₦airaland Forum

budaatum:
https://www.nairaland.com/4069527/what-created-god-response-atheist

That is not in any way mystic superstitious, All evidence i postulate in that thread are not in anyway related to superstitious claim. My position on that thread was simple. Everything is natural even if unexplainable. Before we could see the cell it was unbelievable and not so long ago the atom and dna were unimaginable. To think humans are at the peak of our evolution and our knowledge of the universe is crazy. There is much to still be explained and even more still waiting to be discovered which point to the demonstration of God. Same can't be said about witchcraft and spell which have enough documented explanation as far as human is concern.

budaatum:
It's not your "message on nairaland as a traditionalist", which is commendable, that made me wonder. Rosezee just sounded like you did in a recent thread of yours.

I'll ask lordreed what he thinks.

which thread is that? Can you point me to it.

budaatum:
vaxx, I would have thought this sort of reasoning would have been up your isle!

my message on nairaland as a traditionalist is not rooted on superstition, it is simply for those who wanted to be empower thru orisa psychology without relationship to ritual fanaticism, divination and all sort of mystical activities.

Rosezee . Spirituality isn't about devil or separate soul.Spirituality is all about not being stupid. It is about fool prove.

Rosezee:
That's not the point and you know it... Or you don't. The point is, you can be in denial of anything you don't want to believe. See 'my friend,' witchcraft cannot be proven. That's the hard truth. But you should ask yourself this question: if there is a physical realm you can see, could there be another one you can't see? You cannot limit your mind to just one. That viewpoint is myopic...and foolish. The truth is, there is another one. We called it the spiritual realm. That's the realm that complicate a lot of things for us because spiritual beings can do something that will hurt us because we have a 'soul' - a spiritual version of ourselves. Witches are possessed by the devil. They use that spiritual version to hurt people badly. So yes they do exist. To think otherwise, especially as an African is ludacris because it is more obvious here.

Believe me, if there is any iota of truth in the evidence of witchcraft, i will not be ignorant of it, cuz I am much more closer to the root than many wannabes here.

So No, witchcraft its not real But the placebo effect(i.e) the psychological condition) is real. The BELIEF that it is real …FEELS real.

some babalawo or herbalists types do have access to herbs and spices that can create coma’s, healing etc - But that’s the herbs and spices working, the chemicals in them. Not anything special from the (likely) schizophrenic shaman giving them.

We live in an age of great literacy, instant documentation (with pictures!) of any and every event, and unprecedented communication. If there was anything even remotely strange in the world, there would be a reasonable body of evidence for it by now. Instead, do you know how much verifiable evidence exists for any witchcraft claim ever made? Precisely zero.

If there’s been not one shred of evidence for anything witchcraft by now, it’s reasonable to conclude that it is not real and it is nothing more than the childish imaginings of a species in its intellectual childhood .

ecstasy37:
Your notion is good but what u are suggesting equivalent of telling a child the importance of walking when he hasn't even started crawling we haven't even resolved the issue of life and welfare the basic indices of humanity before we can talk of trading. But on trading the diminishing returns effect of the strength of the dollar in the African economic terrain is one of the impeding factors among millions until we start to love our own we will spend forever trying to perfect the economic structure pass to our by the colonialist

see, The whole issue is, there is no support for African business, if you want monetary wealth, support african business and let the support circle back to you.
We need to create economic unity.

This is the same pragmatic growth strategy Europe/US realise and it helps them to bring the majority of their citizens into the economic mainstream

African requires an economy that can meet the needs of all our economic citizens – our people and their enterprises in a sustainable manner.This will only be possible if our economy builds on the full potential of all persons and communities across the length and breadth of African. We need strong cooperation to achieved that.

ecstasy37:
Which wealth do you speak of the wealth to poverty indices across Africa is more than 100million to 0.4 how do you think the European / the US did it ...dont believe anything u see on mainstream media unless u have deep insight u will decipher some coding but until u will continue to call a spade a spade

The European and the US understand the basis of economic unity which African had become allergic to. If there is no focus on black empowerment thru strong links of cooperation among blacks. We shall still remain poor. The thru success to financial breakthrough is to buy from each other.

