Allah Always Knows Best. May Allah never allow me to say anything in His disrespect. Everything happens according to His will.
Amen.
I want to elaborate on Oneness as I use it in context of Allah or God and the proper grammatical usage. Proper grammar is important because without proper grammar, language or its sentences and phrase may give a different context or meaning; therefore, I want to emphasize on what I mean by Oneness and why I use it the way I use it.
Oneness is the essence of everything that is—by everything I literally mean everything including but not limited to actions, people, sects, meaning, world, words, sentences, things, table, universe, hear, voice, noise, listening, sight, eyes, smell, roses, perfumes, colognes, taste, pizza, any food or anything at all that we can imagine, conceive by any means, feel through all our senses that is hear, smell, taste, see or touch, anything at all.
If there is nothing then there is Oneness, if there is everything, everything is Oneness, everything is made out of Oneness (I use the word made out loosely, why? more about it following). Each and everything comes from it and each and everything returns to Oneness. When nothing existed, Oneness existed, when nothing will exist, Oneness will exist, when everything is existing, Oneness is existing. Oneness is not a vacuum, as vacuum itself is made of Oneness, Oneness is not nothingness as nothingness is made of Oneness; Therefore, to reiterate myself, Oneness is the all there is, there is nothing but Oneness. Although nothing can be compared to Oneness, as Oneness is above each and everything, but I will try to give an example, may Oneness forgive me, to illustrate what Oneness is. Imagine a colorless piece of cloth. Now, if you make protrusions out of it like putting a finger below it, it will take the form of a protrusion in the form of a finger. Now imagine the colorless cloth is infinitely big and you can make infinite amounts of protrusions in it, Oneness would be analogous to that colorless piece of cloth and protrusions will be anything that exists or conceivable by any means or simply anything that is. Now, you can make protrusions big or small, any size, any color, any shape, or any kind of protrusion but the base material would be the same colorless cloth. You see where I am going with this? Oneness would be like that colorless cloth and protrusions will be anything that there is. At the same time, since the colorless cloth is the same piece, so all protrusions, although having separate identities with shape, color or however, will be made out of the same thing and connected with each other. Exactly, the same way Oneness works. Everything is Oneness but yet maintains its own apparently distinct identity.
People may call this oneness by different names: Allah, Yahweh, Ram, Om, God, Ahura Mazda, Khuda or by any other name. However, I call it Oneness, and find it more appropriate, since that explains it best in English Language. Plus, other names come with historical connotations or baggages, which Oneness does not, and since Oneness is everything, Oneness incorporates all the names too.
I hope that Oneness is clear now and what I mean by it. We are all Oneness, we are just protrusions but we do not realize what we are with obvious exceptions. How to realize Oneness is another discussion, that have been dealt with in previous discussions and will be talked about more in the future.
Oneness, the name, the word itself, should always be used with a capital "O" for respect and it has no sex or gender, so to refer Oneness by He, She or It, will be demeaning or derogatory, by all means, as sex or gender are protrusions of Oneness themselves. Therefore, if Oneness needs to be addressed as a third person, in grammar, then a new term, I am introducing, to maintain the sanctity of Oneness, is and from here on will be used: O. So, if I need to say, for example that Oneness is great: I would say: O is great. If I want to say Oneness is the greatest of all and knows all, I would say: O is the greatest of all and knows all. In another instance, if I would need to say Oneness is love and beauty, I would say: O is love and beauty.
That brings us to another great part, O is love and beauty. There is, and there can never be, anything more beautiful and lovely than O. All the love and beauty in the world is because of Oneness as it comes from within. Love and beauty are subjective and come from within, but where that within comes from is Oneness which is like that colorless cloth connecting us to Oneness and everything around us.
Oneness is a beautiful word, at the same time, I find Allah as a universally beautiful word. Oneness is just an English version for Allah, and clears the understanding behind Allah, as a lot of baggage and connotations have been attached to it. Perhaps, the same thing is true with other names, mentioned earlier or in use for God. However, I am inclined towards Allah, as I find it amazingly beautiful.
