Quranist – Hadith Rejector

share this pageShare Page
Adnan Rashid

Channel: Adnan Rashid

Episode Notes

Episode Transcript

© No part of this transcript may be copied or referenced or transmitted in any way whatsoever. Transcripts are auto-generated and thus will be be inaccurate. We are working on a system to allow volunteers to edit transcripts in a controlled system.


00:00:00--> 00:00:11

Have a bath after discharging a very wet dream of having if you've had intimacy with your wife, do you have a bath after it? I do. So why? Because it says

00:00:12--> 00:00:23

it doesn't say after the after the intimacy with your wife showed me now in the Quran, where it says that you have to have social after intimacy with your wife or after Java. Show me. Show me Show me Show me Why do you?

00:00:39--> 00:00:52

The distribution of war booty Robert mentioned whenever the Prophet gives you take it on whatever he doesn't if you don't take it. So the context is war booty is not in relation to the guidance, correct or incorrect?

00:00:56--> 00:01:02

When we check it out, we'll see what it talks about. Okay, and there are many more examples.

00:01:04--> 00:01:06

Please educate me. We'll educate each other.

00:01:27--> 00:01:42

By the way, this is a very big topic. So inshallah I hope that we can discuss it so hard. Oh, yeah, no, no, no, we can we can do because this is something that I have not had the opportunity to properly discuss. And I'm interested to get the best possible feedback on the topic. So do you personally?

00:01:47--> 00:01:48

Do you pray?

00:01:51--> 00:01:52

Okay, do you know what the parameters are?

00:01:53--> 00:01:55

I know, because I've looked at every single

00:01:59--> 00:01:59

standing

00:02:01--> 00:02:01

record.

00:02:04--> 00:02:04

I've mentioned

00:02:06--> 00:02:09

the word of Allah in there. That mentioned even a moment

00:02:14--> 00:02:20

somebody mentions your hands and mentions your face, it mentions your feet, it mentions your head, it mentioned all of them.

00:02:24--> 00:02:34

In every detail, was this is the thing you have to you cannot you cannot say we do this now. We don't find it. And therefore it's missing. I'm saying the logical trajectory is what

00:02:35--> 00:02:42

is our practice in accordance with because let's say for the sake of argument, if we talk to the Jewish people who accept it,

00:02:43--> 00:02:49

they will say that our practice comes from the Tom woods, we don't find it in the Torah. And in fact, this is the argument they made. Okay.

00:02:54--> 00:02:56

Where is the booty with? Okay?

00:03:00--> 00:03:06

So basically what Allah has given to the Rasool mean, achill Cora, from the people of the

00:03:07--> 00:03:09

area of the town. So what is that?

00:03:11--> 00:03:20

What What did Allah give to him from there? Was it revelation? Or was it booty? Or was it what Who said that? I'm asking you is that revelation? Yes, it is.

00:03:23--> 00:03:25

Are you imposing now a meaning on the Quran?

00:03:26--> 00:03:33

I'm telling you, there's no logical way you can interpret that as revenue though your logic is not what interprets the Quran Agreed? Agreed.

00:03:35--> 00:04:00

This is the point now, you will rather use your logic to find the context of the Quran than the prophetic tradition. The prophetic tradition is not historically reliable, it is contradictory Why? Why Why is it not historically reliable? Now? Let's talk about that first. Now that we know that we know you're using your logic to interpret the Quran I reject your logic. Your logic is as good as your own.

00:04:01--> 00:04:02

What does it mean?

00:04:03--> 00:04:24

to not use a man is telling you to use your logic? repeated refrain. Now you're doing exactly what you're accusing me people like me off right? 90 accepting Naresh now I don't know using your I do not understand the Quran from my own logic. I don't I refuse to do that because I know you can. Why don't you do it? No Ally's not telling you to use your logic to understand the Quran Where Where is he?

00:04:25--> 00:04:28

And when the verses of Allah tada Bruno Qur'an

00:04:31--> 00:04:51

theorem Okay, here lies giving you a specific question. If there are discrepancies if there are contradictions the Quran then it is not from Allah. Okay? Go here, Ally's not asking you to interpret the Quran or the will of the Quran or the fear of the Quran from your own logic, unlike asking you to go and find contradictions. Right. Now he's saying why contracts generate deeply.

00:04:53--> 00:04:59

So now we have a disagreement and you want to use logic over the Hadees I don't want to do that. I would rather go to the Prophet

00:05:00--> 00:05:16

Okay to interpret the Quran and come to people like you or someone else, why don't we make the Quran demo Haman on this topic? And who makes it Mohammed when you say more Haman one versus Mohammed over another? who interprets the first verse to make it more human? For another because Allah has made

00:05:17--> 00:05:26

a new movie? No. Okay. In one sense, it is clarifying. And it's also clear. Okay. So when a line is

00:05:27--> 00:05:29

subjective, okay.

00:05:30--> 00:05:32

So where did you get? How do you pray?

00:05:35--> 00:05:36

I follow the guidance.

00:05:38--> 00:05:43

When you place your hands, irrelevant. Now that's very relevant. And let's not,

00:05:44--> 00:06:07

you know, try to slip out of arguments. Let's be straight, and deal with the question. How do you pray? as a Muslim? I'm asking how do you bridge? When you say Allahu Akbar, I don't. For you don't do that. What do you do? Because the hand raising, and even the position of the hands in it is in the historic history of Islam. not consistent. When do you Wait, wait, let me finish my point.

00:06:08--> 00:06:17

The followers of archery the consistent money and these people because the practice of I'm asking you for money. Have your hands like this?

00:06:18--> 00:06:19

How do you pray?

00:06:20--> 00:06:23

I stand precise for how I

00:06:24--> 00:06:24

stand.

00:06:26--> 00:06:41

If Allah gives a piece of information, that's all you need. I think all these extra details you're going backwards. You say you pray, the Quran says akima. Salah now established prayer. How? I'm asking you, how do you establish prayer? Simple question.

00:06:42--> 00:06:43

No, you haven't answered.

00:06:47--> 00:06:47

I pray like this.

00:06:50--> 00:06:52

I've just demonstrated. How do you break

00:06:55--> 00:07:02

down to cross country? Show me how do you stand and how do you bow and how do you I'm standing. I just demonstrate. Look, this is simple.

00:07:03--> 00:07:05

Yes, I'm saying this is how I pray.

00:07:07--> 00:07:19

Okay, you're going the wrong way around. You're following these extra things and say it's not Stan Winston's there's nothing else to it. Okay. How do you start when you? How do you start the prayer? Let's say you're now starting the priorities.

00:07:21--> 00:07:21

What do you do?

00:07:23--> 00:07:23

You see

00:07:24--> 00:07:27

that there's a reason why you cannot answer this question.

00:07:29--> 00:07:36

Because you do not have a consistent standard to choose to stand by, you know, you are in trouble.

00:07:37--> 00:07:48

Standard is basically the, the what's the word? The consensus of people hundreds of years? No, yes. No? Yes. No. Okay. You don't know what my standard is the honey?

00:07:49--> 00:08:12

Have you studied it? Actually? I have a good idea. But yes. You haven't studied it? Okay. The answer is you discuss it right now you can tell me? How can you judge a science without studying it? Okay, how can you judge it? I have read it up. I know a good What have you read? I have read about the different approaches taken to make it the eighth to say what's the chain of narration? How do I know?

00:08:13--> 00:08:15

Tell me what is the definition of say?

00:08:17--> 00:08:18

Well,

00:08:21--> 00:08:30

the definition of side hustle is another thing. Tell me what the easiest question to a basic student of science. He says what is the definition of Zaha Hadid?

00:08:32--> 00:08:51

And I'm not going to say I have the definition because I don't care about the definition. No, no, no, no, no, no. You are challenging the science. Yes. And criticizing it without having known it. You don't know it. I familiar with the methodology taken and how they supposedly judge the region. I'm familiar with how they consider whether it's more than

00:08:52--> 00:09:00

whether it's okay. What books did you study? One name one. You just mentioned the word religion.

00:09:01--> 00:09:27

And the science that deals with the question of religion is called animal radar. What book Have you studied on Elmore? JOHN? One one book, justified to me the logic of the job and how it's possible to have actually done so you haven't studied it? I'm going very systematically. I'm focused on the discussion. And I will I will request that you remain focused also, right? You're not being focused, we're talking about

00:09:29--> 00:09:35

to talk about it. You're going to order areas which are not relevant or not. You are made to claims that the

00:09:37--> 00:09:45

evidence does not give me evidence I'm giving you you're putting your own spin on it. You're using your logic to spin it. You're not using any logic.

00:09:46--> 00:09:47

For example,

00:09:50--> 00:09:57

Quran says when the Quran says yeah, are you Hello Dina Armando. adeola

00:09:59--> 00:09:59

Emery

00:10:00--> 00:10:23

Boom, yep. And says you've just replayed you've answered yourself wait when the Quran says and the Quran says first Allah, Allah dico. In kuntum la tala moon when the Quran says For example, in vichara in Allahu Allah afternoon, what is the what is the term thicker hair? What does it mean? In this? You've taken all the

00:10:24--> 00:10:32

or when the Quran says wherever the answers, for example, in Surah najem. Mama, how are

00:10:34--> 00:10:49

you how, what does that mean? When the when? Let's focus on that one. Let's focus on all of them in context. You said before and determines the context. Versus I agree with you, you take it out of context, that's the problem, okay.

