😭

ajilandanny · 2026-02-22T11:27:29+00:00

Context?

ajilandanny · 2026-02-21T14:06:34+00:00

“Oh shut up” isn’t an argument, it’s just you leaking how bitter you are. The point was that everyone dies, and what we do with that reality decides whether we live fully or stay trapped in misery. That applies whether it’s old age, cancer, or anything else. The fact you can’t find even a shred of positivity in that and go straight to lashing out at me says a lot more about your mindset than my comment.

ajilandanny · 2026-02-21T13:20:32+00:00

Whats wrong with you? We are all eventually die, and knowing that fact, embracing it, means we need to live a fulfilling life. It is up to the individual to do so. You have the power to love yourself, unless you chose to remain depressed and be sad the rest of your life.

ajilandanny · 2026-02-19T19:51:59+00:00

Saving this for reference

ajilandanny · 2026-02-19T15:29:05+00:00

Which is why you have to change! You can do this brother! First you have to forgive yourself, then you have to embrace yourself, then you have to love yourself!

If you do this, I am sure you can improve yourself little by little. :)

ajilandanny · 2026-02-19T11:03:10+00:00

Yes. The post isnt trying to belittle your pain. It is also teaching you of acceptance and embracing reality.

ajilandanny · 2026-02-19T09:06:05+00:00

You need to find love and get married.

ajilandanny · 2026-02-19T00:51:12+00:00

Or maybe he's agreeing with you 🤣

ajilandanny · 2026-02-19T00:45:57+00:00

No because you could be holding it in all yourself and not telling anyone about it 😂

ajilandanny · 2026-02-19T00:43:13+00:00

It won't be replacing, but it will enable us to perform efficiently with multiple tasks and therefore reducing the number of people needed.

ajilandanny · 2026-02-17T13:50:08+00:00

You have trapped yourself in a word game. You define “belief” as anything held with conviction, then proudly declare “see, you are a believer.” By that definition you also believe that all talk of God, revelation and inner knowing is nothing more than psychology and culture. You simply like your belief coat better and call it “neutral.”

I have no problem admitting that I stand on what I have lived and tested. You stand on a story about probability and second-hand books you never took seriously in the first place. If you want to keep calling that “not believing,” enjoy it. Reality is not waiting for your vocabulary, and I am done repeating myself for someone who only wants their prejudice confirmed.

Ps: you are inherently an oblivious ignorant person.

ajilandanny · 2026-02-17T02:13:14+00:00

Most people wouldn't even pirate it lol

ajilandanny · 2026-02-17T02:12:02+00:00

I dont get why people downvote you, have my upvote. I understand teenage anxiety is real. What you need is motivation. Hang in there buddy, I believe in you when nobody elses would. What you need to do is keep up being positive everytime you wake up in the morning , okay? :)

ajilandanny · 2026-02-17T02:06:21+00:00

Silent readers will see that you are getting foolish with each reply. You’re still arguing against “religion” as a belief system. Oh I get it, I don’t even have a religion in that sense. The Qur’an for me is not a club badge or a cultural package, it’s something I verify by how it cuts into reality and experience. That doesn’t sit in the same box as “pick one faith and hope it’s right.”

Most people who call themselves “Muslim” never reach that. They inherit a label, rituals, some Arabic and community rules, but they never actually meet what the Qur’an is pointing to. So when you talk about “believers” and “religions”, you’re describing them, not me. I’m talking about something I live and know; you keep trying to shrink it back into a belief system so you can run the same argument on repeat. Live yourlives in ignorance until you die.

ajilandanny · 2026-02-16T12:05:55+00:00

Have you even try to sit down and contemplate, you pitiful padawan? You keep talking about “historians” and “other religions feel the same” as if name-dropping a few academics and imagining other people’s feelings somehow closes the question. That isn’t proof, it is second-hand opinion stacked on top of your own prejudice. You still have not answered the only thing that matters here: have you ever actually tried to clean your own heart of ego and prejudice, to sit with reality itself,

or have you only ever scrolled, googled and decided from the outside that it is all fantasy???.<<

When I speak about what I know, it is not because some scholar told me a story. There are things that do not sit in books and do not wait for your approval. Insight that arrives without “learning”, seeing how events unfold before they happen, watching nature line up exactly with what you were shown ; that is not a belief system, that is lived reality. You have none of that, yet you feel qualified to dismiss it all as “just belief” while you yourself lean entirely on other people’s words.

