liberalism: White Colonialist's New Religion (2018-10-12) #

0:00:00 to come to the state to deliver his
0:00:02 lecture intellectual doubts about Islam
0:00:05 Marco logic Salam aleikum wa rahmatullah
0:00:27 our heads you know in the West we're
0:00:34 asked a lot of questions as Muslims were
0:00:37 asked many questions regularly pressing
0:00:41 important questions and these questions
0:00:44 usually have something to do with what I
0:00:49 refer to as post enlightenment ideas and
0:00:53 it's connection with Islam so don't give
0:00:56 an example someone will ask why is it
0:01:01 that in Islam for example Muslims get
0:01:05 offended when a picture is drawn of the
0:01:09 Prophet Muhammad isn't this freedom of
0:01:12 expression and freedom of speech and why
0:01:17 are Muslims in this regard against
0:01:20 freedom of expression and freedom of
0:01:23 speech isn't Islam therefore the
0:01:27 argument goes a backwards religion that
0:01:31 needs to be reformed do we not need to
0:01:35 have a reform within Islam because
0:01:37 actually you'll find that Islam has
0:01:41 aspects of it which are against
0:01:43 enlightenment values against liberalism
0:01:47 against freedom of expression against
0:01:51 freedom of speech our thing is these are
0:01:55 very important questions to be asked but
0:02:00 what Muslims need to do and what
0:02:03 Westerners also need to do is they need
0:02:06 to question the question I has a point
0:02:11 every question has a presupposition what
0:02:15 is a presupposition it is an assumption
0:02:18 it is an assumption obviously with these
0:02:22 questions some Muslims they go
0:02:26 immediately on the backfoot
0:02:29 immediately there on the back foot and
0:02:32 just like the Western colonial powers
0:02:39 came into our grandfathers Nations and
0:02:45 attempted to force them to believe in
0:02:47 what they believe in
0:02:49 militarily now the post-colonial Western
0:02:58 masters are doing so using different
0:03:01 techniques and there are different
0:03:04 responses from Muslims and others some
0:03:07 will literally bow at the knee they will
0:03:10 literally bow at the knee surrender give
0:03:14 up yes you're right sir there is a
0:03:17 problem we need to fix it we need to
0:03:19 have revivalism in Islam we need to have
0:03:21 reform we need to clean it up you're
0:03:24 right
0:03:25 some will say we must reject this
0:03:29 completely there is this is a poison a
0:03:31 poisonous ideology and we must remove it
0:03:35 and what we're going to be doing in
0:03:37 charla in the next three days it will be
0:03:41 arguing that the question itself is
0:03:45 problematic all the questions that are
0:03:48 asked are problematic questions so the
0:03:50 first day I'm going to be dealing with
0:03:51 liberalism I know it's on the third day
0:03:53 on your pamphlet but I'm gonna do it
0:03:55 first in Chara I'm gonna be dealing with
0:03:57 questions which deal with liberal
0:03:59 presuppositions the second day we're
0:04:03 going to be dealing with democracy which
0:04:04 is very important and the third day
0:04:07 we're going to be dealing with feminism
0:04:12 and that's why I did on the third day
0:04:13 because if anything happens I can just
0:04:15 go I'm going back to London anyways
0:04:24 today inshallah I'll be talking about
0:04:27 liberalism and by the way I've written
0:04:29 an article on this and I'm planning to
0:04:31 write an article on all three lectures
0:04:34 so I'll be writing written an article
0:04:36 liberalism will be published on it
0:04:38 should be online on Monday Anza Lambda
0:04:40 org dot uk' salaam and inshallah we'll
0:04:43 put the description somewhere so if you
0:04:45 want to do further reading you can do
0:04:46 that there
0:04:47 and moreover there'll be an article
0:04:50 written on each of the topics that I'll
0:04:52 be covering today as well now let's get
0:04:55 straight into it today I'm just gonna go
0:04:59 into three different things I'm going to
0:05:01 do three things today in Charlotte the