00:10:50--> 00:10:53

No, no, but you have to understand something you're using your logic and you're

00:10:55--> 00:11:14

using tradition that he has actually got backup for no reason there's no backup, no backups, not on one second, it's not much and also your argument will eventually go against yourself because ahaadeeth Hari, etc, are preserved in a very, very similar way to the way the Quran is. And it comes down to how to

00:11:16--> 00:11:17

read it.

00:11:27--> 00:11:39

And so on. Right, which is this? vocalize this this is a key important topic actually. The Hadeeth literature is the biggest enemy against the authenticity of the forehand. No it's not Oh, yeah.

00:11:40--> 00:11:41

Read it like that.

00:11:43--> 00:11:44

It says that there are these various reading this

00:11:45--> 00:11:46

like Arthur Jeffrey,

00:11:48--> 00:12:16

against what because people are erroneously attacking the Quran is using based upon using material that is inauthentic as its material to attack the Quran, you you throw away the baby with the bathwater, right? You don't say okay, throw the baby away and throw the bathwater I do believe in different readings, right? I do. You try to write Listen, listen, have you studied the Quran? You are on strike? I assume you're a chronic? I don't use that term. I use that term because choice you are that.

00:12:18--> 00:12:18

How do you like no.

00:12:21--> 00:12:26

I'm a traditionalist. Are you saying? No, I'm a traditionalist? Yeah, this is called me.

00:12:29--> 00:12:41

Thank you, thank you, I'm happy with that. I'm okay. No, you know, you you are against the Quran, if you are calling yourself the Quran only worshipping white by following guidance.

00:12:43--> 00:12:43

How was the Quran?

00:12:46--> 00:13:23

If you follow the heartbeat in several bodies, our current Reserve will not put this aside, because it was not preserved. I am saying Heidi's gone out of the question now. You do not have a piece? Put it aside. Throw it in the sea. Now? No, no, no, no, no, we'll see. Now see what happens. We'll see what happens. How do we get to the Quran? I as a skeptical individual in the 21st century. Don't care about this. I want to get to the most ancient copies of the most ancient text of the Quran. How do I get to it?

00:13:25--> 00:13:27

Before I go there, where do you find it? And

00:13:29--> 00:13:32

I said, throw the Hades in the sea. I've already done that. Because you

00:13:35--> 00:13:41

just believe in you don't believe it had these attorneys use it to to defend your argument. I'm asking you how to get to the Quran.

00:13:44--> 00:13:57

For the position as a skeptical Muslim, in 21st century, I want to get to the original text, the original words the prophet will not get that in the Hadith. The Hadith, in fact, says hello, what's your name? What's your name? What's your name?

00:13:58--> 00:13:59

What's your name?

00:14:00--> 00:14:14

My one, my one. This is gone. We're not discussing this anymore. I'm asking you a very simple question. How do I get to the Quran of Muhammad? sallallahu it's not the Quran of Muhammad, what he taught as the Quran, how do I get read?

00:14:15--> 00:14:25

Well, that is a difficult thing of historical analysis. So why do you believe in it? I believe in it through my own study of it in terms of its course your you studied it. Can you explain to me what you have studied? How do I get to it?

00:14:27--> 00:14:28

How was the Quran preserved?

00:14:30--> 00:14:34

How do I get to it be specific in your question, how do I get to throw some Fatah?

00:14:35--> 00:14:38

I need evidence that Muhammad Sallallahu actually taught us

00:14:39--> 00:14:43

who knows I've already made it up. Malik Maria Maria.

00:14:50--> 00:14:54

By the same way that somebody at that time would have accepted the text

00:14:55--> 00:14:59

who accepted it, the people in his time. How do you know so it came through the people

00:15:00--> 00:15:03

Wait, wait bungee jumping the gun? Listen, I'm gonna try to take

00:15:04--> 00:15:08

me out. Yeah, by the same approach that approach which approach

00:15:09--> 00:15:10

those interrupt man

00:15:11--> 00:15:36

please. Yes, yes please go ahead Okay, by the same approach that logically a person of that time may have assisted in their time they may have assessed that based upon the language based upon the content or what have you maybe finished in my time I'll do another telling me the truth. How do I know they're telling me the truth? Why should I accept someone attributed a statement to Muhammad and I have to accept it Why can give me the reasons why

00:15:38--> 00:15:43

I analyze it based upon its own testimony, its own content, but you don't do that with

00:15:47--> 00:16:04

inconsistent irrelevant to you, you you have put two things in front of you. They're exactly the same in the process of preservation news, they're not to believe one and you reject Guiana because it has problems. Okay, now tell me then how do I conclusively

00:16:05--> 00:16:10

Oh, with certainty with absolute level of certainty, reach the Quran and Muhammad?

00:16:12--> 00:16:13

I want to know

00:16:15--> 00:16:32

you have to do various things. historical analysis, give me one I know why you listen, we spent five minutes on this question. You're not giving the answer. Okay. I challenge you to even answer that slightly. Slightly. Why? Because if you if you say you say ABC, even with the challenge

00:16:33--> 00:16:51

to you is as good as Harry Potter. We've removed it is worse. Okay, no problem. God, you will be happy now. Can you show me the Quran coming to us? I need to know with certainty that what you read as Quran today was actually set by Mohammed Salas.

00:16:52--> 00:16:56

I need the proper process. I need to I should be able to believe in

00:16:57--> 00:17:01

Well, you have nothing you have nothing either by that. I must

00:17:03--> 00:17:07

assist you the Quran is but you're asking a question. You cannot wait, wait, I

00:17:10--> 00:17:35

am already defeated. I'm gone. I'm in the sea. undestroyed Okay, already your the Quran is the superior one. Yeah. And you know, because superior knowledge of the Quran is preservation. Tell me how the Quran came to you. How do you know that what you just read data from third party was actually set by Bahamas 14 centuries ago. Tell me a part of that is, as you said, my reading and analysis and doctrine, which is what?

00:17:36--> 00:17:39

Mister leave me finish the question. Yes. Yes.

00:17:42--> 00:17:45

I'm my own assessment of it as being the Word of God.

00:17:46--> 00:17:55

Can you also listen, listen, I'm also having a text which is consistent as far as I'm aware in terms of its historical trajectory. Okay, now

00:17:57--> 00:18:25

you're asking a question that it's impossible to answer even for you Marwan is telling me in the year 2017. Yeah. 16th of April. Yes, I have studied it. And I believe I believe I believe, but one is completely irrelevant to me. I don't care what my mind has to say. I want a proper historical process, which Marwan uses to reject other sources and applies to the Koran, but, but it's not consistent in his application. Wait, we can do actual analysis, okay, which will

00:18:26--> 00:18:29

be okay. Okay. I'm saying I've already accepted defeat.

00:18:31--> 00:18:31

How do I judge?

00:18:33--> 00:18:59

I'm already defeated, I'm gone. Yes, I'm finished. You're finished. I'm asking you tell me how the Quran came to you. Can you explain the process? In about two minutes to be correct short do give me a summary that define define define what you mean by the process of heart? Why How do you know certain Fatiha Yes, was actually read by Muhammad 46? Where do you get it? Is it comes down to you know, how do you know how do you know? Explain?

00:19:01--> 00:19:02

My knowledge is based upon faith.

00:19:04--> 00:19:06

And what is that analysis? analysis of what

00:19:08--> 00:19:10

coherent texts as a logical

00:19:13--> 00:19:17

is the definition of good? What is the definition of the Quran?

00:19:18--> 00:19:19

You're asking a question.

00:19:22--> 00:19:27

Behind the question, Mr. I'm already defined the question I am modifying the question you're asking.

00:19:29--> 00:19:59

What do you mean by that? You're the teacher and the student. You're superior. I'm inferior. I'm defeated. I'm gone. I'm trying to learn as a skeptical student as a troublemaker will give struggle to the teachers. Can you please tell me what the Quran is? Can you explain what the what what is? What is it consistent? What is it? No no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. That's a different story. He accepted what is going on what what is simple, it is the guidance from Allah the recital it is the reminder it is the criterion

00:20:00--> 00:20:04

Many of the other criteria of it, it is the book that I accept in 114.

00:20:05--> 00:20:38

That I believe to be consistent text, whichever now is unlikely, to the best of my ability. It is a text which is the common text among the majority of the Muslim ummah. It is what I have been looking at peoples of the history and transmission of the Koran. it to me Makes sense, I realistically preside but according to that definition, anyone can write a book of 114 chapters, and has claimed claimed guidance in it. Yeah, you you're referring to a specific text called the Quran? Yes. Right. Which specific content? You know, you're claiming that specific content is what Muhammad taught

00:20:39--> 00:20:54

the best of my knowledge, to the best of your knowledge, can you can you explain why, to the best of your knowledge? That is what Muhammad taught. The first thing is that it's actually a huge topic. And it's also off the side from where we're talking about.

