Project Kali

The statement that “reality is not made of atoms but frequency patterns and waveforms” is philosophical speculation with no alignment to Islamic theology.

• Islamic Understanding: Allah created the universe and everything in it in a real, tangible form. It is not an illusion or a mere “frequency.” Allah says:

  “It is Allah who created the heavens and the earth in truth. Indeed, in that is a sign for the believers.”
  Quran 29:44

While modern science explores the subatomic and quantum world, this does not negate the reality of creation as Allah willed it. The statement that “this reality is made up of zeros and ones” has no metaphysical basis in Islam.

The terms “Shiva” (pure masculine) and “Shakti” (pure feminine) are rooted in Hindu cosmology and theology. They are not applicable in Islamic discourse:

• Allah is beyond gender, duality, and creation. Allah is One (Ahad), Eternal (Samad), and unlike anything in creation.

  “Say, ‘He is Allah, [who is] One, Allah, the Eternal Refuge. He neither begets nor is born, nor is there to Him any equivalent.’”
  Quran 112:1-4

Assigning masculinity, femininity, or dualistic attributes to Allah is a form of shirk (associating partners with Allah), the gravest sin in Islam.

The speaker suggests that reality is a “transgendered duality” (zeros and ones), and ultimate truth involves dissolving this duality. This aligns with concepts like maya (illusion) in Hindu philosophy but contradicts Islamic teachings.

• Islamic View: The world is real, created by Allah as a test for humanity. While life is temporary, it is not an illusion:

  “And We did not create the heaven and earth and that between them in play. We did not create them except in truth, but most of them do not know.”
  Quran 44:38-39

The claim that “crushing all dualities leads to ultimate one or zero” is pantheistic and heretical from an Islamic perspective. In Islam:

• Allah is One in His essence, names, and attributes.
• Creation is separate from the Creator.

The statement that “reality is a mathematical structure made of zeros and ones” is a philosophical metaphor without foundation in Islamic theology.

The discussion of chakras (energy centers) and achieving “ultimate orgasms” to transcend reality stems from Tantric practices and Hindu mysticism. This concept has no basis in Islam and directly opposes:

• Islamic Purity and Modesty: Islam calls for discipline over desires and maintaining moral purity (tazkiyyah) through worship and obedience to Allah.

  “Indeed, the soul is inclined to evil, except those who are shown mercy by my Lord. Indeed, my Lord is Forgiving and Merciful.”
  Quran 12:53

The excessive focus on sensual gratification as a path to transcendence is contradictory to Islamic spirituality, which seeks nearness to Allah through:

• Salah (prayer)
• Dhikr (remembrance of Allah)
• Fasting and self-discipline

Such ideas of “orgasms in chakras” promote hedonism, which Islam strongly condemns.

While Islam acknowledges detachment (zuhd) from worldly pleasures as a means of focusing on Allah, it rejects the dualistic and impersonal notion of the Divine proposed here.

• True Detachment in Islam:
  • Does not mean rejecting reality.
  • It involves submitting to Allah’s will and seeing the world as a temporary abode, with the ultimate goal being the Akhirah (Hereafter).

The Quran encourages worship and remembrance of Allah to transcend the distractions of the dunya:

“Indeed, in the remembrance of Allah do hearts find rest.”
Quran 13:28

Transcendence in Islam is not achieved through mystical eroticism but by surrendering to the oneness and majesty of Allah.

The idea that “reality does not exist unless you observe it” aligns with subjective idealism and certain interpretations of quantum mechanics. However, this is incompatible with the Islamic understanding of creation:

• Allah’s Knowledge and Will determine reality, not human consciousness.

  “Do they not see that Allah, who created the heavens and the earth and did not tire in their creation, is able to give life to the dead? Yes, indeed He is over all things competent.”
  Quran 46:33

Humans are part of creation, not the center of existence.

1. Allah is transcendent, unique, and beyond all creation—there is no masculine or feminine duality.
2. Creation is real and purposeful, not an illusion or “frequency of zeros and ones.”
3. Desire is to be controlled, not celebrated as a means of transcendence. True spiritual elevation comes through obedience to Allah.
4. Reality exists independently of human perception, as decreed by Allah.
5. Concepts like chakras and “orgasms of energy” are foreign to Islam and oppose its teachings of moral discipline and spiritual purity.