0:05:02 first thing is I'm going to give you a
0:05:04 brief history of liberalism a brief
0:05:07 history so you understand what it is
0:05:08 number two we're going to be talking
0:05:11 about the premises of liberalism the
0:05:15 first principles of liberalism where do
0:05:18 we start with liberalism and number
0:05:21 three we'll be talking about the
0:05:22 implications of this on Islam and
0:05:25 Muslims and the discourse between Islam
0:05:28 and Muslims in the Western context
0:05:30 especially so we'll start you see all of
0:05:36 these slogans that you've you're very
0:05:38 well aware of freedom of expression
0:05:40 freedom of speech they're extensions of
0:05:43 the liberal philosophical framework okay
0:05:45 so if someone is asking you a question
0:05:49 that presupposes liberalism like these
0:05:54 questions the question would be this
0:05:57 what if your ideology is baseless wait a
0:06:03 minute
0:06:04 say that one more time okay what if your
0:06:09 ideology is baseless what if there is no
0:06:14 way to prove the very beginnings or the
0:06:19 very starting points the very premises
0:06:21 of liberalism therefore the question
0:06:24 becomes obsolete
0:06:25 why does Islam why do Muslims get upset
0:06:29 with the drawing of the Prophet Muhammad
0:06:30 why not
0:06:31 could be the easy answer well it needs
0:06:34 to be in line with liberalism and well
0:06:36 if we can demonstrate that liberalism is
0:06:41 in fact based on what you call
0:06:44 corrigible presuppositions meaning they
0:06:48 are capable of reform or improvement
0:06:53 then there is no need to ask the
0:06:55 question because you're asking me a
0:06:57 question based on baseless foundations
0:07:00 so let's start with the brief history of
0:07:03 liberalism you see there was a man
0:07:07 called John Locke very famous man he's
0:07:12 actually one of the most influential
0:07:14 people who ever lived in my opinion he
0:07:16 died in 1704 he wrote many books one of
0:07:20 the most famous or if not the most
0:07:21 famous one hero is a book called the two
0:07:22 treatises of government and in this book
0:07:25 he argued the case for a social contract
0:07:27 he said we are all born equal we are all
0:07:31 born free interesting Locke John Locke
0:07:34 believed in God in fact he believes in
0:07:36 one God he was a Unitarian who's a
0:07:38 nonconformist Christine didn't believe
0:07:40 in the Trinity but he based much of his
0:07:43 philosophy on God and that's why a lot
0:07:49 of the governments of his day Britain
0:07:52 France and of course the United States
0:07:55 of America they incorporated literally
0:07:58 what he said in that the two treatises
0:08:01 of government into the for example the
0:08:05 US Declaration of Independence the Bill
0:08:08 of Rights in the in the United Kingdom
0:08:10 which was written in 1688 his words
0:08:14 which is one of the most important
0:08:17 documents and all of British history
0:08:19 it's called the Bill of Rights and of
0:08:22 course the u.s. Declaration of
0:08:23 Independence one of the most important
0:08:25 documents in all of American government
0:08:28 and politics so for example
0:08:35 the famous phrase that we hold these
0:08:38 truths to be self-evident that all men
0:08:41 are created equal and that they have on
0:08:47 any unalienable rights of life liberty
0:08:50 and the pursuit of happiness this is the
0:08:53 US Declaration of Independence it's
0:08:54 taken from or slightly adjusted it's
0:08:58 taken from John Locke so a lot of these
0:09:00 ideas human beings being born free
0:09:03 freedom etc is taken from directly from
0:09:06 John Locke and the thing is about John
0:09:09 Locke is that he believed in God and if
0:09:13 you look at the wording of what he said
0:09:15 in the two treatises of government he
0:09:17 justified that for example human beings
0:09:20 are born equal and that they are born
0:09:22 free because he said that they were
0:09:24 endowed by the creator and this is part
0:09:27 of the US declaration independence they
0:09:29 were given this by God they were given