Mohammad (Peace Be Upon Him) was a revolutionary, because he said "la illaha illAllah" which is usually translated as "There is no god but Allah" at the same time, it can be translated as "There is no god but God. The first translation can be seen in historical context where Allah was one of the many gods that Arabs had, and Allah was the god of creation or Creator god. Nevertheless, Allah equals God, no matter how one sees it, whether in historical context or whatever context. Therefore, we can derive the second translation where it means "There is no god but God". I am leaving out the second and important part where it says "Muhammad Ur Rassoolullah" or in English: "Muhammad is the messenger of Allah", intentionally for now as it will be discussed in forthcoming discussions, if Oneness Wills. However, coming back to the second translation, for a second forget about it and think if it makes sense to say: there is no I but I or there is no chair but chair or there is no sun but sun. Isn't it an obvious statement? Even may I dare say, unnecessarily redundant. After all, I am me and sun is sun and chair is chair, so what is the point of saying there it no I but I or any similar statements for anything else. I hope, I can convey the redundancy or seemingly unnecessary repetency, about the second translation that there is no God but God. Nevertheless, it serves a purpose, a very important purpose, exactly the reason that Muhammad was a revolutionary, unlike nobody else, since he (Peace Be Upon Him) puts an amazingly beautiful concept in a simple phrase that there is no God but God.
Now why do I say that 'there is no God but God', statement is amazingly beautiful and expounds, transcends love all around with just that even though I showed that it is redundant and repeated. To understand this, we have to dig deeper and understand what is meant by when we say God, or in other words, define God (Although Oneness = God, and I have already deliberated in detail of what Oneness is, I am trying to give an understanding of the word, in the word 'God's' historical context, the way it has been in use by others, since Oneness is a term that I have introduced and has no historical connotation or baggage). We can try at the best, as Allah knows best, as the understanding of God can never be given through words. It can only come from Heart, no words can describe or define God as God is the meaning of a meaning or a definition of a definition. What I mean is: try to give meaning to the word meaning or what does mean mean or how would one define meaning or what is meaning? In other words, what is the definition of a definition or what does one mean by definition or how does one define a definition? Where is the core basic definition or understanding or meaning of it all is coming from?
To understand it better, try to do an exercise, where take any word and define it, then define the word or words or phrase that are given as a definition of your chosen word, then further define the definition of the definition that you came up with for the chosen word, and keep doing it and what you will realize is that it will become circular or/and you will use all the words in the worlds but still fail to reach a core definition where the words defined used to define the chosen word and then further defining the chosen word's definition is undefinable. Therefore, there will be either one of them or both of the following conclusions to the said exercise: 1)the definition on further defining the definition of the chosen words repeated will become repetitive 2) the definition will keep including new words but fail to come to a word that is further indescribable in the sense that it would have no shades of grey of understanding for anyone.
The conclusion 2 is important because when you keep using new words to define the first chosen word, the meaning of words always have a shades of grey to them because we come to understand the meaning of a word or simply understand words through our experiences which we acquire as we are growing up (see also: discussion on exploring feelings). We all share a large chunk of experiences but we do have varied experiences and we begin to realize the differences in our understanding or meaning of words when we explore concepts in detail, for example love. We all have experienced love. We can have a discourse on love and listen and do things that comply to our understanding of love but when we elaborate on love, we see that our understanding is not exactly same. The same is true with justice, truth or any other word—especially the metaphysical concepts, that no two people will share the same exact understanding or meaning of a word when elaborated large enough. And we see the differences in meaning of concepts accentuated or standing out, when we meet people from different cultures, as they have vastly different experiences. However, we will also see that when we give a word to a single physical object, then we have exactly same experiences related to that physical object. However, when we try to use the same word for other physical objects, based on whatever similarities, we will encounter the same problem of shades of grey of understanding. A simple example can be chair. Now we all can imagine a chair, but when we come to defining a chair, our definitions might be different, even if they are similar once we further define the definition, we will start seeing the shades of grey. However, coming back to the conclusion 2, we will see that each word that explains the another word, will have a shade of grey and we encounter problems when we meet people with different shades of grey or different understanding of words than we have.
Therefore, it will never be possible to reach a word or a definition where we have exactly the same meaning and understanding, as we see the more words the bigger the spectrum of grey, thus the bigger the understanding gap. We can arbitrarily choose, a definition and ignore our experiences to reach a consensus but that would be us giving a meaning subjectively, rather than an absolute meaning. I guess, the reason that there is an absence of an absolute objective core word or definition of meaning without any shades of grey at all, that Wittgenstein called language "a game".