The Islamic path to spiritual fulfillment is rooted in Tawhid—recognizing Allah’s Oneness and seeking closeness to Him through worship, gratitude, and remembrance. True detachment comes from freeing the heart from the dunya (worldly desires) and focusing on the eternal reality of the Akhirah.

As Allah says:

“But the Hereafter is better and more enduring.”
Quran 87:17

What are your thoughts on the concept of transcendence within Islam versus other mystical traditions? Would you agree that the focus should be on worship and remembrance of Allah rather than speculative metaphysical ideas?

Let’s refute the claims empirically, epistemologically, and through a psychoanalytic lens without relying heavily on Islamic theology. The argument presented is full of logical fallacies, misunderstandings of physics, vague metaphysical concepts, and contradictions that we can systematically dismantle.

Claim: “Reality is made of sinusoidal waveforms (zeros and ones), not atoms and molecules.”

Empirical Refutation:

• Reality, as established by physics, is composed of particles and fields that interact in complex ways. Modern science (through Quantum Mechanics and Relativity) explains matter, energy, and wave-particle duality, but this does not reduce everything to frequency alone.
• Frequencies describe oscillations, vibrations, or repetitive patterns. They are attributes of physical systems—not fundamental “building blocks.” To say “everything is frequency” is like saying “everything is color” because objects reflect light—this is attributing a property as the substance.
• Digital “zeros and ones” are human-constructed binary abstractions used in computers. Reality is not fundamentally binary; these models exist as human tools for describing systems, not actual building blocks of the universe.

Example:
Consider sound waves—a frequency-based phenomenon. Sound requires a medium (e.g., air or water) to propagate. Frequencies cannot exist without a physical basis. Thus, reducing reality to “frequencies” or “sinusoidal waveforms” ignores the material substrate that makes these frequencies manifest.

Claim: “Zeros represent pure masculine (Shiva), ones represent pure feminine (Shakti).”

Logical Refutation:

• In mathematics and computing, zeros and ones are binary digits (bits), an abstract representation of two states (on/off, true/false). These are not real entities but human-created symbolic systems to simplify computational processes.
• Assigning gendered metaphysical meanings to zeros and ones is entirely arbitrary and unfounded. Gender is a biological and social construct that does not apply to abstract numbers or waveforms. There is no empirical basis for linking masculinity to “stillness” and femininity to “vibration.”

Example:
If zeros and ones inherently had masculine and feminine traits, then every computer program would carry metaphysical significance. But computers, calculators, and digital devices function purely on logic and mechanics, not subjective metaphysics.

Claim: “Dualities like 0 and 1 create reality. Crushing dualities leads to ultimate oneness (pure feminine) and eventually zero (pure masculine).”

Epistemological Refutation:

• Duality is not an absolute feature of reality but a framework for human understanding. Examples include light as both particle and wave—a duality we use to describe behavior, not an intrinsic property of existence itself.
• Philosophers like Immanuel Kant argued that our perception of reality involves dualities (space/time, cause/effect) because of the limitations of the human mind. These dualities are mental constructs—useful but not foundational truths.
• “Crushing dualities” as a path to truth is logically flawed: even the concept of “crushing duality” requires a binary premise (dual vs. non-dual), creating a paradox.

Example:
Wave-particle duality in quantum physics shows that a photon can behave both as a wave and a particle depending on the observer’s measurement. However, this duality exists as a description of behavior—not as evidence of a mystical “oneness” or “zero.”

Claim: “Each chakra corresponds to desires (e.g., food, sex, power), and activating them maximizes ‘orgasms’ leading to detachment.”

Psychoanalytic Refutation:

• This framework reduces human desires and experiences to overly simplistic metaphors of “orgasms” and chakras. In psychoanalysis (Freud, Jung, etc.), desire is far more complex. It cannot be satisfied or transcended by merely activating or “crushing” symbolic centers.
• Freud’s pleasure principle argues that humans seek pleasure to reduce internal tension, but unchecked hedonism leads to deeper dissatisfaction (repetition compulsion). Similarly, focusing solely on maximizing pleasure—whether through food, sex, or power—creates an addiction cycle rather than liberation.