ecstasy37:
Juju jazz magic what ever term u want to use bothers on two things illusion and belief

Higher multi dimensional being can create illusion that can play on the human intelligence and being gullible due to embedded programming some easily fall for it

The use of quantum intuition to predict the outcome of certain fate paths is prerequisite and the wielder of such ability can manipulate the for telli of the possible outcome of the future and it will seem like magic but then again a activator is needed to read and accept the coding the activitor in this case the human brain

Imagine this scenario a young man goes to a native doctor for the purpose of money rituals the native doctor through the help of these multi dimensional being sees his fate path knowing he will make those riches eventually just needs to trigger him with the illusion, he's told to bring some human parts in doing so his conciousness has established the believe that illusion of money ritual is real he goes home and continue his normal business, results starts to manifest he believes that it's the illusion thats work not knowing that his belief which is actually the manifestation of his conciousness

Folks if u are looking for magic or jazz look within not without we are all gods and together with all the infinity if the cosmos we are God

You sound like billionaire.

See bro the Hollywood version of muilt dimension really doesn't exist as far as we know and we have no evidence to believe such a concept does exist at this time. The scientific use of dimension really has no relation to the science fiction version.

It is a combination of ignorance and laziness that makes people seek for divine money from a babalawo. The babalawo exploit their ignorance and they become more poor than they were. There is no magical short cut to monetary wealth. The reasons we have hard time creating wealth Is because wealth developed from economic unity (that is buy from one another) if African begin to buy from one another , consumed African product and services We will create the same wealth the western world had created or perharps bigger

tintingz:
Lmfao!!!

Dude, does Wikipedia has reliable sources in their articles, kindly answer yes or no?

This is not an inteligent question ( sorry for the used of the words) what matter is if the evidence used by the Wikipedia on its own is a standard source Since Wikipedia can be edited by anybody regardless of their qualification, the reliability of their source become fragile. So what to do as independent researcher is to evaluate the accuracy of the article cited which is is a lot of work, if you want to do it right, but here's what it would involve. Pick the article. Find the most authoritative secondary and tertiary sources on that same topic. Read and correctly understand these sources. Evaluate how what you have learned differs from the content of the Wikipedia article. Try to figure out cause for the discrepancies, by examining the sources cited in the Wikipedia article.

You will probably find that the article was pretty good, but with some weakness. After you have done all this work, you will be in a very good position to improve the article yourself. I used wikipedia also but adjust myself when an authentic and credible reference is available.

The man in the video was only playing fair, he gave good reasons. "Don't trust Wikipedia, any articles without citations don't trust it, double check the citation and make your own decisions

The Wikipedia employee " actually know that, it is ignorance to rely on such a secondary source. Rather follow the citation and cross check for authenticity.

Let assume Cambridge report was found in Wikipedia reference, is it reliable?

Good, you then verified cambridge report and scrutinized it and see if the report is exactly what is written on Wikipedia or it contain any form of bias.

Now, what if I clicked on the reliable sources cited on Wikipedia and started using them to support my claims, are you still gonna argue about that?

Seriously, there is no difference searching on google for sources and collating them to prove a point.

They are diffrence, wikipedia can be edited and written by anybody. All what you need is to be a registered member. And once you registerd, you are good to go. Such a webpage can be influence by self bias or financial gain. So it is always accurate to cross -check if what is found in such article cited by the editors is in agreements with what is found on the Wikipedia page.
,

Now back to the argument. These reports here are another thing regarding your report.

https://www.penn.museum/sites/expedition/ancient-egypt-and-black-africa/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/06/22/health/ancient-egypt-mummy-dna-genome-heritage/index.html

https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2017/06/29/mummy-dna-ancient-egyptians-middle-eastern-todays-african-mixed-population/


Please don't tell me they are not reliable.

Not disputing if one evidence is not accurate as any other, my argument is, An open source like wikipedia is not reliable which Wikipedia itself honestly agree except you.

The volume of information in these weblinks you cited now is influenced by the opinion of the author just like many other books. So to tell the difference between it and Cambridge. Read their historical books or article on the same topic, You will see a difference for sure. What is and isn't true is up to how much proofing you are willing to do, and your own opinion will play a major part in your excepted truth.

