Is Shariah The Solution To The World’s Problems
Channel: Hamza Tzortzis
File Size: 67.70MB
Speaker discuss the positive historical influence of shariah law and how its implementation could contribute to the progression of modern society.
Episode Transcript ©
Transcripts are auto-generated and thus will be be inaccurate and at times crude. We are considering building a system to allow volunteers to edit transcripts in a controlled system. No part of this transcript may be copied or referenced or transmitted in any way whatsoever.
Muslims do in the name of God in the name of Allah. Nick hem to the left of salat wa salam ala rasulillah.
Brothers and sisters and friends, I greet you with the woman's greetings of peace as salaam alaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh.
For those who don't know, that basically means with a Peace and blessings of God be upon you all.
I like to thank
the University of Leicester, Islamic Society for arranging such a
interesting and important topic. Because I think, as Muslims, non Muslims, human beings in general, we have a lot of misconceptions about Sharia, about Islamic law, about the teachings of Islam in general. And I think the reason for that is because we live in a post 911 reality, and not post 911 reality is somewhat of a dangerous reality, because what we do is that we take baggage, we take emotional, intellectual, social, individual baggage, and we superimpose it on the other. And it's very dangerous. And I think because we all have egos and human beings have this spiritual internal disaster called the ego, and post 911 type of environments feed the ego, and we really want to say
it's us against them. As you had the off repeating statement.
You're either with us, or you're with the terrorists, that kind of false dichotomy. I don't even watch Star Wars. But remember, Obi Wan Kenobi, when he talks to Darth Vader is just about to become the Darth Vader. And he said, only a Sith Lord deals in absolutes. Yeah. And I think there's a good point here. The point is, it's not that kind of black and white reality. Now, the reason I mentioned this in the beginning, is because we superimpose this baggage and because human beings do that, anyway, we have an amazing ability to take what we think is right to take all these kind of pseudo patterns we believe to be true in our past, and we superimpose them on others. And I think this is a
shame. And it's happened not only within the Muslim community, but outside of the Muslim community, too. And it's not the non Muslims looking at the Muslims, but also the Muslim looking at the non Muslims too. We've all suffered from a pugnacious attitude. And I think we must stop this. And it's very important for us to highlight this. Now, let me give you an example. In non current sociology or psychology, we know there are two different things, those things off your drama and your reality. And your drama is the interpretation of reality. These are two different things. But sometimes we think that the same thing that your drama is the same as reality. Let me give an example. Imagine
I'm at work, and I'm in the office, and I always walk towards the kitchen to make a cup of coffee. I do this many times a day. And every time I do it to my best friend's a whispering,
like, okay, I don't have a self esteem issue. All right. You make your coffee, you go back, again, go to make your coffee or tea, and you see your two best friends again, whispering.
Like, hold on a minute, something's going on here. They stop every time I get that.
Next day, they'll get my tea, my coffee to my best friend's
continuing for a whole week. So what happens to me, they're conspiring against me. They're gonna stab me in the back. There was redundancies a few months ago, they will be out. I knew that day, john in the pub, the way he looked at me. I knew it. And this has been going on all my life. around seven, my mom said exactly the same thing.
And then you build this kind of drama. And you have a meeting with your line manager. After a few days, you get ready by the table. I'm out.
In unemployment, you think very deeply. Within three days, you get an email, you have mail.
And your friends email you and they say, Hamza
who would you just planning a birthday party?
And as human beings, human beings, take the past, take baggage, take our interpretation of the past or even our drama, and we superimpose it on other people. This is why if I were to ask me you know, loosens around what do you think of the word Islam or Muslims? Maybe certain things will come up in your mind straight away terrorism combinations.
Again, they think they know a old
You could even see, by the way, somebody is saying, yeah.
manifestation of that. Also ask the Muslim What do you think of the word for example, secularists, atheist, and the Muslims may say, and I've tried that many times, cold, reductionist, don't have any emotions, a spiritual,
or these kind of terms, and they're both wrong. We're both wrong. And that's the problem, the most of us, and everybody else is on for too, it's a human thing. So I think it's very important that beginning to really understand and divorce, that shindow link between our drama and reality itself, because they're not the same thing. Guaranteed.
So when we have this approach, really be able to turn off our internal radios, because those internal radios are those judgments are the superimposing of that drama on to who we are. So I want you to turn that radio also can really connect with each other as human being now as Muslims or as non Muslims, but as human beings, and we need to turn off that radio if you don't think you have a radio. Oh, is because even when I was when I've been speaking, there's been a little boy saying, was he talking about what to do with Sharia law?
I've seen on YouTube, he looks much fatter now. And I don't believe he's Greek looks Pakistani. Yeah. All those internal radios his tail off to the bottom of
so we could really connect with each other as human beings.
So Islamic law now before I get into the topic, I want you I want to tell you how Sharia Islamic law has already changed your life. I want to tell you how Islamic law the Sharia has really made your life much better.
I want to tell you, how Islamic law civilized, every single one of you in this room? Oh, yeah, baby, Sharia law. It changed your life, and you don't even know it.
I'll give you three reasons. Reason number one,
presumption of innocence. Reason number two,
scientific progress. Reason number three, tolerance.
If it wasn't for Islam,
we may still be killing each other. If it wasn't for Islam, you couldn't go to a call roll and say that wasn't my read.
If it wasn't for Islam, you will not have an iPad on iPhone.
I know it's upsetting you, man. I'm gonna tell you why. I'll give you references and he won't be by Mr. woodleigh. Oh, by normal Western historians. But the reason we get upset is how could Islam do such a thing you put on Islam? How? What's the matter with Islam? Nothing good for us, these backward guys who wear skirts.
But that's the whole problem you see. But what do we get academic on the issue, you see are open a whole array of evidences and references for you to wake up for everybody to wake up because we're all sneaky. Of course, we said we know why this is so easy to be a little clique. Oh, I can find myself as a humanist, secular atheist. Therefore, that's all I know. I define myself as a Muslim. And that's all I know.
People with like smaller Plato, Plato, no coffee, because we're still children. And that's a way to change the reality, people really scratched the surface, not just listen to Sky News on Fox News. It's a shame that we live in the 21st century. And you have Muslim and non Muslim organizations such as the atheist Alliance, etc. They still use social media, and they have unburied cliches about other human beings. Why on earth? What's wrong with these people? Haven't they been breastfed? Or is it is no humanity in these people? How can you really get a brush and tall everyone with the same brush? How can you do that? How can you know scratch the surface a little bit further? And then
you're good example when I was in an island when I was visiting the atheist conference.
People would ask me
Give me a stone in Islamic law yes or no.
And I said, give me give me an abortion Yes or no? Oh, well, it's not as simple as that. Also for me when yes or no but for years and years discussion. So I replied by saying in the Sharia and Islamic law, you know, drug
have begun so we don't get stumped.
But the point I'm trying to say and highlight people is that we really need to wake up and just really scratched the surface. And shame on all of us. Because guaranteed is Muslims in this room may condemn democracy, but they have never been Plato's Republic will know anything about democracy. This Muslims is one that condemned liberalism, but they never know who john Stuart Mill is. And there's people in this room
who condemned the Quran and never went to Colorado next to Jesus before, only look forward they want to see. So as both sides people is both sides of the story. And I think I'm in a good position to talk about this because yes, I come from a non Muslim background, my dad is a secular humanist, stroke, spiritualist, stroke, stroke confused.
So I am and I converted to Islam. So I think I've got both legs, whatever you call it, and both sides really understand the different perspectives. So these three things, let me start with the first one, which was the presumption of innocence.
Now, if you look at the history of the presumption of innocence, we know, there are very contradicting kind of views on how we develop the presumption of innocence. But I'm going to go from a specific European centric context. And other argue that Europe developed the presumption of innocence as the result of Islam. Because john Louis the liar, so you know, john Dewey came Louisiana. He basically traveled to the east. And he basically met a monk. And if you could read john D is chronically you could see details concerning this. And he made this monk and this monk talked about that he read the Bible, you read the Koran, the book of the Muslims, and he will quoted
a prophetic tradition of the Prophet Mohammed Abu bpce, with regards to justice, and then he went back and King Louis, the mind develops the presumption of innocence. Before that, do you know what how we would know someone is innocent or guilty, they'll find a jewel, if you will, you're innocent, and all you get burnt alive. And if you survive, somehow, you're innocent.
And if you read the works of muscle boy sod in his journal that was published in the Journal of East Middle East Studies, in 1980, you see that he calls john Dewey, the chronicler of King Louie. And this article highlights and elaborate, elaborate upon the fact that this man had a core influence on the presumption of innocence in European Western legal theory, all from the Sharia or from Islamic law. And his article is called on the presumption of innocence on the probable influence on the presumption of influence.
So check it out. It's in there, now by Mr. Abdullah who do have some opinion, London. Yeah, it's actually by a Western reference. And this is not a historical accident because we know the presumption of innocence was born. When Islam came in the seventh century, because the song resonates with teachings of justice of the Quran. The Quranic discourse says three times in the law, have you been studying? Indeed, God loves the just.
Also the Quran says, Yeah, you can live in Abu Dhabi in any language to Haida Abdullah Christi, will remain in the country Nana comunidad de leeuw Oh, you who believe be steadfast witnesses injustice for God and do not let the hatred of others make you swear from justice, be just first closer to your duty.
And we know in the prophetic teachings of the Prophet Mohammed upon who bptc they tackled, the individual dolomiten Yama, Yama, be cautious of oppression and injustice, for is going to be darkness on the Day of Judgment. We know the second cave of Islam the Companion of the Prophet Mohammed according to the peace, although even though the Allahu anhu May God be pleased with him, he sets out amazing principles with regards to a judge and how he should act fairly and be just and presume the innocence. So it came from the stand directly. This is sheer people and is affected everyone's life in this room. Many of you have been to court or you know someone who's been to court
the presumption of innocence. Direct difference from Yes, the boogeyman, Islamic law.
It is argued that if it wasn't for
the justice of Islam and the tolerance of Islam when it conquered other nations
And not tolerance and justice to create that tranquil environment for people, Muslims and non Muslims, to seek and explore the interconnecting principles of nature. If that wasn't in place, we would not have the Renaissance and want to have the scientific revolution of the 15th and 16th century.
If you read the works of Professor Thomas Arnold, the arabist. And the historian, he claimed that he asserts that if it wasn't for exam explain, we would not have the renascence we wouldn't have that essential historical milestone for all Western scholarship to use as a springboard to take them into the trajectory of the scientific revolution in the 15th and 16th century because it was Islamic Spain, as a result of the principles of Islam, the just principles on the the social and political governance to allow minorities to live with each other, and amongst each other, and to educate themselves. If it wasn't for these principles emanating from the prophetic traditions and emanate
from the shrine itself. We would not have the scientific revolution.
This is why when the Christians took it back to legal What did they find? They found manuscripts on mathematics, geology, geo geometry, astronomy, sciences.
And they took them they translated them into Latin, other languages, so they could really explore the sciences that we take. For raunchy today. For instance, there are two interesting gentlemen.
And you could check this out a BBC documentary for yourself. It's called when the Moore's rules they believe
that neither Molly and Adeline have Barth. They traveled from England all the way to Toledo and took manuscripts. And they took these manuscripts back to where Oxford and it is argued that they created the first institution which is now called Oxford University. So outside the front door walks into university, you should say in Arabic, writing, and hamdulillah.
