Allah is ENERGY

[sealchan]

Matter is energy; energy is matter. Energy can be quantified. Is Allah material? Can Allah be quantified?

I have heard it said that the net energy of the Universe is zero. Like some great profusion of virtual particles that arose in a self-organizing, self reproducing fashion out of nothing which may or may not return to that nothing.

Is Allah this?

 

[Duke_Leto]

I have heard it said that the net energy of the Universe is zero. Like some great profusion of virtual particles that arose in a self-organizing, self reproducing fashion out of nothing which may or may not return to that nothing.

Is Allah this?

The zero-energy hypothesis is that ‘negative’ energy is balanced out by ‘positive’ energy, not that energy doesn’t exist — In the same way that a magnet possesses both a positive and negative end, but still has a magnetic field. You sound like you’ve been misled by a woo-y Youtube video or something that misrepresents science in order to sound impressive.

Unless you have a panentheistic understanding of God; that is, you believe the entire universe is God, then God cannot be “just” energy, because energy is quantifiable and qualifiable — Which is to say that God is finite and his nature can be understood. This is not the Islamic understanding of God.

Energy would be a creation of God. It cannot be God unless all is God.

 

[sealchan]

The zero-energy hypothesis is that ‘negative’ energy is balanced out by ‘positive’ energy, not that energy doesn’t exist — In the same way that a magnet possesses both a positive and negative end, but still has a magnetic field.

Unless you have a panentheistic understanding of God; that is, you believe the entire universe is God, then God cannot be “just” energy, because energy is quantifiable and qualifiable — Which is to say that God is finite and his nature can be understood. This is not the Islamic understanding of God.

Energy would be a creation of God. It cannot be God unless all is God.

Well in that quantification we have the law of conservation of energy and I think the zero-energy hypothesis allows that law to be thoroughly consistent.

I agree with you.

God is energy should be seen as a metaphor, not an equation. And all metaphors have their limited scope even if they are deeply moving.

 

[exchemist]

Scientifically, nothing is energy - things have energy nothing can be energy: Matter and Energy: A False Dichotomy



Nonsense (see above). Oh and E= mc^2 is about energy and mass (not matter) - nothing can be mass either.

Nice link. Strassler is good value.

 

[exchemist]

So you cannot explain consciousness (mind)?

A bid for non-sequitur of the week award?

 

[sealchan]

The zero-energy hypothesis is that ‘negative’ energy is balanced out by ‘positive’ energy, not that energy doesn’t exist — In the same way that a magnet possesses both a positive and negative end, but still has a magnetic field. You sound like you’ve been misled by a woo-y Youtube video or something that misrepresents science in order to sound impressive.

Unless you have a panentheistic understanding of God; that is, you believe the entire universe is God, then God cannot be “just” energy, because energy is quantifiable and qualifiable — Which is to say that God is finite and his nature can be understood. This is not the Islamic understanding of God.

Energy would be a creation of God. It cannot be God unless all is God.

I see God as something very much like zero-energy...whom I call The Nothing-Yet of Infinite Potential. God has this perplexing quality of being present to so many yet having no substance to prove in a lab. He/She/It is clear as day to those who believe and yet as varied as the selection of beverages in the Beer and Wine aisle at the grocery store.

 

[viole]

Well in that quantification we have the law of conservation of energy and I think the zero-energy hypothesis allows that law to be thoroughly consistent.

I agree with you.

God is energy should be seen as a metaphor, not an equation. And all metaphors have their limited scope even if they are deeply moving.

Well, i hope it is a metaphor. I cannot imagine a God being measurable in calories.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Matheist]

A bid for non-sequitur of the week award?

Not at all:

1. Energy exists.

2. Everything is Energy (1).

3. Therefore, Energy is God/The LordLaw of the Universe.

4. You are not Energy (but transformation of Energy).

5. Therefore, you have no existence.​

 

[exchemist]

Not at all:

1. Energy exists.

2. Everything is Energy (1).

3. Therefore, Energy is God/The LordLaw of the Universe.

4. You are not Energy (but transformation of Energy).

5. Therefore, you have no existence.​

1) Energy does not exist of itself: as other have pointed out, energy is a property of a physical system. It is an attribute, not an entity.

