haven't thought about that uh but now
2:06:57 we'll move on you know i've just given
2:06:59 you all this wealth and we'll just
2:07:00 pretend that it's just naturally there
2:07:03 and you haven't just been given it free
2:07:05 of charge we'll just assume all that
2:07:07 thank you and now we'll talk about i
2:07:08 think excuse me you know you got all
2:07:10 this well because it was given to you
2:07:13 um
2:07:14 don't just assume it argue for it and
2:07:16 you can't actually argue for it mr
2:07:18 atheist you can't demonstrate it at all
2:07:21 you are acting as you have said very
2:07:23 eloquently before
2:07:24 you are acting on faith
2:07:27 you mr atheists are acting on faith that
2:07:30 all these things are real true objective
2:07:33 and solid in some form
2:07:36 and then you argue but i'm sorry you
2:07:38 can't do that in philosophy you've got
2:07:40 to be able to at least
2:07:42 exhibit and be explicit about your
2:07:43 assumptions you can't just smuggle them
2:07:45 in
2:07:46 and say right now i'm here let's go to
2:07:49 business no you can't do that that's not
2:07:50 how philosophy works you've got to
2:07:53 uncover your assumptions you need to be
2:07:55 aware of them
2:07:56 and not just smuggle them in and then
2:07:58 start from that because there are no
2:08:00 self-evident truths you've got to argue
2:08:02 for them and account for them and not
2:08:05 just take them for granted and that's
2:08:06 what atheism does except in one area
2:08:08 where it focuses its firepower on the
2:08:10 existence of god and i'm saying well
2:08:12 again as i've already said that's not
2:08:13 consistent not consistent at all
2:08:16 they accept certain presuppositions yeah
2:08:18 not others yes the mystic has killed
2:08:21 every peace opposition
2:08:24 none no presupposition is allowed here
2:08:26 paul
2:08:29 no presupposition
2:08:31 like i told you earlier i don't say any
2:08:33 more material or mind i say
2:08:37 seen and unseen
2:08:42 the quran it says in an ayat nur it says
2:08:45 the light of allah it's not from east or
2:08:47 west
2:08:50 it's not from east or west when you
2:08:52 reach this point of awareness
2:08:54 there is no east or west
2:08:56 east and west are nested in this
2:08:58 awareness
2:09:00 where is this point
2:09:02 of awareness there is no referential
2:09:04 point other than it
2:09:06 it's not east or west
2:09:09 the quran says the most beautiful things
2:09:12 when you interpret it in the light of
2:09:14 the fitra
2:09:15 the quran is speaking to your fitrah
2:09:18 to your intellect
2:09:20 and
2:09:21 to the worldly observation you have the
2:09:23 world of the senses yes
2:09:25 allah is talking to in even allah is
2:09:26 talking about history
2:09:28 and his and theological facts but these
2:09:31 are all these are all supported by your
2:09:33 fitrah and none of them
2:09:35 no not even your logic not your sign
2:09:37 none of them are outside of the fitrah
2:09:39 none of them the fitra supports them all
2:09:42 your belief in the law of
2:09:43 non-contradiction fitra your belief that
2:09:45 the future will behave like the past
2:09:46 fitra your belief in theological
2:09:49 theological uh understanding
2:09:52 you cannot escape it paul
2:09:55 if you've if you haven't killed every
2:09:57 presupposition
2:09:58 you have not had a direct experience
2:10:00 with this truth
2:10:02 that's a type of poverty
2:10:07 is where every when you're a muslim what
2:10:08 do we tell you to say first thing
2:10:12 Music
2:10:20 your tower now where do we start why do
2:10:22 we start with the shahada
2:10:25 before we even ask you to pray well you
2:10:26 have to do shahada first
2:10:29 it's the start
2:10:30 but you're giving me lip service even
2:10:32 paul 2.0 remember the robot we're
2:10:34 talking about
2:10:36 he can give lip service to shahadah but
2:10:39 does he understand the shahada he can
2:10:40 never understand it
2:10:43 he has no subjective experience he has
2:10:45 no inner
2:10:47 experience
