Atheism Javed Akhtar Debate.

Even the infinite regress concept was poorly explained even though it is critical to the argument. Must be one of the few expositions of this particular argument attempted in urdu and it shows... In any case, I believe javed did eventually understand what was being said but asked why the universe couldn't be the necessarily existent being.. Another concept which should have been explained better. Opening statements should have been longer to allow a proper development of the argument

Javed was extremely flimsy though and just came across as what he was... A non philosopher debating philosophical concepts above his head

 

Depth over Breadth,
Substance over spectacle,
Grassroot results over Arcane scholarship,
Foundation before ornamentation :

What we Should be focusing on is actually practical & useful works that benefit ordinary people, over highly cryptic elite academic debates that remain confined to scholars.

Studying more & more advanced texts in mantiq is not going to magically save people from atheism if you cannot even translate & contextualize it while actively engaging with your opponents.

True success is measured not by how complex or obscure one’s scholarship is, but by how effectively it addresses real challenges and produces tangible results at the ground level

This is not meant to undermine scholarship & specializations, but to draw attention towards the fact that we are excelling brilliantly at one while failing humiliatingly at the other.

When last did any barelwi engage with an atheist at a Big scale like this. Throughout the New Atheism movement, since about a hundred years ago, how many historic debates have taken place between us and the west wherein we decimated them in their own language and terminology?

Unfortunately none. Ala hazrat, the man who was first & foremost in refuting all the newest heresies that popped up in his time would not be proud of this.

 

I dont think this is true. As I said earlier, Shamail debate points weren't too good. And I think one of the brothers pointed it out that deos had this debate for popularity.

Secondly as aH said debate is not for everyone. You have to get ulama and students who are interested in this and spend their time perfecting this art. Furthermore I concur with aH debates are sort of fruitless and are a great way to cause more confusion among the awaam.

Thirdly Ahlus sunnah has to defend alot of its "own" problems most of which are new. For example. Before we had to refute deos and we did perfectly. The past 100 years our ulama did this perfectly and exposed these deviants but now we have raafidhis and shias sprouting out of Ahlus sunnah now we have ulama who have to deal with this.

As abu Hasan has highlighted many times that sunnis are just lazy. We wait for someone to do the work. Look the Raafidi scene only a few ulama are dealing with it. Many sunni ulama dont even have the decency to merely support other ulama on the correct stance.

Also we just waiting for barelwis (those closely affiliated with Alahazrat) to do the work. Meanwhile the Habaib and Many arabs (likes of Shaykh Yaqobi) are enjoying life umrah travels, this retreat that retreat. When these celebrities are called out then many will try to defend them. Like everyone is trying to do their own thing.

 

This whole shamail Nadwi debate is making barelwis very salty due to the popularity deos are getting to enjoy but only We are to be blamed for this.

Our aslaaf left behind the most refined & sophisticated arguments for us but we failed to translate & reinterpret them according to the need of our times.

We're still busy discussing the most abstruse, hair-splitting mantiqi abhaath out there while these basic, kindergarten-level arguments are wowing people across the world. Unfortunately, it's fair to say that our Contribution in fighting New Atheism is practically non-existent, besides Shaykh Asrar of course.

 

I think the Mufti was quiet weak in his arguments in numerous places.
Overuse of English concepts not clearly explained.
Didnt answer Akhtar on some of his questions too well. Especially the point he brought up about God watching the war on Gaza without doing anything.

Feel like Shaykh asrar is the GOAT in this field. What sets him apart is his vast knowledge on history and I think his general knowledge is just on another level.

Feel like the muslims present there were just clapping randomly at every thing the Mufti said in English.

 

Created this thread for the debate discussion.

 

Think we should move this to another thread.

 

Just skimmed this. Same tired arguments. I would say that the deo should have explained the kalaam terms better without using the English, which also needed to be explained more thoroughly. For what it's worth, it seems javed didn't know what these terms meant so couldn't comprehend the argument fully.

Additionally, he basically tried to make the point that maybe the universe is eternal and I'm not sure whether the deo addressed this or not beyond stating that the universe is contingent. There are several unique ways to prove the universe is not eternal without referring to the big bang, such as:

1. Consider the moment that we are in right now. If the universe has eternally existed, it means an infinite amount of time has elapsed
2. In that case, in one hour, an infinite amount of time plus one hour will have elapsed
3. It's not possible to add to the infinite, otherwise it wasn't infinite in the first place
4. Therefore, an infinite amount of time has not elapsed
5. The universe cannot be eternal as only a finite amount of time has elapsed

Etc

Javed did try to bring up multi verse theory and I think the possibility of an infinite number of big bangs and big crunches having occurred but this would suffer from the same problems. For example, if this has been going on for eternity, then it's happened an infinite number of times already but if it happens again, that's infinity plus one etc.

He also brought up the standard stuff of some religions being against scientific progress etc. Response should be: not all religions are against scientific progress, additionally the existence of God and some religions being against scientific progress are not mutually exclusive etc.

 

It wasn't just the Deobandis, the lite-Salafis like Hamza Tzortzis and the team at Sapience Institute helped the Deo prepare for the debate. Even if one of our own was to debate an atheist, would we be willing to reach out to experts in this field? Nope.

 

William Lane Craig has had bigger debates against Sam Harris etc but... This current one could eclipse those at this rate. The Craig ones have massive views but racked up over several years.

I'm aware the deos have been trying to debate javed to literally years. And a good performance will make them look like intellectuals and help propagate their maslak amongst so many million viewers

 

That in itself is an issue. An atheist can't come up with how good and evil can be defined. That's the first thing Muslims should ask atheists to define based on rationality.

 

Haven't watched it but expect javed to get smashed. Any debate like this boils down to emotional arguments from the atheist which is ironic since they claim to be rational... Even the problem of evil is ultimately an emotional argument because the presence of evil and the existence of God are not mutually exclusive.

Side note- I never really see logical kalaam style arguments in urdu. I'm assuming it's because there are bigger issues to deal with such as Shia etc and atheism is overall never expected to take a strong foothold in Pakistan etc. There were atheists even back in the day and javed akhtar and the like are just continuations of a minority trend. I do think we need more on this in urdu despite this though because:

1. We should always be on the front foot
2. Well presented kalaam style arguments actually increases the respect of the listener for the tradition because if you've never been exposed to it, you don't know it exists. In the same way that a lay person can be impressed by a professor talking about quantum physics and walk away with the concept 'wow, didn't realise people can be so smart'. And suddenly, you're way more amenable to listen to anything these people say just because you think they're geniuses.

 

This debate was huge; 2.5 million views in just 5 hours!

Possibly the biggest Atheism vs Theism debate to date