Is there any way i can talk with you brother?

@@asadabdul4486 0:44 that's a talismant witch craft

0:44 that's a talismant witch craft

Thank you for the links

I admire your intellectual integrity, Filip. I just wonder sometimes if Religious Studies, as an academic discipline, might sometimes avoid taking on some of the most challenging and critical questions about religions. We have this problem in multiple academic disciplines. My own went on a vast excursion into the depths of critical theory for a few decades and, somewhere along the way, began to neglect the questions that give it is greatest relevance and utility to the world as it is at present. Islam has been politicized both from within and without in ways that I imagine make scholars uncomfortable. But behind all of that noise are some challenging questions about Islam - and, by extension, other religions which share some of it's properties. Namely, what are the elements in a religion - or religious sect, to be more precise - that make it dangerous or harmful? Is there such a thing as a dangerous religious sect? If a religion has a long tradition of quite extensive religious laws, can it every really be divorced from politics? Can it exist happily in a secularized society? Is Islam at all responsible for social stagnation in the Arab world in the past century? (Or five centuries depending on your read of history). These questions might be specific to Islam, but similar ones can be posed of Christianity or high control new religious movements ("cults"). Why do Christianity and Islam have such a strong preoccupation, historically with persecuting "heretics" Jews homosexuals etc... is Christianity just as prone to religious wars as Islam seems to have been? A bigger question. Is monotheism inherently more intolerant and power-seeking than polytheism? If so, why does Judaism seem different? These are the kinds of critical questions that large numbers of people are asking. And while I do deeply admire religious studies scholarship for its nuance, I can't help but to notice that these questions usually get whisked away and aren't taken very seriously by your field at large. The typical retort can be paraphrased as "Well, religion is divergent and diverse" ... But that's not really answering the questions at all. It's avoiding them. I think this is a fairly big mistake for scholars. We need to make a bigger point of reminding society why expertise is valuable.

"Revert" is a verb, not a noun.

@@c.a.t.732 not in this context

@@unquestionabletv With all due respect, the "context" itself is made-up. No one is originally a follower of any religion... we're all essentially born agnostics. If one later becomes a Muslim, that's called being a convert.

Totally makes sense but all language is really made up so doesn’t matter either way. You know what I mean so what’s the point?

Dear brother, Read listen what ever you like, but assess them through Litmus test of Quran, Sunnah, Hadith and Companions tradit9, if it fits to this criteria accept it otherwise reject. Satan has misguided thousands from dreams.

I lost mine a year ago almost and I have to say I feel the same way. Love to you and your family 🫂

@@RadacStungnthumz Thank you

Mine was my second dad and when he passed a part of me died. Now I just remember him with a smile on my face and I feel his presence around me still. Love never dies

​@@user-po3ko9yb5w🙏🏼

I lost my son 3 years ago, now I study 12 hours everyday just to get away from the pain in my head. I feel better now however I realised we live in a evil world, I become smart / wise 🦉, kind of like an owl, I live alone but not lonely.

JazakAllah kheyr brother :) As someone who has only begun following Islam seriously in the last few years, all I can say is that I implore you to further pursue your quest for guidance in this creed, and that I wish for the finest of Allah's blessings [SWT] onto your dear self.

I got the opposite from reading the Quran tbh.

@@jhunt5578 the Qur'an can be a difficult read, it can potentiate or nullify your faith based on your state of mind at a given moment. When I first began reading the Qur'an, the experience made me feel unspeakable existential horrors, whereas nowadays when I am confronted with horrors of the world I run to the Qur'an for solace. That's because I've gone from a begrudged believer to one who seeks submission to God. When you read it, it is good to stay introspective and observe the responses it elicits within you as there is a lot to learn from this regarding who you are and what your state of mind is. Lastly, I think you should beware of poor translations that seek to elucidate verses that are cryptic in nature, and exegeses that offer vacuous or narrow-minded explanations of verses with a wide range and applicability of meaning.

❤❤❤

Hello, is German your native language?