0:09:33 freedom and equality by God he had two
0:09:38 or three principles that he believed in
0:09:40 one was a theological belief so he
0:09:43 believed that all human beings were
0:09:45 endowed equality by God they were given
0:09:50 equality and freedoms by God but he also
0:09:53 believed he also believed in something
0:09:56 called the hedonistic principle and this
0:09:59 will be a very important point which I
0:10:01 want you to really pay attention to the
0:10:03 hedonistic principle is the idea that
0:10:06 the ultimate morality is pain and
0:10:09 pleasure
0:10:11 so what's ultimately good is what feels
0:10:14 good or what is pleasurable or desirable
0:10:17 to you this would be the cornerstone of
0:10:20 liberal moral philosophy it's called the
0:10:23 hedonistic principle so after John Locke
0:10:28 came about and he had such an influence
0:10:31 because of the English Civil War which
0:10:33 took place in 1642 to 1651 where the
0:10:37 Royalists and the parliamentarians were
0:10:40 attacking each other
0:10:41 Parliament reconstituted itself using a
0:10:45 lot of the Lockean principles sold in
0:10:48 and so did the US and France and these
0:10:51 countries they took these liberal
0:10:53 principles and then they became very
0:10:54 normative it became the norm now anyone
0:10:58 who speaks against the liberal
0:11:00 principles is AB is speaking in
0:11:04 aberration to the social and cultural
0:11:07 norms of the West that must must be
0:11:10 understood after John Locke you had many
0:11:12 different philosophers that came and
0:11:14 advanced his theory like Montesquieu or
0:11:16 Rousseau or for example Tocqueville who
0:11:20 wrote democracy and America which will
0:11:22 cover tomorrow and others and these
0:11:27 individuals just expanded the theory
0:11:29 most notably I was our I would argue is
0:11:32 John Stuart Mill who came in the
0:11:35 Victorian era and he talked about the
0:11:37 harm principle so about two you know
0:11:40 hundred two hundred years later this man
0:11:41 came John Stuart Mill and he advanced he
0:11:44 said yes he left the whole theological
0:11:48 discussion he didn't say that we were
0:11:50 born equal a free he took yes he
0:11:52 believed that we were born equal but he
0:11:53 didn't say it's from God some say he was
0:11:56 agnostic even he didn't believe me maybe
0:11:57 didn't believe in God the law Allen God
0:11:59 knows best if you believed in God or not
0:12:00 yeah but here's a problem this is a very
0:12:05 big problem for liberals if initially my
0:12:09 question first question if initially the
0:12:12 justification for human beings being
0:12:15 born equal and free was based on
0:12:18 theology ie God how could a succession
0:12:24 of philosophers inherit the same belief
0:12:27 system without basing upon the same
0:12:29 principle in other words John Stuart
0:12:32 Mill yes he said we believe that we were
0:12:35 born equal that were born free but he
0:12:36 didn't say anything about God so the
0:12:38 question would be how can you prove that
0:12:39 were born equal or that we were born
0:12:42 free this is a very important question
0:12:44 and what do you mean when you say who
0:12:47 are born equal or we were born free even
0:12:50 John Stuart Locke John Mill sorry does
0:12:52 John Locke himself said this is not in
0:12:55 all cases the Creator might decide that
0:12:58 we are not born you're born equal for
0:12:59 example so what do we mean well we're
0:13:01 not born
0:13:02 what do we mean with Zbornak we are not
0:13:05 born equal if we look at it on the face
0:13:07 of it because really some of us are born
0:13:08 in impoverished places some of us are
0:13:11 born in very you know bad places rich
0:13:13 places poor places some of us are born
0:13:15 with disabilities some of us are born as
0:13:17 men woman black why this that where is
0:13:21 the Equality is differences all I see is
0:13:23 inequalities everywhere so what do we
0:13:25 mean by equality so someone will come
0:13:27 and say actually we mean equality of