2:10:50 allah says in the quran i made you from
2:10:52 dust and soon after behold you're human
2:10:56 what does this mean human you have to
2:10:57 ask yourself what does it mean i'm human
2:10:59 dust is not human
2:11:01 allah created you fashioned you you're
2:11:03 still not human
2:11:05 what is it about you paul that makes you
2:11:06 human allah's telling you if they don't
2:11:08 even reflect upon themselves the quran
2:11:10 is telling you they only see the
2:11:11 appearance of things
2:11:14 they only see the world as paul 2.0
2:11:16 everything is machinery
2:11:18 chemistry and physics
2:11:22 you know
2:11:23 one man said everything's so arrogant i
2:11:25 forget he's a famous atheist hitchens
2:11:26 nichols he says i don't have a body i am
2:11:29 a body
2:11:30 think about that for a second
2:11:32 i don't have a body he says because i
2:11:34 wouldn't tell there's something else to
2:11:35 me
2:11:37 says hitchens says i am a body
2:11:42 and i forget who said i think was john
2:11:44 lennox he said well how did you survive
2:11:46 your death because when you died there
2:11:48 your body's still there
2:11:51 all the components all the parts if i
2:11:53 told you hey your cars all the parts are
2:11:55 there
2:11:56 where is that thing now that's missing
2:11:58 that we say you're dead you've
2:11:59 transitioned
2:12:00 prop him up he used to move pop him up
2:12:02 move him around no he's not moving by
2:12:04 his own why not oh he's missing
2:12:06 electrical signals charge him up shock
2:12:08 him with electricity what's wrong with
2:12:11 it why is that body there but he's not
2:12:13 there
2:12:15 what is it about him that he went
2:12:16 through a transition
2:12:18 remember we said human beings are part
2:12:20 concept human beings are part metaphor
2:12:23 that lump of flesh was always going
2:12:26 through transition we are metaphor
2:12:28 razeri said it best
2:12:30 you know he says
2:12:32 only allah exists
2:12:35 we're not only monotheistic we're
2:12:36 mono-ism we are
2:12:38 meaning only allah exists in this
2:12:40 particular category
2:12:43 exists in this one way unique to
2:12:46 him me and you exist as
2:12:50 a shadow a metaphor
2:12:53 a concept
2:12:54 almost like a dreamer the characters in
2:12:57 his dream
2:13:00 the dreamer is not the same reality as
2:13:01 the characters of his higher reality the
2:13:04 dreamer depends on him the mind your
2:13:06 mind my mind
2:13:09 is a type of reflection
2:13:11 it doesn't belong to us
2:13:14 we are here to observe it you're having
2:13:16 a direct observation observation of
2:13:18 allah when you die paul that mind that
2:13:20 you're observing will still exist the
2:13:22 face of allah will always exist
2:13:24 it existed before and it will exist
2:13:25 after now i'm going to give you a
2:13:27 beautiful argument by by emanuel kant
2:13:30 oh yes
2:13:32 emmanuel kant says this he says look
2:13:34 this is a transcendental argument oh
2:13:36 yeah
2:13:37 he says
2:13:38 are there going to be squared circles
2:13:39 after you die paul
2:13:43 no no
2:13:45 there are there are truths out there
2:13:46 that existed before we before us and
2:13:48 after us
2:13:50 but these truths
2:13:53 these analytical truths that we talked
2:13:54 about earlier
2:13:56 they only exist via mind
2:13:58 but you admitted that they are
2:13:59 indestructible
2:14:01 plato agreed we all agree they're
2:14:03 indestructible
2:14:05 but they existed eternally so there's
2:14:07 this eternal mind kant says
2:14:10 remember we said allah started the
2:14:12 universe with b
2:14:15 b is a product of mind
2:14:20 allah is talking about the realm of the
2:14:22 mind
2:14:26 i write with a pen
2:14:28 i'm writing i'm putting these symbols
2:14:31 it's for a mental activity that i'm
2:14:33 expecting you to go through the word be
2:14:36 is a mental issue it's a mental process
2:14:40 i don't i don't like to say i don't
2:14:41 agree i don't necessarily
2:14:44 only say that we're the world is ideal i
2:14:46 say i like it i say look keep it seen