2) Everything is not energy. Clearly, since energy is a mere property of a system, the system itself cannot be energy.

3) Even if the first two statements had been true, this would still be a non sequitur.

4) A true statement! (Well the first half: the second does not make sense.)

5) Idiotic. Cogito ergo sum. It is you that doesn't exist....obviously.

 

[Matheist]

1) Energy does not exist of itself: as other have pointed out, energy is a property of a physical system. It is an attribute, not an entity.

So you're saying "the capacity for doing work" does not exist of itself, this make sense?

2) Everything is not energy. Clearly, since energy is a mere property of a system, the system itself cannot be energy.

The "system or capacity for doing work" is not Energy, and this also makes sense to you?

3) Even if the first two statements had been true, this would still be a non sequitur.

Why not? It proves you have no existence. Only ENERGY (GOD) exists.

4) A true statement! (Well the first half: the second does not make sense.)

Therefore God exists.

5) Idiotic. Cogito ergo sum. It is you that doesn't exist....obviously.

How? Can you prove your existence?

 

[exchemist]

So you're saying "the capacity for doing work" does not exist of itself, this make sense?



The "system or capacity for doing work" is not Energy, and this also makes sense to you?



Why not? It proves you have no existence. Only ENERGY (GOD) exists.



Therefore God exists.



How? Can you prove your existence?

To take the last first, cogito ergo sum does the trick nicely, I find.

Regarding energy, yes exactly, it makes perfect sense, The capacity for doing work is a property of a system, not something that can exist by itself. Consider: if you give me an example of a system, I can explain how one would set about determining its capacity for doing work. But in the absence of a system it is an impossible exercise. Thus, a capacity for doing work cannot exist by itself, any more than the colour "green" can exist by itself. It has to apply to a green "something" (an object, a ray of light, etc). Green is an attribute of something, not an entity in its own right.

Now, if your conception of God is the capacity for doing work, that is OK, so long as you realise that God is then an attribute of physical entities (a sort of soul, perhaps?) but has no independent existence.

 

[Matheist]

it makes perfect sense, The capacity for doing work is a property of a system, not something that can exist by itself.

What is there in existence other than "the capacity for doing work / make changes"?

 

[Niblo]

‘Allāh is the Light of the heavens and earth. His Light is like this: there is a niche, and in it a lamp, the lamp inside a glass, a glass like a glittering star, fuelled from a blessed olive tree from neither east nor west, whose oil almost gives light even when no fire touches it – light upon light – Allāh guides whoever He will to his Light; Allāh draws such comparisons for people; Allāh has full knowledge of everything – shining out in houses of worship. Allāh has ordained that they be raised high and that His name be remembered in them, with men in them celebrating His glory morning and evening: men who are not distracted, either by commerce or profit, from remembering Allāh, keeping up the prayer, and paying the pre-scribed alms, fearing a day when hearts and eyes will turn over. Allāh will reward such people according to the best of their actions, and He will give them more of His bounty: Allāh provides limitlessly for anyone He will.’ (Al-Nur: 35-38).

The sūrah is named after the ‘Verse of Light’ (35) in which the light of Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla)’s is contrasted to the darkness of the disbelievers.

It is a mistake to confuse the Exalted with anything physical (with energy and so on).

Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla) tells us that: ‘There is nothing like Him (ka’mith'lihi).’ (Al-Shura 11).

Ka’mithlihi is a word that uses two letters to describe likeness. The first (‘kaf’) is used to liken one thing to another to a great degree. The second (‘mithl’) likens one thing to another to a small degree. Linguistically, therefore, Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla) is telling us that nothing at all can be compared to Him, not in the slightest degree.