Hallo, Yes german is my first language

Language; When you look at the actual linguistics, you'll find that many were puzzled by the opposite, that is, how the other "semetic" (why in quotes will be revealed later) languages were more "evolved" than Arabic, while Arabic had archaic features, not only archaic compared to bibilical Hebrew, Ethiopic, "Aramaic" contemporary "semetic" languages, but even archaic compared to languages from ancient antiquity; Ugaritic, Akkadain. What is meant here by Archaic is not what most readers think, it is Archaic not in the sense that it is simple, but rather that it is complex (think Latin to pig Latin or Italian or Old English, which had genders and case endings to modern English), not only grammatically, but also phonetically; All the so called semitic languages are supposed to have evolved from protosemetic, the Alphabet for protosemitic is that of the so called Ancient South Arabian (which interestingly corresponds with the traditional Arabic origins account) and has 28 Phonemes. Arabic has 28 phonemes. Hebrew has 22, same as Aramaic, and other "semitic" languages. Now pause for a second and think about it, how come Arabic, a language that is supposed to have come so late has the same number of letters as a language that supposedly predates it by over a millennium (Musnad script ~1300 BCE). Not only is the glossary of phonemes more diverse than any other semitic language, but the grammar is more complex, containing more cases and retains what's linguists noted for its antiquity, broken plurals. Indeed, a linguist has once noted that if one were to take everything we know about languages and how they develop, Arabic is older than Akkadian (~2500 BCE). |Classical Arabic | 28 consonants, 29 with Hamza and 6 vowels; some consonants are emphatic or pharyngealized; some vowels are marked with diacritics | Complex system of word formation based on roots and patterns; roots are sequences of consonants that carry the basic meaning of a word; patterns are sequences of vowels and affixes that modify the meaning and function of a word | Flexible word order, but VSO is most common; SVO is also possible; subject and object are marked by case endings (-u for nominative, -a for accusative, -i for genitive); verb agrees with subject in person, number, and gender; verb has different forms for different moods and aspects | | Akkadian | 22 consonants and 3 vowels; some consonants are glottalized or palatalized; vowels are not marked | Similar system, but with different roots and patterns; some roots have more than three consonants; some patterns have infixes or reduplication | Fixed word order of SVO; subject and object are not marked by case endings, but by prepositions or word order; verb agrees with subject in person, number, and gender; verb has different forms for different tenses and aspects | | Aramaic | 22 consonants and 3 vowels (later variants have more); no emphatic or pharyngealized consonants (except in some dialects); vowels are not marked (except in later variants such as Syriac) | Simple system of word formation based on prefixes and suffixes; some roots or patterns exist, but are less productive than in Arabic or Akkadian | Arabic is the only corollary to proto-semitic, infact the whole semitic classification is nonsensical for anyone with a somewhat functioning mass between their ears. hebrew, aramaic, rest of madeup dialect continua only have 22 letters of the 29 protosemitic letters Arabic has all 29. The difference betweeen Arabic and the other creoles and Pidgin is the same as that between Latin and pig latin or italian. Arabic is written in an alphabetic script that consists of 28 consonants and three long vowels. For example: قرأ زيد كتابا qaraʾa zayd-un kitāb-an Zayd read a book This sentence is composed of three words: qaraʾa (he read), zayd-un (Zayd), and kitāb-an (a book). The