0:13:29 opportunity and some others will say no
0:13:30 equality of outcome well they've had to
0:13:33 adjust that because they realized the
0:13:35 fallacious nature of just saying that we
0:13:38 were born equal what does it mean what
0:13:41 do we actually mean what do we mean by
0:13:42 we were born free almost all
0:13:45 philosophers agree that everything is
0:13:49 determined even atheist philosophers
0:13:51 believe this that is determined by
0:13:53 genetics and environment so what is free
0:13:55 freedom what do you mean explain so
0:13:58 already it sounds nice what they say but
0:14:00 it has no real evidence base John Stuart
0:14:03 Mill did try and prove something called
0:14:05 utilitarianism utilitarianism is the
0:14:08 idea it's really the has a mystic
0:14:10 principle so you pleasure for you but
0:14:13 pleasure for them for the for the
0:14:15 largest amount of people the great is
0:14:17 good for the greatest number so it's
0:14:20 going back to what's pleasurable for you
0:14:23 and this became really the most
0:14:26 normative way of describing liberalism
0:14:27 the most normative way of describing
0:14:30 liberalism is through the hedonistic
0:14:32 principle all the extension of that
0:14:34 which is utilitarianism and then he put
0:14:36 into it the harm principle so he says
0:14:38 that you can do whatever you want so
0:14:40 long as you don't harm anyone else do
0:14:42 whatever you want isn't this what you
0:14:43 hear okay or why is homosexuality not a
0:14:47 problem in society because we are
0:14:50 liberals and we believe you can do
0:14:52 whatever you want that makes you feel
0:14:54 good so long as you don't harm someone
0:14:58 else this is John Stuart Mill basically
0:15:01 that's where he got it from
0:15:02 that's where society accepted it from he
0:15:07 had a part of his book he's got a book
0:15:09 called on utilitarianism and a part of
0:15:11 it is proving utilitarianism he actually
0:15:13 puts this as as the
0:15:15 they're heading he says proving
0:15:17 utilitarianism and you know this is the
0:15:20 one of the most attacked segments in all
0:15:23 of philosophy circular reasoning
0:15:26 everyone's attacking him saying what
0:15:28 you're talking about he said and you can
0:15:30 read the article for more information
0:15:31 but basically he had a circular
0:15:33 reasoning in his approach to try and
0:15:35 prove utilitarianism therefore almost
0:15:38 all serious liberal thinkers are of the
0:15:43 opinion that there is no way of proving
0:15:46 hedonism utilitarianism so the first
0:15:49 principles of liberalism are corrigible
0:15:53 now what does that mean if the first
0:15:56 principles of liberalism are not fixed
0:16:00 objective absolute or true one more time
0:16:04 okay the first principles of liberalism
0:16:09 are not fixed they are not objective
0:16:12 they are not absolute and they are not
0:16:15 true if the foundations of something is
0:16:22 shaky then that thing itself will be
0:16:25 shaky therefore John Stuart Mill who
0:16:33 expanded freedom of expression in his
0:16:36 book on liberalism and others like him
0:16:38 it's not just simple ten others many
0:16:40 many philosophers freedom of expression
0:16:41 freedom of speech freedom to this
0:16:43 freedom of that they all based it on
0:16:45 corrigible baseless foundations can you
0:16:50 imagine and the Muslim in the West is
0:16:56 compelled to answer the question what
0:16:58 what question on a moral philosophical
0:17:01 basis your question has no basis proved
0:17:04 to me liberalism is true that's what you
0:17:06 should say to him why is it that Muslims
0:17:09 they don't believe that drawing a
0:17:11 cartoon of their prophet isn't this a
0:17:13 hindrance of freedom of speech yes it is
0:17:15 proved to me why liberalism is true
0:17:18 that's the answer
0:17:20 proof to me that liberalism is true well
0:17:25 Muslims if they leave the religion this
0:17:28 and
0:17:28 and apostasy and whatever okay no
0:17:30 problem prove to me that liberalism is
