میں نے سر سید احمد شاہ صاحب سے یہ سنا کہ قسمت کی دو پہلو یا دو ٹائپ کی Luck ہوتے ہیں پہلا static and دوسرا variable یعنی تقدیرِ مبرم اور تقدیرِ معلق ۔ کیا آپ نے جو ابھی بیان کیا ہے اس کے ( 40:35 ) اندر کیا اس کا یہ مطلب ہے کہ آپ کسی static تقدیر کو مانتے ہیں؟ کیا اس کا یہ مطلب ہے کہ آپ یہ مانتے ہیں کہ ہر چیز تہر شدہ ہے ؟ ہر چیز پہلے سے ہی مکمل تہر شدہ ہے؟
9:47 تک یہ دو سوالات ذہن میں آگئے۔ جاوید صاحب نے کہا کہ ذہن اپنی آپ پر کچھ قوانین لاگو کرتا ہے۔ تو وہ کونسے قوانین ہیں؟ کیسے اور کیوں لاگوں کرتا ہے؟ دوسری بات یہ کہ جاوید صاحب نے کہا کہ ذہانت اچھی بھی ہوتی ہے اور بری بھی۔ کیا ذہانت اپنی ذات میں اچھی یا بری ہوتی ہے یا اس کی استعمال اچھائی اور برائی کیلئے کی جاتی ہے؟
Excellent, need of the time. One suggestion: You mentioned early in the lecture that consciousness exercises control over intelligence and predilection when imposed defeats all the processes of mind to analyse contradictions as well as unity between 10 (say) different experiential categories present in mind. In my experience, this is by far the major impediment in developing intelligence in our society. Your entire lecture, questions like how, why, who, etc, presupposes the obvious that the person asking these questions has decimated the predilections and approaching these with an open mind. However, I think specifically identifying the hazards of predilections and suggesting methods to negating it and developing an open minded approach needs to be addressed in your next lecture. Thanks
@ourlegacy8894 The extremely realistic but pathetic condition of our society, very explicitly explained by Javaid sb, indicates that we need to intelligently ask and answer some very basic questions, such as: 1. Who am I basically? From amongst the possible answers: human being, Muslim, Pakistani or ethnicity. 2. Why am I a Muslim? From amongst the possible answers like tradition, knowledge, experience or some other. 3. Am I a Muslim in word, theory or practice? 4. If I don't act according to my word, am I a hypocrite or a Muslim? Some of these questions have pretty obvious answers. Applying the QA process Javaid sb has explained, the conformity of answers will probably be more than the difference. Will be an interesting experiment. In my earlier comment, I was trying to say that unless these basic questions are addressed and resolved, rest of the later questions cannot be intelligently answered.
@@suhailhamid8245 JazakAllahkhayr for your thoughts on this, I agree, apart from these fundamental questions, do you think there are other questions that one needs to introspect on? would appreciate any thoughts on this
@ourlegacy8894 I think it would be better to discuss the questioning process first. Questions on religious matters are not desirable in our religious structuring. If tolerable, only such questions that do not question the basics are allowed, which defeats the whole efficacy of the questioning process. Our premise should be that if there is only One Absolute, All Encompassing Reality, then whatever way one tries to realise it, he'll do so there because there is nothing else to realise. The only requirement is for one to be free of all predilections and be sincere in the quest. So, all types of questions, whether scientific, philosophical, atheistic, or agnostic, should be encouraged. The answers will lead to the same Reality.