Contradiction:

• The speaker claims orgasms in all chakras can lead to detachment. This is inherently contradictory:
  • Pursuing pleasure strengthens attachment (as per behavioral psychology).
  • True detachment involves moderation and self-control (e.g., Viktor Frankl’s Logotherapy emphasizes meaning, not pleasure, as key to fulfillment).

Example:
Pursuing constant sexual or sensual gratification (as suggested by “chakra activation”) has been empirically shown to desensitize the brain’s reward systems, leading to reduced satisfaction over time. Hedonistic pleasure-seeking does not transcend reality—it entraps individuals within immediate gratification loops.

Claim: “Reality doesn’t exist if you don’t perceive it.”

Empirical Refutation:

• This claim misinterprets ideas from quantum mechanics, particularly observer effects. The quantum “observer effect” relates to how measurement influences small particles—it does not mean that reality disappears without perception.
• At the macroscopic level, reality exists independently of human perception. Trees fall in forests whether or not anyone is there to hear them.

Example:
If reality ceased to exist when unobserved, large-scale phenomena like gravity, tectonic shifts, and cosmic radiation would have no basis—yet they occur regardless of human observation.

Claim: “Humans are transgendered species trying to find the pure feminine or masculine outside.”

Biological Refutation:

• Evolution does not indicate that organisms are searching for “pure masculine” or “feminine.” Gender differentiation in species arose biologically to promote reproductive success. There is no “feminine essence” humans are seeking outside of themselves—this is anthropomorphic projection.
• The term “transgendered reality” is a misuse of biological and psychological concepts. In psychology, transgender identity refers to individual experiences, not an ontological state of the universe.

Example:
Claiming humans are “transgendered species” ignores evolutionary biology, genetics, and developmental processes that explain gender roles and identities.

The speaker’s philosophy promotes unbridled sensual gratification as a method for “transcendence.” This approach contradicts established psychological and philosophical findings:

• Hedonism (pursuit of pleasure as the highest good) leads to emptiness and diminishing returns.
• Philosophers like Epicurus argued for moderation—seeking only pleasures that do not harm mental well-being.
• Modern psychology warns that constant pleasure-seeking leads to dopamine desensitization, increasing dissatisfaction over time (e.g., addiction research).

Example:
Chasing constant “orgasms” of food, sex, or power creates cycles of dependence, reinforcing dissatisfaction rather than achieving any meaningful transcendence.

Claim: “Earthly love is diluted by lust and materialism; pure love exists only in astral realms.”

Islamic Refutation:

• Islamic Concept of Love: In Islam, love is a comprehensive concept that integrates spiritual, emotional, and physical aspects. Love for Allah (حُبُّ الله) is the highest form of love, which purifies all other loves. The Prophet Muhammad ﷺ said:

  “None of you truly believes until I am more beloved to him than his father, his child, and all the people.”
  (Sahih Bukhari, 15)

• Balanced Desires: Islam does not consider human desires (e.g., love, wealth, or physical intimacy) inherently impure or “lower.” Instead, they are natural gifts that must be regulated within boundaries. Allah says:

  “And [He] placed love and mercy between you.”
  (Surah Ar-Rum, 30:21)

  • Materialism: Islam teaches moderation (wasatiyyah). Seeking lawful sustenance or beauty is not sinful unless it becomes excessive.

  • Lust: Physical intimacy is not condemned but honored within marriage. The Prophet ﷺ said:

    “In the sexual act of each of you, there is charity.”
    (Sahih Muslim, 1006)

• No “Astral Realms” for Pure Love: The idea that pure love exists elsewhere contradicts Islamic theology. Allah has placed signs of His love and mercy within this world:

  “We will show them Our signs in the horizons and within themselves until it becomes clear to them that it is the truth.”
  (Surah Fussilat, 41:53)

• True Transcendence: Islam promotes purification of the soul (tazkiyyah) and moderation—not escaping earthly desires. True love is realized through obedience to Allah and fulfilling one’s responsibilities in the world.