0:17:32 true your question is based on a liberal
0:17:35 presupposition your presupposition is is
0:17:37 based on first principles which are
0:17:40 courage of or baseless or otherwise
0:17:42 faulty therefore your question
0:17:45 carries no epistemic weight don't ask me
0:17:48 the question let me ask you the question
0:17:49 proof to me that liberalism is true from
0:17:53 first principles from the premises is
0:17:55 there only true because you had a
0:17:59 succession of wars by Western European
0:18:03 countries that decided to go eastward
0:18:06 and westward and spread liberalism by
0:18:08 the sword and put liberalism in every
0:18:12 crevice of our society and because
0:18:15 because white people have decided that's
0:18:17 true we must believe it's true in some
0:18:20 and some societies is it true because
0:18:25 even though you had liberals who
0:18:29 believed in freedom they colonized the
0:18:32 people going against what they believe
0:18:33 in and they enslaved others in the
0:18:36 triangular slave trade for hundreds of
0:18:39 years and it's only true when when it
0:18:42 benefits the white man is that the kind
0:18:46 of liberalism you want to bring back
0:18:47 what kind of liberalism is it what
0:18:49 you're talking about
0:18:50 proof to me that liberalism is true
0:18:52 simple as that you know let me tell you
0:18:55 something most of the questions will lie
0:19:01 that we receive about Muslims having
0:19:06 shaky faith or Muslims on their way out
0:19:11 of Islam or people not coming into Islam
0:19:15 because there is some kind of barrier to
0:19:16 entry to Islam is based on a doubt that
0:19:21 they have because of a question that was
0:19:23 posed which has a presupposition of a
0:19:26 Western enlightenment philosophy and
0:19:28 liberalism is number one on the list so
0:19:31 if we can show that liberalism is not
0:19:33 true or it cannot be proven to be true
0:19:36 therefore the doubt is unjustified you
0:19:41 should doubt what you're saying the
0:19:42 question you're asking about that don't
0:19:45 doubt the answer of the question
0:19:48 the truth is Muslims have become overly
0:19:51 apologetic yes and do it you're bowing
0:19:55 at the knee you're bowing at the knee so
0:20:01 here I want you to really think about
0:20:04 something you know in ancient societies
0:20:12 like for example the ancient Greeks the
0:20:14 ancient Greeks they had mythology
0:20:19 mythologies defined in two ways primary
0:20:21 ways in the dictionary one of them is
0:20:25 one of the ways of defining mythology is
0:20:27 like a story or some kind of tradition
0:20:29 which is not really it's fictitious it's
0:20:31 not real but which helps bring forward a
0:20:34 kind of moral another way of defining
0:20:36 mythology is something which is false
0:20:38 something which is not true so let's put
0:20:41 ourselves on a time machine go back to
0:20:43 the ancient Greeks they believed in gods
0:20:45 different gods Athena
0:20:47 Zeus Hercules you know you've heard of
0:20:49 these gods yes you've heard of these
0:20:51 gods and they believed in those gods
0:20:55 without real justification no one proved
0:20:57 to them the existence or the worthiness
0:20:59 or of Athena or Zeus or Hercules they
0:21:02 believed in those got no problem no
0:21:04 argument there is no cosmological
0:21:06 argument equivalent for Athena there
0:21:08 isn't so they believed in those gods and
0:21:11 they believed in those things
0:21:14 axiomatically as it were they lived a
0:21:18 life it was part of their culture they
0:21:20 were you know they were absorbing all of
0:21:22 those things and then for example to
0:21:27 give you an example when it came to the
0:21:29 introduction of Christianity if you look
0:21:31 at Christianity and when it was
0:21:34 introduced to the Roman Empire you'll
0:21:36 see I mean this is all over the
0:21:37 historical works there was now synthesis
0:21:40 the syncretic model you know
0:21:42 Christianity amalgamated with those old
0:21:45 gods of the Greeks why because it was so
