Shahmir Azhar

Dissident Kemcolian ('24) | Philosophy | Theology | Jurisprudence | Politics | Rhetoric | Discourse | Oration | Orthodoxy

Contented.

[Shahmir Azhar @ShahmirAzhar2]

@jameelbehram For them all laws can be imposed except the divine law (Shari'ah), because it's a "personal matter" after all. But the Western Shari'ah of liberalism is a global Shari'ah to them which every person must obey.

[Hamza A. Tzortzis @HATzortzis]

Intellectual brilliance is neither necessary nor sufficient for guidance.
Even if one falsely assumes that human beings are purely rational creatures, it still doesn’t follow that intelligence guarantees truth.

The human being is far more than a reasoning machine. We are a dynamic synthesis of body, heart (qalb), intellect (ʿaql), and innate disposition (fiṭrah). True understanding emerges not just from sharpness of mind, but from the purity of the heart that hosts it.
When the heart (the seat of the intellect) is diseased, whether through kibr (arrogance), ʿujub (self-admiration), or corrupted desires (shahawāt), it blinds the intellect.

And when the heart is blind, no amount of reasoning, no volume of evidence, no degree of IQ will unveil the truth.

You cannot reason your way to light if your heart insists on darkness.

In the end, guidance is a gift from Allah. It is He who opens hearts and veils them, who guides whom He wills, and leaves to stray whom He wills; not out of injustice, but out of infinite wisdom.

[The Ghazalian @TheGhazalian]

I am so Ghazalian that I even dream about occasionalism, which itself is occasionalism. So I dream about occasionalism, which itself is occasionalism, to then say that I dreamed about occasionalism, which was also occasionalism and me telling of it is also occasionalism. 💪🏻

[Shahmir Azhar @ShahmirAzhar2]

@IamSheri23 @MuslimPhil @brethrenfpurity @husnayn_ @_titanslayer_ @sultanm28903166 Not a bad idea

[Shahmir Azhar @ShahmirAzhar2]

@_titanslayer_ @raza0927 There's his Maqāsid al-falāsifah as well

[Shahmir Azhar @ShahmirAzhar2]

There is an intense need to grasp the notion Al-Walā wa'l-Barā' clear in many circles order to prevent such stupidly impuslive intrusions on such instances.

[Shahmir Azhar @ShahmirAzhar2]

When a Muslim is arguing with someone representing a heretical position, we shall surely stand by the Muslim even if we differ about the details of the matter he is arguing for.
The abomination of the heretical position supersedes our internal disputes, however intense they are.

[Farid @Farid_0v]

Today, I learned that a large number of people on this website take their aqeedah from Quran, Sunnah, and Ghazali.

Wait...

Quran and Ghazali.

[Shahmir Azhar @ShahmirAzhar2]

Opened twitter after months only to see the same bunch of "quacks" regurgitating the same non-sense on Al-Ghazali, Mu'tazilites and so on.
There is no cure to obstinacy, for sure. They're never gonna learn.

[Hamza Abid @HamzaAbid__]

Absolutely thrilled to co-conduct the #KEMHOW intro to batch 28' yesterday. Overwhelming response and interest shown by them. Hopes high for the future InShaaAllah!

@AdanIqbal11
@kemhow

[Shahmir Azhar @ShahmirAzhar2]

"Do they seek a way other than Allah's, while to Him have submitted whoever is in the heavens and the earth, willingly or unwillingly, and to Him all shall return"
(3:83)

[Shahmir Azhar @ShahmirAzhar2]

The same author of pathoma once again.
Startling!

[Ramon Harvey @RamonIHarvey]

I recently handed in detailed Series Editor review comments for Hussein Abdulsater's forthcoming monograph on the theology of al-Jahiz. This is a very important book, and will make us reconsider aspects of the standard early kalam narrative, the history of the Mu'tazila and more.

[Shahmir Azhar @ShahmirAzhar2]

Immediately clicks in mind whenever I see this whole circus of electoral process in a nation-state and the same hideous faces getting rotated over under the same hideous paradigm of governance

[Shahmir Azhar @ShahmirAzhar2]

"The way these people follow is bound to lead to destruction; and all their works are vain." (7:139)

[Ali S. Harfouch @asharfouch]

If Muslims could engage with Aristotelian logic and neoplatonism with such depth creatively, then we should also be able to do so with contemporary paradigms without succumbing to their metaphysical and normative commitments.

[Islamicize @islamicize]

The modern world is imposing enough such that every action required of you as a Muslim will appear to be abnormal and out of the ordinary. Normalizing sin and stigmatizing piety

Do not be discouraged and faltered by these trends. Forge through with utmost confidence. Remain firm

[Shahmir Azhar @ShahmirAzhar2]

"Stay away from the democratic way, hold strong to some maturity, as the brain of two thousand asses can't come up with the human thought"

~ Iqbal

[Haseeb.does.medicine @DoesHaseeb]

@danyal_ahmad_ "Tell me you know nothing about Orthodoxy without telling me you know nothing about Orthodoxy"^

[Shahmir Azhar @ShahmirAzhar2]

@danyal_ahmad_ It isn't a "new breed", chap.
You probably need to explore more about the history and the way classical scholars have had exactly the same opinion.

[Shahmir Azhar @ShahmirAzhar2]

@He_Laughed If that is the case, then he failed to provide any evidence for this assertion whatsoever.
His only point was to dismiss all analytical propositions from being applied to "existence"
Moreover, "priority and posteriority" is also an analytical distinction, in my view.

[Shahmir Azhar @ShahmirAzhar2]

𝐓𝐡𝐞 "𝐋𝐚𝐚𝐥" 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐝𝐢𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧:

Better have said, "my regurgitation of Russell's position", and even that's all about the contingency argument, calling it a criticism of "cosmological argument" is an egregious academic blunder.

Anyhow, let's see through it (1/4)

[Shahmir Azhar @ShahmirAzhar2]

no analytical distinction can be applied to existence and then you end up attributing the category of "priority" to existence.
You probably don't even know what you're saying. Have some rest, doc!

The calibre of the "professor". Well!

(4/4)

[Shahmir Azhar @ShahmirAzhar2]

Consider the second statement. The proposition: "existence is prior to analytical propositions" is itself an analytical proposition?
The distinction of "priority and posteriority" is in itself an analytical distinction.
You base your whole critique on the notion that (3/4)