2:14:48 and unseen because we don't know we
2:14:50 can't say we don't have uh you know
2:14:52 something in the philosophy called the
2:14:53 egocentric predicament maybe we don't
2:14:55 get into it now because it's quite long
2:14:56 but we don't have direct experience with
2:14:58 the dunya we can't go outside our minds
2:14:59 to check to verify but
2:15:02 long story short all we're certain of
2:15:04 what we can be certain of is that
2:15:06 there's a seen world an observed world
2:15:08 and an unseen world this we can be
2:15:10 certain of because we're having direct
2:15:11 experience of it the muslim philosophers
2:15:14 they went beyond logic and they said
2:15:16 look we want to know what we have direct
2:15:18 experience of what we cannot be wrong
2:15:20 about
2:15:23 and we want to kill all presuppositions
2:15:24 that's why if you look at the
2:15:26 the
2:15:27 the greeks they only had one mystic i
2:15:29 would say parmenides was really the only
2:15:31 mystic maybe pythagoras also possibly
2:15:33 again we don't know 100 of their
2:15:35 philosophy is what they were
2:15:37 and the arab philosophers were great
2:15:39 mistakes all of them were mystics
2:15:42 the british empiricists
2:15:43 not really they flirted with it they got
2:15:45 close to it but they never became mystic
2:15:47 i think can't almost reach mysticism but
2:15:49 not quite i think even almost uh
2:15:51 schopenhauer
2:15:52 almost reached mysticism but didn't he
2:15:54 fault it at the end
2:15:56 and i think it had a lot to do with the
2:15:57 byproduct of their time because you have
2:15:58 to understand when the plague hit the
2:16:00 church and it killed the church it
2:16:01 weakened the church science rose they
2:16:03 didn't want to go back to religion
2:16:05 whereas the muslims religion and science
2:16:07 went hand in hand the stronger islam was
2:16:09 the stronger the religion was they had
2:16:10 the golden age together there was a
2:16:12 sentiment
2:16:14 of we have to
2:16:15 strip the power of the church so don't
2:16:17 give them any religious don't reach
2:16:19 mysticism you'll bring them back in
2:16:21 there's a you see the scientists in the
2:16:23 west they hate their religion they hate
2:16:25 the religion they came from even though
2:16:26 their fault their forefathers
2:16:28 isaac newton was incredibly religious
2:16:30 galileo was incredibly religious they
2:16:32 were they were mystics they were
2:16:33 mistakes isaac newton was a mistake
2:16:36 isaac newton on his deathbed rejected
2:16:37 the trinity
2:16:39 are you aware of this
2:16:41 oh he he spent most of his life writing
2:16:44 against it we now know this was uh
2:16:45 wasn't made public during his own
2:16:47 lifetime of course because he was
2:16:48 suffering severe consequences but uh
2:16:50 correct it's well documented now from
2:16:52 his private writings that he was
2:16:54 a passionate unitarian and
2:16:56 he had a particular horror of uh for him
2:16:59 of the trinity he thought it was a
2:17:00 terrible doctrine that was false to
2:17:03 jesus christ and so on that's a
2:17:05 different subject but yeah absolutely
2:17:06 right yeah but he he also
2:17:09 rejected the trinity he was but he was a
2:17:12 mystic as well i would say he was a
2:17:13 mistake
2:17:15 he in mysticism you could not have three
2:17:19 paul let me i want you to i want you to
2:17:20 explain to me the number ten
2:17:23 what is the number ten imagine i was a
2:17:24 child you didn't explain to me the
2:17:25 number 10. go ahead explain to me gosh
2:17:27 that's a good question um
2:17:29 i would basically count from one upwards
2:17:31 and say that no don't use the number one
2:17:33 please
2:17:35 you cannot use the number one maybe
2:17:36 you're gonna say it's five and five but
2:17:38 then i'm gonna ask you what's five
2:17:39 depending on how young which i was i
2:17:41 would basically get 10 objects out on
2:17:42 the floor say 10 um
2:17:44 toys or something and say this is what
2:17:46 10 look you know i'd give i'd make it
