Video

The worst part about characterizing al-Ghazali as anti-science and anti-mathematics is he even states, in no uncertain terms, at the *start* of Tahafut al-Falasifah that he isn't opposed to science, logic, or math. This isn't hidden in some obscure corner of the text, it's literally at the start. He goes so far as to say that trying to shake someone's faith in undeniable scientific fact is more likely to shake their faith in religion than it is in science. On the question of eclipses being caused by religious prostration and revelation rather than astronomical (scientific) causes, he states: "If you tell a man, who has studied these things [scientific theories] - so that he has sifted all the data relating to them, and is, therefore, in a position to forecast when a lunar or a solar eclipse will take place: whether it will be total or partial; and how long it will last - that these things are contrary to religion, your assertion will shake his faith in religion, not in these things." I would have liked to hear more about al-Ghazali's weaknesses as a philosopher. I agree with most of his refutations of Neoplatonic and Aristotelian philosophical doctrines, but he does seem to, at least occasionally, be unreasonably uncharitable in his criticisms. It seems like you got into this to some degree in your Ibn Rushd video, though I think Ibn Rushd's rebuttals on the points brought up in that video aren't particularly compelling in Ibn Rushd's favor. A lot of al-Ghazali's critiques seem overly narrow at times too. Even if you disprove the exact position held by a certain philosopher, there are often ways you can reword or modify that position to defend against the criticism. On that front, I might be more sympathetic to Ibn Rushd's more general characterization of al-Ghazali. al-Ghazali's view on executing his philosophical opponents has also always stood out to me as particularly bad.

Al-Gazali is real culprit for making Muslim backward. He was against the science and mathematics. He believed every-thing is done by angels. He told that when we burn the piece of cotton by fire then, the fire does not burn it but angel do so. He told that science discovered rules/laws of nature but these rules and laws of nature cannot be relied on and cannot predict predictable scientific result because every time Allah keeps on destroying and recreating whole universe continuously so how can the laws of nature predict predictable result hence science is useless according to him because science heavily use the laws of nature to predicts the scientific results. In nutshell, According to Al-Gazali, if someone shoot the arrow properly at the target then it cannot be predicated by law of nature discovered by science because each time whole universe is getting destroyed and recreated. I mean how stupid this idea is which he gave to entire Muslim world, that according to him, if someone drop the stone from the height then you cannot predict whether stone will fall or not, if it will stay hanging up in the air, or it will start going up. His stupid views are widely accepted by Muslim clergies, scholars so at the end blind follower masses of common Muslim also believed it that was resulted in the lost of curiosity, scientific research. Muslim stopped paying interest in mathematics. These things kept Muslim away from scientific development and at the end we find Muslim backward in modern and post modern world.

Are you sure that person in the painting is Ibn Rushd and not Avicenna ?

I don't know that he successfully reconciled faith and reason, in light of his statement that "the doors to Islamic ijtihad (interpretation) are closed". It is a fact that the Golden Age of Islam came to a close around this time. It can be argued that al-Ghazali did his part to make that happen.

How many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Philosophy without science is just a figment of the imagination.

All of this was stated thousands of years earlier in various representations of The Dharma.

This is a beautiful video and a fitting testament to the legacy of Ibn Rushd

The fatal problem with metaphysics, of any kind, is that its truly unknowable. At best its a higly educated/logical guess. At worst its just mental masturbation. Especially when it tries to divorce itself from empirical evidence.

He is from Farab, Turkmenistan, our professor used to say in 1970's.

He wrote nothing. Deowned in the unreal prrofless nothing and put ambiguity stopped the developement. Trash.

