Did Al-Ghazali reject Causality? - DEBATING GHAZALI (ep. 3)

[@Dhaniyal19]

Attendance who came here after listening qasir ahmed raja ❤

[@muhammadshahedkhanshawon3785]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/l3XWeHmrequlipo

[@sajadahmad1651]

Me

[@RoxenO]

Great video !!

[@abdullahhani672]

At last a high quality philosophy channel from pakistan. please dont stop.

[@SubboorAhmadAbbasi]

May Allah bless you immensely This is such a beneficial video!

[@_titanslayer_]

JazakAllah khayr Subboor bhai. Your support means a lot. 🙏

[@SubboorAhmadAbbasi]

@@_titanslayer_ I travel to pakiatan every few months would be great to do a podcast with you insha'Allah

[@_titanslayer_]

InshaAllah!

[@shanekk6181]

Waiting for podcast

[@sagittarius6526]

Let's goo, brother dropped another gem. Jazak Allah khairan

[@abdullahzahidshah9513]

The more i listen you, the more i start loving you sir. Now this channel is one of my favorite channels. Jazakallah. ❤

[@rationalbelief4451]

Your videos are great. Great analysis and huge references. Keep making

[@towardsjannah1657]

❤

[@deadBOY_79]

i am not philosophy student , but when i read Quran , it force me to become a scientist / researcher . (as it says : Don,t you think oh humans : multiple times )

[@zohaib.meraj_16]

Imam Ahmed (Rahimahullaah)said: “Tawakkul is an action of the heart, i.e. it can neither be attained by the utterance of the tongue nor by the limbs.”

[@AkramBawani]

Good video now I am understand these important topics

[@MyPersonalSoch]

Thanx sir to give a befitting reply to seculars If you have time Then please make at least on videos on ibn e cena Beascuse he conside a gem of islmaic thought

[@VS-2002]

Absolutely refreshing take on a scholars work. I must commend your ability to not just read the works of scholars but *truly* understand where they were coming from, why they wrote the book, and what they *truly* stood for. I am going to watch this video in parts and will comment as I find insightful things to emphasize.

[@faisalempire1689]

Ahh... Finally...😮 It felt like the wait was very long😂❤

[@muntazermehdi2411]

Kindly make a separate video on Mutazili and Ashari

[@Abuhurera-q8w]

Epic video ❤ 🔥

[@LaibaBuzdar]

I want you to tell this historical context at start but still its fine in 3rd part. Keep sharing knowledge. Thnx.

[@uzairsiddiqui490]

Allah apko jazai kher de ❤❤

[@shaukatmahmood9086]

Love the way you discuss and explain, you got a new sub👍🏼

[@_titanslayer_]

Thank you! 🙏

[@kidzuna-p4j]

Great as always😊

[@aamir3876]

Asalamualiykum, amazing work, kindly convey how one should begin and understand philosophy in real sense without challenging religion as most of the philosophers eventually digress (study and experience) plus kindly make a vedio on the book of Alexander dugin the great reset vs the great awakening, you can finish it in one sitting as the fyodor doesteskey states the best way to hold someone captive is not to make him realise he is in prison, and I believe that is deadly relevant in today's age please. Regards.

[@Ahsaniftikhar.]

Great Shershah Bhai ♥️🙌

[@hassaanghaffar]

The quality of overall recording can be improved. Especially light issue is prominent. You can find videos on the issue

[@salman_esp]

I watch your video but why have you stopped brother?

[@BRMUSLIM]

Qasar ahmed raja also said that❤ few days ago

[@jaykumarjoel0832]

God bless you brother can you do video on Yahya lbn adi and his contribution in islamic golden age and another Christian scientist on that period

[@basitjamil3286]

@UZMA RUMI, Now plz come and reply. Uzma You misled masses a lot.

[@Abu-hasnain]

She belongs to Pervez Hood bhoy group, whose aim is to spread lies against Islam and Muslims

[@um-ubaidullahbhat3103]

absolutely they mislead many and presented themselves like they are true seeker of knowledge and islam dont have answers to all these philosophical questions and we muslims just follow islam blindly ....