Claim: “You must eliminate your ego and all material desires to transcend.”

Islamic Refutation:

• The Role of the Nafs (Self): Islam recognizes the nafs (soul/self) as part of human existence, but it does not demand its annihilation. Instead, the goal is to purify and elevate the nafs:

  “He has succeeded who purifies it, and he has failed who instills it [with corruption].”
  (Surah Ash-Shams, 91:9-10)

• Balance, Not Annihilation: Islam teaches moderation—not total eradication of the ego or desires. The Prophet ﷺ and the sahabah (companions) lived in this world, engaged in family life, commerce, and worship while maintaining spiritual excellence.

• The True Path to Transcendence:

  • Detachment in Islam means detaching from sin and disobedience to Allah, not rejecting worldly blessings entirely.
  • Ihsan (spiritual excellence) involves worshipping Allah as if you see Him while remaining engaged in the world.

Refuting Ascetic Extremes: The Prophet ﷺ refuted excessive detachment when a companion vowed to abstain from marriage, food, and sleep. He said:

“Your body has a right over you, your eyes have a right over you, and your wife has a right over you.”
(Sahih Bukhari, 5199)

Claim: “Chanting mantras attracts astral entities who help you transcend to pure love.”

Islamic Refutation:

• Tawheed (Oneness of Allah): Islam firmly rejects invoking anyone besides Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَتَعَالَىٰ). The Quran condemns shirk (associating partners with Allah):

  “And do not invoke with Allah another deity. There is no deity except Him.”
  (Surah Al-Qasas, 28:88)

• Real Spiritual Transcendence: Achieving nearness to Allah requires worship (ibadah), remembrance of Allah (dhikr), and sincerity—not chanting mantras to mythical entities.

  “Verily, in the remembrance of Allah do hearts find rest.”
  (Surah Ar-Ra’d, 13:28)

• Jinn and Supernatural Beings: Islam acknowledges the existence of jinn, but seeking contact with them is forbidden and dangerous. Allah warns:

  “And there were men from mankind who sought refuge in men from the jinn, so they only increased them in burden.”
  (Surah Al-Jinn, 72:6)

Claim: “The universe exists because we vibrate; everything is a reflection of ourselves.”

Islamic Refutation:

• Allah’s Independence: Allah is completely independent of His creation. The creation cannot influence or sustain Allah’s existence:

  “Allah is the Ever-Living, the Sustainer of all existence.”
  (Surah Al-Baqarah, 2:255)

• Pantheism Rejected: The belief that “everything is God” (unity of being) is an error that contradicts tawheed. Allah says:

  “There is nothing like unto Him, and He is the All-Hearing, the All-Seeing.”
  (Surah Ash-Shura, 42:11)

• Human Role in Reality: The universe existed long before humanity and will continue after. Our purpose is not to create reality but to worship Allah:

  “And I did not create the jinn and mankind except to worship Me.”
  (Surah Adh-Dhariyat, 51:56)

Claim: “Love is dissolved by lower desires (lust, money, power, etc.), and only ‘pure love’ exists in an astral realm.”

Logical and Psychoanalytic Refutation:

• The statement creates a false dichotomy between “love” and “lust” or other natural human desires. Freud’s psychoanalysis demonstrates that love (Eros) and desire are interconnected—they cannot be fully separated. Humans express love through various forms, including emotional intimacy, sexual desire, and care for others. These are not “diluted” versions but authentic expressions of human experience.
• “Pure love” existing only in an “astral realm” is a speculative claim without evidence. Love is not an external state but a product of human relationships and psychological bonding rooted in biology and cognition.

Empirical Evidence:

• Neuroscience reveals that dopamine, oxytocin, and vasopressin govern love and attachment in the brain. Romantic love and sexual attraction activate similar brain regions, showing that desire and love are part of the same continuum, not opposing forces.
• The claim about “astral planets” as locations for pure love lacks any verifiable evidence. It is subjective speculation rather than an observable reality.

Example:
Loving relationships require balance—not the rejection of desires like sex, companionship, or financial stability. By dismissing natural desires as “lower chakras,” the argument promotes ascetic extremism, which historically has not led to psychological well-being or fulfillment.

