“…because it is work that makes sense!”

Like every Saturday I stood at the stall with a friend of mine while the world went by. Oxford was flooding with tourists, from Spain to Japan and even the USA on this fine summer afternoon. Even the breeze was calm so that it didn’t blow the papers away. The Palestinian flag would blow gently, occasionally slapping someone in the face as if trying to grab their attention; sometimes it worked at other times it didn’t, but it sure was funny to watch.

My mind had been preoccupied with thoughts about life and the meaning of it all, because that is what happens when I get a lot of free time. But then I turned to my friend, a grey haired matured man who worked as a software engineer, I remembered how he talked about planting vegetables in his allotment and I asked him.

“You know, I think I want to get into gardening” I realize how strange that sounds for a twenty year old so I correct my self “…what I mean is, I want to know how to grow vegetables”, that still sounded weird but what the hey!

And so he told me all about it. How he tried and failed the first time, how potatoes are the easiest (and probably most useful thing) to grow, how you have to get personal with the soil as you dig it up and weed it out. How the soil itself is a living thing and that you are working with it. He told me about farmers cooperatives that he saw in the USA when he lived there and the ones that he sees in the village of Abingdon where he lives now. He told me a lot, but then I asked him.

“Why does it feel…right, that I should work and labour to produce something for myself?”

Because that is what it feels like to me. All this talk of “selling yourself” to corporations at University, of “developing skills” which are just vague made me realize that the real world is rushing towards me fast, and I didn’t like it. Because when I look at us, the human species, as animals it all seems so strange and so disconnected. We do not forage or hunt any more, we just do these jobs that give us money and then we go to a big building full of food, it is there that we exchange this money for the food that we need to survive. It just seems so strange. But my good old friend hit the nail right on the head, he simply said.

“Because it is work that makes sense! You produce something for yourself and you aren’t working for anyone else.”

And I remembered what that thing at the back of my head was, and it formed into the phrase “having control of the means of production” as said by a famous fellow called Karl Marx.

Maybe that explains why I felt more alive and awake when I weeded the garden out. Even a simple and menial task like that felt good to do for me.

…or I am just a freak. And that is why the world is an interesting place.

 

I, pet goat 2 – Spiritual journeys and the esoteric

A friend of mine showed me a video made by Heliofant, a computer animation studio that is “focused on creating experimental and challenging content. Bringing together artists from the fields of dance, music, computer animation and visual arts, the company is very interested in exploring the common ground that underlies many spiritual and philosophical traditions in a lyrical form”.

And I would really like to stress the part on common ground that underlies many spiritual and philosophical traditions, because that has a word, and that word is pluralism:

The most important thing to remember is that this is about the spiritual journey of a particular individual, and it uses powerful symbolism that you may or may not be familiar with, as a form of story telling. Combined with the music, it makes an amazing piece of art that has moved me.

Yet, because of the powerful symbolism, conspiracy theorists of all kinds (not that I have anything against them), have been throwing accusations and interpreting it in many different ways. From the video as a vision of the illuminati taking over the world, to our reptilian over lords from another planet returning. Just search it in google or on youtube and you will see what I mean.

But it never occurred to anyone to just watch the interview with the director…

But I don’t want to talk about all of that. What I want to talk about is the pluralism within. The Inner Christ figure on the Ancient Egyptian boat with the third eye on his forehead, the little Muslim boy who comes back to life and spins like a whirling Dervish of the esoteric Muslims, and even the pagan dancer who momentarily looks like the Hindu goddess Shiva, or the South American worker drowning with his Hammer and Sickle, what could they all possibly have in common? And why does it matter?

It matters because they share common ground in the dark world that is depicted. A world of deception, brainwashing and war. A world that has always been dominated by the elites, whether you want to call them Illuminati or not, there are people who hold immense power and who are using it for their own interests. There have always been these people, it is not recent. Yet with all these religions and ideologies depicted in the video, they all share a revolutionary principle, the turning around or transformation of the societies that they were born in. From Islam in the midst of pagan Arabs to Christianity in Roman Palestine. They all at least try to strike a balance, or completely reject spiritual materialism. They try to emphasise on the notion that personal wealth is either not everything or simply nothing. They acknowledge the singular nature of the origins of humanity. “And I breathed into him of my spirit” God said about Adam in the Qur’an…the Qur’an that is as an “ebb and flow of the Ocean” to the Sufis which leads to spiritual insight, much like the Inner Christ or the Third Eye of spiritual insight.