All praises are due to God.
Because if it wasn't for God, that removed the prophetic teachings, to allow that tranquility, in Islamic Spain, for the scholars to arise to develop these manuscripts, and then the western scholars to come and translate them and develop them further, take them back to Oxford.
Maybe Oxford University wouldn't be around.
I'm not saying his only his father did this. But here you go, the Sharia has affected our lives today. This is why the science that you see today is as a result of this kind of historical milestone called Islam explain, which is as a result of the Quranic and prophetic teachings. This is no historical accident because the Prophet Muhammad upon him the piece, he spoke about, clearly about the rights of the minority of the rights of the other. When he even said CLIA waived the harms he didn't meet, which means a non Muslim under our protection harms the Prophet himself. We saw the furor that happened as a result of the Danish cartoons. 100 people died, embassies were burned. But
the Prophet is saying so low, it was upon him the peace, you have no Muslim under protection, you're harming the Prophet. So imagine some type of fury that would exist in Islamic governance, when a non Muslim is treated unjustly.
And we have classical scholarship in the 15th or 16th century to substantiate this in my coffee. He elaborates and elucidate upon the chronic and prophetic principles on how to treat the other he's an easy hot new tolerate the harm.
He says be just advise them on the affairs
and this links back to the prophetic teaching of let me know I had to come help that you hit Billy if he when he put enough see, you're a true believer unless you love for your others for others, for your love for yourself. And this is no Muslim Brotherhood is human brotherhood, and never we collected this hadith in Albanian, the 40 hobbies, the 40 prophetic traditions that you collected together. He said this means human brotherhood, Muslim Achmad, another tradition. It talks about people in general. So these principles facilitate that. But this doesn't mean other isms and schisms don't have these principles. I'm not saying that. What I'm saying. We have historical precedents
people think Islam for your iPhone. actually kill you believe in Allah. Allah we iPad because if it wasn't for Allah revealed this tradition, maybe you still be wearing heavy boots
and drinking each other's blood from each other skulls.
Because it was religion that civilized religion civilized the West
Honestly, and this people argue for secularization thesis, these people will take your coat off again.
Honestly, if you read our history, it was religion that civilize the masses, right? You might think aspects of our barbaric and so forth. But this will be Arabic people, if it wasn't for religion used to be doing God knows what specially in Northern Europe, especially in this country, because there's no civilization here. Any city monuments, anything special that was a civilization in Europe?
Whether this civilization, Egypt, Greece, China, in Europe, Middle barbarians, when there was libraries in Africa, and those libraries in the east, people in England, we us Brits, were still drinking garden couldn't speak almost. So there's no saying, Oh, we must be extremely secular. That's a joke, because it's religion that put your clothes on. Don't try and take them off. Now. Come on, let's be fair.
So the scientific revolution.
The final point
We should have john Locke,
good. JOHN Locke,
the amazing thinker who wrote various treaties and tolerance. He wrote on civil governance, and he's been actively to forming if you like, as a result of the medium of the founding fathers of America, the American Constitution.
And john Locke was an interesting man, because he came from an interesting period, you could argue just after
the religious wars in Europe, and other time, these thinkers were trying to formulate
some political models for human beings in Europe to live peacefully.
And why it's interesting that they looked to the right or to the left, to the east for guidance. JOHN Locke was heavily influenced by a gentleman called Edward pokok. Edward pocket was the head of Islamic Studies at Oxford University,
I believe in the 17th century.
And Edward pokok, traveled to Palestine of the east to collect manuscripts, and learn various things with regards to treaties on tolerance. For example, you know, karate was from the 15th or 16th centuries, I could imagine, he probably took one of his manuscripts.
And he went to Oxford University and john Locke specifically says in his own words, that there's no one else I like to say, in his lectures, or when Edward Koch, and he was heavily influenced by Edward Koch to the point that john Locke wrote on civil governance and civil governance, you know, when he talks about governance, he says, leadership rulership is a divine trust, a vise currency, translate that into Eric people.
the caliphate principles,
john book, treaties of foreign influence, as a result of the Islamic tradition, you don't believe me? Go to Christopher jaywalkers, Islam in the West, Christopher J. Walker's.
Not out of luck for use of Fatima Ayesha, but Christopher J. Walker, check it out people. It doesn't mean that Islam gave the West tolerance in general, but there's a heavy influence on a leading figure.
So before we regain to this debate, we need to start with thankfulness. Think about this, because when you have a discussion if you want to ruin emotional baggage, take your history. So your history by the way.
Whether you consider yourself a Muslim or non Muslim or non British The point is is your history. So when it comes to the discussion of Sharia law,
or Islamic law, Sharia
then come to the discussion humble.
Humble yourself. The outrageous phenomena of Fox News Sky News and all this back was rubbish and couldn't do here.
chit chat rubbish that they point the finger Islamic discourse when the very media to Peter to using in order to defame Islam is as a result of Islamic thinking. The algorithm for example, we developed that wasn't Mr. Joe Bloggs was it
was Mr. Joe Muslim.
So we can be thankful
to give this a British kind of phenomena. fairplay family
is a family. So now I understand your history. Now let's discuss Sharia in a contemporary context.
This is the pictures painted on fox news and other narratives. Okay?
You have a big scary guy. He's Brown.
He has a beard up to his belly button.
And he's standing outside tescos
and you have in the Cubby,
who covers and faces leaves the eyes
to see the road.
The big cloak. Many of you call it a walking sleeping bag.
And inside that cloak, is a massive sword.
And she's standing
on his left.
And there's a poor wife to from Leicester
is so hungry, he rides into tescos to still his favorite cookie.
big boost in big guy looks at him.
And he gives them a copy or not.
He basically runs off to chips mobile, his big jumps, takes the sword out of Allah He cuts his hand.
This is the cartoon, the character of his article portrayed by these irresponsible people
from and via the Western media. That is jungle justice. That is the kind of Voodoo of blackface the people.
And this is a shame.
Because the Sharia is a 1400 year old legal system that has intricate
details that has an amazing principles that actually solves many problems that we that we have today.
I want to contrast the Islamic social model with this criminal code with the liberal or the individualistic model.
Now, it is arguable that Britain and America and other European nations live in a liberal society.
The politics we adopt generally in the West is that of liberalism. And it's a distributed disputations doctrine with many strands. But the foundations philosophically for liberalism is what you would call atomism. In the words of Professor Charles Taylor, all in the words of the Malin Friedman Professor Malcolm Friedman, a feminist political philosopher, yes, I'm a Muslim, and I'm quoting it feminists. I'm proud of that. Because today's feminism has developed far greater than that silly reaction that we had. Or we should be like, man, yeah, making man the yardstick for women, which is, which is another slavery really isn't it?
You don't even know your nature. You want to be like a man. That's a certain reaction. But today's feminist is quite very detailed, especially with the works of diary Russel, and Marilyn Friedman. They don't react to that. Now, let's take a look. What does it mean to be a woman? Is it just a social construct? Let's have a discussion. It's very good, that these things are happening, especially in the field of feminism, which is actually a category within political theory feminism.
So, the basis for liberalism is what you call individualism or activism. Now, in the words of personal freedom and individualism is the idea of the self, the idea of you of the individual human being, that is an abstract entity divorced from social attachments. That is individualism from a political perspective. And I would argue, just like traversable communica argues that most of liberal theory is underlined by this aspect of activism of individualism, and activism individualism, in my humble opinion has destroyed our societies, we have social fragmentation indicate as a result of excessive individualism, which is a result of liberal theory.
This is why David Cameron, or for many of you, that would come on. He basically said broken Britain. And the shame shameful thing is, is that when it comes to Western society, when there are issues in our society, what do we do? We blame people. We don't blame the system. But when we become Muslim societies, we don't blame the people we blame Islam
double standards, double standards that you want to swear that
I'm going to do today.
So you see that is quite amazing, isn't it? We look at our society. Oh, guys for is those black people in Hackney? Yeah, read between the lines, people when you get these papers, that's what the saying is told black people, honestly, or the Muslims or the brown folk. Generally, it's like that.
Blame men. They'll blame us.
Our system is the best Can you see. But when we look at the problems of other societies, also the people that is slavery, it's Islam.
This what you call a cultural supporting complex,
and it's sick. It's emanates from the ego, because I want to be better than the other person. Who are you come back and watch it. And you forgot to say
that kind of ridiculous cultural dominance. So
were we individualism, a division has caused social fragmentation and decay, because individualism is propagated and the reason is propagated because if you read the works of Professor will kymlicka, political philosopher, he's a liberal theory, you have to have this principle neutrality, or this neutrality or this principle distance. What I will say that a Liberal government can't say what the good life is, in political philosophies called the conception of the good life, for example, we won't really say to you, everyone must be compassionate. And this what compassionate means everyone must be caring, and this will carry means everyone wants to be this and moral and this will morals
mean, Liberal government can have that. This is why a political theory and liberal society, you have a marketplace of values. And there's a competition amongst the people that discuss these values and have a competition. The problem with that is those who the most money and power, I'm going to have more influence and no benefit. And they'll have their own conception of what they think the good life is. Now, this is very important to discuss. The reason it's very important to discuss is because in absence of a government saying this is the conception of the good life, you have social fragmentation decay, because the individual is what I would call the corporate elite, the capitalist
will use their wealth and power to say, this is who you are, you're no human being your bling bling. You're what you should buy. And so consumerism has
tightened its grasp around our necks, because consumerism is, you don't know what needs, you know, what you don't know your own needs, and the infinite
need you have. And by that I have a product for you to
think about the concept of a stupid iPad is an iPhone and a laptop, it's in the middle. He didn't need it before. But now you think oh my god, this might
be something in between an iPad, and a laptop, maybe called the iCloud or something. God knows you have all these intermediaries? Yeah.
And it's ridiculous. And so consumerism does, isn't it? So the point I'm trying to say is in a liberal society, you have existed individually being pushed.
And this is why I would argue that the England riots was as a result of just normal use. Normal, you
know, being able to define themselves anymore, because they used to define themselves with the new Nike trainers, or look at me, I have a mobile phone, the best one, the latest one was a brand new 50 inch TV. Now, since the credit crunch happened, financial crisis, they combined these things anymore. So what happens, they go and see it to find their sense of self now, because that's what defines who they are people.
So individuals that have already made social breakdown and phenomena by have destroyed our families. If you read the children society report that was published in 2009. It's an amazing report to the society report. It concluded that children in Britain, America are relatively more poor, are ready to go
in less stable families than anywhere else in the world, and they conclude it's because of excessive individualism, this kind of I'm alright jack, what's in it for me? I was on the bus the other day. And you know, we sit on the bus on the train, rather, these seats are for the elderly and disabled. And then underneath it said, this is required by law. Let me tell you something. Why on earth does that have to be said, like an unwritten law? That should be done because human beings are not individualistic.
But the reason the government and people who make these buses and stuff like that have unique those placards, this is for the disabled, and pregnant women and those who are elderly. It says this is required by law. What does that say about our society? That was so individualistic, that we have to have a stick to remind us, hey, you know, get in trouble if you don't allow this old woman to sit down.