00:20:59--> 00:21:00

My walking about Give me the evidence.

00:21:03--> 00:21:05

And I will accept this one.

00:21:07--> 00:21:11

Already. I've already conceded defeat, I am defeated.

00:21:15--> 00:21:16

He's asking you to I'm

00:21:17--> 00:21:27

just under the seat, I'm gone. I'm in the sea. I've been thrown into the sea. I'm asking your the Quran if you believe in the Quran. Now, it's been nearly 10 minutes or 15 minutes, because

00:21:31--> 00:21:31

it's not your

00:21:33--> 00:21:35

fault. That was the purpose of discussion.

00:21:36--> 00:21:50

I'm asking you, and I'm going to show you my own reason you want to call your own reasoning that you are inconsistent, and not completely inconsistent. Give me Give me a reason why you cannot explain to me, you can do it either.

00:21:51--> 00:21:57

I can but I'm not claiming it. I can know exactly what you know, you know what I'm doing here? I know exactly what I'm doing here.

00:21:59--> 00:22:01

Okay, okay, good. So you know what I'm doing right? Let's

00:22:07--> 00:22:16

go those who have a little bit of sense, little brains, brain cells can see that you are not able to answer a simple question that is not super and you cannot answer it. He's

00:22:18--> 00:22:21

already considered defeat. I am defeated.

00:22:25--> 00:22:26

And I asked you, I

00:22:27--> 00:22:40

am now asking you to explain to me why are you honest? Why? What conviction do you have in the text of the Quran? And how do you know Muhammad said, what you claimed he said 40 centuries ago, let's say Alhamdulillah?

00:22:42--> 00:22:48

Why am I poor? Honestly, because I've done a few things. So number one, I have read the Quran, I have much to learn

00:22:51--> 00:22:54

from Mohammed. That's the fundamental question.

00:22:55--> 00:22:58

Muhammad, for me, is irrelevant in the shame.

00:23:11--> 00:23:15

How do you know it's okay. Not to move Mohammed out of the picture.

00:23:16--> 00:23:20

This is gone. Mohammed is gone. hardiness from Allah.

00:23:21--> 00:23:25

That is a completely huge other discussion. Nothing related to the Hadith, my friend.

00:23:30--> 00:23:32

I'm interested in the discussion of do we know

00:23:33--> 00:23:34

this anymore after

00:23:37--> 00:23:37

discussing it?

00:23:42--> 00:23:48

Why are you killing a dead? Why are you killing, killing an animal you view it's already dead.

00:23:50--> 00:23:57

This is dead. And I accept that. Okay? You don't accept Hades. No problem with that. Let's throw this in the sea that we have done doesn't

00:23:59--> 00:24:03

give me one example from the Quran that the Hadith is required.

00:24:04--> 00:24:04

Even

00:24:06--> 00:24:16

if you're not going to be part of that, which is why I came to you with there's no point to talk about Iran. So you don't want to talk about marijuana? No, because that is beside the point.

00:24:18--> 00:24:20

Let's say I'm I'm a skeptic and it's irrelevant.

00:24:22--> 00:24:25

What you have to answer is what I asked you and that is justified to

00:24:27--> 00:24:32

you clay you cannot do that then admit defeat and the discussion is over. I have already admitted.

00:24:34--> 00:24:39

I know I know. I know. I know. I know. I know. He's going through a very good okay. So if you're not

00:24:40--> 00:24:42

I don't want to go around to the third one.

00:24:44--> 00:24:46

It is not clear to all of us. It's not

00:24:47--> 00:24:59

you are you are you. You're not able to tell us how the Quran came from Muhammad to you. You have failed utterly failed to demonstrate that

00:25:01--> 00:25:05

demonstrate how these came to us. And the Quran, you want me to demonstrate

00:25:08--> 00:25:15

your interest in the old boy Okay, now now now, now you interrupted me I will explain, justify.

00:25:18--> 00:25:25

I don't care about justifying itself. The Quran is the movie man, if you cannot justify from there on how do you know?

00:25:27--> 00:25:27

Okay?

00:25:29--> 00:25:32

Let's say, let's say, let's say let's

00:25:33--> 00:26:00

say I'm not a Muslim, I'm a non Muslim asking questions about the product. I don't believe in the Quran. Let's assume for argument's sake, I am asking you a very simple question. You are a Quran so I'm asking you, can you please prove to me with absolute certainty that what you claim to be the Quran is exactly what Muhammad taught 14 centuries ago, related to our discussion that I started with, I already explained that I am not I'm not a Muslim, let's say

00:26:01--> 00:26:06

you cannot do that. Why not have to take part in the discussion? You're gonna

00:26:07--> 00:26:12

force me to become something I'm not. You know, you accept and you accept that? I am asking

00:26:13--> 00:26:17

you the same question. Because you're diverting, because you are not able

00:26:19--> 00:26:21

to understanding marijuana marijuana.

00:26:23--> 00:26:27

Now, let me simplify the reason the reason why we started

00:26:31--> 00:26:34

everyone who's watching this bleeding answering the question because

00:26:41--> 00:26:43

when you start to explain to you,

00:26:44--> 00:26:48

is when you start to explain how the Quran came to you came over.

00:26:51--> 00:26:54

With that, when you start to explain, you will start to substantiate

00:26:59--> 00:26:59

or complete.

00:27:08--> 00:27:12

Guys, I know what I'm doing. This is why I'm asking him explain to me how the Quran came to you.

00:27:14--> 00:27:15

For the past 15 minutes,

00:27:16--> 00:27:19

20 minutes, 20 minutes, 20 minutes?

00:27:22--> 00:27:26

Half an hour? Because you are taking part in the original discussion.

00:27:27--> 00:27:29

Around this is the discussion, not the discussion.

00:27:30--> 00:27:32

Have you started about?

00:27:36--> 00:27:41

Have you seen that? discussion? But why? Don't try butcher technique with me. Okay.

00:27:44--> 00:27:52

Have you seen the cartoon? Kung Fu Panda? Okay, when he lands on this, this, what he called his body was his name, you know, the snow leopard?

00:27:53--> 00:28:23

Because you're a big, big fat handle the big, big fat panda. Yeah. So this is the discussion. Okay. No, no, no, you don't find this question for me. I came to you to tell you I to ask, justify the need for hiding from the Quran, then you go around all these other ways, which are not relevant to this specific decision. Wait, wait, you're asking me to justify the child without the mother? I'm asking you. I'm asking you where the mother come? Where did the mother come from? Once you start to explain what

00:28:27--> 00:28:35

a mother came from what she did, how she lived, what she how she nurtured the child, then you will, by extension structure with a child

00:28:41--> 00:29:03

explained with the target. I'm trying to take you to the Mother, I'm telling you, the child came from the mother. You're saying no, I don't want to know the mother. I want to know. So I think we both at least one thing we both agree on. For the sake of this argument is we both agree there is no Quran, which we believe in. Okay, let's take that as the first point and say, Hey, we know why we believe in it. Why do you? Why do you

00:29:05--> 00:29:42

know is relevant? It's not right. And also one second, one second, you know, your initial question. You know, your initial question, you asked that you keep saying let's go back to he answered it. He did not know he answered it. What did you say? What did you say? No, according to my logic, that does not make sense. How do you know? He said, I know because of I know, because of the commentary of the freelancer. You said, No, I'm using my logic. So now he's proving to you how his logic of using the ahaadeeth and the tradition is actually valid. You don't want to go down that route. Because you know, you'll prove it. No, because I'm asking you for specific details. Not a general

00:29:42--> 00:29:51

all in our I've been I've been dealing with these topics for the last at least last 10 years, or 15 years. Awkward God, you're no more on me.

00:29:53--> 00:29:56

Because you're going the wrong way. I'm saying take your

00:29:57--> 00:29:59

genius. Let's take for granted both of us.

00:30:00--> 00:30:19

Okay, I know that we both know that we both agree that you studied the Quran for 15 years, you have bits and pieces over. Okay, but okay, I don't want to be the earliest manuscripts of the Quran, start naming them, number one, start naming them. I don't have it in my memory. I read me 15 years. You said you studied

00:30:21--> 00:30:24

medicine you but I know. Because I'm not taking part deep debates all the time. So

00:30:26--> 00:30:29

this show that I am more of a chronic than you are?

00:30:30--> 00:30:49

No, no. Why? Because I have I know exactly where the manuscripts are. I know what the changes are named. And I know what the changes are, who transmitted the Koran with the Quranic readings, where the differences are, you know, in the reading, okay, why there are differences. I have studied all that process, you don't want to discuss it for a reason. I've actually read about all of that myself.

00:30:51--> 00:30:56

Why, you know why, you know, explain that to me, because it's something that I read, and I don't record in my mind, because

00:30:58--> 00:31:00

if you're not convinced, it's

00:31:01--> 00:31:04

illogical, it has no basis. And that is why

00:31:06--> 00:31:15

we're not talking about the logical thing. Again, we're not we're not logical. Your logic is correct. Or your logic is correct. I can be wrong, prove me wrong.