Watch out when you talk about the third eye though, some people might label you an Illuminati sympathizer!

But it is odd that we look at all these religions and start to obsess over their differences, yet I guess it is easier to focus on the multitude of Gods and Goddesses the Hindus have, the holy trinity of the Christians, the strict monotheism of the Muslims and the complete Atheism of the South American Marxists.

Maybe we should start focusing on similarities, maybe that is a place to start in this interdependent and globalized world?

The Game of Thrones and prophecy in the real world

I have been reading the Game of Thrones, and I am on the second book now; a Clash of Kings. Asides from the amazing level of detail that George R.R. Martin has put into the history and culture of his world, which I find truly inspirational, I think that there are lessons to be learned from a book such as this. I find that the story reflects elements of reality that we have in our own world, elements that are either simply interesting, or crucial to the understanding of society.

In the second book of the epic, called “a Clash of Kings”, the Seven Kingdoms of Westeros fall into chaos as three separate lords lay claim to an already occupied throne, and another lord aims to carve out a kingdom for himself through conquest.

However, high in the sky, a blood red comet is spotted. It’s presence seems to be like that of a second moon, prolonged and ever present, blood red as it spews fire from it’s tail. The most interesting thing about this is that many people look at this comet and see it as an omen:

Daenerys Targaryen, who used a witch to bring back to life three dragons after an age of their disappearance, believes that the comet is guiding her to a goal across a harsh desert. A goal leading to her reclaiming the throne in Westeros.

Balon Greyjoy, a lord to the sparse Iron Islands to the west of Westeros, sees it as an omen for blood and conquest, seeking out to carve himself a kingdom in the north. As their saying goes, “we do not sow”, implying that they don’t create, but take what is theirs.

Mellisandre, a priestess from the Far East, and advisor to Stannis Baratheon, another claimant to the throne, has brought her religion to the Lord and those who swear fealty to him. Unlike the polytheistic pantheons of the Old Gods and the New, she has a monotheistic vision of a fiery lord of light, R’hlor. The burning nature and red colour of the comet leads her to believe that it is a harbinger to the God’s prominence and rise of Stannis Baratheon to the throne.

These are just some of the interpretations as to the meaning of this sign. Yet what it reminds me most of is the concept of the Antichrist and return/coming of the Messiah that spans the Abrahamic religions, and also the more general concept of the “End Times”. Islam, Judaism and Christianity believe that there will be a particular sequence of events leading to the end of the world, and that there will be signs pointing to this. Yet each has their own interpretations of what the signs are, or who the Messiah will be and what he will do. I can’t help but notice a similarity here, as devout followers of all Abrahamic religions look at what they perceive to be rampant corruption and materialism around the world, which they see as a sign of the End Times, or maybe even a harbinger of God’s wrath.

Waltz with Bashir – further thoughts

In my so called review of Waltz with Bashir, I brought up some comments made on another review from the website Electronic Intifada, here it is again:

The question of who was doing whose dirty work is not so easily answered, however Israel was nobody’s sidekick when it invaded Lebanon. The film does not show us the Israeli shelling of Beirut that led to 18,000 deaths and 30,000 wounded, the violations committed against civilians, the destruction of Palestinian and Lebanese resistance. And what about the fact that the Palestine Liberation Organization and armed resistors had been evacuated more than two weeks before the massacres, and that it was the day after multinational forces left Beirut that Israeli Defense Minister Ariel Sharon made it known that 2,000 “terrorists” remained in the camps? The focus of Folman’s quest for responsibility in Waltz with Bashir hones in on lighting the flares as the Phalangists “mopped up” the camps. That two months before the massacres Sharon had announced his objective to send Phalangist forces into the camps, that the Israeli army surrounded and sealed the camps, that they shelled the camps, that snipers shot at camp dwellers in the days before the massacres, and then having given the green light to the Phalangists to enter Sabra and Shatila, the Israeli army prevented people from fleeing the camps — all of this is absent in Waltz with Bashir.

In my eyes, a documentary is ideally a blend of investigative and accurate journalism mixed in with multimedia, be it using a camera to capture real life footage or, as in this case, using animation to record these events.

The aim of journalism, as many people believe, is to search for the truth. Some may believe that there is an objective truth to everything, others may believe that finding the objective truth is an impossible task. Personally, I agree with the latter, since the prejudices that crawl within our sub conscious constantly will tend to twist our perceptions, and these perceptions can be further twisted by our memories as time passes. But there is no reason for you to take on my view, and there is very good reason for you to go away, research and make your own judgements.