Do you think these subtleties in our society accrue to tone what brings up the point that we do live in an individualistic society so innovation
Don't argue has created social breakdown indicators on the sphere of what's in it for me? Because in because liberalism and individualism really emphasizes individual freedoms and individual rights. Now, there's no problem with these per se, but you emphasize them. You knew that the righteousness over the rights of society or the rights of the firm, and there's no, there's no, there is no balance here.
And other organisms create other aspects of social decay, for instance, great, Yes, you heard the word or a PE rate.
liberalism has facilitated rate.
Let me justify this to you. Don't get me wrong. Muslim mode is no good. Yeah. You look at the Google indexes for pornography and rape, and it is disgusting. Yeah. But we don't believe the Islamic societies anyway, because it's full of dictators and not apply or implement the principles of Islam. But let's look at it from a context of our own home Britain. liberalism has facilitated rape, especially from a legal perspective, because in western legal theory, there are three values that have to be an interplay with each other in order for law to manifest itself or come into play. And these one of these values are individual freedom. Now, pornography has been legalized and liberal
society, even pornography depicting violent or aggressive acts. If you look at the updates in 2008, you see that they haven't really stopped aggressive acts or pornography has been allowed under the banner of that really stupid legal value, your individual freedom, your personal freedom, and an excessive sense. And I would argue, allowed pornography has facilitated rape. Let me give you the evidence.
That directly refers to a feminist, if you could find it, you can find it in pornography and rape. And it's published by Oxford University Press. And in in her essay on rape, a multi causal model. She says, although pornography is not the only causal factors, a multi causal model, but it's one key factor, and she quotes statistics that 66% of all rapists, they call, and they refer to pornography as an inciting factor to rape. Obviously, the critical psychological perspective, if you watch pornography, and you see excessive aggression against a woman, and the woman is all about pleasing the man not the other way around, then would you see divided a woman, she's a piece of
meat, she's a caucus?
Think about it. Think about it, yes or no.
It's very simple. And also Dynavox, which looks at statistics in California, in America University, that 35 or 36% of all college students, university students, they would rape a woman, they would rape a woman if they could get away with it.
Think about that.
They would great for women if they could get away with it. And this relates to statistics from Amnesty International, UK and others, that there are 167 rapes every day in this country. That's 90,000 a year. The ones are reported, by the way.
Even in America was recent publication that said, almost 20% of women
are victims of sexual abuse in America.
And I will argue this because if individuals will allow something like pornography, then it's gonna have an inciting factor as per the research of the feminist philosopher, Dinah universal. So liberalism has been reeling from this perspective.
Now, let's contrast what we've just said with the Islamic social model.
Any song is totally different is based on a different fundamental philosophy. And this philosophy is best summarized in the prophetic teaching of the Prophet Muhammad, peace. When the bottom I haven't said that I'm paraphrasing that society is like a boat, you have an upper deck and a lower deck, the upper deck gives water to the lower deck power, the lower deck do they make a hole at the bottom of the boat to take water, and the opposite, don't stop them. What happens to the boat
So here is an interplay between individuals and society, society and individuals. This is our conception of society not excessively individualistic, but not excessively communist, that we're all the same. It has this balance between individual rights and social rights, but does see society as an entity of its own, that does have an influence on individuals and individually have an influence on society. To prove this, anyone studying psychology, you know, the development of the social norm happens between two processes due to the two processes is called informational social influence and normative social influence. And these are processes that actually create on how
The social norm.
So this is a phenomena amongst even Western academics in social theory or social psychology, or sociology.
So as long as the current view so what does Islam do? It doesn't have a principal neutrality, it says, This is the good life. It takes the bricks, thoughts, these are morals, this will compassion means this will justice means this is the conception of the good life, it doesn't leave it up to the marketplace of value for society to compete. So the capitalists can really define who you are why consumerism, rather, it says, This is the conceptual goodbye. So there are these Bibles, on top of these bodies are propagated by the media. For example, what do you see in the media today Norio because I'm worth it. individualistic, right?
But media for design perspective would be you know, look at the beauty of humanity will want to live connected, conscious take care of each other, was the last time used to live on an advert was the last time we saw an advert? And if we did is very rare. And he was just like,
me, because I'm very rich Christians. Thank God, you know.
So the media doesn't affect us and influence us, anyone studying studying marketing, we see that everyone who studies marketing, we're not studying, people who work in marketing should be shocked, especially when it comes to toys and children. read the books about toys and children and TV the ways influence our children so much they've just become growing consumers going individualists is terrible, and they do it
And they're destroying our children. This bill should be handled if it was me, how's the router? I'll put a law in Parliament, that everyone who does marketing to children, especially in the consumer sense, must be home because they've destroyed us. Our inclinations have been destroyed our natural disposition as human beings have been socialized, it's almost a satanic perspective because of marketing TV, buying toys that you know, and all this crap really. And it's dangerous. Take TV as an example, if you read the book,
called remotely controlled, you see that there are so many studies that children actually remotely controlled by the TV and it rewires the brain. If you see kind of studies in neuroscience called neuroplasticity, it shows that even to them watching 20 minutes a day, rewires the brain affects them for life almost
my children as an example I don't allow my children to watch TV if they do some very rare tasks ourselves. And my son sits with me in a course that I delivered to Muslims for 10 hours, no complaints, no noise
and all the wonders like Why are you such a good parent? No, I'm a crap parent. How do you see my children so shame?
But I just didn't let them watch TV so they don't get used to ridiculous fake pseudo stimuli and they always have to be like all over the place climbing the walls
my son can make a hovercraft out of toilet roll he's only four
and that's not because I'm very I'm not it is once more fun don't show them TV
no like typical madmen the religious guy selling TVs the Satan Yes, I'm not saying that. But these are the current studies read about it.
So the point is we have a construction good like we propagate these good values from in within society. Then on top of that we have mechanisms in society to prevent crime in the first place. mechanisms in society to prevent crimes in the first place because the liberals was like that doesn't happen. It's an almost a fake sense of absolute freedom do what you want, as long as you don't harm each other. Whatever that means. Because how do you know your your actions on the effect of society was stupid philosophy. It gives me an address we want to be the taxi drivers was all about hugging anyone.
So sweeping aggravates Yeah, how your political action hasn't harmed society? How you know, the very fact that you support a capitalist system hasn't destroyed the rest of Africa. Wake up, Jeremy. People are mad, mad? I don't think
so what can you do?
I'm gonna have many rounds in this talk.
I've only had a few sleepless. So
the point is, is that
the mechanism of society to prevent crime in the first place. For example, if you read the works of the criminologist Clive Pollin, he talks about that essentially, that we always look at the laws we look at the context or the psychological, social circumstances making someone do crime in the first place like that. Someone stole something because they want to make a financial gain. Why did I make a financial gain because this capitalist society can be consumer society saying you define yourself by another
call you by the way you look for that stupid little brand and the glasses that you claim a buddy see.
You see the query, it's a joke, nice slum boy have that situation because we don't say when it's on your laptop subliminal advertising, for example, or unjust marketing campaigns, or environments, the agitation of these instincts, it's not will not allow that. So it prevents the making, it puts mechanisms in place to prevent crime in the first place. Because we're social animals, people, then on top of that, we have a very
justice system, we don't believe in beyond reasonable doubt.
It has to be almost conclusive. 99 99.9% short notice reasonable doubt, based on circumstantial evidence, I was reading about circumstantial evidence the other day, I was like, Oh, my God, some of you get put into life based on circumstantial evidence. That's an inference. He does reasoning to the best conclusion, say, Oh, my God, you know, you could really destroy someone's whole life. Yeah.
And the reason maybe what's the legal theory has developed this way is because they didn't they were very individualistic. They didn't want to show people that by values. They wanted to talk about by law, because the Labour government few years ago, no more as bows and anything more in those places, if that's gonna really change people, you can't change people by the state. And that's what Islam says, its values, its worldview is your foundations, what have you seen my life in the universe, that's going to change you.
So we'll have beyond reasonable doubt, we have almost impossible criteria, because the Prophet Mohammed appointed VP said, it's better to release nine guilty people than have one person have been afflicted by a punishment that's innocent.
And finally, on top of that, we have what we call suitably harsh punishments. No barbaric punishments seem to be harsh, and they're not there to be implemented all the time. They're there as a deterrent effect, as the Quran gives us a philosophy of of crime and punishment, which is a deterrent effect, a deterrent effect.
This is why cutting the hand of the thief and stoning the adulterer and stuff like this is not meant to be applied on everyone. It's a final straw
was someone escaped the cohesive values, they escaped the propagation of these Bibles, they escaped the mechanisms of cybercrime in the first place, and they escaped the criteria of so almost impossible to be fulfilled for punishment to be implemented the first place, then they probably deserve the punishment in the first place. If they escaped all of that, do you see, we should not see Islamic law in context of liberal law and the way liberal psyche works is totally different. Because the way we tend to be with Iran is not by law. This is 114 100 years old, 1000 years when the Sharia was implemented property history, handful of people got punished 11
or 12, or 13, or 14,
showing that this step would be terrific, even now in Saudi Arabia, by the way, I do not consider an Islamic environment has injustice doesn't have transparency has a capitalist model for economics. It's not *ting in any shape, or form. But even then, in the course, when someone who knows that they deserve to be called for example, for them to be stoned or whatever the case may be, they give them a way out because the perfect toys to give you one way out. Are we sure?
Are you sure you know the law?
No, I think you do. Yeah, it's almost like that. I know, check him out.
A scholar in this country. He's from Saudi by Palestinian origin. He was talking to us about how when he was being a jurist who claimed to be a jurist, he actually he actually saw his people giving him an excuse, because therefore determined not to be implemented. This way the VPC turned away many times when someone said, Please clarify me I did the same, for example, I did this crime.
So it says, should you be harsh pressure based upon this model, and you may still disagree with it. But now you see in his, in his profile context, based upon these mechanisms, and models and layers of society, rather than thinking, Oh, it was it was implemented in London, then everyone's happy because that's not true. Anyway.
Take the culture as an example.
The punishment adultery has to be
inflicted on someone as a result for witnesses, pious witnesses, so the acting public, because if you spy on someone or seeing someone's house, you know, pious anymore because it's a sin in Islam, to spy and look into someone's house without their permission. Do you know that it's a sin so you don't pass anymore? So full pious witnesses have to see the act in public. And the scholar says, said that the pen has to go to the ink pop. I think you know what I'm saying? Yeah.
And the testimony has to be accurate. So if someone had a birthmark, for example, and they got the leg wrong, then they all get ripped at lashes, you know that they get because then the deterrent became, I'm not going to be a witness because that maybe I was wrong.
You get a lashes for false testimony.
And that, again preserves the honor of the woman from that perspective.
the there's so many more criteria. And I remember one scholar was saying this to a non Muslim, just average, Joe Bloggs, he said, Wait a minute, it has to be done in public. And you have to see that the penguin Inc. And we have to have these witnesses and they have to be pious. And you have all this criteria has to be old age of puberty, and you have to have exactly same testimony, etc, etc. These are the nice we get caught and they deserved it. Because they've been sold London, we have these things happening in public here. Do you see? So we have to see this in context. Most bloodthirsty? This is the terror. We don't want to be actualized. Okay, this is the prophetic
And let's talk about law with regards to rate Ken clock. Yeah, Ken Clark, the guy who doesn't really respect women, in my opinion, is a conservative dog, in my view. And the reason is because again, I'll say that in his face, because he infrared, you want to repeat it again presented for one year, for one year. You know what happens to replace a spa, she doesn't need four ministers. It's called under the criminal category of hiraga. And we have this stupid woman commander Murphy, who's an apostate from Islam knows nothing about Islam. She's just a reactionary. She's a joke. She always claims to everybody achieving their biological Islam so bad when I was raped, gotta call witnesses.