00:31:17--> 00:31:22

You've taken around 150 different. Let me say what I'm asking you justify. Let me say one thing.

00:31:24--> 00:31:35

I will do it. One final point is, please, when I'm done with this discussion, let me say one thing. Let me say one thing before you say that you're justifying your understanding of the plant through your logic

00:31:37--> 00:31:45

as best as you can, you were born and raised somewhere, right? You're in a society makes sense. You were born and raised, etc. You went to school.

00:31:46--> 00:31:55

And you were conditioned in our society, you assume you don't know. Okay, that's fine. No problem. Your magic will not be consistent with every single person's logic.

00:31:57--> 00:31:57

By definition,

00:31:59--> 00:32:04

always consistent. No, it's not always consistent. No, it depends on who's speaking. I don't know it's subjective.

00:32:06--> 00:32:25

Logic very time from place to place subject is logical to you is not logical to Mr. X. I'm talking about logic in a layer for learning. Let me come back to the question now. Did you know we have manuscripts from the time of the Prophet on the Quran? familiar one to two between before he started?

00:32:26--> 00:32:29

Do you accept them? Birmingham? Do you accept them?

00:32:30--> 00:33:01

I haven't seen it. I haven't assessed it. I can't say for sure. Okay. Do you accept them as belonging to the companions of the Prophet or not simple one, yes or no? If they come from the same time, when the companions are alive, there is only one logic that follows. And here your logic, I don't know, for some reason fails. Okay? Because I'm careful, unlike you. Okay, so who don't those who don't have manuscripts? It has to be compelling. It's most likely it is why most likely? What what the Chinese are writing their pets? I am not. And I do not know for sure.

00:33:02--> 00:33:03

Why is

00:33:04--> 00:33:17

not have you read those manuscripts carefully? No, I have not yet done it. Okay. Do you know about the inferior text? Yes, that can be behind it, or you can get to read it. Okay. Now, this is this is the

00:33:18--> 00:33:35

this is the main point, the hobbies literature tells us that there were certain variations in the Quranic text. In the early texts, certain companions of the Prophet, were reading the Quran in different ways. That's why we have the Shah and Omar, photog reading.

00:33:37--> 00:34:12

Okay, they were both reading it differently. And they went to the Prophet, he doesn't accept it, because he corrected now the Quranic manuscripts amazingly confirm what the Hadees is telling you. When you read, when you read the inferior texts, in the manuscripts that date from the prophets time. those differences that have been documented in the literature are exactly they're a material parchment that was recorded, dated, or written, and scribed in the time of the prophet or very close to his time by the companions. Now, what do you have to say on that?

00:34:19--> 00:34:21

Tell us why. So why why are

00:34:22--> 00:34:41

so until it's sometime that I can answer allies that I'm not going to speak like, I'm not 30 but I can leave me positive. Okay, let me pause it. Okay. Now you say, and I'm going to accept what you say because I can pull it out right now and show you the images right now. Harlem says Do you want to see them? the Quranic column says, Yeah, right. Yeah. Okay.

00:34:44--> 00:34:45

The text Now again,

00:34:48--> 00:34:49

I have done this.

00:34:50--> 00:34:52

He's done it. You don't accept my

00:34:57--> 00:34:58

series, one second.

00:35:02--> 00:35:05

Have you analyzed Have you? Have you analyzed the chances? Yes, actually,

00:35:06--> 00:35:09

what is the logic to accept is legit?

00:35:12--> 00:35:14

Because you're precondition like

00:35:15--> 00:35:44

oh my god, okay. These parchments are dated to mid seventh century when the companions of the Prophet sallallahu Sallam were alive, majority of them are alive. Okay, because the last Companion of the Prophet died, died in the year 110. He, it was under a beautiful, okay, a companion told me about a dossier now. Okay, he, no, no, no, that's

00:35:45--> 00:35:46

someone else is

00:35:47--> 00:36:28

a different person available on it. Sorry to fail honor is the last Companion of the prophet who have died and has died in 94. Okay, this parchment is before and has died long time before and has died. It has an inferior text, which has been dated to have come from of man's time. Okay, it's mighty Codex, the companions of the Prophet had written this, those variations, which we find documented in the Hadith literature, in terms of truth, are there. Okay, so that confirms at least those reports on a roof are absolutely correct. In the light of material evidence, we find from the time of the companions, you have no legs to stand on as a Quran is

00:36:29--> 00:36:31

two things scribal errors can happen in every time.

00:36:35--> 00:36:35

Listen,

00:36:36--> 00:36:51

they've been William maybe finish my point, then you say? So that's how you take apart and discussion. Number one, it is possible to have scribal errors at any point and to correct them makes perfect sense. Number two, the concept of proofing itself when nobody actually understands it when you do

00:36:52--> 00:37:06

not understand these? Yes, he's right. He's right is right. On our roof. We have 30 opinions, nearly 30 opinions, the scholars of Islam did not have the evidence we have today. So you didn't have it? Didn't have other

00:37:07--> 00:37:08

evidence. Yeah. Come

00:37:09--> 00:37:28

on, confirming what you're saying. Okay, so let me finish. Okay. Most of these classical scholars didn't have the evidence we have today. Okay, now what we have today, actually 100% confirms one opinion in particular one opinion. And that opinion is what they were, there are seven types of variations in the Quran.

00:37:29--> 00:37:49

Three in the previous monic text, what did man do when he standardized the text? Okay, when you put the Quran in one reading, for example, what did he do? What did he get rid of? This is a very interesting question. What did he actually remove? Okay, from the day, there were seven types of different variations, okay, what are they

00:37:50--> 00:37:56

up here? As we are told in the, in the literature, they were

00:37:57--> 00:38:06

not nice. Here, you know, these things are, you know, these things are real, you know? So how can I, you know, okay,

00:38:07--> 00:38:08

what do you

00:38:11--> 00:38:11

use

00:38:12--> 00:38:25

a moussaka with with a wife of the Prophet correct or incorrect? Yes or no? Do you believe that? Do you believe that? I'm saying this is your position? Do you believe that? Do you I'm asking you, do you believe that? I'm saying that's a valid historical position, as far as I'm concerned,

00:38:27--> 00:38:34

come from where does that come from? because for me it is in the Quran or in the Hadees. That position, you just, you just show yourself.

00:38:40--> 00:38:44

Every single thing you could claim about the Quran is going you believe

00:38:48--> 00:38:49

that you just use this.

00:38:50--> 00:38:51

as a

00:38:52--> 00:39:07

basis, it has been recorded. You said that's a valid historical position. I'm asking where they come from, where does that position come from? That's where it is, in the literature, I saw you choose to believe in some and reject others. So when a report goes in your favor,

00:39:09--> 00:39:25

there's two things Okay, number one, as a religious source is one topic number two, if it may have some sort of historical source, that's a different thing. When I say it's a valid or as a logical position historically, as I see, there's no reason why could be wrong. Okay. I'm gonna ask you a question. I do my

00:39:26--> 00:39:28

logical. I don't.

00:39:32--> 00:39:36

I'm going to ask you a question. Prove to me that it does require from the question

00:39:38--> 00:39:41

I've already proved that you have not endorsed this.

00:39:44--> 00:39:46

Is that okay with my brother.

00:39:49--> 00:39:58

Decide if people think I'm a stupid, you know what, I'm not taking that in a logical discussion. I'm asking you a question. I'm gonna ask you a question. Oh, no.

00:40:00--> 00:40:07

I'm gonna ask you a question answer my question for Ivan. I will, I will I should first question what is the what is the evidence

00:40:08--> 00:40:08

that you need?

00:40:10--> 00:40:17

evidence? And Mike, I'm answering your question by posing a bigger question. Give me evidence of the Quran is Ramadan

00:40:18--> 00:40:20

irrelevant? That's irrelevant

00:40:23--> 00:40:25

except your view of the Quran I have

00:40:26--> 00:40:35

no problem with that. So that's what we're talking. So I'm asking you to Now give me a standard you used to judge the Quran? How do you know it's the Quran mama taught?

00:40:37--> 00:40:43

You don't have an answer for me for the last 45 minutes you don't have an answer to my question. My question is, give me

00:40:46--> 00:40:47

I'm gonna tell you why.

00:40:48--> 00:41:15

We have in Bukhari certain reports on the Prophet that have three individuals between between Bukhari and Prophet Muhammad. And we have these reports are 22 in number 22 reports since al Bukhari before his collection, and there are others, which for individuals between Bukharian Mohammed, so Buhari states has done a ohada Dasani Maki

00:41:17--> 00:41:23

Maki Eben Ibrahim was a teacher of Mr. Bahari. He had a teacher called

00:41:28--> 00:41:29

patient, he had a teacher current

00:41:31--> 00:42:06

teacher was Salma. akua, a companion of the Prophet and he narrated from the Prophet. So between Bukhari and the Prophet, there are three individuals and there is no broken link. They are all connected to each other. They all learn from each other. And the chain is uninterrupted. Not Tell me when the party narrates from this chain? Why is it a lie? Why is it not trustworthy? Tell me why. Because the very nature of oral transmission is difficult to ever say that it's been preserved. Let me give you one example. What about some other artists?