The above comment from Electronic Intifada makes one thing clear. When it comes to reporting the Lebanon War, Waltz with Bashir fails to mention many crucial events that even the most prejudiced of people cannot miss. But one has to keep in mind that the object of truth for Waltz with Bashir was not who the victims of the war were and what happened, but rather, it was why Ari (the protagonist), forgot everything about the war and in particular the massacre which he witnessed (and was an accessory to). The answer, of course, emerges and that is because he associated himself with the complacent Nazi guards in the concentration camps (as one theory goes) and the shock made his mind block this memory. Even at the very end of the movie, it is projected that the worst that the soldiers did was kill a few civilians by accident and unsuccessfully try to stop the massacre by contacting their higher ups. Nothing is mentioned about heavy shelling or preventing people from escaping during the massacre, but it is a fact of history.

Now I want to ask. Since the very act of simply firing flares to light the way for murderers during the massacre caused Ari to go into shock and completely forget everything, how do you think he will react to talking about how they had to prevent victims from escaping the horrific event? The entire a film is a product of his own perceptions and an interesting one at that. If the Israeli government, and even most of the Israeli people, refuse to take responsibility for events such as The Nakba which happened even before that, or if they do not dare but talk of the Lavon Affair in hushed voices, what do you expect?

I will make it no secret that my mother, and her side of the family, unfortunately witnessed and experienced this horrific war too. Their perceptions are radically different to Ari’s because they were in a different position. They and their fellow refugees have experienced injustices that outweigh the traumas that Ari and his friends suffered in the war, far outweigh them. That is why, if the object of truth was indeed the War itself and the injustices therein then it is essential to include the views and perceptions of the oppressed. However, for this particular film this was not that case.

I have arrived at the conclusion, that as a Palestinian who is aware of the other parts of history behind the Lebanon war, that I ought not to merely complain about this film’s inaccuracies, but realize that it is an insight into the mind of an Israeli soldier. Not only do they see as as faceless and nameless rabble, but they also see themselves as morally superior at every turn of event, finding difficulty in taking responsibility for any action they may commit. So let us go to them, let us let them know that of the 6+ million Palestinians scattered throughout Palestine, Lebanon, Jordan, Syria and the rest of the world, we are not faceless and we are not morally inferior.

What Nietzsche made me think…

Usually, during a philosophy lecture, I am drifting in and out of consciousness and am generally half asleep. But on one particular day I was lucky enough to be alert, and on that particular day, the lecture was on Nietzsche.

Now the lecture was only a quick summary, and I have not read any of his works as of yet, but I hope to read Thus spoke Zarathustra. Anyway, one part of his theory of morality really made me think.

Friedrich Nietzsche (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 He claims that the Judaeo-Christian tradition has dominated the Western world since its beginnings. Among the traditions is their theory of morality. He questions why the moral philosophers of the West seem to take this morality for granted. He accuses Kant and his “morality of reason” of using Christian morals and furnishing it with reason, without examining the content of morality itself, for example. For him, even Marx seems to have a Judaeo-Christian influence, now I was confused by this since Marx claims that all of religion is a means of control and an “opiate to the masses”. But there is one crucial element that influences him and all others. By Judaeo-Christian, Nietzsche doesn’t seem to simply mean Christianity or Judaism, but a way of thinking. 

The “slave mentality” of Judaeo-Christian thought

The judaeo-christian tradition is an example of slave mentality. The way of its thinking is tailored to support the weak and feeble. Christians, for example, preach ideas such as “the meek shall inherit the Earth”. Another well known example is the parable in which Jesus explains that it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. The slave mentality typically hates the material pleasures, reflected by its hostility to adultery, gluttony and greed. And favours the immaterial, such as goodness of the soul, salvation and agape, a divine and non-sexual love.

The master mentality

Prior to the rise of Judaeo-Christian tradition, most of the world was, in a sense, paganistic or polytheistic. They had a very different way of thinking, a master mentality, that was the polar opposite. They favoured the material things of this world, such as honour and bravery in war, wealth and riches, the pleasures of the body itself, beauty and so on. They did not help the slave but used him to their advantage, and they, according to Nietzsche, achieved many glorious things.