Sorry to disappoint the viewers, but the information in this documentary is almost, if not totally wrong ! Abu Hanifa's father was a great carpet trader, when he died his two sons inherited, each one, half of his business. Abu Hanifa was a good for nothing guy who lost everything except that his father gave him a good education. At that time reading & writing was considered a blessing. He roamed in the streets of Kufa and spending his time in mosques, thus taking notes from the scholars' lectures ! That's why they say that he had had a 1000 teachers. It was too hard for him to memorize his notes, that's why he opted for Raai (analogy). And analogy in Islam is REJECTED, because Iblees was the first to use Raai ! Seeing his punctuality in the mosque and interest in religion, he was offered the post of imam in a mosque. The news went in the ears of the king who subsequently sent his minister with a gift to gauge his personality, because the Abbassid kings were afraid of Ehlul Bait PBUT & their followers, lest they would be overthrown. The minister didn't find Abu Hanifa worthy of consideration, he returned with the gift to the king. The king thought to himself, if the minister found Abu Hanifa a worthless guy, therefore he can be manipulated! He sent back the minister with the gift, on receiving the gift he immediately issued a fatwa of kufr against whoever goes against the king !!! Thereon he became famous thoughout Kufa. At the same time Imam Ja'far Al Sadiq PBUH was the Imam in Madina and there wasn't a problem which the Imam couldn't solve ! All the Muslims use to gather around him for knowledge in both science & religion ! The popularity of the Imam was a threat to the king, Mansur, so he convoqued the Imam to Kufa. He organised a debate between the Imam and Abu Hanifa, unfortunately the debate turned to be catastrophic for Abu Hanifa who couldn't answer even one question out of 40 !!! During the Imam's stay in Kufa, Abu Hanifa used to visit Him frequently, thus calling himself Imam's student ! When leaving the Imam, he would criticize him and would issue fatwas against those of Imam;s. Imam CURSED him. Malik bin Anas, who was a student of Imam in Madina said : IT'S BETTER TO LEAVE THE COUNTRY WHERE ABU HANIFA'S FATWAS ARE FOLLOWED ! Many of his contemporary scholars and even Ibn Hanbal said : ABU HANIFA IS THE WORST CHILD TO BE BORN IN ISLAM ! According to Abu Hanifa IT IS PERMISSIBLE TO PERFORM NIKAH WITH MEHRAM, IF THE DUE IS PAID TO A PROSTITUTE IT'S LEGAL AND THERE'S NO HARM IN COMMITTING LAWAT (GAY ACTS) !!!??? He became 'imam e azam' just because he was protected by the Abbassid tyrants. To conclude I'd suggest that the reader undergoes investigation & research from different sources of information.

Its funny! The bandit gave him such great advise! And what does he do? He moves the knowledge from the books into a save space. The bandit pointed at a deeper truth. What if you forget it one day? If knowledge is the key then show me the lock.... I dont need knowledge. Everything i need to know i can witness everyday. But if my brain is full of thoughts and full of questions it simply cant meet the real problems. Why you search for a reason? Why you dont want to be here and now but search for meaning in the past or in the future? Why are you scared of death? A free mind meets problems, it does not create them.

Thanks!

Why did you butcher the pronunciation of Setara?

The intellectual proof of islam....opinion discarded.

Have fun. Its free for all

Too many cooks really do spoil the soup. Many have turned into armchair theorists with plenty many stories to tell.

Alias the Philosophers Stone.

Thank you for this video depicting the great scholar Abu Hanife. One correction however: the claim that hanafi school took mutawatir hadiths only is not correct. Hanafis benefited in their fatwas from saheeh, even sometimes weak hadiths. In hanafi usoul there are conditions to benefit from hadiths for ijtihad.

Super interesting work, thanks for the efforts!

This is why understanding Islam properly and deeply requires one to be broad minded and rational rather than narrowly literalistic. JazakAllah for these beautiful videos

he was a supporter of LAWAT... Lootee fail

chaos ker ker k deen ka hulia khrab ker dia is ne... aur Iman Sadiq k khilaf gai,,, what a shame...aur kufria aqaid rakhta tha ye abu hanifa... afsoos....

shame on you,,,,..very stupid man he was,,,, imam jafar asadiq ke mojodgee me is ko ke museebat paree thee,,, deen per kias kernat... Iam asadiq ne in ko kabee pasan nahe kia...

He's the reason why the golden age of islam was torn down and now becomes civilization of backwardness

If you do philosophy long enough you'll realise nothing we say is incredibly profound. Its all been said before. The difference is what resonates with you at a specific time. Like how different songs make you feel differently at different times of you life. The only people that were able to stake that claim were the men who were philosophising before the written word

Is all that is Iranian also Persian?

@9:08 ‘literal scripture as the authority’. I was opened-mind until that point. I’ll return to the philosophers.