Nevertheless, I do not think that an absolute meaning without any shades of grey is missing, its just not realized or rather is unrealizable through words, logic or reason and that absolute meaning where all other meanings originate from is: God or Allah or Oneness. One of my great masters, Mevlana Jalaluddin Rumi once said: “That oneness you can't know by reasoning”.
Now, as a skeptic one would argue, its understandable that there might be no absolute word or definition without shades of grey but God as a source of all meaning? That does not follow through.
I understand and allow me to explain please.
To say there is no core absolute meaning to language and our communication is at best the conjecture based on shared experiences would render all our communication meaningless, imagine how dull, lonely, meaningless our communication or I even dare say, our existence will be. Whatever we are conveying, has no core basis to it, we are just reflecting back and forth some noises which just allow us to have actions that allow us to live on or carry on our life. There will be no sense no of selflessness, as we can never be selfless, as our only basis of communicating are our experiences, and we can only understand the other person through our own experiences, without ever, ever truly understanding the other person based on the sheer basis of other person's experiences. If we are involving ourselves in every communication, through our experiences, then how can we be selfless right?
Therefore, there has to be something at the core of it all, that is separate from us, yet connecting us, the core meaning per se, to have a selfless attitude and to have a "meaningful" conversation or communication.
From here on, logic or reason has no role to play, as I said earlier, the core or absolute meaning is unrealizable through words. It is based on feeling, that I am not trapped within my mind and that I can understand others based on their experiences without including my own experiences because I feel the presence of an absolute meaning. I feel that selfless actions exists, and that humans are very much capable of them. Even if I try, I cannot shun or ignore this feeling. To explain more, let me explain what I mean by the word or my usage of the word feeling. Apart from the physical stimuli that we get from our five senses, there are two more things present that make up a human consciousness or simply a human. These two things are: thoughts and feelings. Thoughts are what one might call intentions of the mind that occur straight from the mind and they happen as it is in the form of words. When I think, I am a good person, if the phrase: I am good person occurs directly, then it is a thought. Feelings on the other hand is what one might call intentions of the heart and they occur without words. We just feel. We feel and then give words to them, to explain what they are. They might also be described as a person's convictions without words. Using the same example that we used for thoughts. If I feel I am a good person, a feeling of goodness or a feeling of whatever might arise and then I will give it words, that I feel I am a good person. Therefore, if something occurs directly in us in the form of words, they are thoughts. If something occurs in us, which are not in the form of words, but we give words afterwards to describe it, then they are feelings. A feeling is a very distinct, undeniable experience from within, which needs words to be described. A person in which a feeling is rising, will know what the feeling is or what it is trying the person to compel to do something. To explain to the other person, the person in which the feeling rose, the person will look for words that will try to best explain the feeling. If the same person is explaining thoughts to the other person, then the person would not need any looking for words as the thought itself, occurred in the form of words.
Therefore, I feel the existence of an absolute meaning and I cannot deny it as I said before, even if I tried. Without this feeling, I will find it hopeless that communication has any more intrinsic value than self gratification. Since I do not find myself hopeless, therefore, the feeling might exist even if I do not identify it. In other words, this feeling also compels me to identify that an objective truth exists even without my existence, though I would only know it through my existence.
Now that I have connected the existence of an absolute meaning albeit my feelings, what is left is to connect the fact that this absolute meaning is indeed God or Allah or Oneness Oself. To do that, we have to first understand, what God is and God is Oneness, which is I like to call universally as Allah. I have already explained in detail, or at least attempted it, since Allah Knows Best, Oneness is everything. So, this feeling and absolute meaning both are Oneness. I have also mentioned that feelings come from within which in turn come from Oneness. Therefore, the absolute meaning is Oneness or God or Allah Oself.
After establishing the fact, that all meaning in the world or all meaning in human consciousness is derived from Allah or Oneness, we go back to our primary motive of why the statement "there is no god but God" absolutely beautiful, even though we saw that it was redundant and seemingly unnecessarily repetitive.
For one, the repetitiveness just shows and hints the redundancy of the existence of Allah or Oneness. Although I introduced the word Oneness, the reality of the matter is, the whole idea and discourse behind Oneness and that nothing existing except Oneness is simply stated beautifully through the statement: "there is no god but God". The redundancy and repetitiveness of the phrase is the most beautiful thing about it, as it includes and illustrates the idea of Oneness just so simply which has no historical precedence and no succession. Leonardo Da Vince said: "Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication" and this phrase is the perfect example of what Leonardo said.