00:42:09--> 00:42:18

is redundant. By that standard? The Quran is redundant altro is not Quran is oral transmission, because it was recorded in his life. Okay, it's all still.

00:42:20--> 00:42:23

It's Quran it is read. It is Cora it goes.

00:42:27--> 00:42:29

The argument you're gonna throw against me?

00:42:30--> 00:42:34

isn't an argument you're not giving an answer for and also, let me give you one example. Okay, now,

00:42:35--> 00:42:57

let me give you an example. Suppose an ad about the prophets final sermon. You're familiar with that? Yes. There are at least three different versions of it, where he says, I review the book of Allah or I leave with the book. In my example, I live with the book of Allah and my family. That is supposedly a very widely observed narration.

00:42:58--> 00:43:15

area, it has three major differences. Why don't you answer that? Three? What three major variations of a supposedly, I understand your question. Now, that question, you conclude that the incident is untrustworthy? No, I'm giving you an example how you're supposed

00:43:17--> 00:43:30

to get to the board isn't reliable. I'll give you an example. Key Point is changed. I'm gonna ask you a question. I'm drawn to your question. I'm trying to make a point. Okay. This is what we call a logical discussion. So either way.

00:43:33--> 00:43:39

These are all extra topics I want Oh, no question. In this in these four variations

00:43:40--> 00:43:41

are the commonalities.

00:43:42--> 00:43:54

similarities, yes. Right. So what do we get? That the similarities are definitely what the prophet had said, right? Right. Okay, maybe I'll give an example. Abraham Lincoln

00:43:55--> 00:44:20

delivered a speech, his presidential speech, for example, there are four versions of it. Four versions, all versions vary from one another. Okay. What we do know that Abraham Lincoln definitely spoke, definitely delivered a speech. And the content of that speech are pretty much determined by looking at the four versions by looking at similarities. Likewise.

00:44:21--> 00:44:26

Likewise, these three versions of the speech of the Prophet

00:44:27--> 00:44:30

effect established that he definitely delivered a speech

00:44:32--> 00:44:37

and the content of his speech are pretty much determined by looking at the similarities with the free speech. Okay.

00:44:39--> 00:44:39

And

00:44:41--> 00:44:49

what have you studied history of? I'm a student of history, by the way. Okay. Do you know what historiographies I familiar with?

00:44:51--> 00:44:59

There are two options in front of you. You either go by conventional rules of historiography, how historians use historical events, and how they determine what is true or what may not be true.

00:45:00--> 00:45:03

Or you come up with your own logics like you are today you know

00:45:06--> 00:45:31

I am giving you asked me where where where I bought the standard from I'll give you the standard right the standard okay my historians my tradition is people who have been studying the same historians who would maybe reject that the locker and or who would reject the heat like many do Do you accept their standards as well or just the standard a two two which is totally rejects the Koran you just made a claim what is totally reject

00:45:32--> 00:45:45

what exists is a different story but I'm saying about it being preserved for example, a historian for example, says that it is a common man named one Muslim or non Muslim named one who says it doesn't come from I'll make an empty claim.

00:45:48--> 00:45:49

I've got a headache now you make an empty

00:45:51--> 00:45:53

inshallah, when you answer the tougher on food added

00:45:55--> 00:45:56

to this discussion,

00:45:57--> 00:46:00

I'm more hobbies is now. Okay.

00:46:01--> 00:46:06

I will take all the hobbies from the casino and adopted even more now you have not even one bit.

00:46:09--> 00:46:12

The question is not related to the topic.

00:46:16--> 00:46:18

didn't want anything I said.

00:46:20--> 00:46:25

You didn't answer my question. You made up your mind Baba, you have already made it very clear.

00:46:26--> 00:46:27

Anything he said

00:46:30--> 00:46:36

you have already made up? We are using the Quran as a premise. Right? Right. Right.

00:46:37--> 00:46:42

You see, this is the problem. You're claiming logic but you don't have logic. I have a lot of

00:46:43--> 00:47:27

Quran as your basic premise. Right? Right. No, it is your premise that you're saying the Quran is what you're saying. It's true me in the Quran, where it says, this is a logic I'm saying I think what is a mutually accepted source of evidence? No, that is not in your case is not so you don't know. I know you don't I it is it is mutually accepted. Okay. Therefore you start from I accept the Quran because I am very consistent with my standard. Okay, when I accept something, I have a standard to accept it. You do not accept that standard. You have no leg to stand on. You cannot believe the Quran for rejecting the Hadees if you reject the Hadees you are by extension rejecting

00:47:27--> 00:47:30

the entirety of the abrogation?

00:47:31--> 00:47:33

Yes, I do. I where do you base that from?

00:47:35--> 00:47:54

Really, yes, it's mostly from Hades. Actually, if I show you in the Quran, then I have actually studied that in detail. Go ahead and try. And then you're gonna use your logic to have you read a book by a abrogation upon Islamic law. A detailed book, I recommend you read it. Okay.

00:47:56--> 00:48:02

On the topic and analyze the ideas on the topic in great detail, taking all of the analysis of previous callers on that topic. Okay.

00:48:03--> 00:48:06

disrespected by your acceptance of the

00:48:07--> 00:48:22

abrogation, regards to for example, after after this discussion today, at least in the future, you will think twice before you throw the Quran in the middle of a discussion without being able to substantiate his authenticity.

00:48:24--> 00:48:39

I have I have had long discussions with giant Chronos. I think you're a student you I mean, I have had discussions with giant Chronos. And I only asked him one question. How did the Quran get to you? And I was not disappointed even today because you could not answer the same question.

00:48:42--> 00:48:58

Today, they cannot answer this question because they don't want to answer this question because no one did it because the moment is not answering the question describing the process to me, it will start to become clear that they are inconsistent. They are being hypocritical. So do you accept the body because of history? Or because of

00:49:00--> 00:49:03

both I challenge you to give me any evidence from the Quran.

00:49:13--> 00:49:31

I can see that you're an intelligent person, maybe Okay, your brain works. You're talking to me. You speak you are analyzing questions. You have cognition. You're giving me intelligent answers. Why are you refusing to accept a simple fact we're trying to clarify to you that again? No, no, no, no, no, no.

00:49:33--> 00:50:00

It is a directly related question. It's not saying Okay, I'll tell you why it's relevant now. I'm gonna simplify it I know why you think it's relevant. I know. But that's not the question Marwan Can I finish? We use the same standard to believe in the authenticity of the fraud. We used to believe in the authenticity of the Hadees Okay, now, this is why it's relevant. I am asking you because you throw away had a decent to see you. And we don't we don't okay. The reason why we

00:50:00--> 00:50:28

Except this because we accept the Quran by the same standard, what you do is you devote the standard of the Quran completely from the discussion, you want to stick to the Hadees. The reason why we take you to the Quran to show you how inconsistent you are, because you cannot possibly in any shape or form, explain to me as to how the Quran came to you without using that process. That same process, the Hadees came to us through Okay, do you understand the relevance now? Do you I understand it?

00:50:30--> 00:50:37

Did you understand it? Did everyone understand the relevance? Everyone agrees? That is relevance except view. Do you know except No, I do not.

00:50:39--> 00:50:51

Because you're not Because? Because logically speaking, even if the heat is perfectly preserved, let's posit that even if it's perfectly preserved, if the four iron tells you not to follow it, you cannot follow it. I am saying that I am

00:50:52--> 00:50:58

correct or incorrect. Why are you using the Quran when you can't prove it? Why are you Why is the Brian important?

00:51:00--> 00:51:09

The point is, even if we accept the Heidi is perfectly preserved, if I can demonstrate to you from the Quran that it should not be followed, you still have to accept that will not happen. You know why?

00:51:12--> 00:51:18

will not happen? It will never go on it does not on the topic of abrogation on the topic of the country.

00:51:21--> 00:51:22

is clear that

00:51:23--> 00:51:40

where does that come from? Where does it come from? And the Hadith it mentions about Oh, supposedly, there was an ayah for stoning. Supposedly there is the punishment for storing what we don't find in the Quran because of abrogation. We have also only the whipping that is in there. it contradicts the Quran number two.

00:51:41--> 00:51:50

But when you when you file your marriage isn't that's not the topic of marriage among viewers when you finish your marriage. When do you finish your past? Are you married?

00:51:52--> 00:51:52

Are you married?

00:51:55--> 00:52:01

Are 100 diction or one? Are you married? irrelevant? Are you married? irrelevant to the topic? Let's say he is.

00:52:02--> 00:52:04

Okay. Do you have a dreams?

00:52:05--> 00:52:14

Nope. You don't know. You don't have the male. Okay. Okay. So if you've never discharged as a male in your life, that is not something I'm talking to you.

00:52:16--> 00:52:18

I'm I'm coming to the question you asking once again.

00:52:19--> 00:52:21

It is a single thing we are discussing.

00:52:26--> 00:52:34

Have a bath after discharging a very wet dream of having if you've had intimacy with your wife, do you have a bath after it?

