Muhammad Dovud

BA in Political Science at UWED.
MA in Civilizational studies at IHU.
Interested in Islam, philosophy, history.

[Muhammad Dovud @Muhammaddovud99]

@HusanBoymurodov @RealHasanSpiker @Aziyzulloh23 Aristotel, Platon boʻyicha mutaxassis, ham sharq, ham gʻarb falsafasini chuqur oʻzlashtirgan.

[Muhammad Dovud @Muhammaddovud99]

@HusanBoymurodov @RealHasanSpiker @Aziyzulloh23 Bir necha yillardan beri bilaman, zoʻr faylasuf.

[Muhammad Dovud @Muhammaddovud99]

@b_buxoriy Boʻladi, shunday o'rganganmiz.

[Muhammad Dovud @Muhammaddovud99]

@HusanBoymurodov Juda koʻp kommunist musulmonlar bor. Hatto islomni oʻzida alohida yoʻnalish ham bor, kommunistik-sotsialistik yondashuvga ega musulmonlar.

[Muhammad Dovud @Muhammaddovud99]

Amerikada, qoʻyingki butun dunyoda Islomofobiya haqida xoʻb va serob yozgan, umuman olganda Islom haqida bir necha oʻnlab kitob muallifi, Gʻarb kishisining islom haqidagi dunyoqarashi shakllanishida koʻp qadar hissasi bor olim, falastinparvar Jon Esposito 86 yoshida vafot etibdi.

[Muhammad Dovud @Muhammaddovud99]

Gʻarbda oila instituti oxir-oqibat yo yoʻqolib ketadi yoki umuman jamiyatda chetga surib tashlanadi. Quyidagi gaplardan shunaqa xulosa qilish mumkin. Kapitalizm mevasi.

[Harsh @huntheharsh]

I think marriage as an institution may gradually decline over the coming decades. The economy increasingly makes it difficult to raise a family, and without the intention of having children, marriage often seems to serve little practical purpose. Instead, we may see the rise of alternative family structures, such as groups of close friends buying homes and living together for companionship, emotional support, and shared expenses. In that sense, the concept of family may evolve beyond the traditional framework of marriage.

[Muhammad Dovud @Muhammaddovud99]

Yurtimizda hindlar koʻpayib ketdi degan gaplar yuradi. Aslida ular xonliklar davrida ham yurtimizda jamoaviy holda yashagan ekan. Hatto Buxoro xoni hind savdogarlarini kelib joylashishi haqida farmon ham chiqarkan ekan. Oʻsha paytda ham aloqalar kuchli boʻlganiga dalil bu.

[Muhammad Dovud @Muhammaddovud99]

@shavqiy21 😂

[Muhammad Dovud @Muhammaddovud99]

@shavqiy21 Oʻzingiz oʻqidingizmi xay?)

[Şener Aktürk @senerakturk]

Türkiye'nin komşularının komşuları arasında aktif revizyonist iki ülke var: İsrail ve Rusya. Her ikisi de komşu toprakları işgal ve ilhak etti. İsrail Kudüs'ü ve Golan tepelerini, Rusya Kırım'ı ve 4 doğu Ukrayna vilayetini ilhak etti. Abhazya & Güney Osetya da Rus işgali altında.

[Chad Crowley @CCrowley100]

To understand the above, it is necessary to clarify what Evola means by freedom and the tradition from which that concept arises, since it belongs to a conception fundamentally different from the modern understanding of the term.

When Evola speaks of freedom in “Revolt Against the Modern World,” and throughout his work more generally, he means freedom in an aristocratic and traditional sense. This conception does not belong exclusively to Evola’s account of the Perennial Tradition, but to the older inheritance of Western aristocratic civilization itself. It is the freedom known to the Indo-European warrior, the Greek aristos, the Roman patrician, the Germanic thane, and the medieval knight. It is the freedom of the man who rules himself first.