Cambridge is a trademark on her own, making her impacts on this topic a very robust conclusion. Such a citadel of learning will try as much to seprate itself from bias. It has a reputation to protect. Nonetheless it is an European university which should be bias by rejecting african supremacy.

tintingz:
No.

Myth are just fairytales.

No.


No, I've been telling you the Wikipedia article has references.

Lol, now I'm trolling?

My premise was about Wikipedia having references in their article therefore it is reliable in this case, you're the one trolling.

My goodness.

hogwash . ""Stop the trolls"". Pls i want to play some video games.

tintingz:
Does Wikipedia attach reliable sources to their articles, yes or no?

i think the question you should ask is, does Wikipedia established itself as an authority? In which i will say no. Wikipedia rely on multiple source for its assertion. No doubt, but It employs no systematic mechanism for fact checking or accuracy like a well established scientific paper or academic websites.

Here is an employee of the Wikimedia Foundation, the non-profit who owns the Wikipedia website, advising people: "Don't trust Wikipedia", and he explains why. Skip to time code 0:59 to hear what he says.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MK-Tp4__f-0&x-yt-ts=1422327029&x-yt-cl=84838260

tintingz:
Did you read the article at all?

It is talking about mirror source, when you're using Wikipedia article as a source for another Wikipedia article.

Here is rule number one in the same link you presented.

Wikipedia generally uses reliable secondary sources, which vet data from primary sources. If the information on another Wikipedia page (which you want to cite as the source) has a primary or secondary source, you should be able to cite that primary or secondary source and eliminate the middleman (or "middle-page" in this case).
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_not_a_reliable_source

Please read and understand the content of the link you are providing.

You are a troller.

I have state in my entire reply with you that wikipedia is a third party information center. An relying on it is not standard as it depends on other information. All the Wikipedia links i submit agree with that.

No academia or any suitable scientific paper will ever reference Wikipedia. It is not a standard.


So repeating after me, will not solve the initial flaws you committed . relying on such Wikipedia in the presence of reliable and trusted evidence is a complete hogwash

It baffles me you are not learning but trolling.

tintingz:
Myths are stories widely known In cultures, they are usually tales about gods, supernaturals that has no evidence. History and myths are mix together that most people don't even know what's historical and myth. A tale may actually be true but with time it is distorted when re-telling, this is when it becomes myth.

You are only repeating after me. Why that?

Yes, history mostly deals with facts because they are investigated.

You are still repeating after me.

Ok

Lol

You are mixing things up, what that page is saying was Wikipedia don't have self research or original research therefore don't take them reliable when sources are not attached to it.

Good. Simple, that is what i am telling you since and you are finding it difficult to let it sink into your head.

From the same link you presented it said,

Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published sources, making sure that all majority and significant minority views that have appeared in those sources are covered
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources#Wikipedia_is_not_a_reliable_source

Here is another one

Wikipedia does not publish original thought. All material in Wikipedia must be attributable to a reliable, published source.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research

Now, it appear to me you are not debating but just trolling, The page i posted on the Wikipedia report actually expose more than what you quoted averagely. It is essential you read the whole context So as to not give pseudo conclusion. Am tempted to ask if you are going there to read what suit your opinion or the entire Article.

Kindly read carefully before present your claims.

The article clearly said that scholars disagree with the black or white ancient Egyptians.

Cambridge is not only the authority on this subject, how many times will I say this?

No, I have refuted this claim above.

Lol. One of the reference in that Wikipedia page about Black Egyptians is from Yale university, are they not trusted?

No, you are forcing me to accept it as the only source on this subject.

You are simply trolling me. Just admit. Learn and relearn. The hypothetical claim you read are not false. But claims under investigation. That is what hypothesis means.

tintingz:
How do scholars know when a story or a figure is real, historical and a myth?

simple. , they are diffrence. Mythology is a collection of tales that generally explain the past: these may have a basis in fact but are embroidered to explain the present. They are simply to demonstrate a point.

History is an attempt to uncover and create a factual account of the past.

Quantum physics, dark matter are theories that are observed and calculated.

They are not proven, they are evidence base assertion not a proof based. That is the message i am passing thru.

i still don't get the connection how biology adaptive process equate to conquering the world

maybe you need a personal study on this. You could go ahead and read your beautiful Wikipedia report on that.