This man, Islamic Arabic bitwixe. She's a twig, because she's a twig.
And she deserves that because she drives a lot of normal non Muslims who really don't want to know what Islam is about. She just takes them down the wrong path.
And she says, Oh, look, look, it's not rape is under the category of hiraga, which means highway robbery. And the reason is like highway robbery because someone's stealing the honor of a woman falsely.
And she doesn't need four witnesses. Heaven isn't enough. And DNA is enough. I do the punishment for a rapist
in a criminal court with all the conditions etc.
There are various options, but some of the options include crucifixion.
They're cutting the left leg and the right arm. Good.
Of course, is good. This is compassion. The woman a woman has a high status in a man in Islam, because she's the first teacher of the scholar and the first protector of the majority. The one who defends the Islamic State for most of the non Muslims and this is why when Salah Medina you use five which is the Lionheart, you have Jews and Christians find which the minor
okay to protect because they soldier by Lionheart as a colonialist, for instance. And by the way, I don't know how we Brits like each of the Lionheart, because one whether you're born in Britain is born in France. I don't think you speak English. And you know, we said about London.
Something like that. So it's just a joke. I don't know why the heck we revalue so much. But the points are saying is a woman has a really high status, and she's the central role of the family. And that's the problem. He said that paradise, the keys to Paris under the field, your mother.
So the point is, if someone lays a handle such a woman or rapes her, it's the equivalent of reckoning the whole society or harming the whole society. So we have harsh mechanisms to prevent that. If you really did it, then you're gonna get the worst punishment because you've destroyed the foundation of our society. That's how it's done. One is the woman clock can clock with a conservative market, you say, Oh, they give them one year for a wage job. Think about this from
from that perspective.
So sure, you know, is the solution obviously, because what I said is true.
But on the non arrogant,
on the final thing I want to ask is a more general that we may be engaged with all of our hearts is two things. First thing she knows about crime, sure, about the rights of the neighbor, do you know that
the Prophet Muhammad upon the peace he was so worried about the rights of the neighbor that he told the angel Gabriel,
via revelation from God would tell him that you inherited some of the inheritance has to go to your neighbor?
If you read the classical tradition to classical works from the score of the allegories at the 11th, century theologian, philosopher, he wrote a whole list of things that we have
Due to our neighbor within the Muslim or non Muslim, and I take care of the emotional mental health and physical health, if you see your next door neighbor, he's got his ties halfway down. He's hardly shaven. He's got MTB balls and his walk into what we depressed everyday walking back from work rather really depressed every day. And as a Muslim, you never inquire about his well being, you get comfortable with their judgement.
This is the reality of being enabled as some you have to when you cook, even food, when they smile, you should smile, when they're unhappy, you're unhappy, you're almost mirrors of each other.
So the rights of neighbor as an amazing thing. Also, we have to take into consideration that Islamic rule also includes purification Bohol.
purifying this thing,
an hour Arabic meaning something that wavers because the heart is always changing.
So it's always about the inner dimension of how to purify your heart, of course, isn't the plan that you won't be saved from the deodorant unless you have COVID saline, pure a sound heart.
And this is the Quran. So it talks about the heart and what about the soul about the nuts in Arabic and how to really suppress and kill the ego
talks about your slavery. This one will not pay on the 14th century theologian and philosopher and jurist, and polymath. He said that if you are true freedom, and slave yourself to God,
because the man of the quarter never chose that he's going to be why he never chose that he was going to be a man.
He never chose a unit Pakistani have
chosen to be black. He knew it wasn't going to be both
these things people don't say you're free to fight for freedom
is freedom. If you were born, you had a microchip and you say otherwise not long. I don't want to be a boy. actually be go actually be bold. I don't want that. That is cool. I don't have people in the only point in England, that would be freedom.
But you know, you're slave to your context. So the the Enlightenment kind of philosophers, the postmoderns philosophers like the existentialist that hyperglide them. Hydrogen. They've been amazing points where it points that the human being is flawed. They have this concept of Cronus that you're thrown in reality, and you have no choice. Sorry, mate, you've been Who do you live? Yes, you're going to be a black man.
No choice, yes, you're going to be a woman.
No choice people even choose your parents, your siblings. And you say you're free, you're a slave. And you're always going to be a slave. But the way to deal with it is by being accountable and being responsible and dealing with your context in the best possible way, which is the Quranic narrative, and the way to free yourself from your own ego. And the way to free yourself from the social ego social pressure is by enslaving yourself from the divine. This will tell you said the 14th century philosopher, jurist, polymath, he said to really free yourself,
you enslave yourself from the divine, which frees you from your ego and frees you from social pressure? This you should do as well. That's what the Quran says. Are you going to follow your forefathers, even if what they were doing saying was baseness.
And the final thing is about economics.
Capitalism secularism of secular capitalism and liberal capitalism, wherever you want to call it, is the tourism of the 21st century. So we'll start looking at the Muslims. Yes, 3000 people, 911 innocent people, we are all side. But let's get over. You know what, we have to get over 20 million children every few years die because of the biggest weapons of mass destruction, which is debt and poverty from the IMF and the World Bank.
And we're containing about 3000 people. Don't get me wrong. For the Mr. Five no audience. I was really sad in my day, and I'm still sad. But I'm a human being and I'm not stupid. Could a stupid person will cry over this 120 million human beings die because of the biggest weapon of mass destruction. And it's not bombs. It's not nuclear weapons, it's debt.
And if they lie to us, us Brits go to this concert or in world poverty and human assault everything. Oh, yeah. You know, have your split but you know, take some speed and have a love and at the same time, give charity you don't have to because we need every day to pay the interest.
Bro one African nation for one year, around 1000 contracts.
The leading you down stupid path because we're stupid *. We need to wake up with sheep
with a feather in the wind. But we're forgetting that we must be the winner.
And that's who we are. And this is the future check the UNDP report 250 people and more wealth than 2 billion people on this planet.
In 1997 to 2000, approximately 20 million children died as a result of more food.
around 2 billion people live under the under to live with under $2 a month or a day. Too many people won't believe you have no sanitation at Trinity. I noticed they Oh, it has to be as high was a slide competition. She really needs no enough resources. Yes. According to the liberal capitalist philosophy, the unjust fate philosophy that has no basis in reality, because according to the food Agricultural Organization, do you know how many calories we have on this planet, we have enough calories to feed three planets, three planets, people,
three planets. But yet the capitals are crazy and saying Oh, food crisis price problems, too many knees on off resources, rubbish again. But the Prophet Muhammad upon whom you piece in a prophetic tradition, said that the son of Adam, the human being who needs his food, shelter and clothing. His geopolitical model is in line with reality 1400 years ago,
because it defined our essential needs. It defined our central limited needs, which creates a philosophy of not excessive competition, but one of distribution.
Also, Islam prevents interest, it prohibits interest because interest is an impediment to the distribution of wealth, because the whole economy of Islam, which is part of Sharia, Islamic law is to ensure the just distribution of wealth.
And that's the number one problem. Somalia 10 million people almost dying because of no food in America tend to do almost dying because of too much obesity.
Don't get me wrong and obviously genetics 105 kilos here
for the purposes of a social phenomenon of being person to anyone I'm not being fat.
Because I'm fat myself, Look,
don't worry. I've got the laser, the theater like you have row one, row two and row three.
I'm selling tickets fast, so
don't worry about that. So I'm gonna try to be present we'll go up. Again, don't worry about that yet. One, two, the stage is a concept get the concept using man versus fetal sky. Disgusting. disgraceful. And we were starving. We were too much food.
Too much food. But the problem is the distribution about the the unjust tyrant. And by the way, if you read the Quran, you see the philosophy of history that tyrants rise, and they forward and hopefully inshallah God willing, the dog acid would fold as well. May he be guided? Or May his heart be ripped out very quickly?
Honestly, because they've had a shock on his face and blah, he's evil, evil, I think we all think he deserves your evil. Honestly, if you don't think he deserves that you're all evil people. Because the coins up to 25,000 innocent people just because of power, and hungry with power, the ego. So the ego does isn't it
for maybe be guided, and if he doesn't get guided, may be destroyed.
qaddafi he died about a couple of billion worth of gold
somani just needed 1 billion to solve the crisis. So the issue is the distribution of both.
So interest interest. If you have interest based society, it actually is an impediment to the distribution of wealth. For instance, if I'm buying something, I have to pay more in interest, therefore have less money in my pocket. But if I pay for it properly, I don't have insurance and I have more money in my pocket, which means I can inject it back into society that someone may argue or you can hold the world and keep it in the back by an Islamic environment. There's no positive interest. It goes down two and a half percent every year. So that's an economic stimulus, injected back into society, for you to engage in entrepreneurship and businesses. It's an amazing model.
Also, the natural resources belong to the people cling to that prophetic tradition. If so, Saudi Arabian populace, they knew even the rest of the world Arab world although the oil is that black gold that they say yeah, if they knew the prophetic tradition of the Prophet Muhammad is going to be peace, which is integrity, the collection of Timothy, I believe that people are partners in three things.
Water pastures and fire, which means Generally, the natural resources, the killer policies. So the government only has a delegated authority to use that wasn't injected back into society. That doesn't happen in the Muslim world, there will be revelation in the Muslim world, if they found out this, this is their money.
King fire, his hand must be cut off, for instance,
for taking our forms of soil for up in Saudi Arabia, that he started his new audio quality. Yeah, I know, you're probably thinking that is the best thing since sliced bread.
and also, the minerals themselves belong to the people according to other prophetic traditions. So you see, we're developing an amazing economic model. But let's talk about stability and the price stability and stability in general.
Money in Islam is not a free floating like a liberal society has to be pegged on something substantial gold and silver. And that creates more stability. Because when businesses are not divided, businesses are not divided when there's more money in society, because when there's more money, there's more wealth. But
it doesn't mean there's more wealth, because it's free floating is not paired on something substantial of the gold and silver.
And that's going to be more price stability. We saw this in the 15th century, in the Ottoman Caliphate in the wealth management after, when you saw there's only 8% inflation in 82 years. That's a six months inflation for Greece or something here.
So there was price stability.
So this philosophy of distribution of wealth, and there's a caste system, which I said the two and a half percent of you have to be distribute to the poor. And we have an unprecedented history for this. For instance, in 4053, you could find a letter from a rabbi in Philadelphia to invoke Constantinople. And the rabbi says to his breakfront come to the land of the Muslim, the Turks rich are the fruits of the oppressive and heavy taxes.
Also, we see that in history if you go to Turkey, and Istanbul, the European side, you see the old most if you have a historical guide, you see these domes in his in his mosques, and the marble domes needs to be filled filled with gold, the who was poor, they could go and get the gold and put it in their pocket. And they started seeing these dome kind of buff is will always spoil, meaning everyone has to eat shirts and clothing, everyone had money.
Also, you see a time in history, when the administrators had to collect this the cap, the spiritual tax, and then distribute to the certain conditions like the poor, etc. And they came back to the caliphate to the cater to the Sultan to the Ruta, and they gave him money. They said, We were to order the land, everyone that has food, shelter, and clothing. First time in the history of the universe, that estate enabled everyone to have food, shelter and clothing. Say that to 80,000 homeless in this country.