Now the question that Nietzsche asks is, why do all the moral philosophers, from St Augustine to Karl Marx, take this slave mentality for granted. Why do they not look back in history and see “the other side of the story” as it were. A totally different spectrum and way of thought.

What it made me think…

Now the reason that “slave mentality” arose instead of “master mentality” was obvious to me. It was simply a reactionary force, just like Karl Marx’s theorized proletariat revolution is reactionary to industrial capitalism. But as I walked out of the lecture at the end, and went back to my room, I thought that this “reaction” of ideologies did not just happen between this so called “slave mentality” and “master mentality”. In fact, it happens all the time.

Just think of it, everything you see is a product of history and its motions. From the language you hear, the architecture, the attitudes, subcultures, music. This is not just in the Western world, but a universal thing amongst humans. Everything we have today is the culmination of thousands of years, of ideologies that produced reactions, and these reactions produced ideologies themselves. According to a lecturer, Hegel once said that “Africa has no history because it has not been written”, but I say no. The history of Africa is written within its faiths, political parties and tribes. It is written within their culture, traditions, borders and customs. It is written within their tongue with which they speak, just like any other part of the world.

Atheism as a “religion”?

I just had a thought, and I think it is time this site lived up to it’s name.

Before I begin this discussion I would like to make some things clear. At my most faithful I am a Muslim, and at my most doubtful I am an agnostic theist. Therefore, I am talking about Atheism as an outsider, and not as a person who is part of the Atheist community. I am not trying to downplay or insult Atheism, it is just a random question that turned into a full blown conversation in my head. Please keep an open mind.

Can Atheism be considered a religion(that is in the least traditional sense possible)? Initially, I thought that the straightforward answer was yes. The structure of Atheism is based on a set of beliefs.

Before I go further, let us use the example of Islam to draw a contrast. Islam’s sources of knowledge are three; The Qur’an as holy revelation, the hadiths of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and his companions, and the Sunnah (or way of life) of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) which, in a sense, is found out from the Qur’an and the Hadiths. From these sources come the theories about the origins of the the universe, of man, of morality and so on. And these can be interpreted and then practised in many different ways.

Now it can be said that Atheism, as a system of belief, has a similar structure. There is one source of knowledge, or a methodology, from which its theories arise; that is empirical observation followed by the Scientific method (i.e. experimentation). From this comes the theory of the big bang and evolution. But this system, as a whole, can be interpreted and practised in different ways. One friend of mine, an agnostic atheist, chooses to live and let live, so to speak. Even if I present an argument against the existence of God and it had some logical flaw, he will point it out purely because it is a logical flaw. He is pragmatic and very respectful, and we do get along well. Other Atheists I see harbour some sort of hate for “religion as a whole”, despising its history and its present state and doing all they can to undermine it because they see it as a threat. Some go as far as hunting down who ever thanks God for being helped in a dire situation instead of the people who “did the helping” so to speak. And again, other Atheists, interpret their inevitable death and lack of an afterlife as an opportunity to live life to the full and make it better for everyone else, others seem to slip into a depression and fear death for the rest of their lives.

But there are problems I ran into. For instance, in Islam there are more definitive sets of practices and beliefs one must have to be categorized as a Muslim. That means that although interpretations are numerous, there is striking similarity between all of them. Atheism is not like that, it is much more “free form” in a sense.

Secondly, and more importantly, you simply cannot use the Bible or the Vedic scriptures to disprove the Qur’an and vice versa, they are completely separate, each with its following who do not dispute its truth, or at the very least, take information from it. The Atheist methodology can be, in a way, used to dispute these scriptures in terms of their physical state (working out when the books of the Bible were written, for instance) and their content (did God really create the Earth in seven days? Does the Hebrew within it suggest that it is literal or metaphorical?). And so on and so forth.

It remains that Atheism is a set of beliefs, with a groundwork methodology, and people can choose to base their practice and conduct on these beliefs. However the methodology is outside “the box” of revelation, scripture and tradition. So can it be called a religion? pseudo-religion? Unique religion? Or no religion at all? Please, feel free to add to the discussion.

P.s. check the comments for some very good contributions.

Arabs and Philosophy

I walked through the streets of Hammersmith, sporting my suit and a small, neat Palestinian flag pin on the lapel of it. I turned this way and that into some side streets and I come to the road I need to be at. After walking past a few downtrodden, small offices I get to my destination; the Palestinian “embassy” or  delegation.

I breath in and press the button. A loud buzz and click comes in response and I step through, and it was like going into Narnia.