Are sources Wikipedia attached to their articles original, reliable or not?

The bone of my argument is simple. Wikipedia is not a standard source
. Wikipedia itself acknowledged that it is not reliable.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources#Wikipedia_is_not_a_reliable_source

Cambridge has it own research their research doesn't outweigh other research, it is just one of those research, there are various research on this subject and from different sources from Wikipedia and it says scholars don't agree with the hypothesis of ancient black Egyptians.

The postulation you read on Wikipedia is not even falsed. It was called an hypothesis for a reason . I advice you to read the Wikipedia itself. It postulate some beautiful evidence on the subject. You are reading too much of the criticisms. Cambridge is an established authority and a reputable higher institution of learning, hence making its assertion a grandaur on this feild.

Wikipedia collated research from each sources. Again the links are there

i don't know your buggle. Wikipedia already accept it is not a realiable source.the link is up there. .

Argument from authority is not a fallacy when we all agree on the reliability, authority and consensus of a subject.

Good.

When two authorities disagree with themselves about a subject, then we can say it's still a debate.

it depends, here prestige and trademark become a yardstick. People will likely reference a trusted and a well known authority above the lesser known. The reasons is obvious.

You're trying to push me to agree that Cambridge is the only authority here whereas there are other authorities on this subject.

No i am trying to let you know that cambridge as an authority is trusted amd realiable .simple.

Your almighty Wikipedia is not reliable.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_not_a_reliable_source

tintingz:
Myth doesn't have proof it is just a story anybody can made up.

People don't just say a story is myth, they say it when there is no evidence to back it up.

Hogwash, Nobody can prove that things will always fall down when you drop them.

Nobody can prove that energy is conserved.

Nobody can prove that dark matter exists.

Nobody can prove that quantum physics is real.

Proof is limited, therefore not enough . All what you can gather are evidence. Even myth are not evidence based neither is it proved based.. When scrutinizing mythology, you are not checking if it is true or false but it's usefulness. , you cannot fully understand much of what was written in the past without understanding the allusions to mythological events and references to mythical stories and themes, and frequently history as well.

Crack open any bit of literature, especially from the 19th century or before and especially poetry, and you will find references to people, places and events the author can reasonably assume are ‘common knowledge’ among his intended audience enabling him to make metaphors and allusions in a shorter space.

We are talking about conquering nations, how did early primitive humans conquered the whole world?

Thru biological adapitve process and many more.

Wikipedia has always attached sources to their articles, not just one source, different sources from reliable and original sources when it comes to scholars agreement and disagreement.

Wikipedia on its own is not a standard source, that is my argument. Wikipedia depends on multiple source that is why i called it a third party source. Using it as as a reference in a researched paper is unacceptable as it is not standard.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Egyptian_hypothesis

Go to the site, the highlighted numbers are sources you can click on them, you have access to them or scroll down for the references

i am aware of this, i had refer you to it earlier.my argument again, Wikipedia on its own is an encyclopedia. So not suitable as a refrence .better still, cite out the document the Wikipedia is referencing. . And justapose it with Cambridge claim.

Kindly stop using one source and said it is the only authoritative source which was not consensus by all scholars, stop arguing from authority, it is a fallacy!

citing university of cambridge is not one source. As the report is based on scholarly resarch conducted by Cambridge historians themselves. When it comes to citing of academic paper. Cambridge is a trademark.

The Argument from Authority is misunderstood to be a fallacy in all cases, when this is not necessarily so. The argument becomes a fallacy only when used deductively, or where there is insufficient inductive strength to support the conclusion of the argument.

I have used it inductively here as a lawyer will cite constitution as an authority to position his view in court of law.

tintingz:
Myth is a myth, it can be useful but not base on reality and fact.

myth is about cuiltural influence, true, mythology is something which we dont have any fix solid proof to say it really exist! Which mean we can neither say it doesn't exist nor can say it does exist! Simply it's existence is like mystery type. But saying it is false it entirely too simplistic to say.

I

it seems you forget the premise of this argument.

will you kindly remind me? Or you are not seeing the dot i am connecting in my postulation.