And also, there's a difference between private and public ownership in Islam. It's not a communist system. Okay. So let's do a taster of the Islamic model. So you see that Sharia law is quite comprehensive. Who's going to deny that you see sure your voice is timeless? Who's gonna deny that? You say Siri little makes sense with his own principles, accents and models and values? Who's gonna deny that?
He will talk about Jihad as well.
Which Jihad has often been described as terrorism, which is no because terrorism, according to the definition, is the killing of innocence for political cause and Islam as an advocate of any shape or form. jihad is of two types, the Jihad of the soul to deal with the blemishes of the heart and the ego. And also the job of the physical jihad, which we believe that sometimes often diplomacy fails, we have to basically engage in warfare to establish justice and peace because the Quran says What is the matter with you? They don't find the cause of God for the oppressed people of the town that they say, Oh, my Lord, when are you going to relieve us from this oppressor?
Just like liberal interventionism supposed to be humanitarian.
This is why they went to Iraq, under the false premise of liquids of mass destruction, but it didn't really give a damn about the Chinese, or the shanty towns in Brazil, or the African oppressors, or whatever is happening because it seems that doesn't it, or Islam Karimov Uzbekistan that boils his political opponents to death and rapes the children and women and actually injects his political opponents of the AIDS virus. Look at Amnesty International can UK Human Rights Watch? Check it out for yourself? America gives them like millions and billions of dollars of support. Islam Karimov is not listening to humanitarian Who the hell How dare anyone say all these things like humanitarian if
it was nobody being serious today? They don't care
It was a Tunisia Libya was more important, because it was a British project. Libya, if you study politics properly, you see had nothing to do with caring about the people was rubbish. That's why there was supporting the so called jihadists in Libya. The irony is what happens in western politics is based on benefit. And when the benefit gets stronger elsewhere, you break that when you go somewhere else typical.
So Johannes, I'm very just, this is why Jews Yes, the Jews and it's very shameful what happened just recently apparently, a Muslim killing innocent Jews children with a disgrace. That's wrong, and we disagree with that obviously hasn't been tried trial if it hasn't had any fair trial, anything but nevertheless, if it was him, it's disgusting, regardless of background. But look what the jury said about the Muslim Zion czar, a contemporary Jewish historian. He said that's when the Muslim Christmas treats of Gibraltar the Jews or the Muslim was liberated from Christian persecution. It regards a 19th century Jewish story. He says the Jews knit favorably under the mohammedans.
So the point is brothers and sisters, we spoke by economics, liberalism, rape, social problems, jihad, everything all the boogie men all the hot potatoes under the sun, I hope I've demystified it.
I do for being brash or crude. It's not really like my style, but it's therapy for me. And also because I'm very tired as well. So that usually breaks down those barriers and to speak more impressive. But hope you've taken with a pinch of salt as mine was my way of expressing these things. Don't take it personally, if you have to apologize. Take the message, not the messenger because he's irrelevant, really, especially from an Islamic discourse perspective, not to say that our message isn't relevant. messages, posts messenger like us, because we believe in Asana, in all grades for things belong to God. We do it with the tools that God uses to manifest his wisdom, His
urashima His mercy and compassion. So brothers sisters, I'm really looking forward to this q&a I'm definitely show there's gonna be some interesting question answers. May Allah bless you may Allah guide us, Allah.
Take care of you guys. And may He bless your life with guidance and the neural wiring in the new revelation. And may He
enable us to have a very peaceful society in Britain so we could all benefit from each other? Amen. Amen. So I had as Muslims do. So for HANA caloptima, what
I said when he
was talking to Blake, thank you very much for your patience.
Okay, thanks, everyone, for listening. I
hope you all enjoyed the lecture, what we'll do now is we'll open the floor
for questions and answers. Do you have a question you'd like to put your hand up? Hopefully you have this paper and you can write it down and pass it on to the front? And we can read out?
quite a bit of time.
it's not loud enough, can you just repeat
the question and more
needs to be cleared up?
You, you say to that if the West came down without humanitarian intervention, he wouldn't be in China? Well, that would result in the death of his old.
And you mentioned Syria, and I suppose an intervention in Syria is actually a very interesting piece written by etc, relations theorists.
She's an interventionist as well. The West has tried and tried and tried to get
legitimacy from the fast food organization, the United Nations that Russia and China has blocked and blocked it, and they will continue to block it and Russia will continue to sell weapons to us out and there is nothing that the West can do. Frankly, they would the West would want to intervene.
For like, can't No, no.
because they can't go in without this ghostliness stations in this case, and this is what we had a little bit of pretty bad.
But we had humans.
what I mean by West is small w no big w Yeah. Yeah, I was. I mean, the ones who make the decisions now. So I mean, I'm not saying Western people. I'm a Westerner.
Yeah, the point is, for us to be under the illusion of all these wars happen as a result of purely humanitarian grounds. I think you really have to
You look at the foreign policy interventions of the United States in the past 50 years, and we see that every single one of them is for their interest in their benefit. If it wasn't they wouldn't be doing. That's the nature of politics.
What's that going to do in America?
America intervene because it's purely humanitarian.
That's what I'm saying is is that it was not simply an oil. No.
Yeah, no, it was more strategic as well. It was strategic it was to prevent another hacker mini from arising in the Middle East. There's a whole load of issues there. So as to do the interest. It's nothing to do humanitarian grounds. First to believe that will be is just a joke. It means that we haven't understood Western politics. So Western politics is politics in general, people do things for the interest and benefit you have in the mouth of Obama all the time. American interests, American interests, American interests.
Yeah, yeah. Fair enough. But the point we're saying is why by West, by the way, it's not the Big West w small W, the ones who currently have the strings that they pull. Okay. I don't mean us West. Yeah, we're nice guys. Nice Guy, you're articulate nice leather jacket. You know, you're supporting intervention in Syria. So do I. So there you go. So don't get me wrong. I know what you're saying. But generally, my place when I say is that, generally the foreign policy has been led, not by humanitarian, not for humanitarian purposes. But for more benefit driven purposes, which
was Islam, the Islamic enterprise will be different. It would have to be according to the values, practices different has to be based on genuine oppression and genuine heart to establish the justice and harmony of Islam.
Yes, that's the
reality, and how important it is to be there. To make.
Yes, but again, there is also the CTO meeting as well.
Have we done everything that is scientific view, if we look at the book, paper papers in our sky, I don't know how many people have read this book. But it's a very important book that reveals how some scientific studies are not actually scientific studies, yet, science has been used as an open to ignorance, like, for example, putting funds on public services, or cutting funds in education, and always making sure that they provide evidence of scientific,
you know, sort of research to support this
perspective. Again, science is always being used to ignorance. And as you said, you know, there is this imbalance between individuals and societies interested in general. And therefore, religion itself, once upon a time was called to that progress on civilization. Yet, it is actually one
that spirituality and those fundamental philosophies are actually calling to
deconstruct that way of thinking. It's not all objectivity, but
spirituality as well. Yeah, so your calling was good. Yeah, it's good comment about totally unrelated to the normal things, but it was very good to
me Take one written summary. Is it true that a rapist has to then marry the woman who raped and if not Islam? Where is it coming from? Who is lying to Islam at all? It was written in the Bible. I think he's individualist. I don't remember but it's in the Bible somewhere that you basically marry the woman you raped that's your punishment.
That's the kind of unjust kind of draconian justice in the Old Testament
so it's not in any way shape or form
Islamic take one more
documentaries they're good to persuade
my looks like Chinese to me by the way.
I'm gonna go back to wake up. Okay, I understand what Islam says about interest However, what are the consequences? I'm gonna take that load off your scholar. I'm not a scholar, obviously. But there have been there have there are some scholars who talk about the major difference for education and if you don't know Muslim country to various another scholar, so don't ask me. I'm just a guy with a big mouth.
Yes, far right. far left
And maybe politically as well.
But just because those people then
make these contributions to science, that doesn't necessarily mean that those other beliefs were correct. I mean, for example, like contributions to science
misplace questions. There is a misplaced question is because I never spoke about that these are Muslim, some of them are Christian scientists and Jews. What I said was that the principles of governance to city the tranquility, that allowed the scientists to develop, listen to some of the work of states. So it doesn't make any difference. My argument was,
you being Muslim is gonna make your scientists No, have you seen the Muslim world? Very much science fair? Yeah. I was talking about when the government because remember, progress is a political phenomenon.
We have the right politics, you have the right progress, you have a good ideology of the right programs. So the point is, when Islam as a political governance, governance model was implemented, then it created that tranquility. For example, we've got 20 pound notes,
and you want to put it out. Rick students amongst us is Lester,
who's been I don't want to go
behind it. Who's behind the queen, the Queen
the 18th century founder of capitalism and modern economics, you know what he said about the caliphate? He said, The Empire the caliphs,
gave gave us that needed tranquility and principles of governance, to allow people, Muslims or non Muslims to look into the interconnecting principles of nature. So the government, the government, these principles facilitate that and I did say, other modules to do that. Maybe secularism, capitalism, or the planting of seeds, we have a historical precedent for that. Do you see there's nothing to do with intrinsically your belief, although I would argue that the Quran doesn't make you think to reflect, as a parent says, payroll, you don't use your brain, and gives you other methods of thinking. So you come back.
Here, the beauty of Sharia law is that it allows minorities to come into play. This is why john Locke was influenced by political influence by Assad about treaties of tolerance and civil governance. This is why the ultimate period, if you read the book, if you read the book, and then from an COVID, a juicy story is called a world with him. He said he clicks 1000 Records under the Ottoman Caliphate, and in Islamic law, Jews go to rabbinical courts, Christian, go to the priests and the Muslim go to the party design judge, for he quotes and he states Historically, the majority of the Jews didn't want to go to the rabbis know where he went to go to the court. He thinks I'm in
charge. It's amazing. He said to William book, A World Within by unencoded. Also, we have Richard wda. from Columbia University. He quotes in his book, The Case of the Islamic Christian civilization, the Justice method justice would metadata impartiality, irrespective of religion. It's shocking, isn't it? Some people think, you know, especially religious, this one wasn't those for everyone.
Oh, good. Are you serious? No.
Yes, that means Yeah, the thing is, don't pay extra tax. That's actually
a myth. The pre tax as like, for example, if you read the works of Rousseau, when he talks about citizenship is like a contract with the government. And that's how we see it. So basically, when non Muslims living with Islamic State, they'll pay taxes like Muslims pay tax and by the way, increases taxes as much higher and, and they would pay the whole family someone can't afford it won't pay, they will be given money. And the tax is for them, that they don't have to find the army Muslim to protect those people. Regardless of the fight the army, the good they can if they want, but they'll be protected and their rights will be honored, etc, etc, to the point that Muslims live outside of
state that he has more rights than the Muslim outside of the state.
You made some reference?
is the same
media that you are referencing? To see how?
Yes. Now I
actually, I've never referenced us. I've never used the BBC to show how bad acid is. I know. But I know qaddafi acid is bad because I know brothers, and brothers or brothers have been tortured that have been treated badly.
But in all fairness, friend, if you go to Syria, you see that if you beat to the dominance of Syria, the darlings of Syria, that people get tortured, and then they get forgotten in history, they get killed, any kind of even small type of rebellion against the government.