Secondly, since God is everything, if we replace god by everything, we get: "there is no everything but God" or easily put "there is nothing but God." Therefore, bringing us a full cycle back to from where we started, with Oneness or Allah that there is nothing existing but just Allah Oself. Also, showing that Oneness is not a new concept or inclusion that I have brought, the name Oneness was just necessary to remove the historical connotations and baggage from Allah to show the essence of "La Illaha IllAllah" that "there is nothing but God". Plus, since Allah is a universally beautiful term and Oneness is just its English form, we can say the same statement as: "there is nothing but Allah" that nothing exists except Allah that Allah truly is One. If there is no other, if there is nothing else but Allah, if nothing is except Allah, then it is undeniable that Allah is One.
Third: it also brings into its fold, the idea that words when stretched become repetitive, from our exercise's conclusion 1, which again could just be another sign that there is just the repetitiveness of Allah all around, anywhere, everywhere. Each and every word, points to the repetitiveness of Allah for Allah is the only existence there is, when there is nothing but something, its bound to be repetitive. If we take the colorless cloth example again, how is it possible that the protrusions do not have the repetitiveness of the material they are made from? How is it possible that each and every protrusion provides nothing but the qualities of the original cloth? Therefore, it is not possible with the world as well, and each and everything in it, to yell and mean nothing but Allah as well, since it is nothing but Allah or Oneness.
Fourthly, the conclusion 2 from the exercise when explained further made us reach to the result that the core meaning of any language or word or phrase or sentence, is indeed Allah or Oneness.
Everything points to the existence of the One and Only, Indeed the One and Only, the Infinite, the most Overwhelming, the most Beautiful or for me, simply, Love—none other than Allah. And, Prophet Mohammad (Peace Be Upon Him) is the person, the messenger, who blatantly and simply, noted the obvious without any doubt, that it was divinely inspired.
Allah Knows Best. May Allah never allow me to say anything in Os disrespect. May Allah forgive me for my blatant excesses in this discussion. Nothing happens without the Will of Allah. Amen.
Amen.
I want to elaborate on Oneness as I use it in context of Allah or God and the proper grammatical usage. Proper grammar is important because without proper grammar, language or its sentences and phrase may give a different context or meaning; therefore, I want to emphasize on what I mean by Oneness and why I use it the way I use it.
Oneness is the essence of everything that is—by everything I literally mean everything including but not limited to actions, people, sects, meaning, world, words, sentences, things, table, universe, hear, voice, noise, listening, sight, eyes, smell, roses, perfumes, colognes, taste, pizza, any food or anything at all that we can imagine, conceive by any means, feel through all our senses that is hear, smell, taste, see or touch, anything at all.
If there is nothing then there is Oneness, if there is everything, everything is Oneness, everything is made out of Oneness (I use the word made out loosely, why? more about it following). Each and everything comes from it and each and everything returns to Oneness. When nothing existed, Oneness existed, when nothing will exist, Oneness will exist, when everything is existing, Oneness is existing. Oneness is not a vacuum, as vacuum itself is made of Oneness, Oneness is not nothingness as nothingness is made of Oneness; Therefore, to reiterate myself, Oneness is the all there is, there is nothing but Oneness. Although nothing can be compared to Oneness, as Oneness is above each and everything, but I will try to give an example, may Oneness forgive me, to illustrate what Oneness is. Imagine a colorless piece of cloth. Now, if you make protrusions out of it like putting a finger below it, it will take the form of a protrusion in the form of a finger. Now imagine the colorless cloth is infinitely big and you can make infinite amounts of protrusions in it, Oneness would be analogous to that colorless piece of cloth and protrusions will be anything that exists or conceivable by any means or simply anything that is. Now, you can make protrusions big or small, any size, any color, any shape, or any kind of protrusion but the base material would be the same colorless cloth. You see where I am going with this? Oneness would be like that colorless cloth and protrusions will be anything that there is. At the same time, since the colorless cloth is the same piece, so all protrusions, although having separate identities with shape, color or however, will be made out of the same thing and connected with each other. Exactly, the same way Oneness works. Everything is Oneness but yet maintains its own apparently distinct identity.