2:17:48 visual and
2:17:49 um you know quantifiable visually
2:17:53 but you'd need the one
2:17:54 hmm you cannot have the 10 without the
2:17:57 one no oh that's what you mean in that
2:17:58 sense no so you'd say look there's two
2:18:00 five and five makes ten but what's five
2:18:02 well five well five is five ones
2:18:07 what so what you have to fundamentally
2:18:08 you have to explain one
2:18:11 to explain 10 you first have to explain
2:18:12 one to explain 0.5 you have to explain
2:18:15 one
2:18:15 everything refers back to one
2:18:21 before you had two because two is one
2:18:24 and one
2:18:26 everything is trying to be
2:18:29 a copy everything is pointing back to
2:18:31 the one
2:18:33 every road leads back to god let me let
2:18:35 me just tell you something every road
2:18:38 whether it's math arithmetic science
2:18:40 history philosophy theology it all
2:18:42 reaches it all returns back
2:18:46 to the one
2:18:47 now even the pagans the talmud paganism
2:18:49 came first impossible
2:18:51 how could you have known of one or two
2:18:53 two three four gods if you didn't know
2:18:54 about god you took allah and you copied
2:18:57 him and you made a likeness you
2:18:58 partnered to him you started with one
2:19:00 you started with this nucleus you
2:19:02 started with this awareness we all
2:19:04 started from this one awareness and then
2:19:06 the contents of this one awareness we
2:19:09 made into multiple gods we added to it
2:19:11 we we increased from there
2:19:15 we didn't start from zero
2:19:17 we didn't start from non-existence
2:19:20 we started from one that's why he's
2:19:23 constantly saying he's one when allah
2:19:24 says he's one he's telling you i'm
2:19:25 literal
2:19:26 i'm literal remember everything that's
2:19:28 multiplicity you you paul are
2:19:30 a byproduct of many things
2:19:34 your body is made of all sorts of cells
2:19:36 that have changed over time you're the
2:19:37 ship of these remember the ship that
2:19:38 these in 99 parts you're a bunch of
2:19:40 parts that are changing morphing your
2:19:43 part concept part material
2:19:46 part scene and part unseen
2:19:48 allah is only one he's not in the
2:19:51 category of seen and unseen he's not
2:19:53 this juggling act this metaphor there's
2:19:55 no metaphor to allah he's only pure
2:19:59 truth he's objective he's actually
2:20:02 he's not only a objective thing there is
2:20:04 nothing else that is a directive other
2:20:05 things have levels of objectivity
2:20:08 there are no truly objective things
2:20:12 outside of allah
2:20:14 everything else has a level of
2:20:16 objectivity and subjectivity there are
2:20:18 always a mix remember berkeley's
2:20:19 triangle
2:20:21 they're always a mix of objectivity and
2:20:24 subjectivity
2:20:26 we never have perfect objectivity until
2:20:28 we kill every presupposition we kill
2:20:29 every paradigm and we're left with
2:20:31 a state of awareness a taste that we we
2:20:35 see
2:20:36 directly we've experienced directly and
2:20:38 this is what guess what paul that's a
2:20:40 religious experience
2:20:41 you're not having a logical experience
2:20:43 you're not having a scientific
2:20:44 experience you're not definitely not
2:20:46 having a historical experience
2:20:47 you're having a religious experience of
2:20:49 truth ultimately this thing we're always
2:20:51 looking for
2:20:54 this thing we keep talking about
2:20:57 this thing we talk about like it's right
2:20:58 here on the table but when we try to ask
2:21:00 you where is it you never find it
2:21:02 this thing is a religious experience
2:21:05 like it or not like it or not all
2:21:08 truth is a religious experience you
2:21:10 start with the shahada and you work your
2:21:11 way from there and then you get to
2:21:13 mathematics and then you get to logic
2:21:14 and then you get to science it all
2:21:16 starts with this religious experience
2:21:18 and that's what the quran is telling you
2:21:19 if they don't reflect upon themselves