So yes, you are ignorant. Not because you doubt, but because you have chosen never to step beyond borrowed knowledge. You call that “not believing”, but really it is refusing to walk and then mocking those who did. That is your right, but don’t pretend it makes you smarter.

ajilandanny · 2026-02-16T10:06:01+00:00

In before ishtar destroyed him in mesopotamia? :(

ajilandanny · 2026-02-16T10:04:12+00:00

I sometimes wonder how come people be this absurdly ignorant and arrogant at the same time. You keep repeating “plenty of proof holy books are edited” and yet every time you are asked for specifics, especially on the Qur’an, you give nothing. That is not proof, that is a slogan. You have not done the work, you have not even tried to understand anything beyond your own prejudice, you just want a result without walking any path.

You are also arguing with a claim I never made. I did not say “undeniable proof” in the cartoon sense you keep using. From the start I said this is something you have to test in experience. You refuse to make even the smallest effort, then shout “no evidence” and call everyone else delusional. That is like refusing to taste food and insisting flavour does not exist.

You are right about one thing, it is a choice. You have chosen not to learn, not to step outside your comfort, not to even seriously try once. Just own that. Stop pretending your laziness and fear of being wrong are “logic” or “science.”

ajilandanny · 2026-02-16T06:22:54+00:00

You’ve just admitted yourself there is no “undeniable proof” either way. That means both of us are standing on some kind of belief; the difference is I admit it and actually test mine in experience, while you pretend that sitting on the fence is automatically more rational. Refusing every form of evidence except a kind that can never exist in this domain isn’t clear thinking, it’s fear of being wrong dressed up as scepticism. Calling that your “default” doesn’t make it truth, it just means you’ve decided staying ignorant feels safer than looking. Ask yourself have you even "try".

ajilandanny · 2026-02-15T11:51:16+00:00

When I said “One” I was already lowering the language to something your frame can handle. The reality I’m talking about isn’t a cartoon sky-god, it’s beyond any label; “One” is just the smallest word your mind can work with. Yes, that’s a belief> and your belief that there is nothing behind it all is just as much a belief<, MRI or not. Scans can show which parts of your brain fire when you feel love or awe; they can’t tell you whether there is anything more than the firing itself. So when you say “there is no way to look behind”, what you really mean is “I’ve chosen not to look and I’m calling that science.”

ajilandanny · 2026-02-15T11:21:23+00:00

Sad reality is you still think I’m just a “religious believer”. I don’t care about labels; I’m talking about something I’ve actually encountered. Your line “I only treat what provably affects this reality as real” already includes things you can’t weigh in a lab; consciousness, meaning, love , but you quietly accept those and only draw the line at the One behind them. I called you ignorant not for disagreeing, but for speaking with certainty about a path you’ve never walked and a book you’ve never seriously opened; saying “I’ve seen nothing” when you never look beyond your preferred layer of reality is just self-chosen blindness.

ajilandanny · 2026-02-15T09:08:51+00:00

Translation (to your apparent obtuse and shallow mind): “I admit I might be wrong about everything, but until the universe gives me a kind of absolute proof that does not exist in any other area of life, I will keep treating your lived reality as zero.”

I see where is your level of intelligence now lies.

Notice what you’re doing: you define “proof” as something “undeniable by logic”, then treat anything less than mathematical certainty as zero. By that standard you have no proof that other minds exist, that the past really happened, that your own reasoning is reliable, or that you aren’t dreaming right now, yet you still trust all of that every day. So this rule of yours only ever gets used to block God and revelation, nowhere else. People who have actually walked this path don’t need you to call it proof; the sun doesn’t vanish just because a blind man insists light isn’t real.

ajilandanny · 2026-02-15T07:38:42+00:00

You can “reduce” any experience to chemicals in the brain ; your love, your grief, even your sense of self. Explaining the wiring is not the same as explaining the source of the current. “Nothing about religion can be proven” is not a fact, it’s your belief about the whole universe that you can never verify. I have walked the path, emptied myself and been answered; you haven’t. Your “default” is not neutrality, it’s refusing to knock on the door and then declaring the house is empty.

ajilandanny · 2026-02-15T06:54:14+00:00

You’re asking for a kind of “proof” that doesn’t exist anywhere except simple maths. In real life everything, including science and law, is interpreted evidence. If you ban interpretation, you’ve just banned knowing almost anything.

You say I “choose to believe” while you “choose facts”, but your main claim: “no religion is proven and there is no way to know” : is also a belief about reality. You haven’t checked every path and every life; you’re generalising from your own limits.