Claim: “We vibrated into existence, and when we stop vibrating, the universe disappears.”

Empirical and Epistemological Refutation:

• The term “vibration” is misappropriated. In physics, vibration refers to oscillatory motion within a physical system (e.g., sound waves, quantum fluctuations). It is a property of matter and energy—not the cause of existence.
• Claiming that “the universe disappears” when a person stops vibrating reflects solipsism (the belief that only one’s mind exists), a philosophy that has been rejected because it cannot explain the objective consistency of the world.

Empirical Evidence:

• Even when humans cease to exist or observe, natural processes—like the orbits of planets, decay of atoms, and biological evolution—continue independently. Reality does not require human consciousness to persist.

Example:
If a tree falls in a forest and no one is there, does it make a sound? Science says yes—sound waves are generated regardless of observation. Similarly, reality does not rely on “vibrations of consciousness” to exist.

Claim: “Eliminate your ego to transcend material desires and achieve nirvikalpa samadhi (absolute stillness).”

Psychoanalytic Refutation:

• Freud and Jung argued that the ego is essential for maintaining psychological balance. The ego mediates between primal desires (id) and moral constraints (superego). To “destroy the ego” is to lose this balance, leading to dissociation or a loss of self-identity, which can cause severe psychological harm.
• Transcendence, as conceptualized here, promotes escapism rather than growth. Real transcendence involves integrating desires and emotions into a higher state of self-awareness—not denying them.

Epistemological Point:

• The video claims that rejecting all desires (health, wealth, love, etc.) leads to transcendence. This is logically self-defeating—to desire not to desire is still a desire. One cannot escape desire by desiring its elimination.

Example:
Healthy detachment, as in mindfulness practices, involves observing desires without being ruled by them—not eradicating them entirely. True transcendence involves a mature integration of all aspects of the self.

Claim: “Chanting mantras to entities like Kali or Krishna will take you to the astral realm of pure love.”

Epistemological Refutation:

• While mantras can have psychological benefits (e.g., focus, calmness), attributing them the power to “connect with multidimensional beings” is subjective belief, not an empirical fact.
• The idea of “astral realms” or “multi-dimensional entities” lacks verifiability and resides solely in metaphysical speculation. These claims cannot be tested or falsified, making them non-empirical.

Psychological Explanation:

• Repeating mantras can activate the brain’s default mode network, leading to meditative states that bring a sense of calm and detachment. This does not imply contact with other beings but reflects the mind’s natural capacity for introspection.

Example:
Religious or spiritual experiences often provide personal meaning but are subjective experiences, shaped by cultural, emotional, and psychological factors.

Claim: “The universe exists because we vibrated; when we stop vibrating, the universe disappears.”

Epistemological Refutation:

• This claim echoes solipsism—the view that only one’s mind is certain to exist. However, solipsism fails to account for the objective consistency of reality experienced by billions of individuals.
• The universe existed billions of years before human consciousness emerged, as evidenced by cosmic background radiation and geological formations.

Example:
The Big Bang Theory and fossil records empirically demonstrate the universe’s long history, independent of human perception.

Claim: “Earthly love is flawed because it is diluted by material desires; astral planets have pure love.”

Psychological Refutation:

• Material desires (like financial stability or attraction) are not inherently negative; they are practical and biologically driven needs. Rejecting them as “lower desires” promotes unrealistic ideals of love.
• Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs shows that humans must fulfill basic needs (food, shelter, safety) before pursuing higher emotional or spiritual connections.

Example:
A person in poverty or unsafe conditions cannot “transcend” to pure love without addressing their material needs first. Healthy love integrates emotional connection with practical support.

Claim: “Build love, not overcome lust, because lust is part of you.”

Psychoanalytic Perspective:

• Lust, as a natural drive, becomes problematic only when it is excessive or disconnected from emotional intimacy. Psychoanalytically, repressing lust can lead to unhealthy compulsions, while acknowledging and channeling it constructively promotes well-being.

Balanced Approach:

• Instead of demonizing lust or worshipping “pure love,” individuals can seek a balanced relationship where desire and emotional intimacy complement each other.