word order is verb-subject-object, which is different from English but similar to Proto-Semitic and Akkadian. The word zayd-un has a suffix -un that indicates the nominative case, which is equivalent to "the" in English or "-u" in Akkadian. The word kitāb-an has a suffix -an that indicates the accusative case, which is equivalent to "a" in English or "-a" in Akkadian. Proto-Semitic is the reconstructed ancestor of all Semitic languages. It is not written in any script, but linguists use a system of symbols to represent its sounds. For example: ʔanāku bēlīya ʔašū I am his lord This sentence is composed of three words: ʔanāku (I), bēlīya (my lord), and ʔašū (he). The word order is subject-object-verb, which is different from English but similar to Arabic and Akkadian. The word bēlīya has a suffix 'ya' that indicates possession, which is equivalent to "my" in English or "-ī" in Arabic. The word ʔašū has a prefix ʔa- that indicates the third person singular masculine pronoun, which is equivalent to "he" in English or "huwa" in Arabic. I'll compare Arabic with Proto-Semitic and show how Arabic preserves features that are lost or changed in other Semitic languages. Let's start with a simple sentence: ## The house is big Arabic: البيتُ كبيرٌ al-bayt-u kabīr-un Proto-Semitic: *ʔal-bayt-u kabīr-u Hebrew: הבית גדול ha-bayit gadol Akkadian: bītum rabûm Amharic: ቤቱ ገደሉ betu gedelu As can be seen, Arabic and Proto-Semitic have the same word order (noun-adjective), the same definite article (al-), and the same case endings (-u for nominative). Hebrew and Akkadian have lost the case endings and changed the definite article (ha- and -um respectively). Amharic has changed the word order (adjective-noun) and the definite article (u-). But Arabic is not only similar to Proto-Semitic, it is also pre-Semitic, meaning that it is the original form of Semitic before it split into different branches. This is because Arabic preserves many features that are not found in any other Semitic language, but are found in other Afro-Asiatic languages, such as Egyptian and Berber. These features include: - The definite article al-, which is derived from the demonstrative pronoun *ʔal- 'that'. This article is unique to Arabic among Semitic languages, but it is similar to the article n- in Berber and the article p-, t-, n- in Egyptian. - The dual number for nouns and verbs, which is marked by the suffix -ān or -ayn. This number is rare in other Semitic languages, but it is common in other Afro-Asiatic languages, such as Egyptian and Berber. - The imperfective prefix t- for verbs, which indicates the second person singular feminine or third person plural feminine. This prefix is unique to Arabic among Semitic languages, but it is similar to the prefix t- in Berber and Egyptian. - The passive voice for verbs, which is marked by the infix t between the first and second root consonants. This voice is unique to Arabic among Semitic languages, but it is similar to the passive voice in Egyptian and Berber. Finally, a more complex sentence: The letter was written with a pen. Arabic: كُتِبَتِ الرِّسَالَةُ بِالقَلَمِ kutiba-t al-risāla-t-u bi-l-qalam-i Proto-Semitic: *kutiba-t ʔal-risāla-t-u bi-l-qalam-i Hebrew: המכתב נכתב בעט ha-michtav niktav ba-et Akkadian: šipram šapāru bēlum Egyptian: sḏm.n.f p-ẖry m rnp.t Berber: tturra-t tibratin s uccen Here, Arabic and Proto-Semitic have the same word order (verb-subject-object), the same passive voice marker (-t-), the same definite article (al-), and the same preposition (bi-). Hebrew has changed the word order (subject-verb-object), lost the passive voice marker, changed the definite article (ha-) and the preposition (ba-). Akkadian has changed the word order (object-subject-verb), lost the passive voice marker, changed the definite article (-um) and the preposition (bēlum). Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.