You get massacred? I mean, you know, it's almost Water, water. What was in Arabic is like record reporting of so many different people in different places that could claim it's a lie to claim a conspiracy. That's the first point. The second point is qaddafi.
qaddafi I know brothers, I thought they were hand and they were tied to a car and driven around the university. These are the brothers who just given leaves itself. What are you talking about? These guys? Would dogs, dog their dogs in the Find a gun? Face nothing.
Under the rules, and I know the brothers know the brothers.
What do you mean to say?
Let's say man is no is a very great principle in Islam, that you speak the truth and you be just even if it's against yourself kith or kin, Rachel Paul. And that's what we have the liberty to speak up.
Yes, sir. Hi, yeah, you've mentioned you don't like Saudi Arabia, and you're anti Gaddafi, you're anti asset. That's great.
So why doesn't? Or isn't there a sort of Sharia law that is working in the contemporary world today?
There hasn't been implemented when it gets implemented, and maybe we'll have a discussion. Okay, I'll give an example. If you look at the Maryland poll, most of the Muslim world 75% wanted aspects of shooting the government's but who want to do and then I'm choosing even in Egypt, that it was sold out, it's a shame it is sold out on the surface. And if one wherever you want to call them, they just sold out in Egypt, because the Constitution has to remain extremely secular. Also, you have to see the rest of the Muslim mode is when we say Sharia What do we mean? Do we mean that small things like Divorce Law, or some comprehensive system here, this what we're talking about? That is
all interlinked. And that's not implemented in totality, unfortunately. And what I mean by sure is not this kind of crazy animal that's going to be ever expanding Tiki over this and go through like an amoeba or something and say, I mean, Muslim or die. I'm not talking about I'm talking about a beacon of light for the world. That's why, yeah, so I understand that. So the question is, then, why hasn't it worked in the supposedly Islamic
world for 1000 years, we'd have a better CV than secularism has, it's just these couple of 100 years, it hasn't been implemented. But if you do look at the history of Islam, you see a CV 1000 years of history, and you unfortunately see the broadest history of the secularism. So the The point is, what we need to understand is people who do Cofer, they're in the dungeon in prisons. If you look at the prisons in Egypt, in Syria, especially loads of people who are calling for Islam in a non violent political way, they have been tortured continuously, in Uzbekistan, specifically political opponents who give leave it to say it slowly is tradition for poverty. They put in the
prison in the dominance injection of the AIDS virus, the the fingernails are pulled out, the wives are raped in front of them saying denounce your Islam, or we rape your wife, Amnesty International Human Rights Watch, check it out.
And that's why because the kind of movement that's happening in the Muslim world is being squashed by these political powers. So I could agree with everything you said. But the point is, these are the very same Islamic leaders. These are Muslims committing atrocities on fellow Muslims.
Well, crazy, yes, great, isn't it? Just like the Catholics who killed the Protestants and vice versa. It's a human broad religious change how
Not change systems if you don't if you change the system of the hearts and you got nothing it's like it's like spraying perfume on a casket or you know dressing up a mummy.
You know mommy is running inside whether from a Christian point whether a Christian rapper, it's got like 90 million hits. It's called with the court. Why don't Jesus and hate religion
there's a Muslim version as well. Why love Jesus and
I don't know the rest of it.
Hey, let's, let's pick another white face.
been looking at?
Well, there's a different reason apostasy, this belief, this belief is a phenomena to human phenomena. And this is really categorize them as that are always welcome in Islamic governance and Islamic Society. apostates are welcome to the only differences amongst Islamic scholarship is that they start becoming political apostates, which is tantamount to treason, and there's repercussions to that. So I don't think there's anything wrong with that, especially since we're treating with some countries in the West anyway. So it should be more nuanced. There are differences of opinion. But it's the you know, it's not like, Oh, he's an apostate.
I mean, do you even do even though the conditions within the book, so many Muslims know the reality of Apostasy or whatever the case may be, but there is mainstream scholarship and other scholars who say that there are severe repercussions to the one who becomes a political state, which fair enough politics.
But you know, there are differences.
As Christians, oh, yeah, of course.
Those eyes can kill
human intervention, yes.
estimate that it had killed 4000 people, but now, some human rights
Association reporting that the maximum civilian casualties after the intervention was almost 100,000 per day. And now, if you've been following on the news, or part of live Libya wants to see and there's tribal, tribal tension, there is an also the NTC, the central government, it's it's not powerful. So there are actually more problems now facing the current Libyans, those who are present or not oppressed than before, the kadakia current situation in Syria, Russia and China, one of the arguments for not making an intervention is that they don't want to have the Libyan scenario where there was a high civilian casualty. So what is
what does Islam say about the situation also in the Syrian situation? You have now some Arab countries are given weapons to the opposition, which is causing further bloodshed? Yes. So
one can look at it from a point of view that okay, they'll be oppressed, we have to give them something to dependence. Yes. Is that correct? islamically. And also, what is the Islamic solution to this wonder scenario, what sorts of solutions are sharing?
My thoughts my thoughts to my general reading
take it at that in that context, don't stop calling Luca Hamza.
He said, go do this.
Now we know that in Islamic in the Sharia, you can't find this ruler.
But the Muslim legitimate ruler, people forget to do
Find that because you have this so quick. Saudi lovers as they already do that to the Saudi King. But he is he a legitimate ruler first and foremost to discuss that. I'm not passing judgment, but it has to be a legitimate ruler.
Now, there are other traditions that indicate that if someone disobeys God, you don't agree. Yeah, something of taken as a Jewish Prudential principle to disagree, ruler. Also when someone gets attacked and killed, then some scholars have said that you can fight back. Now with the case of Syria, for example, he's not almost sort of ruler. He comes from an Arabic tradition, believe in Islam, is extremely separate ends up implementing a Syria model.
And the pressing of the people in that context would you do? I don't know by reading, read a fatwa from 107 scholars of different types of situations or quote from the political Islamic spectrum. And they all said, fight back jihad.
In Syria, it's legitimate.
That's why I've read. I don't know what my views are. I haven't read too much about it. But you have to realize is all that
fitna is worse than persecution is Muslim killing. That's a chronic point. persecution is worse than kidding.
Because if you don't start to do something about it, you're gonna have persecution for the rest of your life. What kind of existence is that? There's no, is that? Or is it all in standing up and fighting and saying, I'm going to try to change this nasty situation? And then when you
all the ins and outs of what's going on, pass any judgment in its totality. But these are some things that happened with that. Chef meet them actually published that on the 21. c website. Check it out. He's a respected scholar from study here. So just check it out. I mean, yeah, sorry.
What do you think he told me? So ask me questions want to catch me out?
Looking for from an international point of view?
I know exactly. That's my advice to everybody.
If the Arab states grew up, became legitimate in their own right, understood the power that they have, they could have solved every single problem in the Western world.
All it takes is, for example, Jordan, or another country uses army and just to go solve the serious problem. That's what it takes you you're supposed to save up for justice, the Turkish Prime Minister,
I think he's he's a chief danger for the, for the Muslims. He just has a big mouth by a guy with a big mouth.
He has a big mouth with no backing
to Egypt, and they will boot him Do you know that they booted, the Turkish Prime Minister because they look up to me for so long, you go on sticks, because you've done nothing for the Muslim world. And you're supposed to be like, you know, taking care of everybody and so forth, going to Syria so that
they could have a deal with the two genders that got taken away. By the room wasn't on ease what a what a woman was harmed.
Or when someone when there's a situation they would write letters to the double Romo to people say, Mom is going to begin with you and me with me, because we justice will honor the woman of the justice of humanity. So I think what the Arab world should do or we can do, they should just let loose the Army's for good causes for legitimate causes, which is legal is legal in the US, what is the USA article 51?
article 51, or something like that talks about that every individual collective has a right to defend themselves.
And this could be used under that premise. Why not Muslim? Could you do anything? What about the situation in Gaza in Gaza? If Jordan woke up Egypt woken up other countries were caught, they won't be this like kind of human prison. The irony, they forgot about the history of the concentration camp and they made into concentration camp, essentially.
This is do something just show you my alley. So I have a wall kill people. But since we're standing, we're walking we're at the border. So so far, you know, strike
Fear in their hearts because this game.
So I think I think the Muslim world has enough equations to solve its own problems. The only problem is is sincere leadership.
We need to say leadership.
So, you know, the irony is both leadership comes from the people. So,
you know, sometimes we we think the leader is stable, so all our problems, but who is the leader.
So we the leader is a reflection of who we are sometimes.
And that's what we need to change our hearts. Because no matter
need to start off with,
okay, he can, and he could take over the whole world establish a piece of Islam, if he did it for the sake of God, he's going to help. So it's all about the heart, we owe the actions. And that's why the leaders have sincere hearts. They don't do it for the sake of the ego, others did it for the sake of God, and they do right. And hopefully we'll have a better place in this world will be a beacon of light for people who went to South Africa's problems or the economy in 20 minutes or died to freeze the big problems. And Islam says awkward gentlemen mess, we're here for the people who live in this not meaning that's not fun. The people, we're for the people.
We've let people down, we have the solution, we're not using it.
Alone, not change the condition of a people.
Apart from it,
it has to be with us as well, because we don't have a revolution in our minds that obviously, we will still be cheap. Of course, very
many of us are sheep, unfortunately.
This was the process, I'm always double check, it's on the heavy machine. That's a winner, the winner would have the feather in the wind with the wind itself.
We change direction. And that's what we do. And for that to happen. You really need brave people you need people that don't care about other people are not familiar with a perspective, I don't care what they think. And the Sahaba, the companions of the Prophet would like that very risky. They care about social pressure, social law, gamma, this is the truth. You see, that's how people stand up, you know, Malcolm X, almost when he stood in the Oxford University speech, and it was really brave, and he stopped many people like that. I mean, as an example, this is a 20th century example of someone who spoke, you know, and he was very, very brave with his words. And we snatch up their
hands, and he says, always teacher pleases so phenomenal. Anyway, yeah. Well, this summer Do
you spoken sister the back or the back?
Yeah, it was good.
Would you mean are you allowed to kill him that way?
Yeah, of course, he can't. He can't. Well, I don't know. But in general principle is that you can't mistreat people even in Acts of war. And you can't kill people in that way. And if you eat meat, you have to trial some money to travel in the jungle justice versus a well known principle in the *tier. So yeah, there's no justice so when I heard the way he died, I knew the first thing I said if it's true, that he was sodomized with a knife and stuff like that. I said this was not gonna have there's no happiness people the minute you become like your enemy you're finished can last that's why I said this doesn't mean okay with me no goodness in this movement because if there are many
things adopt the position they adopt just like what the enemy was doing that they weren't the same thing. So they are gonna be one guy who didn't follow where everyone else was saying so it could have been this anomalous result. So by the side that way he died even though he killed those two people I mean to to do that, but it's a big sign from Allah from God say liquid tyrants you know alive The King of Kings you're nobody you know. So it's a trust relationship is a divine trust
system with a brand new job and glasses
I guess it doesn't mean no more than me though.
It doesn't mean you know more than me
Yeah, brother here. He said that the Best Worst of people die.