Bane philosophy at your own perril.

Ibn ruschd was from the luwata tribe in cordoba an was of Berber origin. He wasnt arab, he was only shooled in arabic an spoke arabic. It doesent matter where he is from but i just wanted to mention it.

He was a real piece of sh!t. He's the reason why the Muslim world of today is as humiliated and backwards as it is today. When Ghazali's word became law because some people wanted to control the populace, many thinkers, scientists, and polytechnics such as Averroes (Ibn e Rushd), Avicenna (Ibn e Sina), Ibn e Firnas (Furnace), and many others were vilified, driven out, blinded, imprisoned, or worse! Muslims MUST come back to atheism and natural law. Reject religion and gel with Koran.

FACT : 99% of Arabs never heard or reed anything about this Man

This video... Is an experience... The narration, soothing and non-interrupting music, visual rendition... Beautiful!

i read that! loved it..

i am reading the revival... and imam alghazali writes his magnum opus in a sincere manner that attracks any student of knowledge that is suffering from both types of ignorance: simple ignorance & complex ignorance. you can sense from his harsh yet elequent tone that he is confirming his argument for you.

Could you make a video about Rumi, please? He is a fascinating poem writer and figure

A timeless God cannot know what time it is now. Al Ghazali is wrong here. If God knows what time it is now then he is in time and is therefore changing.

bla bla bla! Stopped after 4 min.. too much anecdotes, biographies and useless waffle, and no meat.. even a 14 year pupil would write a better and more insightful essay about Al ghazali and his great ideas

Great video, do you have any good resources to find further information on this thinker?

This was awful. Not only was it filled with inadequate explanations it would drive one away from Islam. The beauty of being a Muslim is the acceptance that I don't know everything (if anything) and that I am also more than likely wrong and unrecognizable to the prophet Muhammad pbuh

Subhanallah

Ibn sina would not have drank because he was a good Muslim as many sources say

"11th century" - ⛔ 'More than half a millennium before' - ✅ "CE" - ⛔ 'Of the Hijra' - ✅ "He thought x" - ⛔ Actual citations - ✅

You make some really weird slide choices.