Are you now arguing from authority? Where is the consensus that Cambridge report is the ultimate authority on this?

Cambridge university herself is an authority on her own "" A trademark ""an established consensus of its own. Wikipedia is not recognised in an academia world when it comes to citation of academic paper . How can you underestimate the community that pull some of the well known elites together.

my argument still stands, Ancient Egyptians are not regard neither as blacks nor whites.

Your arguments is weak and a complete hogwash especially when Cambridge is correcting it. What is Wikipedia if that is your source. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, built at a reference that itself points to original sources. It is not an original source itself.

tintingz:
Mythologies can be useful but it shows supernatural events are fictions.

Not exactly, Myth can be viewed as archetype and as such can have an underlying and eternal truth, whatever the external facts may be. Currently, the word 'myth' is often used as a synonym for 'not true' but this is far too simplistic.

Not conquering

. Homo sapiens was biologically adapted to survive any where on earth before he ever left Africa. Both netherdthal and hobbit were all dominated.

From what I read, scholars don't regard ancient Egyptians as blacks nor whites.

The hypothesis is regarded as a fringe theory. Mainstream scholars reject the notion that Egypt was a white or black civilization; they maintain that, despite the phenotypic diversity of Ancient and present day Egyptians, applying modern notions of black or white races to ancient Egypt is anachronistic.[10][11][12] In addition, scholars reject the notion, implicit in the black Egypt hypothesis, that Ancient Egypt was racially homogeneous; instead, skin color varied between the peoples of Lower Egypt, Upper Egypt, and Nubia, who in various eras rose to power in Ancient Egypt.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Egyptian_hypothesis

when postulating an evidence on a research paper. A Cambridge report will outweigh Wikipedia report.

Wikipedia report depends on both second and third source. Cambridge report was essentially verified as an authority on its own. Even from the Wikipedia you quoted averagely to support what you wish. It established that ancient Egyptians refers to their homeland as kemet ( The land of the black people).

Read the page to verified

obinna58:
I just tire for vaxx

like wetin. Tell me what you don't understand about my view.

tintingz:
Lol

Well it's a myth, what do we expect.

well, it happens to be the best way to get our point across . Using a story and sometimes the best story for the job isn't entirely factual.

Mythology is a useful tool in our societal development just like a hammer is a useful tool in construction. The question isn't whether mythology is true or not, it's whether or not that particular myth is useful to a particular person at a particular point in their life journey. How the myth is conveyed and in what context is equally important.. so myth in tbis case isn't entirely falsified.

So the bulletproof, disappearing, telekinesis juju are not real?

Reality is but an illusion, albeit a persistent one. Einstein. Is the bulletproof , disappearing or telekinesis persistent? You yourself can evaluate it yourself.

Does that mean they ruled the world?

Yes they rule their own world which was predominantly found in africa.

Most scholars reject the hypothesis that the ancient egyptians are black or white.

It depends on how far back you go. 1,500 BC Queen Tiye was black with an Afro and other African (Negroid) features.


This is an authority report on the historical colour of the Egyptians ? Cambridge university data

https://www.fitzmuseum.cam.ac.uk/dept/ant/egypt/kemet/virtualkemet/faq/

servercodes001:
Why don't you educate us please
If you believe it has explanation and you can't give it then you're indeed misguided

And the explanation is basic. Your mind can be altered thru varous means which are simply psychological.

servercodes001:
So,
A man touched by someone he doesn't know and he immediately handed over his money he just collected from the bank, it's the science of the mind for an adult to give his entire money and cry afterwards??

Do you mean people choose to become insane and roam around after someone buried items on their doorstep, why do they become Normal again after it's dugged out and destroyed

I can give you thousands of examples, please tell me whether all this are setups for entertainment or deceit

All what you are trying to point out have an explanation.

tintingz:
[b[Lol, I don't think it's only a mind thing, it is also seen as some kind of supernatural power e.g Sango is said to breathe out fire, is it a thing of the mind?
[/b]

shango fire is simply a symbolism . (I.e) it is a metaphor for the deification of the power of the will.