This argument is deeply flawed from a philosophical, epistemological, logical, and empirical perspective. I will break down the contradictions, fallacies, and weaknesses in the presented worldview using reasoning and critical thinking.

The speaker claims that humans are “already God” but are unrealized gods. This statement suffers from logical contradictions:

• Contradiction of “Potential” vs “Actual”: If one is already God, then realization is irrelevant because God, by definition, is absolute, fully realized, and unchanging. A “potential God” is not a God; it is a contradiction in terms because God is perfect, infinite, and self-sufficient.

  • An incomplete or fooled God cannot be God at all.

• Dependency on Realization: If one needs to realize their godliness, it implies dependence on external conditions (effort, practice, time), which negates the idea of absolute self-sufficiency—a necessary quality of divinity.

The speaker reduces reality to vibrations and dismisses the external world as an illusion created by the senses. This oversimplification is problematic:

• Epistemological Flaw: Claiming that reality “does not exist” because it depends on our senses is rooted in solipsism—the extreme idea that nothing exists outside one’s mind. However, this cannot be proven nor does it hold any practical value.

  • If reality is entirely dependent on personal vibrations, how can we explain shared experiences? Why do we all perceive earthquakes, storms, and deaths as real phenomena? Such universality in experience points to objective reality beyond personal perception.

• Contradictory Assertions: The speaker simultaneously claims that the universe is vibratory and illusory. If vibrations are responsible for the universe’s existence, then vibrations themselves constitute reality, negating the claim that “nothing exists.”

  • To say “nothing exists” while discussing techniques, vibrations, and chakras is logically inconsistent.

• The Problem of Interaction: If the “original state of consciousness” is vibrationless, how did it suddenly vibrate and create everything? If this vibration just happened, it contradicts the claim of a “perfect, null” state. A truly static, unchanging entity cannot spontaneously “vibrate.”

The speaker introduces the idea of duality (positive vs negative, vibration vs null state) and claims that “crushing dualities” leads to godhood. This approach has significant flaws:

• False Dichotomy: The concept of dualities such as “vibration vs rest,” “good vs bad,” or “life vs death” relies on binary thinking. However, reducing reality to oversimplified binaries ignores the complexity of existence.

  • For example, emotions, morality, and physical states cannot be fully encapsulated as mere opposites (e.g., love is not merely the opposite of hate, and death is not merely the opposite of life).

• Circular Reasoning: The technique proposed to “crush dualities” assumes its own conclusion. For instance:

  • Claim: “You are God.”
  • Solution: Crush dualities to become God.
  • Implication: You are already God, but you must perform certain steps to realize it.
    This circular reasoning offers no logical proof for the initial claim.

• Dependence on External Techniques: The process of placing five plates, chanting mantras, and focusing on chakras contradicts the idea of an inherent godliness. If one were already God, why would external techniques be required to realize this state?

The argument rests heavily on the idea of a vibratory realm as the sole basis of existence. While “vibrations” are real in the scientific sense (e.g., sound waves, light waves), the speaker extends this idea beyond evidence:

• Selective Use of Science: Claiming that the universe consists of “vibrations” borrows from physics (waveforms, energy) but then distorts it into unsupported metaphysical claims (e.g., the universe disappears if consciousness stops vibrating).

  • In science, waves and energy are measurable, observable phenomena. There is no empirical evidence that consciousness creates external vibrations or that reality disappears without human perception.

• Observer Dependence: The speaker misuses quantum mechanics to claim that perception creates reality. However, in physics, “observer effect” (e.g., in quantum experiments) refers to measurement processes, not to consciousness creating the universe.

  • The universe existed before humans or any “conscious observers,” as demonstrated by astrophysical evidence of the Big Bang, cosmic microwave background radiation, and geological records.

The claim that “consciousness vibrated” to create reality introduces an infinite regress problem:

• Who Created Consciousness? If consciousness was originally null, why and how did it vibrate? Did another entity cause it to vibrate? If so, what caused that entity?

  • Any coherent explanation requires a first cause—an uncaused, necessary being. Vibrations and dualities, as described here, fail to explain origins.