People may call this oneness by different names: Allah, Yahweh, Ram, Om, God, Ahura Mazda, Khuda or by any other name. However, I call it Oneness, and find it more appropriate, since that explains it best in English Language. Plus, other names come with historical connotations or baggages, which Oneness does not, and since Oneness is everything, Oneness incorporates all the names too.
I hope that Oneness is clear now and what I mean by it. We are all Oneness, we are just protrusions but we do not realize what we are with obvious exceptions. How to realize Oneness is another discussion, that have been dealt with in previous discussions and will be talked about more in the future.
Oneness, the name, the word itself, should always be used with a capital "O" for respect and it has no sex or gender, so to refer Oneness by He, She or It, will be demeaning or derogatory, by all means, as sex or gender are protrusions of Oneness themselves. Therefore, if Oneness needs to be addressed as a third person, in grammar, then a new term, I am introducing, to maintain the sanctity of Oneness, is and from here on will be used: O. So, if I need to say, for example that Oneness is great: I would say: O is great. If I want to say Oneness is the greatest of all and knows all, I would say: O is the greatest of all and knows all. In another instance, if I would need to say Oneness is love and beauty, I would say: O is love and beauty.
That brings us to another great part, O is love and beauty. There is, and there can never be, anything more beautiful and lovely than O. All the love and beauty in the world is because of Oneness as it comes from within. Love and beauty are subjective and come from within, but where that within comes from is Oneness which is like that colorless cloth connecting us to Oneness and everything around us.
Oneness is a beautiful word, at the same time, I find Allah as a universally beautiful word. Oneness is just an English version for Allah, and clears the understanding behind Allah, as a lot of baggage and connotations have been attached to it. Perhaps, the same thing is true with other names, mentioned earlier or in use for God. However, I am inclined towards Allah, as I find it amazingly beautiful.
Mohammad (Peace Be Upon Him) was a revolutionary, because he said "la illaha illAllah" which is usually translated as "There is no god but Allah" at the same time, it can be translated as "There is no god but God. The first translation can be seen in historical context where Allah was one of the many gods that Arabs had, and Allah was the god of creation or Creator god. Nevertheless, Allah equals God, no matter how one sees it, whether in historical context or whatever context. Therefore, we can derive the second translation where it means "There is no god but God". I am leaving out the second and important part where it says "Muhammad Ur Rassoolullah" or in English: "Muhammad is the messenger of Allah", intentionally for now as it will be discussed in forthcoming discussions, if Oneness Wills. However, coming back to the second translation, for a second forget about it and think if it makes sense to say: there is no I but I or there is no chair but chair or there is no sun but sun. Isn't it an obvious statement? Even may I dare say, unnecessarily redundant. After all, I am me and sun is sun and chair is chair, so what is the point of saying there it no I but I or any similar statements for anything else. I hope, I can convey the redundancy or seemingly unnecessary repetency, about the second translation that there is no God but God. Nevertheless, it serves a purpose, a very important purpose, exactly the reason that Muhammad was a revolutionary, unlike nobody else, since he (Peace Be Upon Him) puts an amazingly beautiful concept in a simple phrase that there is no God but God.
Now why do I say that 'there is no God but God', statement is amazingly beautiful and expounds, transcends love all around with just that even though I showed that it is redundant and repeated. To understand this, we have to dig deeper and understand what is meant by when we say God, or in other words, define God (Although Oneness = God, and I have already deliberated in detail of what Oneness is, I am trying to give an understanding of the word, in the word 'God's' historical context, the way it has been in use by others, since Oneness is a term that I have introduced and has no historical connotation or baggage). We can try at the best, as Allah knows best, as the understanding of God can never be given through words. It can only come from Heart, no words can describe or define God as God is the meaning of a meaning or a definition of a definition. What I mean is: try to give meaning to the word meaning or what does mean mean or how would one define meaning or what is meaning? In other words, what is the definition of a definition or what does one mean by definition or how does one define a definition? Where is the core basic definition or understanding or meaning of it all is coming from?