One minute I was in London, the next I am in an office block in Ramallah, Palestine. Pictures of Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas hang either side of the reception desk and all of the furniture is of Arabian style, a little bit over the top, but Arabian nonetheless. It had a faint smell of pipe smoke. As I approach the receptionist I automatically speak English, for some reason or other, and so I carry on instead of switching to Arabic because that would make me seem weird.

‘Sorry, she is off sick, and the person she asked to take the interview is busy.’

Arabs I thought, we are so disorganized and chaotic. I came all the way, preparing for an interview for some volunteer work at this little office, and there is no one. I am at a loss, I take out my phone to see if I can phone the interviewee, but her number just goes to the office’s switchboard, damn it!. Just as I am about to turn around and head out in defeat, a deep, throaty noise catches my ear.

‘MARHABA!’

I say hello in return to the big, burly man that just turned up. The receptionists face contorts in confusion as I suddenly start speaking more or less perfect Arabic. Before I know it, I am sat down at an office just behind the reception, in front of yet another man I never thought I would meet. I don’t know if it was the mess or just the atmosphere of them speaking in Arabic, but I kept on being reminded of my father and the office he works at in Ramallah. We exchange names and a firm handshake, and then he leans back, conversational and friendly.

‘So Ziyad, what do you study?’

‘Journalism…and philsophy’

I say philosophy quietly, like I am brushing it under the carpet, but he catches that word nonetheless and raises an eyebrow ‘Philosophy eh?’ This is it I think, this can either go two ways. He is, at best, going to make a joke about it, or at worst, take the piss for his amusement. ‘Philosophy is very important, you know’. OH THANK GOODNESS! I think as I breath an audible sigh of relief, that sigh where I don’t have to deal with questions like ‘so what do you do? think?!’ or simple statements like ‘it is a waste of time’.

Considering that the Arab world technically saved the Ancient Greek Philosophy of the likes of Plato and Aristotle, why is it that Arabs today only seem to tolerate it or outright despise it? Now I am saying most Arabs, as my interviewee clearly approved and generalising a group of people under one statement is never literally true.

For one, Philosophy today is essential to get someone to think critically and “outside the box”. Not just for random ideas, but for entire policies and practices of society. From the prophet Muhammad (PBUH) to Siddhartha, they all began with critically thinking about themselves and the society around them. They did not follow the status-quo just because they were told to, they thought and reformed, and their ideas influenced many people in the future. They may have had a gift, or they may have been talented, but the point is that not everyone today will be capable of doing it unless they learn a subject that touches upon philosophy and practices philosophy. Coming up with “thought provoking” quotes is not philosophy, but making statements about the very fabrics of reality; be it the existence of God, morality, politics, the purpose of human life, the meaning of human language or whatever, now that is philosophy.

If you want me to be honest, I feel that the Arab world is highly lacking in Philosophy and critical thinking. And something should be done about it.

I have a dream – the bi-national state.

“I have a dream”, I admit I didn’t listen to that speech by Martin Luther King but I know that it begins this way. And Mr King does have a point, we all have dreams on all different levels. Some of us dream about the time we get our next meal, while others dream of a time when we become famous pop stars and there are a lot of people who dream of an ideal life, an ideal state.

I have had such a dream and I know that when I tell you about my dream you will probably think it is too much to hope for, but dreams never harm anyone I guess so here it is.

Firstly, it has to do with Israel, Palestine and the problems that lie between them. And the most ideal situation for me would be a bi-national state…
Yes, many people expect the peaceful elements on “both sides” of this mess to be supportive of a two state solution, and I think that is realistic, but my dream…my dream is a one state solution.

“So who is going to be pushed out? The Jews or the Arabs?”
Well none really, because if it is a bi-national state then it will include both peoples. No one will have to leave.

So let me grab you a map!

So here is a map (pretty big one too, but hey the bigger the better).

Every district, both in the West Bank, Gaza and Israel proper will have an electable representative. These representatives will make their decisions in a “united congress” for the  bi-national state and more local decisions in the “congress” of the state of Israel or in the state of Palestine depending on the district they are from. And because of the bi-national state, there are no borders or restrictions between them because they are essentially one.

Think of it as a two state version of the United States of America.

There will be no Arabs or Jews in the face of the law, it is just one man, one vote, based on the irrevocable fact of our humanity which unites us. Whether someone is a Jew or an Arab is something that is to be respected, and not discriminated or prejudiced against.