00:52:36--> 00:52:37

So why? Because it says

00:52:38--> 00:53:01

it doesn't say after the after the intimacy with your wife show me now in the Quran, where it says that you have to have social after intimacy with your wife, or after Geneva. Show me. Show me Show me Show me Why do you? Why do you ever show them? Because you should? No, no, no, no, no, no, no. Okay, no, no, wait, wait, wait, wait, you have hustle after work or after job.

00:53:05--> 00:53:06

We do this

00:53:14--> 00:53:15

trajectory.

00:53:16--> 00:53:22

This is what we call hypocrisy. At its peak, you know, you are doing things that

00:53:23--> 00:53:25

perform hobbies and you don't believe in it. You

00:53:28--> 00:53:37

don't believe in something, you start practicing it. You're praying. you're praying you're making it because it is not mandated. Everything else is optional. Okay.

00:53:40--> 00:53:42

Why? Because if it isn't an option,

00:53:44--> 00:53:48

because if it's not, it is not mandated. You understand the logic change argument

00:53:50--> 00:53:51

you're

00:53:52--> 00:53:54

making From where did you get it from?

00:53:55--> 00:53:56

Because the term is using the

00:53:58--> 00:54:02

muscle that that is general muscle? Yes, yes. Okay. After Genova,

00:54:03--> 00:54:07

I asked a specific question. Okay. Do you believe in having a

00:54:10--> 00:54:15

simple question, be honest, do not be believe in it. Determine the current usage and

00:54:18--> 00:54:20

show me Show me this.

00:54:21--> 00:54:23

Okay, what is this? Is

00:54:24--> 00:54:25

this a Microsoft Word?

00:54:26--> 00:54:34

file? No, it doesn't Show me. Show me. Show me. And that can wait with that term. Juno's is not for Genova you're talking about I know

00:54:37--> 00:54:39

that Juno is for the neighbor.

00:54:40--> 00:54:41

That means

00:54:42--> 00:54:45

people who are living by your side, it's not for jenama Okay.

00:54:46--> 00:54:50

So you're not going to answer you're not going to justify daddy from the photo. Hello. Hello. Can you

00:54:52--> 00:54:59

see what's happening? You don't have to take it every other option your mind you're completely broke. It should be your full time.

00:55:00--> 00:55:12

And if you cannot demonstrate, you're using something else. That is the point I'm trying to move around and you understand why are you acting on these? Why are you practicing these? We don't believe in it because I don't say you have to do anything. He says.

00:55:16--> 00:55:19

I say I'm a Muslim before prayer if I need to, I didn't say this.

00:55:20--> 00:55:25

Do you believe in making a simple question? Simple question. He already said he does. I

00:55:27--> 00:55:39

feel sorry for any of the relevant parts. But one Why is it so difficult? Speak Simple English. Do you believe in making Vasile after Geneva? do you justify the howdy from the Quran? You won't answer that question you expect me to answer?

00:55:41--> 00:55:41

Yes, I do believe

00:55:43--> 00:55:47

I've just asked you a question. Can you answer my question now? Do you believe in making?

00:55:48--> 00:55:50

Okay. Do you believe in making?

00:55:51--> 00:55:55

Can we be fair, we're talking we're talking about logic here. theoretically speaking.

00:55:58--> 00:56:00

theoretically speaking.

00:56:02--> 00:56:25

I don't practice anything different. If we talk about a logical argument and we say yes or no for an exist and we accept both of it that it should be. It exists. I'm saying I'm saying demonstrate one that that is required. Good. Very good question. Before I do that, no, no, no before, that is the only question I'm interested in right now. And you keep going every other direction. Okay. Okay. When the Quran says when the Quran says.

00:56:28--> 00:56:55

What is the Quran mean by that? I believe I believe he's talking about Hades that's in reference to the Koran way, how do you how do you because because your logic, your logic, right? No, because we have evidence in the Quran, where were they let me finish my sentence. Do you say? Well, sure, sure. We have evidence of numerous times, I'd say between four to five, if I recall correctly, of the messenger being corrected for something he did an error. Correct. So for example, why did you leave the hypocrites?

00:56:57--> 00:57:16

Yeah, so if everything that he said is revealed, then is it logical that he would have given leave to the hypocrites using the words that come out of his mouth that were supposedly revealed? Yes or no? Yes or no? No. So everything he said was not revealed. Yes or no? Yes.

00:57:17--> 00:57:24

Everything he said was not revealed. Okay. So therefore, my interpretation makes more sense than Yes. Okay. Now, it doesn't. I'll tell you why. Yes, no,

00:57:25--> 00:57:53

no, no, no. I'll tell you why. Okay. Now, you say that only applies to the Quran? Yes. So anything other than the Quran the Prophet said is not trustworthy, right? Anything that using your logic? Wait, did you understand his logic? No. I'm responding now. He'd be better than the Quran, the professor? Is it trustworthy or not? Anything that he says other than the Koran does not become the foundation of Deen. Okay, wait, is it trustworthy or not?

00:57:54--> 00:57:59

The people at his time must listen to Him and follow Him as the community leader. What was his making mistake?

00:58:01--> 00:58:13

Well, as a human I'm using your logic because I don't believe in that logic, but I'm using your logic against your argument. So now tell me if he is saying thing x y&z at play like this gives a cart like this, what if he's mistaken?

00:58:14--> 00:58:23

Correct him after a while? Well, if he corrects me, that answers the question. Okay. So that means a lot of the things Prophet said other than the Quran

00:58:25--> 00:59:10

are correct, right? I would say, I would say that the Prophet was not only that everything he says was source of religion. Okay. I agree with you. 100%, I will help you even more than that. When, when. And the companions of the Prophet understood that. So when he commanded them to say, for example, at the Battle of in war, he said, Can we give half the harvest of this year to bonobo fun to break the alliance of the invaders? And the Sahaba? they asked him, Yasser Allah, is it your command? Or is it your opinion? Okay? Because they've made a distinction between the two entities. command is from Allah period, no debate, no discussion, opinion, they had the option to either

00:59:10--> 00:59:40

accept or reject. So the Prophet said, This is my opinion. This is not an armor, because armor is from Allah, even though it's not in the Quran. Even though it's not the Quran for the Sahaba. They, they knew that when he commands it is from Allah, okay. Even though it's not in the Quran. That's what we call this. That's what we call a beast now. It was revealed. Yes. 100% authentic. This is 100% revelation. Okay, yes. What is your evidence for that?

00:59:41--> 00:59:42

In why law?

00:59:43--> 00:59:57

And I use your logic to show you how wrong you are because now you admitted that not not everything other than the Quran, the prophet said was incorrect. Rather. When he was corrected, that's when it became clear.

00:59:58--> 01:00:00

I'm going back another way. I'm saying he

01:00:00--> 01:00:19

would not have claimed that anything other than Docker is in fact the source of religious guidance. Okay, I understand that. But anything other than the Quran are related to the religion, the companions? Did they take it seriously? Or did they rejected the question? Simple question. I hope you understood it, they would have to follow him as community leader, they would have to follow him. No, no, no, no.

01:00:24--> 01:00:24

No.

01:00:26--> 01:00:31

Thank you. You're making my point for me. Yeah. So when the Prophet told them

01:00:33--> 01:01:07

things other than the Quran, for example, he read the Quran and he told him to stick around to, to do this, for example, do charity like this? Or have a hostel after Geneva? Like you do? Right? For some reason? Okay, have a listen up. And they started to do it. Was that Dean? Or was that optional? Well, first of all, I don't accept that he would have made all these other pronouncements outside of the Quran. Doesn't matter what you accept. One can ask you a simple question. Do you have companions? Did you have companions? Yes, I did. Did you teach them other than the Quran? Did you teach them other than the Quran? I believe he would not have taught them any religion outside of the

01:01:07--> 01:01:08

Quran.

01:01:09--> 01:01:14

You know, ask him a question. I just answered your question. Okay. Did he explained the Quran to them?

01:01:15--> 01:01:23

Some of them came with confusions on the Quran. What does it mean? Okay, did he explain to them for example, for example, Dr. Harun

01:01:24--> 01:01:33

Tarantino story when Mary was called the sister of Harun, okay, and moving on to Java, one of his companions went to the kitchen.

01:01:34--> 01:02:15

And they heard these verses This is a second this is a this was a mistake in your Quran. This is an error and why? They said Mary was actually not the sister of her own. Okay? No, no, this Mary, the Mary Mary, mother of Jesus was not the sister of her own that was another Mary. So the Quran is a mistake, because the Quran is talking about Mary the mother of Jesus, not the sister of Harun and Musa. So this is an hour so Mira Joba got confused? Okay, he came back to the corporate jasola. Can you explain to me they asked this question. He said, they are very right. They have asked a valid question, because this

01:02:16--> 01:02:48

this reference to Mary Jaco Harun is not a biological reference. It is an honorary reference, like in the Bible in the New Testament. Hannah, Hannah is called one of the daughters of David. Is she a physical Daughter of David? No, it's an honorary title. So the Prophet clarified and Robin Sharma went back and told them this is an honorary title. Every single pious person in Israel was either call the son of Aaron, or the brother of Aaron, or the sister of Aaron, because of the piety. Okay.

