FQP20 Fiqh of Penalties – Fighting the Insurgent Rebels
Date:
Channel: Hatem al-Haj
Series: Hatem al-Haj - Fiqh of Penalties
File Size: 95.45MB
Related
- Riyadul Haqq – The Prophet’s Emigration To Madinah Part 3
- Abu Usamah At-Thahabi – 02 The Path to Precision – Common Mistakes in Salah
- Nadim Bashir – Tafseer of Surah Al Furqaan #10
- Ibraheem Menk – Lessons on desires from the story of Yusuf
- Mirza Yawar Baig – Reflect on the Qur’an #12
- Ikram Sanaullah – The life of Sa’ad Ibne Abi Waqqas R.A #01
- Mohamad Baajour – JAR #89 Dos And Don’ts Of The Month Of Rajab
AI Generated Summary ©
The Hanbury complex is a cultural and political complex with a history of rebellion against the wrongful ruler and the need for strong political stance. The speakers emphasize the importance of understanding values and political stance to avoid confusion and chaos, as well as the need for a strong balance sheet to protect assets. Monster is used in relation to cultural differences and the need for a more coherent approach to understanding history.AI Generated Transcript ©
Not on the last razzamatazz are allowed
to proceed. So now, I will go over about Patel and Bobby or the chapter on fighting the insertion rebels
and certainly it's a very sort of hot pertinent relevant topic nowadays.
Not necessarily for Muslim minorities
but for the Muslim majority countries
claim abracadabra online his book on that and focuses on that Emanuel said, you know, under the belt cutter like Bobby or the chapter on fighting the insertion trebles, woman mm Yuri, Dona is a lot. One man said he fathered Muslim in a manner to imagine him feed him as a man if you want to be.
Again doesn't mean that you want to be an Allah Ilakaka him, I will tell a family him falacci Allah Dafoe in cotulla dafa kanessa these are the insurgents who rebelled against the Imam rightful ruler. And keep, like, I did not translate this as just ruler, I only translate this as rightful ruler. And we'll come back to say why.
Wanting to depose him, the Muslims are required to support their Imam in deterring them by the lightest means sufficient for deterrence. If this results in a fight against them, or the destruction of their property, there is no liability on the defender. And if the defender dies, he is a martyr. So if you fight alongside the rightful ruler against the insurgent rebels, and get killed, you'll be a martyr.
Maybe we should finish everything and then just have like,
sort of a discussion afterwards.
But let us first make sure that things are clear here.
Okay, so what I'm gonna be doing on an email, these are the insurgents who rebel against the Imam
insurgents who rebel against the man wanting to depose him.
So these are added value that are to be killed, are to be fought against and to be killed? Where's this coming from?
What is the definition of alibi? What is the definition of the email?
And
certainly, there would be some need for shedding some light on contemporary circumstances and scenarios.
But first, let us be completely sort of faithful to the tradition not only the scriptures, because we will have to always be faithful to the scriptures. But let us go over the tradition as it is, and then, you know, discuss that tradition or analyze it critically.
Now and the tradition here also, according to the humble demons have mainly
Sankara Jonah Allah Imam.
So al Abadi are basically in order for them to be added Bobby, they have to be
aggro group that has shoka
that has basically power.
If they have no power, they are not. They are bandits.
They will be treated like a pot or a clock highway men. And certainly the difference here it's a hairline difference between the two Albury and copart. Or
if you know if people you know have the same cause, the same
understanding or misunderstanding
and they are 20,000
arm people and the man feels that they have power. We call them Albury. Those are insurgents rebels, and they get a completely different set of rulings as we will discuss from bandits.
People have that number is 2000. I am not given any numbers but it is about you know, do they have shelter? Do they have power to be reckoned with or not?
If there it is 2000 people, they have the same understanding like the 20,000.
Or it is 20,000. But they are likely armed. The other 20,000 are heavily armed.
The lightly armed would be called bandits. The heavily armored will be called insurgent rebels. They have the same
it's they have the same motives.
They have the same understanding, just the difference is that these are power, these don't have power. When they don't have power, you treat them like bandits, when they have power.
And yeah, that's what it is, when they have power, you treat them like
two completely different sets of rules.
Now, not only that, they have to have power, but they have to have to,
they have to have sort of some substantiation for their rebellion.
It is not like they are
that we have meaning what, like let's say they are highlighted, for instance, how you have clarity that makes clear of all the Muslim mean and so on, they have a different set of rules as well.