0:21:48 deeply entrenched into their psyches and
0:21:50 psychologies that they could not
0:21:52 separate themselves from these false
0:21:53 gods
0:21:54 they couldn't I wanna ask a question
0:22:01 what is the real epistemic difference
0:22:05 between an ancient Westerner who
0:22:11 believes in Zeus because his forefathers
0:22:15 believed in Zeus without any evidence
0:22:19 without any reasoning actual logical
0:22:23 deduction induction abduction or
0:22:25 everyone what is the real difference
0:22:27 between that individual and the
0:22:30 Westerner who is born into a liberal
0:22:33 household who believes in liberalism
0:22:35 axiomatically without any justification
0:22:38 what's the difference something it's the
0:22:40 only difference that one has a religious
0:22:42 connotation and the other one doesn't
0:22:43 because that is one of the only
0:22:45 differences I can seem to think about in
0:22:48 terms of epistemology very similar the
0:22:51 Western man three thousand years ago has
0:22:54 not changed much from the Western man
0:22:56 today they're very similar individuals
0:23:00 so now the question is why should we
0:23:04 have why should we absorb this nonsense
0:23:07 as it were really why should we respond
0:23:10 to this nonsense it's better to show the
0:23:15 baselessness of it and subhanAllah I was
0:23:19 once reading the book of Jeremy Bentham
0:23:22 who is one of the seniors of John Stuart
0:23:24 Mill he knew his dad James mill anyways
0:23:28 he wrote a book called utilitarianism
0:23:30 and he believed in the great is good for
0:23:31 the greatest number and he basically put
0:23:33 this I remember reading this he
0:23:35 literally said you have two Lords you
0:23:39 have two laws one of them is the Lord of
0:23:42 pleasure and the other one is the Lord
0:23:44 of pain this is what to be honest with
0:23:49 you a lot of the Western world is now
0:23:50 the premise of the you know the Western
0:23:53 philosophy of liberalism the Quran says
0:23:56 our for our item Anita father Allah who
0:23:58 who I have you seen the one who takes
0:24:01 his desires as his Lord Allah Akbar have
0:24:06 you seen the one
0:24:08 who takes his desires as his god we see
0:24:16 them well lie we see them but you must
0:24:19 be aware of them because they will they
0:24:22 will wrap their ideology in the garment
0:24:24 of rationality so that they can push it
0:24:28 to you yes this is rationality your
0:24:30 religion is again what do you mean it's
0:24:32 rationality proof Tamizh rationality
0:24:33 prove it prove it do you think we're
0:24:39 going to be just like the people of old
0:24:42 we're going to absorb the mythologies
0:24:44 and the legends of the white man just
0:24:47 because he has the bigger gun and the
0:24:50 greats of social influence no no this is
0:24:54 not the way of critical inquiry this is
0:24:57 not the way of critical inquiry and so
0:25:04 when someone asks now are you against
0:25:06 freedom of speech are you against
0:25:08 freedom of expression we say we're not
0:25:10 against freedom of speech in as much as
0:25:14 it is not against Islam the Quran
0:25:18 prohibits certain speech no doubt for
0:25:21 example Allah says in the Quran about
0:25:24 their parents what a thoughtful Lahoma
0:25:25 off well I turned her home and don't say
0:25:28 to your parents off since this is a
0:25:31 censorship you're not allowed to insult
0:25:33 your parents in Islam it's a kind of
0:25:35 restriction well that's a bullet in here
0:25:38 down I mean doing it lying behind well
0:25:41 at the Cibola DNA at the owner don't
0:25:44 curse the ones who they they worship
0:25:50 other than God
0:25:51 fire soup Allahu either one behind the
0:25:53 island that they may come back and curse
0:25:55 Allah without any knowledge so we're not
0:25:58 even allowed to we have censorship
0:26:00 self-censorship in Islam we're not
0:26:02 allowed to curse the gods of other
0:26:03 religions we're not allowed there's lots
0:26:06 of things we're not allowed to do of
0:26:07 course we're not allowed to is blasphemy