To understand it better, try to do an exercise, where take any word and define it, then define the word or words or phrase that are given as a definition of your chosen word, then further define the definition of the definition that you came up with for the chosen word, and keep doing it and what you will realize is that it will become circular or/and you will use all the words in the worlds but still fail to reach a core definition where the words defined used to define the chosen word and then further defining the chosen word's definition is undefinable. Therefore, there will be either one of them or both of the following conclusions to the said exercise: 1)the definition on further defining the definition of the chosen words repeated will become repetitive 2) the definition will keep including new words but fail to come to a word that is further indescribable in the sense that it would have no shades of grey of understanding for anyone.
The conclusion 2 is important because when you keep using new words to define the first chosen word, the meaning of words always have a shades of grey to them because we come to understand the meaning of a word or simply understand words through our experiences which we acquire as we are growing up (see also: discussion on exploring feelings). We all share a large chunk of experiences but we do have varied experiences and we begin to realize the differences in our understanding or meaning of words when we explore concepts in detail, for example love. We all have experienced love. We can have a discourse on love and listen and do things that comply to our understanding of love but when we elaborate on love, we see that our understanding is not exactly same. The same is true with justice, truth or any other word—especially the metaphysical concepts, that no two people will share the same exact understanding or meaning of a word when elaborated large enough. And we see the differences in meaning of concepts accentuated or standing out, when we meet people from different cultures, as they have vastly different experiences. However, we will also see that when we give a word to a single physical object, then we have exactly same experiences related to that physical object. However, when we try to use the same word for other physical objects, based on whatever similarities, we will encounter the same problem of shades of grey of understanding. A simple example can be chair. Now we all can imagine a chair, but when we come to defining a chair, our definitions might be different, even if they are similar once we further define the definition, we will start seeing the shades of grey. However, coming back to the conclusion 2, we will see that each word that explains the another word, will have a shade of grey and we encounter problems when we meet people with different shades of grey or different understanding of words than we have.
Therefore, it will never be possible to reach a word or a definition where we have exactly the same meaning and understanding, as we see the more words the bigger the spectrum of grey, thus the bigger the understanding gap. We can arbitrarily choose, a definition and ignore our experiences to reach a consensus but that would be us giving a meaning subjectively, rather than an absolute meaning. I guess, the reason that there is an absence of an absolute objective core word or definition of meaning without any shades of grey at all, that Wittgenstein called language "a game".
Nevertheless, I do not think that an absolute meaning without any shades of grey is missing, its just not realized or rather is unrealizable through words, logic or reason and that absolute meaning where all other meanings originate from is: God or Allah or Oneness. One of my great masters, Mevlana Jalaluddin Rumi once said: “That oneness you can't know by reasoning”.
Now, as a skeptic one would argue, its understandable that there might be no absolute word or definition without shades of grey but God as a source of all meaning? That does not follow through.
I understand and allow me to explain please.
To say there is no core absolute meaning to language and our communication is at best the conjecture based on shared experiences would render all our communication meaningless, imagine how dull, lonely, meaningless our communication or I even dare say, our existence will be. Whatever we are conveying, has no core basis to it, we are just reflecting back and forth some noises which just allow us to have actions that allow us to live on or carry on our life. There will be no sense no of selflessness, as we can never be selfless, as our only basis of communicating are our experiences, and we can only understand the other person through our own experiences, without ever, ever truly understanding the other person based on the sheer basis of other person's experiences. If we are involving ourselves in every communication, through our experiences, then how can we be selfless right?
Therefore, there has to be something at the core of it all, that is separate from us, yet connecting us, the core meaning per se, to have a selfless attitude and to have a "meaningful" conversation or communication.
From here on, logic or reason has no role to play, as I said earlier, the core or absolute meaning is unrealizable through words. It is based on feeling, that I am not trapped within my mind and that I can understand others based on their experiences without including my own experiences because I feel the presence of an absolute meaning. I feel that selfless actions exists, and that humans are very much capable of them. Even if I try, I cannot shun or ignore this feeling. To explain more, let me explain what I mean by the word or my usage of the word feeling. Apart from the physical stimuli that we get from our five senses, there are two more things present that make up a human consciousness or simply a human. These two things are: thoughts and feelings. Thoughts are what one might call intentions of the mind that occur straight from the mind and they happen as it is in the form of words. When I think, I am a good person, if the phrase: I am good person occurs directly, then it is a thought. Feelings on the other hand is what one might call intentions of the heart and they occur without words. We just feel. We feel and then give words to them, to explain what they are. They might also be described as a person's convictions without words. Using the same example that we used for thoughts. If I feel I am a good person, a feeling of goodness or a feeling of whatever might arise and then I will give it words, that I feel I am a good person. Therefore, if something occurs directly in us in the form of words, they are thoughts. If something occurs in us, which are not in the form of words, but we give words afterwards to describe it, then they are feelings. A feeling is a very distinct, undeniable experience from within, which needs words to be described. A person in which a feeling is rising, will know what the feeling is or what it is trying the person to compel to do something. To explain to the other person, the person in which the feeling rose, the person will look for words that will try to best explain the feeling. If the same person is explaining thoughts to the other person, then the person would not need any looking for words as the thought itself, occurred in the form of words.