The Aramaic word for God is "Alaha". It's the word Isa PBUH used. Sounds familiar? Written without the confusing vowels it is written A-L-H ܐ ܠܗܐ (alap-lamed-he) as found in Targum or in Tanakh (Daniel, Ezra), Syriac Aramaic (Peshitta), reduced from the Arabic original (of which Aramaic is a dialect continuum as will be explained) it is written in the Arabic script 'A-L-L-H' (Aleph-Lam-Lam-Ha) add an A before the last H for vocalization. . The book of Daniel, although it’s mostly written in Hebrew, has portions where it’s written in Aramaic. That means whenever “God” is mentioned in the Aramaic parts, the word “Elaha” is used. Daniel 2:20 is one example. In the Syriac Aramaic dialect which the peshitta is written in, it’s pronounced “Alaha”. The word God in another rendition in Hebrew ʾĕlōah is derived from a base ʾilāh, an Arabic word, written without confusing vowel it is A-L-H in the Arabic script, pronounced ilah not eloah. Hebrew dropped the glottal stop and mumbled it, aramic mumbled a little less and it became elaha. Infact both are written written A-L-H in Arabic, it is pronounced i in Arabic and not A because it is an Alef with hamza below (إ أ ) They are two different forms of Alef. And it mean "a god", it is the non definitive form of A-L-L-H, in which the Alef is without a glottal stop/hamza,(ا), but this kind of nuance is lost in the dialect continua. infact "YHWH" itself is an Arabic word as discussed by Professor. Israel Knohl (Professor of Biblical studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem) in the paper" YHWH: The Original Arabic Meaning of the Name." jesus as his name is often misspelled due to the lack of the ayin sound in Greek, which was rendered to Iesous, coupling the nearest sound to ayin, same letter found in 'Iraq', which sounds entirely different in Arabic form 'Iran' in Arabic, with the -ous Greek suffix that Greeks typically add to their names 'HerodotOS', 'PlotinUS', 'AchelOUS' and later mumbled into a J. The yeshua rendition of Isa (his name in the Qur'an) PBUH which is purported to be the name of Jesus is KNOWN to had been taken from greek. Western Syriac also use "Isho". Western Aramaic (separate from Syriac which is a dialect of Eastern Aramaic) use "Yeshu". Western Syriac has been separate from Western Aramaic for about 1000 years. And sounds don't even match up. Syriac is a Christian liturgical language yet the four letters of the name of Jesus «ܝܫܘܥ» [ = Judeo-Babylonian Aramaic: «ישוע» ] sounds totally different in West vs East Syriac, viz. vocalized akin to Christian Arabic, Hebrew, Aramaic «ܝܶܫܽܘܥ» (Yēšūʿ) in West Syriac, but pronounced more akin to Muslim Arabic Quran character name Isa in East Syriac «ܝܑܼܫܘܿܥ» (ʾĪšōʿ). The reason for this confusion is their dropping of phonemes. Only someone that has no idea what the letters are or how they sound would have a name ending in a pharyngeal fricative like the ayin, if it were to be used in a name it would have had to be in the beginning, thus the Arabic rendition is the correct one. An example in English is how the appended -d is a common error amongst the English pronouncing Gaelic names. The name Donald arose from a common English mispronunciation of the Gaelic name Donal. Just how it is with donal becoming donald and the two becoming distinct and the original being regarded as something seperate so too did Isa PBUH turn to Iesous turn to jesus and when they tried going back to the original they confused it for yeshua ( ysu is how it is actually written) for Isa PBUH ( 3'eysah ) "protosemetic" Alphabet (28), Arabic Alphabet (28), Latin transliteration, hebrew (22) 𐩠 𐩡 𐩢 𐩣 𐩤 𐩥 𐩦 𐩧 𐩨 𐩩 𐩪 𐩫 𐩬 𐩭 𐩮 𐩰 𐩱 𐩲 𐩳 𐩴 𐩵 𐩶 𐩷 𐩸 𐩹 𐩺 𐩻 𐩼 ا ب ت ث ج ح خ د ذ ر ز س ش ص ض ط ظ ع غ ف ق ك ل م ن ه و ي A b t ṯ j h kh d ḏ r z s sh ṣ ḍ ṭ ẓ ʿ ġ f q k l m n h w y א ב ג ד ה ו ז ח ט י כ ל מ נ ס ע פ צ ק ר ש ת Merged phonemes in hebrew and aramaic: ح, خ (h, kh) merged into only kh consonant remain س, ش (s, sh) merged into only Shin consonant remaining ط, ظ (ṭ/teth, ẓ) merged into only ṭ/teth consonant remaining ص, ض (ṣ, ḍ/Tsad ) merged into only ḍ/Tsad consonant remaining ع, غ (3'ayn, Ghayn) merged into a reducted ayin consonant remaining ت, ث (t/taw, th) merged into only t/taw consonant remaining The reason why the protoS alphabet here is 28 and not 29, is because the supposed extra letter is simply a س written in a different position, but it was shoehorned to obfuscated. In Arabic letter shapes are different depending on whether they are in the beginning , middle or end of a word. Language; When one looks at the actual linguistics, one will find that many were puzzled by the opposite, that is, how the other "semetic" languages were more "evolved" than Arabic, while Arabic had archaic features, not only archaic compared to