The ‘Verse of Light’ is allegorical; and many interpretations have been made, perhaps the most famous being Al-Ghazali’s ‘Mishkat Al-Anwar.’

 

[Matheist]

Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla) tells us that: ‘There is nothing like Him (ka’mith'lihi).’ (Al-Shura 11).

Do you then believe in a part of the Book and disbelieve in the other? (Quran 2:85)

Here are the contradictions from your interpretation:

Allah is the LordLaw of the Universe. (Quran 1:2)

That is Allah [what is Allah? Allah is] your LordLaw. There is no LordLaw but Him [What is the LordLaw? It is] the Creator of everything [LordLaw of Nature]. So serve Him [Natural Order]. He is responsible for everything [of its Cause & Effect]. (Quran 6:102)

That is Allah [what is Allah? Allah is] your LordLaw [What is the LordLaw? It is] the Creator of everything [LordLaw of Nature]. There is no LordLaw but Him — so how can you be so deluded? (Quran 40:62)​

When he came to the Fire he was called: "O Moses. I (FIRE) am ALLAH!" (Quran 20:13)

(Like the fire of Moses which he saw as what he needed. It was Allah but he did not perceive it.)

Moses said ‘[Allah is] LordLaw of the East and West and everything between them. If you would only use your reason!’ (Quran 26:28)​

History

Sufi metaphysics - Wikipedia

Therefore in order for your interpretation to be valid, you must first prove your translation and interpretation has no inconsistencies with other verses from the Quran, and proving the Muhkamat (FACT).

Why don’t they research the (translations and interpretations of the) Qur’an? Don’t they realize that if it(s translations and interpretations of the) was from someone other than Allah/Truth, they would find many discrepancies in it. (Quran 4:82)
​

My argument "nothing like Him" means "1 (Energy)" is not equal to "0 (matter)". There is no reality but Energy. We are the manifestation of Energy (Allah).

 

[exchemist]

What is there in existence other than "the capacity for doing work / make changes"?

Atoms. Planets. Chickens. Grains of sand. And so on.

 

[Matheist]

Atoms. Planets. Chickens. Grains of sand. And so on.

Okay, bye.

 

[Niblo]

…………………

You reference part of Al-Baqara 25. I assume you mean this part:

‘So do you believe in some parts of the Scripture and not in others? The punishment for those of you who do this will be nothing but disgrace in this life, and on the Day of Resurrection they will be condemned to the harshest torment: Allāh is not unaware of what you do.’

Where, in my previous post have I expressed – or even implied – disbelief in the Qur’an?

I referenced Al-Shura 11; and explained the meaning of the Arabic ‘There is nothing like Him (ka’mith'lihi).’

You draw my attention to Ta Ha 13. Here is the verse in its context:

‘Has the story of Moses come to you (Prophet)? He saw a fire and said to his people, ‘Stay here – I can see a fire. Maybe I can bring you a flaming brand from it or find some guidance there.’ When he came to the fire, he was summoned, ‘Moses! I am your Lord. Take off your shoes: you are in the sacred valley of Tuwa. I have chosen you, so listen to what is being revealed. I am Allāh; there is no god but Me. So worship Me and keep up the prayer so that you remember Me.’ (Ta Ha: 9-13).

Seyyed Hossein Nasr writes:

‘It is said that in the valley God called to Moses from a tree that was a kind of lycium or boxthorn (ʿawsaj) plant. It thus refers to the tree or, alternately, to the fire that Moses perceived and which consumed the tree.’ (‘The Study Quran: A New Translation and Commentary).

The fire was the means by which Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla) attracted Moses to the place where He wished to speak with him. There is nothing in the sūrah to suggest that the Exalted was either the tree, or the fire.

You write:

‘My argument "nothing like Him" means "1 (Energy)" is not equal to "0 (matter)". There is no reality but Energy. We are the manifestation of Energy (Allah).’

Your argument is for you, and you are most welcome to it. Linguistically it makes no sense, since the Arabic for ‘energy’ is not ka’mith'lihi but ṭāqa; but, hey, don’t let that stand in your way!