2:21:21 you think this and that is true and this
2:21:22 and that is good you didn't even start
2:21:25 you didn't even reflect upon yourself
2:21:29 you first had a religious experience of
2:21:31 truth and then you exported and deduced
2:21:33 it into the world
2:21:38 and the ultimate expression of this
2:21:41 is sujud
2:21:44 the head now is lower than the heart not
2:21:46 the lump of flesh as ghozali says
2:21:49 but you know what i'm saying
2:21:50 i was given the answer my intellect
2:21:52 couldn't reach you my intellect couldn't
2:21:54 encompass you it can point you it could
2:21:55 not encompass you
2:21:58 it's the ultimate
2:22:00 it's the ultimate expression of this and
2:22:03 lo and behold it's in the bible
2:22:05 even jesus makes suju even abraham does
2:22:08 moses they all did it
2:22:10 it's the ultimate expression
2:22:12 you cannot do any other express there's
2:22:14 no other way to physically enact it
2:22:19 so when somebody is in prayer of allah
2:22:21 you know when i teach people prayer i
2:22:23 always ask them when i teach them what's
2:22:25 the difference between you and that rock
2:22:27 well oh there's this yeah this is when
2:22:29 you when you pray pray from here like
2:22:31 this is where it is because he tries to
2:22:33 point to it as well he talks about not
2:22:35 that lump of flesh but that thing that
2:22:37 beetle in the box that we all know but
2:22:39 we can't do
2:22:42 allah is not the thing you see
2:22:44 allah gives you the sin he gave you this
2:22:46 awareness and it's in the quran tells
2:22:47 you reflect upon your hearing and seeing
2:22:49 the the faculties you have
2:22:52 the thing that paul 2.0 the robot we
2:22:55 made a while back he'll never have
2:22:58 he will never have even
2:23:00 uh
2:23:01 thomas huxley he admits
2:23:03 he says it's the same as if i rub a lap
2:23:05 and a genie comes out this is not my
2:23:06 words these are not my words okay
2:23:09 this is a man who's
2:23:11 they call him the
2:23:13 darwin's bulldog right he's defender of
2:23:14 darwin
2:23:17 so um you know i mean in a nutshell this
2:23:20 is it
2:23:21 in a nutshell very good no well thank
2:23:23 you very much indeed uh for that
2:23:25 extraordinary um
2:23:27 um
2:23:29 philosophy narrative it was a discussion
2:23:32 um i won't i won't attempt to summarize
2:23:34 it because there was there were so many
2:23:35 nuggets of
2:23:36 um
2:23:37 truth in that uh for us to reflect on
2:23:40 and um i like the way you brought it
2:23:41 back to the quran constantly i think
2:23:43 that's a great thing to do
2:23:45 um
2:23:46 and well like i say just thank you very
2:23:48 much indeed for your um your thoughts
2:23:50 and reflections
2:23:52 and your philosophical acumen and
2:23:54 knowledge
2:23:55 um which um many people many of us
2:23:58 myself including can benefit to to hear
2:24:00 and
2:24:01 learn from so um thank you very much
2:24:03 indeed for your time
2:24:05 thank you and i want to say look i know
2:24:06 i didn't give a formal speech on the
2:24:08 different theories of truth and this is
2:24:09 uh what is truth but i wanted to give
2:24:11 something more
2:24:13 tangible for people who are not formally
2:24:15 trained in logic
2:24:17 i find that philosophy can be intriguing
2:24:20 and
2:24:21 and it can strike the heart if done
2:24:23 correctly
2:24:24 yes but
2:24:26 logicians they like to formalize it
2:24:29 and ibn arubi says look they're teaching
2:24:31 it it's like a a dead man teaching a
2:24:34 dead man
2:24:35 you're learning your knowledge
2:24:38 as nuts and bolts
2:24:41 as
2:24:43 but knowledge doesn't start from here
2:24:45 knowledge starts from direct experience
2:24:48 that's why knowledge starts with the
2:24:49 religious experience
2:24:52 you're having a religious experience
2:24:54 the analogy we give about the robot he's
2:24:56 not having a religious experience it's
2:24:57 if then if this then that
2:25:01 that's not human
2:25:03 when you pray when you read quran
2:25:05 remember from this point this is where