bibilical Hebrew, Ethiopic, "Aramaic" contemporary "semetic" languages, but even archaic compared to languages from ancient antiquity; Ugaritic, Akkadain. What is meant here by Archaic is not what most readers think, it is Archaic not in the sense that it is simple, but rather that it is complex (think Latin to pig Latin or Italian or Old English, which had genders and case endings to modern English), not only grammatically, but also phonetically; All the so called semitic languages are supposed to have evolved from protosemetic, the Alphabet for protosemitic is that of the so called Ancient South Arabian (which interestingly corresponds with the traditional Arabic origins account) and has 28 Phonemes. Arabic has 28 phonemes. Hebrew has 22, same as Aramaic, and other "semitic" languages. Now pause for a second and think about it, how come Arabic, a language that is supposed to have come so late has the same number of letters as a language that supposedly predates it by over a millennium (Musnad script ~1300 BCE). Not only is the glossary of phonemes more diverse than any other semitic language, but the grammar is more complex, containing more cases and retains what's linguists noted for its antiquity, broken plurals. Indeed, a linguist has once noted that if one were to take everything we know about languages and how they develop, Arabic is older than Akkadian (~2500 BCE). Arabic three cases for nouns (nominative, accusative, and genitive), Akkadian has only two cases (nominative, genitive-accusative) and Hebrew, Aramaic have no case endings at all. Arabic verbs have three main aspects: tense (past, present, future), mood (indicative, subjunctive, jussive, imperative), two numbers (singular, plural), and voices (active, passive) inaddition to two genders (masculine, feminine), three persons (first, second, third) and two main patterns (sound and weak). Sound verbs have three consonantal roots that do not change, while weak verbs have one or more vowels in their roots that change depending on the aspect, mood, voice, number, gender, and person Aramaic verbs have only two aspects (completed action, ongoing or future action). Only one gender (common), one person (third) and one verb pattern. As a matter of fact, all of the knowledge needed for deciphering ancient texts and their complexity was derived from the Qur'an. It was by analyzing the syntactic structure of the Qur'an that the Arabic root system was developed. This system was first attested to in Kitab Al-Ayin, the first intralanguage dictionary of its kind, which preceded the Oxford English dictionary by 800 years. It was through this development that the concept of Arabic roots was established and later co-opted into the term 'semitic root,' allowing the decipherment of ancient scripts. In essence, they quite literally copied and pasted the entirety of the Arabic root. Hebrew had been dead, as well as all the other dialects of Arabic, until being 'revived' in a Frankensteinian fashion in the 18th and 19th centuries. And then the Qur'an appeared with the oldest possible form of the language thousands of years later. This is why the Arabs of that time were challenged to produce 10 similar verses, and they couldn't. People think it's a miracle because they couldn't do it, but I think the miracle is the language itself. They had never spoken Arabic, nor has any other language before or since had this mathematical precision. And when I say mathematical, I quite literally mean mathematical. Now how is it that the Qur'an came thousands of years later in an alphabet that had never been recorded before, and in the highest form the language had ever taken? The creator is neither bound by time nor space, therefore the names are uttered as they truly were, in a language that is lexically, syntactically, phonemically, and semantically older than the oldest recorded writing. In fact, that writing appears to have been a simplified version of it. Not only that, but it would be the equivalent of the greatest works of any particular language all appearing in one book, in a perfect script and in the highest form the language could ever take. It is so high in fact, that it had yet to be surpassed despite the fact that over the last millennium the collection of Arabic manuscripts when compared on word-per-word basis in Western Museums alone, when they are compared with the collected Greek and Latin manuscripts combined, the latter does not constitute 1 percent of the former as per German professor Frank Griffel, in addition all in a script that had never been recorded before. Thus, the enlightenment of mankind from barbarism and savagery began, and the age of reason and rationality was born from its study. God did bring down the Qur’an, Mohamed is his Messenger.