Therefore, I feel the existence of an absolute meaning and I cannot deny it as I said before, even if I tried. Without this feeling, I will find it hopeless that communication has any more intrinsic value than self gratification. Since I do not find myself hopeless, therefore, the feeling might exist even if I do not identify it. In other words, this feeling also compels me to identify that an objective truth exists even without my existence, though I would only know it through my existence.
Now that I have connected the existence of an absolute meaning albeit my feelings, what is left is to connect the fact that this absolute meaning is indeed God or Allah or Oneness Oself. To do that, we have to first understand, what God is and God is Oneness, which is I like to call universally as Allah. I have already explained in detail, or at least attempted it, since Allah Knows Best, Oneness is everything. So, this feeling and absolute meaning both are Oneness. I have also mentioned that feelings come from within which in turn come from Oneness. Therefore, the absolute meaning is Oneness or God or Allah Oself.
After establishing the fact, that all meaning in the world or all meaning in human consciousness is derived from Allah or Oneness, we go back to our primary motive of why the statement "there is no god but God" absolutely beautiful, even though we saw that it was redundant and seemingly unnecessarily repetitive.
For one, the repetitiveness just shows and hints the redundancy of the existence of Allah or Oneness. Although I introduced the word Oneness, the reality of the matter is, the whole idea and discourse behind Oneness and that nothing existing except Oneness is simply stated beautifully through the statement: "there is no god but God". The redundancy and repetitiveness of the phrase is the most beautiful thing about it, as it includes and illustrates the idea of Oneness just so simply which has no historical precedence and no succession. Leonardo Da Vince said: "Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication" and this phrase is the perfect example of what Leonardo said.
Secondly, since God is everything, if we replace god by everything, we get: "there is no everything but God" or easily put "there is nothing but God." Therefore, bringing us a full cycle back to from where we started, with Oneness or Allah that there is nothing existing but just Allah Oself. Also, showing that Oneness is not a new concept or inclusion that I have brought, the name Oneness was just necessary to remove the historical connotations and baggage from Allah to show the essence of "La Illaha IllAllah" that "there is nothing but God". Plus, since Allah is a universally beautiful term and Oneness is just its English form, we can say the same statement as: "there is nothing but Allah" that nothing exists except Allah that Allah truly is One. If there is no other, if there is nothing else but Allah, if nothing is except Allah, then it is undeniable that Allah is One.
Third: it also brings into its fold, the idea that words when stretched become repetitive, from our exercise's conclusion 1, which again could just be another sign that there is just the repetitiveness of Allah all around, anywhere, everywhere. Each and every word, points to the repetitiveness of Allah for Allah is the only existence there is, when there is nothing but something, its bound to be repetitive. If we take the colorless cloth example again, how is it possible that the protrusions do not have the repetitiveness of the material they are made from? How is it possible that each and every protrusion provides nothing but the qualities of the original cloth? Therefore, it is not possible with the world as well, and each and everything in it, to yell and mean nothing but Allah as well, since it is nothing but Allah or Oneness.
Fourthly, the conclusion 2 from the exercise when explained further made us reach to the result that the core meaning of any language or word or phrase or sentence, is indeed Allah or Oneness.
Everything points to the existence of the One and Only, Indeed the One and Only, the Infinite, the most Overwhelming, the most Beautiful or for me, simply, Love—none other than Allah. And, Prophet Mohammad (Peace Be Upon Him) is the person, the messenger, who blatantly and simply, noted the obvious without any doubt, that it was divinely inspired.
Allah Knows Best. May Allah never allow me to say anything in Os disrespect. May Allah forgive me for my blatant excesses in this discussion. Nothing happens without the Will of Allah. Amen.