And there's actually faction there's a sectarian factions happy to
wake up with that. Have a good
Let's say first
been very systematic killing and oppression in the
change when you can't sell stuff for as long
as possible and
to some degree of a Western interest
rate on reality.
You guys can have this debate.
To clarify i'm not i wasn't supporting the Gaddafi regime. I was just saying.
So, you know, like Michael Jackson
said about plastic surgery.
You look like him.
Any more questions?
Oh, yes, sir. Have you spoken? Yeah. Excellent. Speak. Yeah.
According to that definition,
it is. And the second point is, to use a democracy is a very famous poet couldn't have a ball. It was called the Pope, the East's. And he summed up democracy in different ways. I agree with him, I just want to bring up the rhetorical point. He said, democracy is a system of governance, that
counts men, but doesn't weigh them
as quite profound. If you read Plato, he argues, even like democracy and took it from, you know, to the philosopher kings, he said that you have to to design a $2 million dollar asset telling us what to do.
So he advocated philosopher King, I think there's problems with democracy. I think two is I think he's become the holy cow of the West. And I think is why we should discuss it the shift from democracy. Because if everyone agrees to something isn't the same, it's the right way forward.
That's a different question, though. That's the interesting point. See, that shows that you want me to believe democracy? If the question is sincere, let's stick to the first point. Do I believe democracy? So there's lots of problems with it. And there are some problems with it. huge problems, especially, you can't have democracy, capitalism doesn't work. The theory is not saying Captain democracy can't come together. They can't work together, because capitalism, per se has a huge influence on people. That is very undemocratic. From that perspective. Yeah. And really up we have resolved. So the point is, is I think democracy, it depends how you define it, if you mean rule of
law, justice, and progress, why we do some things already.
Now, it depends what you mean by democracy, because AI is such a loaded term. What does it mean by if you if you mean peace, rule, justice, accountability, transparency, I think the Islamic tradition has all of that
philosophically has actually no grounds to stand. That's why Plato moved away from it. By the mouthpiece of the final
demo of British democracy, American democracy is so different because you can have more people. You can have the majority in American voting for Bush, Barack Obama gets elected.
So if you're doing your definition, the definition is not.
Well, the general principle is we extract practical examples.
And what do you buy democracy? The people who wanted the startup wake up 30%, for example, wins the vote. In some countries, this vote accuracy, for example. Is that a democracy? It looks like an elitist kind of people who are just interested in politics. Why do leaders have the right to make have a say, you know, these are big questions.
no, I would say with shadows. Why would I use a shadow?
I don't agree. I don't agree with it. It doesn't make sense to me. Oh, don't get me wrong. When we say democracy, I agree with the flavor of democracy, which is a curry I agree with. I like the taste, because it's transparency, accountability, aspects of individual rights as well. You have so many good things, which I agree with. But if you want to talk philosophically, that principle itself, I think, is sharp.
Know what, I think everyone should live under a nice, harmonious Islamic government. And you have to
select you need to actually select here, voted.
No, no, of course not. Because democracy is different democracy says that man makes the law, we say the law is not going to change ever. Because we're saying the source of law is God. Democracy, the source of law is the mind. We're saying? No, we're always want to be the divine structure. But you select a man representing the divine structure.
Yeah. No, you don't know nothing about democracy. Voting and democracy are two different things. Yeah. Voting is a process.
No, not even that way. It depends. It depends the different rules that for example, that you could you could you could have dedicated people to choose on behalf of the people, which is not really democratic. Or you could have a massive vote for everyone to choose one person. But that's not the law cracy democracy is
ruling for the people by the people were saying the ruling is for Allah, there's a difference. It's not from the people or ruling not by the people, is a big philosophical difference. This is purely procedural, how to pick someone as a delegated authority, because for example, we could never have a vote to say, Let's vote, we're going to use a sample. To see it's like almost a constitutional principle here that you can't vote against the Constitution. By democracy, can you see the point is a little different, because we believe ontologically the essence the reality of nature, law is always going to come from the divine.
You appreciate difference.
But there is an abstract
Amen, if you already have a country that has these governments, if if a ruler dies, for example, how do you choose them as a ruler?
know, that can be a solution by Islam.
We have different hierarchies as well, the hirings are based on race, color, creed was based on intellect as well as based on your level, for example, there are differences in people, someone who's more educated in terms of islamically educated and knows more about the inner dimensions of Islam and how to judge a person that's spiritual leadership. So they will have a huge influence. It's not necessarily one vote one person, per se, to be honest, I don't know the intricacies that well. So there's all these things I just
remembered a very crude sense, you'd have to ask them are far more qualified than me.
I don't know. I don't think we practically could have imposed a system on anybody.
So as long as no
factory can work, that's why take the profit is model the product piece. The way that he established his political governance, was that he positively influenced the influential to that particular society and those influences influence their people and they wanted it they were calling for it. So ideally, the government, Governor Cooper,
wait could be rebellion, it could be revolution could be anything.
Or it could be what happened in Georgia, but it was a storm the fall of 2000. I mean, no one can show that. That's what we want. Essentially. We don't want anybody so you just want to basically storm the pilot and say this is the people want this now.
I'm more qualified to meet and fight.
I have an intellectual property when it comes to these issues, because, but I didn't really try to distinguish between democracy as a philosophy and the shares of philosophy, they are quite different from that perspective. And democracy is more
of a procedural and philosophical perspective. Brother Islam, its philosophy would not say that man can rule the other half. It has to be God's rules always. And that's the classical view on Islam.
Politics, so from that perspective, the key differences, but procedurally it could be similarities, like how'd you get that?
ideas of freedom and how
same sex marriage? Yes.
Well, we start out.
At the end of the day, every society is going to call people doing things that they want to do. Example, PDF PDF.
He showed you the PDF here, which we found to be a natural instinct and natural drive will allow you to
apply your principle. As you apply that principle, we're going to allow me to see please be forced to get away with it, especially when the two of they're doing with a young boys. They have consent as well, by the way.
So there's no robot. Yeah.
So the point is, what are you gonna do based on your principle you should not pay for?
Because you're saying, Are you going to allow this is very carefully be philosophical, not emotional, and it's not emotional?
Either allow you say, things that we want to do? That's because we will demand that consumerism
Would you stop that? Yes, but other systems stopped listening to for example, someone's become more sexually intimate sexual, or they have to publicly manifest that in Sri No. So must become pitiful is pretty much manifest that no in other countries in the
same principle, that the thing is with homosexuality you could do with alcohol. Islam is a very defined principle you can spy and claim to be suspicious, even if you catch someone in home doing something you kind of mentioned it, and he has evidence will be seen as no evidence. So privacy privacy unit homosexual, do you want to hear it becomes a crime when it's publicly manifested? That's the shear and not many people know that they think hunting balls are sexual. Yeah.
There we go. Follow various things to do with poverty. Yeah.
These are small issues.
So there's no there's no homophobia, no scam. hates them from that perspective. Yeah. They just see it as a spiritual problem. That's how we see it. We see
just like the Christians and the Buddhist
but why are you saying it's fine? Why are you saying this right?
Why is wrong? Is
our moral our moral morality shaped by reference point? Yes, you're right, my morality shaped by Islam. So therefore, if I believe divine exists, and the crime This causes from him, which by the way, I could hopefully show for good reasons to believe in that then that shapes my moral worldview. And you have a moral view, which is it's right. What was your moral reference point?
why would it be
nobody changing it? I love my brother. I'm gay doesn't mean that love is different. Cat you wouldn't want a homosexual act. Okay? No, don't want sexual feelings. homosexual Act is a different situation. So you know, it's sinful for having homosexual feelings and almost judging anybody. We don't have to do it.
The point is the homosexual act, how does it make you more ready? Right?
just the beginning was like a justification sir. Tell me why is it right? Where does your moral foundation? Or don't know? Like?
charity is right or wrong?
Okay, why is it no role?
Play you have no basis for your mobility?
I really want to be crude here, but I can tell you how
did you study biology psychology?
Okay, let me give you one of the one of biology and even from a biology use you study something construction function? Yeah. Yes, yeah.
I'm gonna give you a clue detail. So you just
kind of awesome, because then people think it's fine. Yeah. There's different situation. I like I like being eaten here.
Now, the good example by the GM from an evolutionary standpoint, to me doesn't make sense. The sphincter muscle, for example, is a one way muscle. Yes, a one way valve. Yeah. If your doctor if you put your finger in that canal, it can scratch and feed it very easily. Contrast that with a vagina, for instance, here is deliberately very thick, and it's mucus has antibacterial agents as well for compensation structure function perspective, even if it is abolished, right? Okay. Well, that's going to actually damage and that's not so there is a biological reason for that, too. It's a one lakh case is harmful, because it always bleeds. Yeah. So from your case of what is harmful, but
the point is, believing God is irrelevant. And don't be wrong. I'm not judging from a second, I have Muslim friends who are homosexual.
But they don't practice it. I think it's a spiritual.
by nature, God doesn't change his mind, though. That's his nature.
Explain why Peters dynamic.
But I always make a point here, a very crude example, my son is four and a half minutes.
And he's sitting in the audience and he's looking at a mathematics Professor writing down calculus, my son's very patient and stands on the chair says, Professor, your bozo, you know nothing about mathematics. Now, what do I say I take you Look, son, I was rude. You have no authority. You know nothing about math, I know that this guy's a professor of math. So he has authority, he sees things that he doesn't see. Same with the divine, where the four and a half year old. And the analogy here that God, one is an authority.
He knows things better than we know. And he sees the social effects of things better we'll do. The only purpose is that God exists and the divine discourse is the crime. But we have philosophical reasons for that. What's wrong with that? That actually is very rational. Your point is like a far healthier alternative to the professor unity. That's how we see it.
Ah, you see,
it explained because God says why command you to do is good for you.
Yes, just don't get me wrong.
No hatred against homosexuals.
No violence against homosexuals. I would say with the homosexual aircar for hours discussing about managing the universe. I have no problems with this is not issued this all hypothetical and philosophical. So I want to make that clear that most of them are to treat anyone any harm. The Prophet said there is no harm no reciprocate or harm. This is purely a philosophical moral grounds which everyone has the right to advocate.
Believe, yes, I find it
is if you can say yes
to this kind of song and dance
In a few centuries, yes, when the king decided I have a divine right to do.
So to say.
So how can you say that people can stay
spiritual and they can challenge?
know, what you have to decide is that the kings, for example, it is something that was baseless. One thing that was saying, well, regardless, we don't believe we will good evidence that divine exists, let's discuss that. And these should be their own discussions about their shapes our view. And we believe this book discusses on a device, that's obviously going to shape your worldview, if you believe it to be true, that's obvious. And the discussion should be like fruits go straight to the roots are the foundation solid? Because because that's all you'd expect in a stairway, that morality has no meaning in your paradigm, because it shifts based on social consensus and time, or if it's
basically evolutionary and social pressure perspective, if that's the case, you have absolutely no meaning because you want to disagree.
So he does, I'm going to show you how it does here, because you have only two other foundations for morality. is social consensus fellow feeling? Yeah, well, that's
the problem with that. So if it is time issues, if there is a social, for example, Nazi Germany, social consensus, let's go kill Jews.
You're saying to me, you have
to be shipped to the same kind of mechanism.