01:02:49--> 01:02:50

Likewise

01:02:56--> 01:02:58

and alight, like,

01:02:59--> 01:03:09

probably correct me if I'm wrong said that this light was the profit slice. Yes. Isn't that following. So you have to pull out the light is referring to how do you Okay, so you don't accept that you don't

01:03:10--> 01:03:23

accept the Quran you quote with him? Where does that where is the Quran likening the Hadith to the mind that they will never accept any reference direct or indirect to prophetic tradition?

01:03:27--> 01:03:49

Okay, not asking your question. Now, this is the question I'm asking when prophets will also import his companions, extra Quranic material, was that part of the religion? Or was it just gibberish? What was it? It was not part of the religion? So why did they do it? Why did they do it? You think they did it based upon faulty transmission of Hadees. Now I don't think that I know that you ever

01:03:50--> 01:03:55

see them do. So when did you see them? Okay, well, did you see the Granby reveals? No, I didn't know why do you believe

01:03:58--> 01:04:18

we believe in the companions, all the other things that we're doing, we're simply done for no reason. They're just a bunch of fingers because the iron gives the minimal guidance, and it gives the general direction as well of what people should do. And if they do extra stuff, all the commentary of the on the Quran by the prophet should be ignored.

01:04:19--> 01:04:27

Even if it can be shown historically authentic. You can't do that. You know, once it combines logic, and logic,

01:04:28--> 01:04:29

nothing

01:04:35--> 01:04:39

studied so much, but you can't give us an open door. When you go for Hajj. What do you do?

01:04:40--> 01:04:59

Actually, I've written a document, I haven't learned it. I'm happy to send it to you on it. I've extracted every bit of information. So how do you do how much I'm asking you? How do you do? What do you do? On the eighth of a job? What do you do? So in the four iron, it mentions that hedge can take place in the sacred months. The word using the iron is Ash for months. So the curse

01:05:00--> 01:05:15

In practice where it's done only in the first 10 days, or whatever that is in fact unfortunate because no four aren't mentioned you can do so you can do it in any other months the sacred months Yes. for answers I know you don't care about finish man. You're completely given care about

01:05:18--> 01:05:20

my friends what happens

01:05:22--> 01:05:36

the same month that I say that you can do it in the well known month and the sacred month? Yes or no? Does it use the plural Yes or no? Let's read the word. I guarantee you it says the Florida months how can you guarantee me well because I have read it that's why okay.

01:05:38--> 01:05:42

You will find in fact your error by only doing it one month. So which was is this show me?

01:05:44--> 01:05:45

Let me get out my document on this.

01:05:47--> 01:05:52

Let's go to the verse and see what what it says and I'm sure you will. I'll be correct. That's what

01:05:54--> 01:05:55

the basic understanding

01:05:57--> 01:06:02

we know that's the basics, I understand why, but I'm not here to give you a lecture on that topic. I'm here to discuss

01:06:05--> 01:06:09

how can you be discussion now is is the part of the religion

01:06:12--> 01:06:17

is the topic of this one, why do you even believe in the Quran? Okay, I can doesn't matter why.

01:06:19--> 01:06:20

So when the Quran

01:06:22--> 01:06:27

says that you explain to the people universe,

01:06:28--> 01:06:29

not one second.

01:06:31--> 01:06:33

Universal one second

01:06:45--> 01:06:49

321 97.

01:06:57--> 01:06:59

If you've studied the Parana timings of salaat, you'll only find three

01:07:01--> 01:07:02

to 197.

01:07:10--> 01:07:14

I can send you a document and before we get to that I have a very important question.

01:07:19--> 01:07:24

I promise I promise we'll go to that. are this is this is this okay? No, no.

01:07:26--> 01:07:33

Explain to me when Allah says in the Quran here you believe Allah in the Quran, right? Allah revealed the Quran. Well, Angela,

01:07:34--> 01:08:07

Angela, la casa decra We have revealed upon you Vicar what you say is the Quran lead to BNL in US ma lucilla Allah him Manasa Allah, Allah him so that you explain to people so that you explain to people what has been revealed upon them, okay. Now, when the Prophet is reading the Quran to them, Allah saying so that you explained to them what has been revealed. So Allah saying that explanation in the Quran is valid. Okay, so where is that explanation of the Prophet?

01:08:10--> 01:08:21

It's not your logic, that's for sure. Sorry. This thing I have actually written documents on this. I don't recall them all on my written documents and you don't recall. Because Because actually, I

01:08:22--> 01:08:30

don't believe in the information you're writing yourself. Now. I do believe that's what anyone who believes in something and writes it is actually there in the brain.

01:08:32--> 01:09:03

Because my memory is [???], that's why Okay, sorry. I started somewhere. Okay, can you explain to me when the Prophet is told in the Quran, so that you may explain what has been revealed upon them upon them? When the Prophet is explaining the revelation? Where is that explanation? He has learned? What is that what what do we call it if he's making clear or elaborating to them? Only based upon Okay, fine. So that elaboration, which is more the Quran, because it is an aberration? Is that clear? The elaboration, okay.

01:09:05--> 01:09:07

I'm not adding I'm saying it's an aberration,

01:09:09--> 01:09:10

that an aberration

01:09:11--> 01:09:14

can be followed that elaboration, can you you're implying it's extra.

01:09:15--> 01:09:28

Okay. The explanation is not the words of the Quran itself is it is an elaboration. Can we follow that elaboration? Can we Okay, so let's let's look at this logically. Okay. Now give me I know I don't care about your logic.

01:09:29--> 01:09:41

We don't believe in logic. I don't use logic to justify I don't you clearly don't use logic. I don't I do use logic. I do use consistent your system. You're asking me a question. Let me answer it. I don't use logic.

01:09:42--> 01:09:57

Yes. So is it correct or is it not correct that throughout the life of the Prophet after he gave God his first trepidation, he was receiving revelation all the way through? Yes or no? Yes. Okay. Now unless there's no crime, how do you know that?

01:09:59--> 01:10:00

That is true.

01:10:00--> 01:10:11

The deal bit by bit in order to help them and also we hear from they say they say and then say so obviously throughout the period, he is receiving revelations that help them that comments are received the revelation from

01:10:15--> 01:10:19

to the best of my knowledge based upon what's been in history through the period from the history.

01:10:22--> 01:10:24

Honestly, it's irrelevant to me if it's 21 years,

01:10:25--> 01:10:33

known as we know, it is no one second, you choose to believe history when you want to believe history, but you choose not to.

01:10:35--> 01:10:35

Because

01:10:36--> 01:10:44

the criterion that you must use not not okay, okay. Okay, so let's use that criteria. So when the Prophet sallallahu Sallam said,

01:10:45--> 01:11:14

he asked me a question, let me answer it. So there's two things here, number one, it could mean that he is making care based upon the reputation that he has with him. And number two, Allah can send down revelation, which by which it clarifies some previous things. So for example, if we look at surah, number four, iron number 176, it says, You're stuck Tunica, as in, they're asking you and then Allah answers about the killala. Correct. So this what happens? It's possible that throughout his life, he is clarifying to the extra revelations about it is possible. It's not Certainly not.

01:11:18--> 01:11:21

You, you are no different. The Christian is

01:11:24--> 01:12:03

the Bible without the background, they don't care about the history of the Bible. They don't care who said what, they just start reading the Bible and start using their own logic to understand the Bible. And this is why they ended up with 1000 sex, you go to Christians, there is a new sex every single street corner, okay? with Islam, we have this tradition protecting the Quran and it I mean, it's corrupted. So, what is what is the literal mean? Tell me so that you can explain to people that the person is giving authority or are is giving credence to that explanation of the puppet using yours, okay. And and now it is black and white in the Quran, where it says so that you may explain

01:12:03--> 01:12:13

to them what Allah has revealed to them. So ally not talking about the revelation itself? I like talking about the explanation. Is that explanation authoritative for us?

01:12:14--> 01:12:16

The answer is anything that would not be

01:12:19--> 01:12:26

the answer is anything that would not be in number it is not a valid source of religion from the profit or anyone else. Sorry.

01:12:27--> 01:12:43

Go again, go again, anything that would not have been copper iron. There was no authority for the messenger to add anything extra to it? I am I'm not saying the Quran is not saying he's gonna add an extra so because the Quran to the contrary says if you added anything into it,

01:12:44--> 01:12:47

yeah, thank you. So we're not talking about extras. Now. We the Quran is saying

01:12:49--> 01:13:10

to them, what Allah has revealed to them that explanation, that commentary that information to understand the Quran better. Where is it? And is it authoritative? Okay, according to the Koran. So the thing is, you cannot take just one idea without analyzing the context. There's another place where the messenger says that I have no ability to guide with

01:13:11--> 01:13:24

your writing without Yeah, I can show it to you. I can I can put the words Yes. It doesn't mean that guidance is to a man to take a shot. The verses in the culatta demon, Dr. Wallach, in the La Jolla diva.

01:13:25--> 01:13:52

In the O Muhammad, you cannot guide those you love right? This guidance is Shahada and Islam, this guidance is not explaining the Quran. So now you again desperately trying to find a way out. But you can't. Because the Quran is explicitly saying that when the Prophet explains it is authoritative. If it's not authoritative, show me Why not in the Quran. That would require that would require something and I could send you a document on it. I don't have it. All.