Experience Meaningless: Experience and prejudice. To accept sight and illusion in the same relativity and not be a slave. Slavery: To be free from the growth of intellect. Experience free from understanding and memory as triviality. Memory: reduced down to recollection without review, in a universe of consistent physics; a triviality of organic invincibility. Experience rendered down to self-sensual recall without existential considerations; meaningless. Prejudice: to accept the delusion that no human can consider and choose. For experience to outweigh sense and sensible prudence and suggest in definite physicality that humanity is as inorganic as the constructs we purpose. Triviality to the concept of Slave, is Mass to Gravity, either one hypothetical without the physics of Trivialization or Mass. One requiring the circumstance of genesis, the other requiring absence of necessity; Nativitus Ancillae. Relativity: the universe revolves around you, but only if you watch with others; relativity born of tripartite geometry; self (observing), other (conferring), objective (occurring): co-intimate experience and co-context. Relativity: all things can happen to you, most didn't, you only know what you think, you only think what you can hypothesize, all understanding revolves around perception and interaction. Understanding and position; relative. Hypothesis: a proposition of a form unsensed in the physical, in the definition "scientific" it is the Fructus Ventris Physica Quantitatis; the guessable, potent in measurability, invisibilia ad carnalis, observationis codificationem. Hypothesis: a concept just beyond sensible observation but within sensory or facultative relativity to intimate comprehension; the space an observer feels safe to coniectura didicit doctrina. A cerebrum exercitium. Meaningless: the words of any personal exposition without the person. Interpretation of intended and intimate communication removed from its physical occurrence. To hypothesize in the spirit of Freud, all are I. Meaningless: a description of a building behind it's façade to a man on the street. Definition without sensible example; invisibility bestowed by the suggestibility of the potent potentiality of descriptionem alienum. Reference without experience, definition without context, experience without definition, definition without reference; to theorize on fancy, the possibilities of cause bereft of "scientific" prejudice towards provable. A description of the unseen to the comfortable in sense, and sensibility; hypothesis delivered socially by the perfecte mediocris to their perfecte mediocris aetatis. Interest and applause humilis, the sermo aequalis. Contemporary communication, external warehouse for internal deliberation. Deliberatio externa by contrast is built on extra-contemporary, the functional in sense and nerve unwilling to mal-hypothesize popularis prudentia. By definition a contemporary is both naturally occurring and actively intersecting, or it is a generational (illusory), built of temporal coincidence. Meaningless in contemporations intimate, capable of saying they share an age. The addict kind Lonliness is a myth spread by the ill, unwelled by popular delusion (self accepted). The sickly, pulsing out their (self) comforting radiance, the marking of a predators territory. A light to shine on all slow enough to not revile it for it's false and reason less eviction of self from capability. The prey; uninitiated youth, vulnerable innocence. Argue not with the aged (or experienced) self-convinced. The miracle of emotional conformation of physical fact convincing to the unknowing, under steady application, overly sweetened (for the self) ideals of pleasure and comfort, the prey forget they knew a peace that didn't requiring feeding or explanation. The virtue of falsely buoyed stability grinding the ignorant, young, and uncatered, all taken in by the sin of kindness as apex. To gift the sickness that tells a human "human emotion in the negative is unnecessary and beyond comprehension or tolerance". To know that there are those in the world of humanity, who in their generationally refined adherence to parasite coddling, will continue to teach the youth "drugs are a healthy and functional right of aware and intelligent people" is a mark of shame in this age of our collective development. The truth of human being betrayed by the proposed necessity of stimulation beyond the natural state, it's supposed normality vouchsafed; sobriety (health) ignored as a greater insanity than parasitism. Salve the wounded pride of the vulgar addict, crucify the outspoken advocate of reassessment. This is not a statement of conflict, rather a portrait of the true and natural order in it's biased equality (comfort belonging to those who crave it most). Exogeny In an era of fear, humanity is tested. The exodus of existential loneliness is a heavy burden. Self-indulgent contemporary values, the pitiful death of the faithful gregarious martyr. Silenced in the passion of virtue, in the fury of desire as necessity, the ideal dies for the joy of man as the ideal devotee of nothing. Endogenous evidence of exogenous truth, derived from noble prejudiced purposes, refutes the pathologies of nature as the folly of prosaic and sensible sustainability. Euphoria at any cost, at any cost.

im GLAD i found this channel.

The Oases of Wisdom project is a great one and I am compelled to salute you for the excellent videos you've created. As someone who's been born in the middle east but currently lives in the west, my interest in ancient philosophy (The Greeks) alongside my Islamic roots have fought to find commonality and your videos illucidating the many polymaths of the mideval period and their study and incorporating of the ancients are true treasures. Keep up the good work 🙏

Infinite regression is not really an issue in modern metaphysics and it is not at all as much of a problem occasionalism is ethically, particularly qua the problem of evil (not so much in the sense of evil existing in a divinely created world, but rather that God should be thw primary cause for this evil). This is as true for Ghazali as it is for Leibniz and a good deql of other other protestant ethicists.

Alas it's cognitive dissonance to be a Muslim and not transition from Sunni to Shi'ite to begin. Why? evidence and logic. Until Muslim philosophers of the time post AH firmly disprove the arguments and evidence of the Shi'ite the rest is simply "intellectual penis size" contests. I paraphrase but the hadith is pertaining to an individual who had knowledge of ancestry, as in the family trees of folk. More or less the prophet said "That is knowledge that doesn't benefit the knower nor hurt the ignorant" You can water that down to effectively mean, knowledge of trivial matters that which do not help or hurt your journey and purpose in this world, or the pursuit of the next. The bread crumbs to start a logical path is to first find the MOST flawed and widely accepted narrator, Abu Hurrairah The father of cats. His history has agreements on both sides of the isle and brings into question whom he praised using his recollected narrations and whom he didn't. Starting from the weakest link you will find it speaks volumes when you find who DOESN'T regard him as credible. After all, The prophets cousin called into question a hadith narrated in his presence and in the presence of the Caliphs who followed the prophet. The reply was "how could anyone ever dare create a fake narration" (gist) The following reply was the logic which ends the debate: "The prophet once told me that after his death, people would attribute false statements to him" said the historically accepted 4th Caliph after the prophet, his cousin and son in law, all one and the same person. If you get it, then you can start your research.