The congressional bodies will be held in Jerusalem, the capital of this bi-national state, so in theory, the bi-national state will respect the nationalism of both Palestinians and Jews by allowing it to be their capital at the same time. East Jerusalem will be a district for Palestine and West Jerusalem will be a district for Israel.

As for the problem of the settlements, two things could happen:
1. They are all dismantled with the illegal settlers being relocated elsewhere.
2. The illegal settlers are told that if they wish to stay, then their citizen ship will be under the name of Palestine and not Israel because they will be required to vote for their representatives in their districts. So a settler in the district of Nablus will vote for the available representatives there.

The extremist elements on both sides should be treated, whether it is Hamas or the extreme settler movement responsible for “price tag” attacks and vandalism. They should be given fair trial in a court of law for all the crimes that they are responsible for, whether it is targeting and killing innocent civilians, or terror attacks (both apply to both mentioned groups).

These are the basics of my thought on the matter so far. But how far this can go I have no idea, assuming it can go any distance at all. I know that it has a high chance of never happening in the history of man, but if you don’t mind, I am going to fantasize how I will be able to travel straight from Jericho to the beaches of Acre and Haifa.

Good bye.

The China brain – is the mind an illusion?

Is the mind an illusion? I read a thought experiment called the China brain (credit goes to Ned Block). And I will start with said thought experiment.

Suppose that in the distant future we create an android with as many neural pathways as the human brain and all its characteristics. However, each neuron is radio controlled by a single individual in China (I know that the population of China is no where near the number of neurons in the human brain, but it is the distant future so suppose we still bred like rabbits too). Every individual in China represents a single neuron, they are given specific instructions of sending a certain signal to another individual who controls a neuron when receiving certain signals (represented by numbers). It follows that if everyone works at full capacity (and at lightning speeds) that the radio-controlled android will exhibit human behaviour since the right signals are originating at the right places and going to the right places to do so.

Android!

What does that mean? What makes the android different from a human? Remember that the impulses will take the exact same neural pathways and produce the same effects. Many of us are tempted to insist there is a difference, especially when it comes to the source of our pride and joy as a species, which is intelligence.

But why? Why should it be different? What this  thought experiment should do is not get us to defend our “uniqueness” in terms of our minds, but to compare and contrast. Indeed, every neuron in our brain is a different cell, each with specific receptors and pathways (the equivalent of the instructions given to the individuals controlling the android). Each one is its own living unit that reproduces and its actions are determined by its own structure (again the receptors and the neuro-chemicals).

If we do take on this view, then the mind doesn’t become a thing in its own right, but a projection or by product of the activities of billions of singular neurons. What are the implications of such a view? Could it mean that the mind, as a singular, whole (and Platonically speaking) indivisible thing is actually an illusion?

Feel free to comment to share your views!

I am a traveller at the foot of a mountain

I was sat with a friend of mine that I had not seen in an age (maybe three years for someone like me) outside a cafe. We talked about a lot of things, but the main theme seemed to be religion and spirituality in the end. We talked about meanings, metaphors, the truths and stereotypes of religions (mainly Christianity and Islam). But at one point he leaned forward and asked, in a very enquiring and interviewing manner:

Let me ask you this, Ziyad. You sound like you are on a spiritual journey, where are you on that journey. 

He took me by surprise. Maybe I am on a spiritual journey, but because he was so open minded I felt comfortable with spilling out my feelings about religion (as someone who was born into a Muslim family) and so I did and here is what I said:

I am a traveller at the foot of a mountain. The summit is where truth is. I can see a possible path up there but I am not sure if it will take me there, I doubt it highly at times and at others I have faith in it.

We discussed this metaphor further, but here is the rest of what I have to say about this:

The strangest thing is, I think I can see multiple paths that lead to the same point. I am only left with an agonising possibility. Do these multiple paths (religions, spiritualities etc) have things in common between each other because there is indeed a universal truth or meaning to life? Or is it all just imagination, a part of human psychology?

Basically, the crux of it is that I do doubt myself at times. I doubt myself in all possible ways and one of them happens to be in my faith. It is said in Islam that if God loves you he will not give you gold or material riches, but he will give you faith. Every now and then I feel fearful that God does not love me, but I tell myself that this kind of thinking is ridiculous.

But one thing is sure and it keeps on going ringing in my head like tinnitus:
Anything is possible, anything is possible, anything is possible.