• Self-Refutation: The argument presupposes consciousness and the external world to deny their existence. If consciousness and vibrations do not exist objectively, then even the concept of vibrations and dualities is meaningless.

The worldview presented in the argument can have harmful psychological and ethical implications:

• Detachment From Reality: Teaching that life, death, and suffering are illusions can lead to apathy and moral indifference. The claim that “God does not care about good or bad” erodes any basis for compassion, justice, or meaningful human connection.

• Psychological Delusion: Believing that one is “already God” can lead to narcissism, disillusionment, or escapism. Such ideas lack grounding in shared reality and encourage a subjective, self-centered worldview.

• Denial of Personal Responsibility: The focus on predestination (e.g., everything is preordained, including enlightenment) undermines the importance of human effort, ethics, and accountability. This fosters a fatalistic mindset where individuals abdicate responsibility for their actions.

The speaker’s claims fail across multiple dimensions:

1. Logical Contradictions: The idea of being “unrealized gods” is self-defeating.
2. Epistemological Weakness: The argument lacks evidence and relies on subjective perceptions.
3. Misuse of Science: Concepts like vibrations and quantum theory are distorted beyond their actual scope.
4. Philosophical Problems: It fails to address origins, causality, and infinite regress.
5. Psychological Issues: The worldview promotes detachment, delusion, and moral indifference.

Ultimately, this argument is internally inconsistent, empirically unsupported, and philosophically incoherent. Rather than “crushing dualities” or denying reality, a better approach is to acknowledge the complexity and objectivity of existence while seeking truth and meaning through sound reasoning and shared human experience.

From the perspective of Islamic theology and philosophy, this argument fails fundamentally because it contradicts core concepts of tawhid (absolute monotheism), divine attributes, and the nature of existence as explained in the Qur’an and classical Islamic thought. I will refute this systematically using aqeedah (creed), Islamic philosophy, and the Qur’anic framework:

The claim that “you are God but unrealized” fundamentally contradicts tawhid, the central tenet of Islam:

• Allah is the One, Absolute Reality:
  The Qur’an makes it clear that Allah alone is the Creator, Sustainer, and Absolute Being. Human beings are created and contingent, while Allah is eternal, transcendent, and uncaused.

  “Say: He is Allah, [who is] One. Allah, the Eternal Refuge. He neither begets nor is born, nor is there to Him any equivalent.”
  Surah Al-Ikhlas, 112:1-4

• God and Creation Are Distinct:
  Islam rejects any form of hulool (incarnation) or ittihaad (union with God). The idea that humans can “realize” their godhood implies that creation is divine, which is false according to Islam. Allah says:

  “There is nothing like unto Him, and He is the Hearing, the Seeing.”
  Surah Ash-Shura, 42:11
  This verse establishes absolute transcendence. Allah cannot be reduced to creation or “vibrations.”

• The Fallacy of Self-Deification:
  Claiming that “you are God” is a profound form of shirk (associating partners with Allah), which is the gravest sin in Islam:

  “Indeed, Allah does not forgive association with Him, but He forgives what is less than that for whom He wills.”
  Surah An-Nisa, 4:48

The notion of humans achieving “nirvikalpa samadhi” or godhood echoes pantheistic and monistic philosophies (like Advaita Vedanta), which are rejected in Islam. Tawhid insists on ontological distinction between Creator and creation.

The idea that vibrationless consciousness is the “true state” and the universe is an illusion (maya) contradicts the Islamic understanding of reality:

• Creation Is Real and Purposeful:
  Allah created the heavens, the earth, and all that exists with purpose and truth (al-haqq):

  “And We did not create the heavens and the earth and that between them in play.”
  Surah Ad-Dukhan, 44:38

  The world is not an “illusion” to escape from; it is a test for human beings:

  “[He] who created death and life to test you [as to] which of you is best in deed.”
  Surah Al-Mulk, 67:2

• Consciousness Belongs to Allah:
  Human consciousness is a creation of Allah, not the source of existence. While humans have aql (intellect) and ruh (soul), these are granted by Allah:

  “And they ask you about the soul. Say: The soul is of the affair of my Lord. And you have not been given of knowledge except a little.”
  Surah Al-Isra, 17:85

  To claim that human consciousness can “lower vibrations” to erase reality is baseless speculation without grounding in revelation or reason.