01:13:53--> 01:14:15

Right. I don't know, at least admit, except the fact that this verse is problematic for me. I'll go and do research and talk come back to you later. Is that fair? What I can say? Is that my research on it, which I've documented, I don't have in my mind, right. Okay. But again, I'll repeat, it is fair to say that this verse is problematic for me. I will go and research it and come back to

01:14:20--> 01:14:23

explaining what you see.

01:14:36--> 01:14:38

I understood, we understood it as I understood it.

01:14:39--> 01:14:41

You using your logic and everything.

01:14:44--> 01:14:51

So you think this is not problematic? Can you explain why this is not problematic? I don't know. Verse number 44.

01:14:52--> 01:14:59

I will take my time to recheck my analysis on that topic, but I'm not going to make up something out of my mind. So so far, it is problematic for you

01:15:00--> 01:15:04

Considered problematic limit translated again unzen la la caja.

01:15:08--> 01:15:10

vichara revelation okay

01:15:12--> 01:15:29

Manasa La La him so that you may explain to people what has been revealed upon them. So it is not revelation, Ally's talking about it is the explanation that I mean do you have an explanation? How do you know the explanation is itself not another revelation in the Quran?

01:15:32--> 01:15:33

Because

01:15:34--> 01:15:37

I don't know because Allah is saying liquid

01:15:38--> 01:15:41

man in a game so no

01:15:43--> 01:16:00

one is around right so that you may explain to them what Allah has revealed upon them. It is not the Quran and the messages It is something outside of the Quran it's not information not because if you look elsewhere, the message was made to say that he judges all around yes or no

01:16:02--> 01:16:05

the messenger judges only by the Quran okay.

01:16:07--> 01:16:12

And if there's if there's a problem people don't understand the Quran what happens the messenger Keep quiet.

01:16:13--> 01:16:26

Messenger tells them breathe different beliefs different visa grant, don't ask me Don't ask me. Don't ask me. What do you think would happen to the companion? When he asked the questions on luggage? The answer in the Quran. That's why it says they do not find the answer in the Quran. Now, what do we do?

01:16:28--> 01:16:28

Well,

01:16:30--> 01:16:33

for example, also the fact that you believe in.

01:16:36--> 01:16:50

That's very important, because he has already said, Hey, I don't make it a requirement. Okay. But, but okay. Do you believe? Do you believe making goosal after Java? I think it's a good practice. Why?

01:16:51--> 01:16:59

Why you don't have scientific evidence. There is no scientific evidence to suggest that it is something recommended.

01:17:02--> 01:17:07

Anything, anything? That's not enough? I don't need that to bring back my mojo. I don't know what else you need for that.

01:17:09--> 01:17:14

is not required. That is a general statement. A practice can be good, but it becomes

01:17:16--> 01:17:31

why is it good? Why is it good? What Okay, what's your definition? What's your definition of good? What is good to 197? There's a hydrolysate in months or a month. So why are you drifting to another topic? Because you said we're going to go to that and we have. So you said you failed to address this one, right? No, is that clear?

01:17:35--> 01:17:41

I have no idea what this is. No, I said this is extra Quranic material I taught by the prophet.

01:17:42--> 01:17:48

I posited a powerful way. And I said, I'm not going to say I have the answer until I've done mine. Okay. Okay. Good. But well, this is pending right.

01:17:50--> 01:18:08

And if it if it disproves your understanding, if it does, if it is, okay, if it disproves your understanding, then what will you change your mind then come back because you become racist? If I find an error, because I don't worship the tradition of elder wrote good, I will do whatever it takes. Oh, good.

01:18:11--> 01:18:11

Let's go to articles

01:18:16--> 01:18:17

of association.

01:18:20--> 01:18:24

54. Remember that year to 197? To 197?

01:18:28--> 01:18:30

Okay, so what does it say about Hodge Bhatia point?

01:18:32--> 01:18:34

You say it has to be in the first 10 days of their hygiene, right?

01:18:36--> 01:18:42

I am saying that because the Prophet otter, what is the what does Allah did the Prophet do? How much do you believe he did?

01:18:43--> 01:18:44

Okay, when did he do it?

01:18:45--> 01:19:11

And why do you believe he did Haji? Hold on, hold on, hold on, hold on, you believe that you believe because Hajj is a requirement, and the messenger would have done it. So would have done it. So there's no evidence for it. For me historical evidence, whatever the method may be, is irrelevant. I believe that the messenger followed the recognition. Do you believe he did? Which is a simple question. Do you believe he did? I showed you why. Because you get the information as he would have followed.

01:19:12--> 01:19:37

You You believe because he believes it has to be because he is a Muslim, and he follows the revelation. Okay for him. So there is no confirmed evidence that whether he did or not right, there may be but it's irrelevant. So the metric is doubtful, right? No, no, he did it. But how did I did it? You just say okay, when you you make your claim profit did hatch would have and did a few different things. Do you agree would have is still

01:19:39--> 01:19:49

a possibility is potentially true? Okay. Did means certainty. So you're saying he did, based upon what? based upon the fact that he would follow the guidance.

01:19:51--> 01:19:59

Again, saying the word would that means downfall because I'm using I'm using that because he's dead. No, but because he is

01:20:02--> 01:20:07

Because due to certainty, there is certainty. Are you certain about it certain about what they did?

01:20:11--> 01:20:14

And I'm certain Why do you? Why do you believe that? Because

01:20:15--> 01:20:15

I believe you.

01:20:21--> 01:20:27

I hope you will go home and think before you sleep tonight, that what you follow whether it's true or not, and believe in life, certainly.

01:20:30--> 01:20:32

There is a reason why we are excited because

01:20:34--> 01:20:38

there's a reason these people are desus. They're not a bunch of

01:20:40--> 01:20:51

barbarian. Okay? They believe in things for a reason. They are using a Christian thick. No, but we still believe they're an error, right? No, no, they are. They are deliberately narrow. Deliberately.

01:20:53--> 01:20:53

They

01:20:54--> 01:21:33

are deliberately in error. People like J. Smith, he is deliberately he's a liar. I believe. He thinks No, is nothing. So he can be intelligent. I'll be I'll be deliberately liar. In error. Do you think I'm deliberately narrow? Do you think most Christians are deliberately there? Even the intelligent ones? They're ignorant? Am I ignorant of tradition? Do you think I'm ignorant? Or they? The Christians can be? They can be sincere, unintelligent and wrong? Yes. ignorant. ignorant. They don't know the history Jews? Do I know the history and intelligent? I don't know the history. tradition. Do you know that? Do I know that you believe you do. I believe I can substantiate

01:21:33--> 01:21:51

standing here. You asked me questions. Why do I believe in that? I was I will substantiate my view as to why I believe it's true. Like the Quran, you asked me the question, which I asked you for 20 minutes, and you didn't answer. I believe in the Quran doesn't matter. It's directly relevant. It is relevant.

01:21:56--> 01:21:59

It's fake. Its fake. It's not real.

01:22:05--> 01:22:07

without even looking at the content, I'm telling you,

01:22:08--> 01:22:19

because a lot of these charters attributed to the Prophet are not real. The ones we have are in authentic histories. poverty has the Treaty of the drought. We don't need anything else if we have

01:22:23--> 01:22:36

one nice talking to you. Again, no hard feelings. We keep talking. I know our feeling bucket. But I want you to think as to why you believe in things when you don't have any gods to believe in them. Okay. This

01:22:41--> 01:22:42

is a monastery that yes.

01:22:43--> 01:22:44

About this

01:22:45--> 01:23:09

approach of today's discussion is not consistent with too scattershot. How about and I'm willing to do this in the other spirit, we pick one very specific topic in local time on this topic of basically justifying the literature as a valid source of guidance. So we can decide in advance what it would be, and then we organize a specific, methodical approach about it. And only on that topic, we discussed

01:23:14--> 01:23:18

the methodology, how would we derive authenticity, or certainty?

01:23:19--> 01:23:24

Any document, and then I can challenge you that debate on your understanding of the Quran, and then you can challenge

01:23:26--> 01:23:29

the topic, the topic that I want to deal with,

01:23:33--> 01:23:34

is there evidence

01:23:35--> 01:23:53

requires us to follow this idea as an external and separate source of religious law. Okay, so and in that topic, it will, it will be inevitable for us to discuss the Quran itself. It is inevitable when you use a source as your source of evidence. I said we will have to challenge it. No, we just

01:23:54--> 01:23:54

accept it.

01:23:55--> 01:24:00

Free. I'm saying we both accept it. So let's just know we accept it based on different principles. So

01:24:02--> 01:24:11

that the methodology of debate, how do we how do we approach the debate? Okay, well, because the conditions of the debate, okay, we will have to agree in the conditions of the debate, and

01:24:13--> 01:24:26

we had a very good discussion today. Today, I have to say, No, it wasn't a good discussion. And that's because, unlike you, I don't do this very much. So I don't have everything prepared. Ready to go in my mind. I didn't come prepared for this topic. Do you have a lot of experience