That's the whole point. That's,
of course, if the divine exists, then he has rights that we have to put towards them. Right. Yeah. So the point is, if Yeah, so the point is, but humans basement as well, because you're just assuming the presupposition you're assuming atheism to be true, which to viewers has actually no basis in reality? So that's the that's the philosophic question. Does the divine exist? So does he know? And that's the situation?
Okay, five minutes.
Good. Right. Here we go.
Did you have five minutes?
question. This one? Oh, let me just do this first. Yeah. Islam teaches peace. But there are so many jihadists, which are used as an example to see patterns of Islam a generic, typical way in the West. So when is Jihad right? jihad is right, when it's right.
It's why when you defend yourself, everyone has the right to defend themselves. Article 51 of the UN Charter, and the offensive type of jihad will go in to intervention. The Quran says when there's oppression and stuff like that, so it's very similar to Western foreign policy discourse. Now, some people, some people claim that it's okay to go and kill innocent human beings. I disagree with that. I think that's not very prophetic at all. It goes against the case of Islamic Abu Bakar radi Allahu anhu, the right hand man of the Prophet Mohammed a pull up piece, the first case of Islam, he gave her a whole treatise on you can't kill innocence, etc. So that's my view.
So you just have to assess it by the prism of Islam by the principles of Islam to look at particular reality if someone claims to be Jihad Does it mean that you have of course not, is killing babies Jad? I mean, what basis I don't think that has any historical basis for the Presidents from my limited humble reading. So that's not that's not jihad. But obviously there are far more complexity complexities to get involved in like you know, is collateral damage.
something to take into consideration in foreign policy the West do it this assignment have to do? I don't know I don't know these answers. These answers are for the theologians and philosophers and the thinkers, but generally in the general principle
jihad is not killing innocent people. That's, that's almost a fact the Prophet Muhammad peace, he strongly recommended people killing children and women abubaker he talks about like almost a 10th principle to Islam predated the Geneva Convention. It predated COVID deer convention to the point that you can't kill trees, you count your mountain as a tee for combatants, etc, etc. So from that perspective, jihad is not going crazy and killing people, I think they view the concept of jihad, just to do what they want to do in the first place, which is terrible. And that's what human beings do is all based on the ego prior
to minutes, because existence,
here will be the cost component.
Very simply, my premise is that I believe the universe began to exist. And we have strong reasons for that. That's based on philosophical, mathematical, astrophysical perspectives. Okay? The first perspective is based on philosophical you can't have the Infinity ontologically exported to the real world basically means as the concept makes sense in mathematics, but it can't be transported to the real world, for instance, was infinity minus infinity or infinity minus five, etc, etc, it's a paradox is a problem. So if you apply it to the history of the universe, the history can't be infinite must be finite. Therefore, the second point is that you have astrophysical evidence, for
example, the second law of thermodynamics, if you consider the universe to be a closed system, that it knows the state of eternity, meaning you didn't begin, or is it still infinite that we should have a heat death by now, okay, because you have a second dynamics, you have from
low entropy to high entropy, okay, so,
so therefore indicates we have good reason to believe we began. Also, you have evidence like Big Bang cosmology, for example, you have the highest standard model oscillation models of quantum fluctuation of the various models, although that is supporting evidence, no direct evidence, and they will have principles within the beginning of time, because we want to just like the theoretical physicist, Alexander bunaken, saying that the universe space time boundary, we can't run away from the beginning of the universe. Now, if you have good reason to believe that the universe began, therefore, we have three questions. They either came, it came from a state of non existence to
existence, fine, I think it created itself self creation, or was created right can something exists from a state of non existence, why nothing knows, very simply has a magic had nothing aside to flowers, you know, it's a trick because the tuition is from nothing, nothing comes. These were previous votes, the publication about time said out of nothing, nothing comes. Now, some physicists say those things do nothing, and they quote, the vacuum for the quantum vacuum is not nothing is actually restructure the universe. If you go to the scientists, you see the quantum vacuity something. So that contention is based basically, exactly technocracy so no, can you monitor so if
you give birth to so very messy situation, don't even imagine it? So, so your mother concrete stuff is a crude analogy, but that Stephen Hawking writes, in his book, The grand design, that self creation is possible, because the law of gravity in the vacuum, but again, you need the universal universe to exist. And the law of gravity is a force of attraction between masses are saying mass messages before you have mass. So he's not even answering the question. So Christian doesn't make sense philosophically. Interestingly, in his book, in introduction, systems, philosophy is dead. The book is full of philosophy. The
third point the universe was supposed to be created as the best example you must have a cause. And this causes is God or Jesus or Buddha or anyone else. It just means the cause. But will you use conceptual analysis, which means thinking deeply about something using reason, rationality, you come to the six golden attributes, which I call it, the first attribute is that it must be powerful configure, the universe must be intelligent because there's laws of the universe if you create the universe, therefore, it must be a law giver, which upon intelligence
must be uncaused because no one no one disagrees, like progressive, Abraham Varghese, he says that no one disagrees with the fact that something must be uncaused either the universe of causes will cause the cause of the universe unfolds. But since we know the universe had a beginning, that's what was because that was the cause of the universe examples. And also you'd have an absurdity of an infinite regress because how would give me a big kiss on the forehead? And I'd ask permission of someone else and that permission was continuing forever. Unfortunately, you won't be that kiss me Yeah. So isn't obsessive wouldn't have needed in the first place It must be uncles.
So, from there, we also have the must be one that from everybody we know must have a will in place the turtle and boy to distance a Fiat effect which basically means it chose the existence and choice indicates a will have to have any work there must be one because one will is equal to one God if you have two worlds and you have these possibilities, I never got created because they will clash otherwise oh one will over became overcame the other wishing basically means is only one goal in the first place. So wherever scenario you take, it means it's going to be one goal therefore one God
and that's really something
The Divine agrees with the character, the principal in the Quran in the hundreds of chapter called would love to add a lot of sunlight, then maybe it wouldn't be that wouldn't be cuckoo for one had to say God really wanted to know he would get something with the question. There's nothing like watching him. Now you may think let's go to the garden, it's not good at the gaps, go to the capsules, you don't know and you squeeze got in there. We've started reality, we observe logic. We've done some analysis, and it correlates to the divine of Islam. There is an argument as up all day, and I guarantee you every contestant will be like, let's go.
Really fast. I'm sorry, I have two minutes for it.
That means you've never heard it before.
arguments are very old argument. Let's move away from the Dawkins Hitchens narrative.
Okay, let's not judge the arguments.
No, I didn't do that the other way around. Okay, listen to this. Let's be attentive, and it will if possible, apologize.
We said universe has a beginning it began to exist, then we say therefore, we have certain options. Could it could existence come from non existence by nothing? Could it create itself? Or did it have a causal creator? So we analyzed options, this explanation? Cause we didn't say God, we even mentioned it specifically said,
You know, I didn't do that.
There you go. So can we still be rational? That is the cause creative? conceptual analysis must have the six attributes which relates to the divine that's my point.
Know, that's the very old Richard Dawkins argument. And I deal with it
all the time. It's my job here. So and I don't want to sound arrogant, but it's really cut to the chase. Okay. Firstly, and the problem of who cause God that's probably addressed that because we said, the two options I use on schools are what cause the cause of cause the universe is uncaused, we've established
we've established the universe is actually caused because it began
Good, let's do that.
So what does that mean? That means the cause must be uncaused.
There's nothing illogical with an uncaused. Cause there's nothing
there's nothing illogical about uncaused cause a conflation between the proposition and whatever is created.
Know, we don't say that we said, ask the question, ask the question, what caused the cause of the universe?
Well, let's follow that through. And I was about to answer that.
So let me give you two very scenarios, the first scenario, and I did that with infinite regress of me kissing your forehead. Yeah. And let me let me let me just make this a case. Right. First and foremost. Whatever begins to exist, has a course we've established the universe began to exist, therefore has a cause undeniable principle. Okay. That's the first point. The second point is no deny that something must be uncaused the universe or something outside that caused us to be uncaused. Now, if we keep on asking the question will cause the cause we can ask that question. But then we say this, what cause the cause that causes universe, then what caused that cause that caused
that to the universe. Wait a minute, then we'll come back to that.
let me answer the answer.
Let me answer here. So if we have an infinite regress of causes, it means we don't even have the universe. Okay? I give an example he had a whole length of dominoes, right? And you can't see the end. But you see them all dropped and the one in front of me has dropped as well. That means there was a beginning to the dominoes is no forever. So in necessitates there must be something outside of that kind of chain. That's uncool that caused that change to happen. So in this is called rational necessity must be uncaused. Right? The second point is you're assuming that God must be more complex than the universe itself. But that assumption is only based upon a party he God isn't.
I know what you're talking about. I know, you
know, that's not entirely true. And I'm gonna explain that. It depends. And this is a big source of discussion of complexity. But by the way, even if you're right, there's an underlying argument. That's the joke thing about it. But let me tell you something. God is not made of pot. Like in Islamic mountains, a traditional belief is one, okay, we see everything within just whiteness. Richard Dawkins, especially when you mentioned this book, The God Delusion when he says that God must be far more complex, because he creates so much of the create the whole universe, that's not entirely true, unless you assume God is made of parts. But that's a straw man of the Divine. Do you
see that's a storage device. And the second thing is to undermine that statement. If he does a he does software engineering.
No one will find someone who does for software engineering. I'm a PhD student at Cambridge. And he was saying we can make a piece of software that's more complex than us.
Take that and smoke it.
But the point is, the point I'm trying to say, is, look at this. But this this the irony of the debate here. God is so irrational, so irrational, we're finding it. So hi, just to break down even a basic premise. Do you see? Well,
Because if you can't break down the argument, then this
is a good argument.
Not nothing I mentioned.
You're making a strong amount of my arguments. really deserved. I never said created out of nothing. I'm saying, Can the universe from a state of non existence come into existence? Why and nothing? Not from nothing? Maybe there was other stuff outside? Who knows? I'm not making that assumption. You're making that assumption.
Now I do believe that but if it's just called therefore, it's not nothing is it?
Now what is CTU doing nothing is it's a bit problematic because the point is all we know from our reality because we were putting that assumption in there I don't see the reason I want to make this argument because it's non religious, per se. I don't make other religious assumptions in the argument. All we're saying is from a state of a non existent existence, can it come to existence by nothing that's an absurdity in itself. So something brought into existence now we don't attribute is true is the divine but when we use conceptual analysis said what you have is actually reason my God, it's in line with what God is, according to Scripture, that's the point. So it's not the kind of you
know, because a lot of atheists do that sometimes, like always the first cause thing is called leaders in discord actually know if you attended to the argument, we broke down and asked why do you nuisance begin if you began as a cause, and it has a cause, therefore, given these attributes, not based on I don't have this and have that is our is based upon the fact that we use conceptual analysis is no other conceptual disagreement to this?
Yeah, no, that's not true. Because conceptual analysis is a rational method.
If you deny cultural analysis, you've denied every single scientific conclusion that has come to this planet. Because when we have data, we make inferences and an inference is reasoning to the best conclusion. If you do not want to do conceptual analysis, you've denied all science.
I'm denying him a surprise that he's picking and choosing now.
Why would you not use case? What basis?
Why doesn't it work?
I need to backtrack actually start from the beginning. I didn't start from the head.
That's why it's called the audio from the beginning of the universe, not from the end of the
But what's your
Okay, we'll wrap it up now. What's your man? Can we sit and watch? What is it?
how we should do this
in a very polite way.