The speaker emphasizes “crushing dualities” (positive/negative, life/death) to “return to God.” Islam acknowledges opposites in creation but sees them as signs of Allah’s perfection and wisdom:

• Purpose of Duality:
  Allah created opposites to demonstrate His power and to guide humanity to reflection:

  “And of all things We created two mates; perhaps you will remember.”
  Surah Adh-Dhariyat, 51:49

  Opposites (e.g., life/death, good/evil) are not illusions; they are real and part of the divine decree (qadar).

• Crushing Dualities: An Epistemological Error:
  Seeking to “erase dualities” is self-defeating. Human understanding is contingent on distinctions (e.g., light/darkness, truth/falsehood). Islam teaches that dualities exist by design and must be understood, not crushed.

The claim that everything is predestined, including “becoming God,” is a misrepresentation of qadar (divine decree):

• Human Free Will:
  While Allah’s knowledge and power are absolute, humans are given free will to act:

  “Indeed, We guided him to the way, be he grateful or be he ungrateful.”
  Surah Al-Insan, 76:3

  The belief that “realization of godhood is predestined” removes accountability, contradicting Islam’s emphasis on personal responsibility and moral effort.

The speaker mentions invoking “multi-dimensional entities” like Mahakali or astral beings. Islam strictly prohibits such practices:

• Tawhid in Worship:
  Worship (du’a, invocation) is directed to Allah alone. Seeking help from entities, whether real or imagined, constitutes shirk:

  “And do not invoke besides Allah that which neither benefits you nor harms you, for if you did, then indeed you would be of the wrongdoers.”
  Surah Yunus, 10:106

• Jinn and the Unseen Realm:
  Islamic theology recognizes the existence of unseen beings (e.g., angels and jinn) but prohibits invoking them. These beings are created, limited, and subservient to Allah, not divine or godlike.

The speaker’s worldview promotes moral indifference and nihilism:

• God as Detached and Indifferent:
  Claiming that God “does not care” about good or bad undermines divine justice. Allah is Al-Adl (The Just) and holds creation accountable:

  “So whoever does an atom’s weight of good will see it, and whoever does an atom’s weight of evil will see it.”
  Surah Az-Zalzalah, 99:7-8

• Denial of Meaning and Purpose:
  The speaker’s reduction of life to meaningless vibrations contradicts the Islamic view of life as a trust (amanah):

  “Did you think that We created you uselessly and that to Us you would not be returned?”
  Surah Al-Mu’minun, 23:115

Refuting this argument philosophically, logically, epistemologically, empirically, and psychoanalytically reveals its flawed assumptions, contradictions, and reliance on speculative metaphysics. I will systematically dismantle the argument before addressing it from an Islamic theological perspective in the next response.

The argument fails on all critical grounds:

1. Philosophically: It contradicts the principles of causality, non-contradiction, and existence.
2. Logically: It contains circular reasoning, internal contradictions, and category errors.
3. Epistemologically: It lacks justification and relies on unverifiable claims.
4. Empirically: It is inconsistent with modern science and observable evidence.
5. Psychoanalytically: It reflects escapism and projection rather than objective truth.

In essence, the claim of “remembering past lives” and connecting with metaphysical entities through desire forces is rooted in subjective speculation and lacks coherence, evidence, and philosophical rigor.

Islam rejects the entire premise of remembering past lives, astral realms, and metaphysical desire forces because:

1. The Oneness of Allah: Only Allah is eternal and self-sufficient. Humans are His creation and have no divine attributes.
2. Life and Death: Each person has one life and one death. Accountability occurs in the Hereafter, not through reincarnation.
3. Purpose of Life: The goal of life is to worship Allah and prepare for the Hereafter, not transcend into astral planes or null states.
4. True Knowledge: Real knowledge comes from revelation and reason, not speculative metaphysics or subjective experiences.

“Verily, this Qur’an guides to that which is most suitable and gives good tidings to the believers who do righteous deeds that they will have a great reward.”
Quran 17:9