Evola is contrasting two forms of freedom. What philosophy later termed positive freedom is the ancient, hierarchical conception: the freedom to act in accordance with one’s higher nature. It is the liberty of self-mastery and command over the passions, achieved through conscious discipline and inner sovereignty. Such freedom is not granted from without, but cultivated from within. It is what Aristotle meant when he held that only the man capable of ruling himself is fit to rule others, and what the Stoics understood as a freedom of the soul that no external power can truly extinguish.

Opposed to this is negative freedom, the modern egalitarian notion of liberty defined not by self-mastery but by the absence of restraint. It defines freedom as the removal of limits rather than the ordering of the self. In the traditional view, such freedom is empty. It produces men governed by impulse rather than will. A people may appear liberated outwardly, enjoying unrestricted movement and choice, while remaining inwardly enslaved to appetite, vanity, fear, or the need for approval, in short, all that is “human, all too human.”

In the formulation above, Evola is describing an order in which freedom and hierarchy were once united. The ruler is great not because he subjugates, but because he governs others as he governs himself. Those who serve him are not slaves, for their obedience is freely given, arising from recognition of a higher authority that reflects their own inner discipline.

To love freedom in those who serve is to affirm the same principle of inner sovereignty in them. The Roman emperor, in this sense, does not extinguish the freedom of others but gathers it into a coherent order. Each man stands within a framework of duty and obligation beyond himself, bound into a greater whole, yet remains inwardly free because he knows his place and measure and lives in accordance with his proper purpose.

For Evola, true freedom rests on form and proportion. It is the steadiness of spirit that endures without surrender to external pressure. The ancients regarded such freedom as inseparable from hierarchy, since order alone gives it meaning. The Roman ideal, and it is an ideal, was to be self-governing and sovereign, holding within oneself the same discipline one embodied in command.

The passage presupposes this understanding. Nobility consists in ruling free men rather than slaves, since only those who are inwardly free can sustain a civilization worthy of reverence, one oriented beyond the fleeting present toward a higher principle. Evola located that principle in what transcends the merely temporal condition of man, and it was this vertical orientation that once gave authority its legitimacy and freedom its measure. When that binding orientation is lost, freedom ceases to be a discipline of the soul and becomes a license for indulgence, while authority survives only as an empty shell. What remains is order without inner form and liberty without self-command, not simply a political failure, but the inward dissolution of a world that has lost all orientation toward what stands above it.

[Muhammad Dovud @Muhammaddovud99]

@HusanBoymurodov Falsafa ham

[Muhammad Dovud @Muhammaddovud99]

@HusanBoymurodov *nodonlik

[Muhammad Dovud @Muhammaddovud99]

@shavqiy21 Geografik va xaritalash nuqtayi nazardan shunday qilishgan. Aslida aytarli sabab yoʻq. Keyin kompas ham doim shimolni koʻrsatib turadi)
Quruqliklarni aksar qismi shimolda va uni ahamiyati katta. Janubda esa jiddiy bir nimadir yoʻq.

[Muhammad Dovud @Muhammaddovud99]

@elershox1912 Tabriklayman. Koʻzingiz quvonchi boʻlsin.

[Muhammad Dovud @Muhammaddovud99]

@anvarxoniy @HusanBoymurodov Bizniki boshqa yoʻnalish))

[Muhammad Dovud @Muhammaddovud99]

@ekstremall @Mirzaolim15 @ziyouz Aniqmas.

[Muhammad Dovud @Muhammaddovud99]

@Mirzaolim15 @ziyouz

[Muhammad Dovud @Muhammaddovud99]

@Mirzaolim15 @ziyouz Yoʻq bu choʻqqi Oʻzbekiston ichkarisida joylashgan. Hazrat Sulton chegarada.

[Muhammad Dovud @Muhammaddovud99]

@Mirzaolim15 @ziyouz Alpomish choʻqqisi.
https://t.co/tcoWcDBlTs