0:26:09 to the highest degree to talk about any
0:26:11 of the prophets and we're not going to
0:26:13 apologize for that or allow you to do
0:26:16 that without without any resistance just
0:26:18 because you have a different paradigm to
0:26:20 us yes we believe in
0:26:21 of speech and yes you believe in freedom
0:26:23 of speech in fear especially but you
0:26:24 have not proven to us from first
0:26:26 principles that they are something which
0:26:27 is which is rational rationalize able
0:26:30 intelligible coherent consistent true so
0:26:35 therefore we don't want to accept it I
0:26:37 have the freedom of speech to say I
0:26:39 don't agree with all the freedom of
0:26:40 speech and I have logical rational and
0:26:44 philosophical reasons not to but you
0:26:50 find people now protecting freedom of
0:26:52 speech or line in a religious way let
0:26:55 him say whatever he wants let them do
0:26:58 whatever they want this that kids going
0:27:02 to school and almost all schools in
0:27:05 Europe vine or the racism is not allowed
0:27:07 so they don't allow it on an
0:27:09 institutional level but they allow it on
0:27:11 a public one is it contradictions
0:27:13 everywhere even they know public freedom
0:27:15 of speech is limited they've limited for
0:27:18 example sexual imagery of children they
0:27:21 know it's there's certain things you
0:27:22 cannot do and you cannot say it's
0:27:24 against morality a poison gas if I had
0:27:28 their ingredients for a poison gas that
0:27:30 you know if I put put it online everyone
0:27:32 can make a poison gas you know would
0:27:36 this be published it would be an allowed
0:27:37 this allowed for it to be published how
0:27:39 to make a bomb I can't just make a
0:27:41 YouTube video how to make a bomb from
0:27:44 raw materials because if I did I'd be
0:27:45 arrested and why is that because it
0:27:49 endangers the people there's lots of
0:27:52 examples of limited of where we
0:27:57 shouldn't have so anyways they know this
0:27:58 from societal experience but we're
0:28:00 saying is even deeper than that
0:28:01 it's from first principles so here the
0:28:05 point we're trying to say is as Muslims
0:28:07 we have an epistemic way of
0:28:09 rationalizing our religion simply Allah
0:28:11 knows best Allah who we can prove
0:28:16 through predisposition we believe every
0:28:19 man being is born with the fetlock with
0:28:22 a predisposition to believe in God and
0:28:25 there is evidence to suggest this and
0:28:26 also rationalize ibly fine-tuning
0:28:28 argument cosmological are all these
0:28:30 arguments you can rationalize it you can
0:28:33 rationalize Allah you can rationalize
0:28:35 and therefore if you believe in Allah he
0:28:38 is the all knowing he's the all-powerful
0:28:40 he's the most wise his injunctions must
0:28:43 be all perfect
0:28:45 therefore the failures of philosophers
0:28:48 and men cannot be equated and should not
0:28:53 be equated with with with a lot words
0:28:59 what he says the injunctions he put
0:29:01 forward the real truth is this the
0:29:04 people who are afraid of these questions
0:29:06 have not internalized let Allah and
0:29:07 Allah strong enough
0:29:08 well I a lot of them have not they don't
0:29:12 believe fully enough the more you
0:29:13 believe in Allah and the messenger the
0:29:16 less you will have any of these
0:29:17 questions why this and you feel old
0:29:20 doubt oh you know my heart I come I'm
0:29:23 gonna leave Islam you know how many
0:29:24 times I get messages I'm glad I had a
0:29:26 message very recently someone I'm gonna
0:29:28 leave Islam why because of this and this
0:29:31 all of the questions they had what to do
0:29:34 with these things that we've talked
0:29:36 about we've been talking about you've
0:29:39 been indoctrinated guys somehow laughs
0:29:41 we've been indoctrinated we've been
0:29:45 conditioned we've been brainwashed to
0:29:48 believe in the mythologies of the
0:29:50 Western man can you imagine this can you
0:29:56 imagine this and so what I want to bring