‘Say (Prophet), ‘Disbelievers: I do not worship what you worship, you do not worship what I worship, I will never worship what you worship, you will never worship what I worship: you have your religion and I have mine.’ (Al-Kafirun).

Goodbye, and thank you for your time.

 

[Matheist]

You reference part of Al-Baqara 25. I assume you mean this part:

‘So do you believe in some parts of the Scripture and not in others? The punishment for those of you who do this will be nothing but disgrace in this life, and on the Day of Resurrection they will be condemned to the harshest torment: Allāh is not unaware of what you do.’

Where, in my previous post have I expressed – or even implied – disbelief in the Qur’an?

I referenced Al-Shura 11; and explained the meaning of the Arabic ‘There is nothing like Him (ka’mith'lihi).’

You draw my attention to Ta Ha 13. Here is the verse in its context:

‘Has the story of Moses come to you (Prophet)? He saw a fire and said to his people, ‘Stay here – I can see a fire. Maybe I can bring you a flaming brand from it or find some guidance there.’ When he came to the fire, he was summoned, ‘Moses! I am your Lord. Take off your shoes: you are in the sacred valley of Tuwa. I have chosen you, so listen to what is being revealed. I am Allāh; there is no god but Me. So worship Me and keep up the prayer so that you remember Me.’ (Ta Ha: 9-13).

Seyyed Hossein Nasr writes:

‘It is said that in the valley God called to Moses from a tree that was a kind of lycium or boxthorn (ʿawsaj) plant. It thus refers to the tree or, alternately, to the fire that Moses perceived and which consumed the tree.’ (‘The Study Quran: A New Translation and Commentary).

The fire was the means by which Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla) attracted Moses to the place where He wished to speak with him. There is nothing in the sūrah to suggest that the Exalted was either the tree, or the fire.

You write:

‘My argument "nothing like Him" means "1 (Energy)" is not equal to "0 (matter)". There is no reality but Energy. We are the manifestation of Energy (Allah).’

Your argument is for you, and you are most welcome to it. Linguistically it makes no sense, since the Arabic for ‘energy’ is not ka’mith'lihi but ṭāqa; but, hey, don’t let that stand in your way!

‘Say (Prophet), ‘Disbelievers: I do not worship what you worship, you do not worship what I worship, I will never worship what you worship, you will never worship what I worship: you have your religion and I have mine.’ (Al-Kafirun).

Goodbye, and thank you for your time.

That's what it said:

Do you then believe in a part of the Book (some principles or rulings) and disbelieve in the other (principles or rulings)? (Quran 2:85)

IF YES, THEN it is not from Allah but the evidence for your "cherry picking translations/interpretations": Verse 4:82.

But as for those with sickness in their hearts, it (the Quran) adds defilement to their defilement, and they die kuffar. (Quran 9:125)

So there is no merit in simply quoting whatever verses from the Quran and claim it from Allah, but you need to prove Muhkamat (consistency of interpretations).

 

[Matheist]

Linguistically it makes no sense, since the Arabic for ‘energy’ is not ka’mith'lihi but ṭāqa; but, hey, don’t let that stand in your way!

It is not linguistically, but metaphorically... "SIGNS"

The metaphor of His Light is that of ... (Quran 24:35)​

AND

We [ = Way of Allah = Sunnatullah = Nature = Natural Order/Signs = Logic = Cause & Effect = Logic = Proofs and Evidences] are responsible for its interpretation. (Quran 75:19)​

ELSE, Shirk

Therefore linguistic, grammar or top ulema etc is not the conclusive evidence, but it is natural signs and logic (the Unlettered interpretation methodology).

 

[The Anointed]

This is still scientifically illiterate nonsense from an article written by a tax advisor.

As I have said before, it is irrelevant who recorded the results of some of the greatest minds in the field of Quantum physics, those results are proven fact, all is but energy converted to that which we perceive as Matter and will one day be reconverted to the eternal energy which has neither beginning or end.