When you said it is mind thing, can you explain further?

it is about psychological controlling

I mostly see Egypt, the question now is, is ancient Egypt consider black civilization?[/quote]This is not what i was expecting you to talk about. There is a solid scientific research that Homo sapiens first appear in africa , somewhere betweeen Ethiopia and kenya over 2humdered and thousand years.

But to compliment it, the first occupant of egypt were blacks and egypt is situated in africa.

We submit a university of cambridge research to back up this assertion later

MrPresident1:
OK na, lol. Even the Bible, which I hold SUPREME in all affairs, tells me that there is sorcery and there is witchcraft.

psychedelics drug can do the work

MrPresident1:
There is juju, but Jesus is greater than juju. There are people who have the knowledge of bending reality, but God pass everybody

An altered state of the mind will give an illusion of an altered state of reality.

obinna58:
I'm talking of how people sees it, juju can be shown physically not only in the mind, involves charm, doing beyond human abilities

there are a lot ways of mind controlling that can manifest physically. It depends on the fellow. Even our politicians use it everyday.

luvmijeje:
Vaxx, I need your opinion on this.

I visited a very close friend of mine last week who had not been able to walk for the past 8 months. According to him this was what happened :

On this fateful day he went clubbing as usual and decides to take a stroll to a brothel not far from the club. Then he was accosted by three young guys who brought out guns and knives. He said, they robbed him of his phones and wallets. And they started rubbing one of the knives over his body. There was no hard contact. So they asked him to start running but he could only walk backward because he was afraid. And they followed him till he got to a brt terminal. Before he knew it, he fell down and couldn't stand up again. He told me the knife was jazzed because that's the only explanation he could come up with. They didn't beat nor cut him. The only contact was the knife rubbing.

That's someone close to me. How do you expect me hear that and still believe there's no black magic?

This will have to do with knowledge, mind control, telepathy, and essence. There are techniques to do that....There is an academic explanation for this.. look up to ""Ericksonian Hypnotherapy""

It is unfortunate our papa and mama cannot document their juju method on paper. It will have serve as same evidence you find in scienctifc paper .

obinna58:
Does it mean juju has another meaning cos in accordance to what you re saying, it kinda means juju doesn't really exist.
We all know juju involves doing extraordinary things

for a start what is juju ?Hope you know Nigeria constitution recognize it.

CodeTemplar:
There is no wireless technology anywhere also. How about that?

The evidence of electromagnetic wave discredit your assertion. If you can control this electromagnetic wave, then you can use it to communicate or to broadcast information.

obinna58:
Vaxx is that really you?

Any problem

tintingz:
Juju is used to protect, since it didn't work when the white came, it is useless.

Kindly tell how Africa ruled the earth for hundred and thousands of years?

. Well for the purpose of limited definition; juju fall into science of the mind. Psychological controling, what was used as a means of protection back then is their mind. Some who positively used it well were saved .

As for the second question. Do a little goggle search and ask me question if flaws exist in my post.

LordReed:
And spelling errors too.

i am on the phone but we take care of that......

This is very important to understand because I continue to read threads upon threads about this on nairaland. Someone even throw a challenge of 100k to know if a spell (juju) exist .

Well Orisa spirituality is a power of light to allow sight to those living in darkness, it is not a spirituality of secret dark witchcraft for you to live in fear of.

My worries is that anytime you promote the belief in witches, magic spells, and that sort of superstitious danger, you will automatically create a fearful population that will hurt anyone (including children) they see as a source of this and pay anyone they believe can save them from this.

It is unfortunate that many proponents of Orisa religion claiming to be babalawo are teaching people to believe in this fearful superstition. The dangers of such belief is self-evident but many continue it simply because it is claimed as an "African tradition."

Listen now and listen carefully. Orunmila's teaches are explicit that the only "witchcraft" that exists is psychological. This is powerful if you are susceptible but it is not actually witchcraft. They caste spells on you thru your psychology by exposing you to self-destructive images meant to subliminally induce fear and panic. This is why you should control the images you let people expose you to (especially from the media and their school system). This is the only way they enter your mind and influence you; not "witchcraft."

our ancient spirituality was regarding the science of the mind, not mystic supersition. Until we realize this, our ancient spirituality will not be able to empower us as a people.

In the name of Orunmila, the wisdom of Olodumare living within.