[@MRohailT]

From your videos about Ghazali, I have come to understand that he was a critical thinker and opposed to Taqleed. We can see his critical thinking in how he was one of the first to actually criticize the blind Taqleed of Greek philosophers, especially Aristotle. The irony is that today, some “Philosopher/ Scientist ”influenced by the West label him as anti-science. Al-Ghazali was, in fact, the complete opposite of how the popular narrative portrays him today. I'm really curious about this intellectual dishonesty. Have you studied or thought about it ?

[@_titanslayer_]

Good observation. You are right

[@abdullahhani672]

​@@_titanslayer_ is the intellectual dishonesty just stem from inferior psycology and west influence or there is another deeper reason?

[@SaeedAhmad-oc5xy]

Hope one day I meet you sir

[@dr.abdulazeemkhan1433]

Assalamualaikum w.r.w.b May Allah s.w.t bless you with more knowledge and make a beacon of light in this age... I just have a small query: What were the 20 points on which Imam Ghazali refuted as I see the discussion is stressed more on 17th point i.e, on casuality. would be grateful if you could state them, shukran Jazakallahu khairan

[@_titanslayer_]

Thank you. You can check the contents of Tahafut al-falasifa, the 20 chapters are about the 20 points of disagreement

[@erikkhan]

Next videos mein south asia key islamic intellectual tradition pr phir bat krna

[@noshadar]

Ghazali prefers experience over words.

[@um-ubaidullahbhat3103]

ايک سچے مسلمان ہونے کے ناتےسچ کو جاننے کے سلسلے میں ہماری پیاس سائینسدانوں سے زیادہ ہونی چاہئے ۔۔۔۔

[@Axhar_111]

Brother, some people point out that imam Ghazali was strictly against mathematics, for that they refer to his books, like Neil D Tyson has also said the same that Ghazali used to say "these numbers are work of the devil", you on the other hand showed contrary to what they say even with reference, i was confused but then i struck my mind that where he is criticizing mathematics he is not referring to actual mathematics, he might be referring to people doing Sehr and using numbers, and because the definition of these thing we're not developed back then the use of word for maths and using numbers for sehr was same. Am I right ?

[@_titanslayer_]

Yes. Ghazali was not against Mathematics but considered it farze-kifaya (communal obligation).

[@MuhammadSaad-be1hp]

I have noticed that people forget to respect Imam al-Ghazali due to their hatred or disdain for him if his philosophical discussion is put aside and one read his other books which are based on hadiths and Jurisprudence, i guess no one will ever hold malice in his heart for him? I think it is not possible, when I read Imam Ghazali once tbh I didn't enjoy reading anything else again

[@sajid279]

Please make a video on the philosophy of Ashtavakra... Bernardo Kashtrup , Donald Hoffman etc have propagated his philosophy a lot... What is knowing? As no one can know my consciousness other than me myself... Does god know what it is to be a person?

[@_titanslayer_]

Thanks for the recommendation but That’s not my field of study.

[@sajid279]

@@_titanslayer_ This is the crux of all religions.. God is the observer of all personal experiences as if he is the consciousness... So God concious re people who observe their own ego/nafs and know it's tendancies... I found lot of similarity between Ibn Arabi and Ashtavakra

[@A.--.]

Ghazali 1057-1111 Ibn Haythem 965-1040 Jabir bin Hayan 721-? Ibn Khaldun 1332-1406 Al-battani 850-929 Al-farabi 870-? Ibn Sina ?-1037 Harun ibn-Musa 780-850 Ar-Razi 865-935 Ibn Qurra 836-901 Ibn Firnas 810-887 Ibn Ishaq 801-873 Al-Zahrawi 936-1013 Taswuff snubbed out great achievements.

[@_titanslayer_]

Ibn al-Shattir, Shirazi, Tusi, Fakhr ad-din Razi, Abhari, Katibi, Urmawi, The school of Shirazi (Jurjani, Iji, Taftazani) the Dashtakis among many other names, all emerged in the next 200 years after Ghazali.

[@A.--.]

@@_titanslayer_ let's analyze each scientist PRE-Ghazali and POST-Ghazali and see what they accomplished, who they were influenced by and draw some conclusions. Can anyone please do this project I don't have time these days

[@_titanslayer_]

Let me suggest you some books. Read: Saliba, Islamic Sciences and the Making of the European Renaissance Griffel, The Formation of Postclassical Philosophy in Islam Adamson, The heirs of Avincenna Read these and I can recommend more.