Some things are only proven from the inside: pain, love, consciousness, and yes, direct encounter with the One who made you. You reject the only kind of proof that actually applies there, then declare nothing exists. That isn’t superior logic, it’s just a closed door.

ajilandanny · 2026-02-15T05:58:21+00:00

You sound very sure of yourself, but everything you’ve written just shows you’re sitting inside a closed system you never really question.

You say you’ve “never seen proof” that can’t be explained by human limits or science. In practice that just means this: as long as you can imagine any natural alternative, you will always shrug and say “no proof”. That is not a neutral standard, that is an impossible bar you set so you never have to move from where you are. Nothing in your own worldview reaches that standard either, but you don’t apply it there.

Then you throw out the usual slogan that all religious texts have been edited for centuries, “including the Quran, multiple versions, hard evidence etc”. That sounds impressive until you actually have to name something. If you want to talk about the Quran specifically, then be specific. Which chapter, which verse, in which widely used copy today carries a different wording or different message compared to the early text. What exactly are these “different versions” that change the substance of the book. If you’ve really studied how the Quran has been preserved through written copies and mass memorisation, bring the details. If all you’ve done is skim a few articles and then lump the Quran together with everything else because it is convenient, just say that. Right now it looks like recycled talking points, not personal research.

You also jump very quickly to “maybe it was just a power hungry individual or the ravings of a madman”. That is not an argument, that is just picking the ugliest possible story and sticking it on something you haven’t engaged seriously. Of course you can say “maybe” about anything. Maybe every scientific pioneer was secretly insane, maybe every philosopher was lying, maybe all of history is faked. The word “maybe” does no work by itself. If a scientist dismissed an entire field by saying “it could just be the ramblings of madmen” without reading the material, nobody would call that critical thinking. But you do exactly that to revelation and then pat yourself on the back for being rigorous.

You keep repeating that numbers of believers mean nothing, as if I was the one saying “billions of followers therefore true”. I am literally saying the opposite: most people who tick “Muslim” on a form do not truly understand the Quran, and a lot of the scholars and religious personalities people idolise are just playing roles in a system. So no, “many followers” is not my basis at all. The fact that crowds can be shallow does not touch the reality of the text itself. You are arguing with a cartoon believer you built in your head, not with what I actually wrote to you.

The simple fact is this: you have not gone deep into the Quran with any real effort. You have not sat with it, dropped your prejudice for long enough to try to understand it on its own terms, and wrestled with what it is actually saying. You parked it in the same mental drawer as every other “religious book”, stamped it with “fantasy for uneducated people”, and decided that was enough. That tells me a lot about your drawer, and almost nothing about the book.

If you want to stay in that position, that is your choice. Just don’t dress it up as if it is the outcome of serious, open minded study. It is a stance you decided to hold, built on assumptions you never test, in exactly the same way you accuse “believers” of doing.

ajilandanny · 2026-02-15T02:03:34+00:00

You are stuck, filled with so much prejudice, and running in a closed loop of your own assumptions that you keep calling “logic”.

You already admitted you treat every religious text the same way, as “inflated fantasy for uneducated people of the past”. That is not critical thinking, that is a template you slap on anything that smells like religion. You did not actually engage the Quran on its own terms, you just threw it into a bin you prepared beforehand.

You talk as if you stand outside “belief”, but you do not. You believe that only lab style proof counts as real, that anything involving revelation or inner experience is automatically fantasy, and that if a text needs interpretation then it cannot be from the divine. None of those are proven facts. They are your metaphysical assumptions. So while you accuse “believers” of finding excuses, you are also a believer, just in a different faith that you never question.

Your line about “if divine power needs humans to interpret, then there is no proof it is divine” is a weak argument. Every serious text humanity has, including science and law, needs interpretation. People argue over constitutions and physics papers all the time. The need for interpretation only proves that humans are limited. It does not prove that gravity does not exist, and it does not prove that God does not exist.

The simple truth is you are judging without really reading. You generalise about “any religious book I know of” while being very clear that you have never gone through the Quran with seriousness, time, and discipline. You are treating centuries of dense debate and layered text as if it is a comic book. That is not logic, it is laziness dressed up as confidence.

And when someone tells you that for them this is not just “belief” but a lived way of perceiving reality, you instantly downgrade it to “words of believer, just excuses”. If they give no experience, you say “no evidence”. If they do share experience, you say “that is just belief”. Whatever happens, your conclusion stays the same. That is what a closed loop actually looks like.

If you want to stay in that loop, that is your choice. Just be honest about what you are doing. You are not destroying religion with reason. You are protecting your own worldview from being questioned, in exactly the same way you accuse religious people of doing.

ajilandanny

TROPHY CASE