0:30:01 forward to you guys is another point
0:30:02 which is really important look at these
0:30:05 Scandinavian countries look at the
0:30:08 Western world in general look at the
0:30:09 European world look at it has liberalism
0:30:13 worked for them they are the most
0:30:14 depressed people well lie there is a
0:30:18 positive correlation as with where
0:30:20 liberalism and atheism is present in a
0:30:22 country and the rates of suicides go and
0:30:24 look at the whu-oh World Health
0:30:26 Organization they're more liberalism is
0:30:29 present in a country the more people
0:30:31 want to kill themselves from depression
0:30:34 another study that was conducted by the
0:30:37 w-h-o and the Forbes magazine they said
0:30:41 the 20 most depressed countries in the
0:30:43 world and they realized that 19 of 20 of
0:30:46 them are liberal Western countries
0:30:49 there is a failure of liberalism and a
0:30:51 failure of the American dream because
0:30:52 there is no meaning attached to people's
0:30:54 lives anymore people are acting beasts
0:30:56 ele people are acting as per their whims
0:30:59 and desires and they are not recognizing
0:31:02 the true purpose of life that's why
0:31:03 Islam alike it's an illuminating light
0:31:05 to those individuals who want to step
0:31:08 away from the darkness of
0:31:10 self-indulgence and an undisciplined
0:31:13 life and into the light of meaning and
0:31:17 purpose and Islam gives you a rational
0:31:21 and spiritual reason to be so here what
0:31:27 we should do is we should not accept the
0:31:32 sanctimonious ramblings of the West the
0:31:36 archetype of the archetypal
0:31:39 post-colonial Western irrigator
0:31:42 who decides that his truth is the truth
0:31:45 this is a post enlightenment dogma as
0:31:48 Karl Marx once remarked regarding these
0:31:51 things supposed to like him and dogma
0:31:53 that they're trying to shove down your
0:31:54 throat in all it always possible but
0:31:57 there is no way they can prove it they
0:32:00 will never try and prove it they will
0:32:02 just axiomatically throw it at you you
0:32:04 should believe it no we will not believe
0:32:06 it
0:32:06 will believe it to the extent to which
0:32:09 it agrees with Islam Allah says not for
0:32:11 unlike Rahim for example there's no
0:32:13 compulsion in religion
0:32:14 come on share a failure at me no I'm not
0:32:16 sure I fell yet for whoever wants to
0:32:19 come believe whoever wants to can this
0:32:20 belief although some scholars say this
0:32:22 is steady then to know you Allah is
0:32:25 telling you to believe but this steadied
0:32:26 if you want to disbelieve Allah will
0:32:27 punish you by the way but yeah we don't
0:32:33 force the people to become Muslim and we
0:32:35 believe in freedom of speech in as much
0:32:38 as it helps someone's inquiry to truth
0:32:42 ask whatever you want so long as you're
0:32:48 sincerely questing the truth as for
0:32:51 those individuals who are trying to use
0:32:55 freedom of speech to cause injury and
0:32:58 insult to individuals we don't believe
0:33:00 in that
0:33:00 how about that we don't believe in that
0:33:02 whether it be to Muslims or non-muslims
0:33:04 whether you be cursing someone's mother
0:33:06 or cursing someone's God we don't
0:33:08 believe in that we would censor
0:33:09 ourselves from this and we will say to
0:33:11 the Western world
0:33:12 listen it's high time you realize that
0:33:15 your ideology has not been working out
0:33:18 for you either on an individual
0:33:19 psychological level or on a societal
0:33:23 level and it's time for you to really
0:33:26 quest and ask for the purpose of life
0:33:29 and that is knowing who Allah subhana WA
0:33:32 tell you who your Creator is where you
0:33:33 came from who you are where you're going
0:33:35 if you know this firmly then you will be
0:33:39 able to insha Allah insha Allah make
0:33:43 something out of your life I've got one
0:33:47 minute and 52 seconds left I'm going to
0:33:49 end here and in that time maybe she can
0:33:52 ask some questions