[@A.--.]

@@_titanslayer_ if you have read them then you should be able to defend ghaxalis critics on their points...why do I need to read them. Moreover, just reading doesn't equal comprehension which is most important.

[@_titanslayer_]

I did defend Ghazali. I have made a 3 part series. You begged for research on post Ghazalian science and I provided you with academic scholarship on the subject.

[@islamicmessage2419]

Even if we accept for the sale of argument that imam was occasionalist still, ocassionalist do not deny causality rather the key is the cause or creator is only god in case of occasionalism whereas for others the only cause is not god.. Don't get why people make this a big issue when it is just the same as their position only the cause is different.

[@bangbang6847]

No audio

[@faisalempire1689]

Sir It has the audio..

[@bangbang6847]

Oh nevermind, i guess i played the video after few seconds it upload so thats why it was still rendering​@@faisalempire1689

[@adeebfeeroz3434]

On one side Ghazali relies more on experience and on the other side he tend to say anything can happen when it comes to miracle 🤔🤔

[@_titanslayer_]

Go to the chapter of Possibility and Actuality in the video. When Ghazali says this it is under the response of Occasionalism that he argue. But that wasn’t his only response to the falasifa. He gave a total of 3 responses. Only one was occasionalism. And later in his life he was unsure whether occasionalism or secondary causality were the right theory of causality. This is why he consisted both to be correct. His emphasis on experimentation is the reason for the developments of science in later centuries.

[@adeebfeeroz3434]

@@_titanslayer_ yeah sure. He left it open ended. ☺️

[@faisalempire1689]

Sir hm chahte hai k ap ibn e cena ke us views ko b explain kar dein ju Ghazali ne reject keye the. Like thoery of the soul, knowledge of particulars and attributes of God. Kindly sir also make a video on this. It will help us to understand more clearly the stance of Ghazali and his criticism on Ibn e Cena

[@AfghanaKhan-j3t]

First is islamic kalam/theology then motazili disobey/reject islamic theology Then ash'ari and maturidi are defending islamic theology from motazili and others Motazili are not first islamic philosophers or theologian but they are fisrt group that are disagree/ disobey the islamic theologies. This whole topic you can learn in aqeedah classes from mufti yasir nadeem al wajidi and others islamic mutakallimeen

[@ethicalconnections9405]

کہاں دیکھ رہا ہے بھی ؟

[@A.--.]

Your presentation is a hodgepodge of statements stitched together to sell your narrative. It is clear that ar the end of his life he was indecisive and confused on causality

[@_titanslayer_]

My presentation is based on a rigorous study of dense texts- both primary and secondary. Your comment is based on your dense brain who can't process technical information.

[@A.--.]

@@_titanslayer_ do you know density of brain 🧠 is directly proportional to higher intelligence 💪

[@adilkhan-uz4zn]

Law of causality is I think a universal principal and is undeniable because those who believe in causality are not against the first cause or necessary cause which is God but it means that whatever events take place in this whole cosmos are the result of chain of causes and effects and God being the ultimate cause. So Ibn Sinas position on the law of Causality is undeniable

[@_titanslayer_]

1. Whether one thinks that the world is maintained via a chain or causes or direct intervention of God, so long as regularity is established in nature - via God’s habit (occasionalism) or secondary causality - one can do science. 2. Science only requires regularity in nature. In both theories of causality, nature is regular and one cannot expect radical break from daily experience. 3. Ghazali didn’t exclusively argue for occasionalism. He also believed equally in secondary causality as well. But what he disagreed with Ibn Sina was the principle of necessitarianism. The whole notion of necessitarianism is metaphysical and whether you believe in it or not does nothing to your scientific enterprise. Most scientists today don’t even know what that is.

[@adilkhan-uz4zn]

@@_titanslayer_ Thanks

[@islamicmessage2419]

@@adilkhan-uz4zn No one denies causality ie those who accept occasionalism also accpet causality but for them there is no secondary causation. You should read the arguments for occassionalism, ibn sina's position is not self evident as you seem to think.