Chill ​@@mznxbcv12345

Agreed!

"Insan özü Xaliqdir, amma cəhalət üzündən bunu bilmir!"

Azerbaijani people in the country of Azerbaijan don't consider themselves both Turkish, and Iranian?

Azerbaijani people are unique, because they are Turkic, Iranian, and Caucasian as well, not just Turkish.

@@agostocobain2729 Agree totally but it does not matter for the seekers of divine knowledge.

@@Resmioglu I say this to you because I’m also half Azerbaijani from Tabriz Iran

Yes. It's an ancient concept that survives. Some people think words spoken can bring things into reality and that calling out someone's name can affect them somehow, even if they're not present (or living in some world views). Instinctively perhaps, people are often insulted when someone gets their name wrong as if it somehow muddies their identity or "essence."

I'm no expert, but I wouldn't be surprised if it actually went the other way around. If so, it wouldn't be the first time Islamic thought has had an influence on Jewish thought.

@@RT-jx9cp The Zohar predates Fazlalah by a few centuries, and the way Filip spoke made me think that some of the parallels I brought up were introduced to Islamic thought by Fazlalah. I do admit that maybe there was an obscure Islamic source that influenced the Zohar and whose ideas were repopularized in Islamic thought by Fazlalah, but I see know evidence for that, and IMO, that's kind of a strech. I also could see some of Fazlalah's departure from the traditional interpretation of the Mahdi in Islam as coming from a syncretism of the traditional Mahdi, and the Jewish view of the Messiah.

Land of idol worshipers Where Muslims worship shrines I'm Human from this planet

Any discoveries?

@@guardingsoul6652 0:44 that's a talismant witch craft

Yes, even the two most prominent sunni scholars like imam muslim and imam bukhari were also persians. And persian was accepted as the dominant bureaucratic language in most of muslim world. We have great respect for persian language, culture and poetry.

@@xyz-rk7ru Persian culture was adopted by the caliphs too! I’m Persian by the way, so thank you for your words my brother.

​@agostocobain2729 You sound a bit bitter about your fellow Iranians who aren't Muslim. Only 40% are according to non regime poll.

@@jhunt5578 Of course not, if you're a real Persian your open to others religions like our great king showed us, Cyrus the great. Also Islamic culture comes from us Persians, the Caliphs want to rid us of our culture, but it was our culture that was adopted. As you can see from what I just commented, I'm a true Persian.

@@jhunt5578 True Islam isn't bad, people make it bad. People are flawed so what do you expect.

The popularity, and perhaps some mystical experience, brings out the disease in a person’s heart of wanting more. More fame, wealth, power. They desire higher status and prestige. You can see their claims becoming more grandiose over time as they accumulate followers and gain more confidence.

I got a lot of old books on the topic, it’s indeed a interesting study ( please see nunatics from USA

Azerbaijan? Wasn't he born in Iran?

He has! It's called "What is Shinto? (Rethinking Religion in Japan)"

Same

I hope this content discusses the movement of Left Islam from the past to the present.

@@ahmadsulvifafiru5 No this is about Ilm al Huruf

​@@ahmadsulvifafiru5no such thing exists, Islamic "leftism" is just CIA/ pentagon friendly Islam , which is not Islam.

Is it me or does the letters in the thumbnail look like a face

Similar. Sounds a lot like Kabbalah mixed with Neo-Platonism (which has a lot of Pythagoreanism), and a dash of Joachim of Fiore.

Sounds like a cuisine ^

Awliya have karamat, only prophets have mujizat.

It's pronounced as Fazl-al-lâh. Indeed, the "z" sound in Arabic is wholly different; but Persians(and other speakers of Iranian languagues, one of them being Fazlallah himself, whose mother tongue was a local, caspian dialect of his hometown and actually his works happen to have some importance linguistically because of that)pronounce it like a regular "Z".

Fazl means nothing, Fadhl means everything

this ض is strong da, there are middle eastern dialects/accents that pronounce it as za, the same with many other letters, like in Maghreb some accents pronounce ق qa as ga, even in English some say 'the' as 'zeh'

King of knowledge!

İ think so, while he was a follower of Fazlallah he is also so much more than that, more Sufi, more emotional and maybe because of poetic imagery more encompassing. That's why Shias, Sunnis, Alevis and Bektashis and modern Azerbaijanis recite his poetry all the time. So in that way the movement is alive today. Just here of Sami Yusuf rendering of the classic kzfaq.info/get/bejne/n6iUZNVmu7WvYpc.html