2:25:07 you have to approach the quran from this
2:25:09 point this is a gift
2:25:11 this is a gift that each human being has
2:25:14 not some human beings each human being
2:25:17 and inshallah the muslims i i hope that
2:25:20 they will take this
2:25:21 and continue and don't be like other
2:25:24 groups
2:25:26 who deny
2:25:27 logic reason and science
2:25:29 gazari says we have to harmonize the
2:25:31 natural sciences and islam not reject
2:25:33 either or and yes science can be
2:25:36 transient it is transient it can't
2:25:38 change over time but we're always trying
2:25:40 to harmonize them we're never rejecting
2:25:42 it never and if there is a if there is
2:25:44 an issue
2:25:46 you know i i don't want to get too much
2:25:48 into what hazel says because i know i
2:25:49 get a lot of friction but
2:25:50 there is a way sooner or later it's
2:25:52 going to be harmonized
2:25:54 if there ever is an issue
2:25:56 and it's up to
2:25:57 it's up to us raising our thinking our
2:26:00 level of thinking
2:26:02 muslims have to raise their level of
2:26:03 thinking we're coming in an age where
2:26:05 information is being spread so fast
2:26:08 you can no longer just
2:26:11 read not understand and prop no no no
2:26:14 you must understand muslims out there i
2:26:16 beg you
2:26:18 raise your level of understanding
2:26:20 the problem is not the world around us
2:26:22 the problem is us
2:26:24 our understanding is weak i've met very
2:26:27 few muslims that understand
2:26:29 the concepts in the quran
2:26:31 i've met very few muslims that
2:26:33 understand even the the most
2:26:36 very important and some are trying yes
2:26:38 but it's time for the muslims to
2:26:41 go and hyper drive i hope this chat i
2:26:44 hope this episode was a good
2:26:46 starting point but there's not if you're
2:26:49 if you're a true believer there's
2:26:50 nothing you're scared to read or learn
2:26:52 or cross-examine
2:26:54 because
2:26:55 now you have certainty me i'm telling
2:26:57 you there's nothing tomorrow and science
2:26:59 that's going to be discovered that's
2:26:59 going to shake my faith there is nothing
2:27:02 paul when i go to the grave
2:27:06 i i don't believe in allah i know allah
2:27:10 there is nothing that's gonna scare me
2:27:14 i fear allah yes i fear to go in the
2:27:16 grave because i fear that i've done too
2:27:17 many i've done more bad than good this i
2:27:19 fear yes
2:27:21 but i don't doubt allah in any way i
2:27:23 fear allah but i don't doubt him in any
2:27:24 way once you get to this level you will
2:27:26 never worry about what some scientist
2:27:28 said
2:27:31 you will never worry about doc yeah when
2:27:33 i read dawkins i laugh
2:27:35 to me he's he's he's
2:27:37 i'm his arguments are childish and
2:27:40 moronic
2:27:42 bring me his greatest defender whoever
2:27:44 has mastered his arguments bring them
2:27:46 they're weak childish and moronic i'll
2:27:48 even use the word moronic literally am i
2:27:50 trying to attack the man
2:27:53 his arguments are diff and weak yet he
2:27:56 sells millions of books why because
2:27:58 people want a permission to be atheist
2:28:00 it's time for muslims to go to the next
2:28:02 level
2:28:03 there is no excuse
2:28:06 and
2:28:07 once you understand the fitra there is
2:28:09 no argument in the world that will shake
2:28:11 you no argument
2:28:13 inshallah this is a
2:28:16 a good starting point for a video
2:28:18 inshallah it'll uh
2:28:20 it'll inspire others to
2:28:22 you know
2:28:24 okay well i think we'll leave it there
2:28:26 but thank you uh so much indeed for your
2:28:29 time and um
2:28:30 um i hope uh people can leave their
2:28:32 comments in the description below and um
2:28:34 follow this discussion up but um
2:28:36 uh i'm not gonna say summarize anything
2:28:39 you said because it was so rich and
2:28:40 detailed uh um but um just thank you
2:28:43 finally again very much for your time
2:28:45 and um
2:28:47 uh and thank you all right until until
2:28:49 next time