And that's a controversial issue, we we may talk about it a little bit later. But the idea here is that they have to have some grievances against the system, they are rebelling because of grievances, those grievances may not be justifiable, completely. But there are grievances
there that that people will consider to be you know, we'll think about there is something that we there is some point even if this that we this week, but they have some point here
and that is
the issue of
motive
or incentive
capitalists of the rebellion, there has to be some point
the rebellion has to be against a rightful ruler.
rightful ruler here is a man it's not necessarily a mammal had it or just roller, it is only rightful ruler.
Because according to the established position and the Hanbury mishap, it is impermissible to rebel against an unjust ruler, which we will come to talk about and Harada Hackman
because we have three different types of rulers and hack him holiday and there is consensus here that you cannot rebel against him and hacking
culture
and that is the the the sort of the point of contention here.
This downloader could be transient random, could be consistent, and sort of
huge can and can and consistent you know, jouer all the time, like extreme jouer all the time. We must make the distinction here some of the scholars made the skipping section between these two in Duany and he asked he make that made the distinction between hagaman faster kunzea whose fist is random and the hacking faster caja whose first pass permanent and enormous
and when you haven't happy mid calf here
and there is consensus here that you rebel against them. And of course, this is in Muslim lands.
So, there is agreement here there is agreement here. There is a lot of controversy here.
Well, according to the Hanbury Meza
you do not the Hungary must have do not allow rebelling against them.
Now there are two reports in the Hanbury mess up.
One report, one report
that the mama had said if we can depose him
They should, and that was reported for taba caught by MLB Allah.
And then the more common and more popular position of mathematics more often repeated or quoted position of MMR mad is to prohibit are rebelling against the unjust ruler. Some people say that the mama mad have these two positions in different contexts, and that the default for him is the permissibility of rebelling against unjust rulers, when there is no greater harm to be expected.
of the greatest and valleys who actually favor the rock narration, the permissibility of rebelling, are Abkhazian unable to appear and even elzy.
But we have to be clear, this is not the authorized position. This is not the popular position.
They say that the MMR mad, prohibited threat, you're rebelling against the ruler within the context of his name,
you know, mourn had this interpretation about helical Qur'an and so on. And they basically
prosecuted the mama mad as everybody knows, when people came to ask the mathematics, they should rebel within that context. And remember, Matt had in his memory, it was fresh in his memory, the fight in between, I mean, and among the two brothers, that caused so much bloodshed and the destruction to Baghdad, he was telling them no don't,
you should not.
But when it comes to you know, that his default position
according to the you know, I'm happy to have and Josie and I will resign and so on is the default position
is the premise liability when there is no greater harm to be expected.
Now, so, so now we have in the Hanbury malherbe these are the the three basically, that in order for people to be called the boba insurgent rebels, and for the rules that we will mention to apply to them, they have to have power otherwise they will be rebels.
They will be bandits.
They have to have some incentive, some motive some sort of substantiation for their rebellion,
whether it is strong or not, but something that they would cite that they will talk about that would make some sense, you know, even if it is not strong,
and they have to be rebelling against a rightful ruler, and as we said,
so, it would not apply to this.
You know,
it would it would certainly apply to this. And according to the authorized position in the Hanbury method, it would apply to this the unjust ruler as well
is not clear.
In the Hanbury man's have How does a ruler become a ruler?
How does a ruler become a rule and this is the majority This is the traditional position in you know, in our tradition, because there is a huge difference. there not a huge difference. I shouldn't say that there is a difference between traditional scriptures.
There is a difference even between self and color. There is a difference between what was popular during the time of this righteous predecessors with regard to this issue, and what became sort of established tradition during the time of an cut off, so we have to keep that in mind. So the ruler in the Hanbury madhhab
that's booted email ama,
but it's a map.
And beside Abu Bakr is a mama because all the Sahaba agreed
that both in the north which means actually
one Imam passing the Imam ship on to the next
and the site Abu Bakr passing it on to Homer. Now I've been with me I will disagree, but his position is not the authorized position in the mouth happier. Lead Magnet me I would say that the member of Omar was not ratified except through the acceptance of the Sahaba. It was not ratified by the mere transfer of Imam ship from Abu Bakr to him. It was only ratified
By the acceptance of the Sahaba but in the authorized position in Cambodia madhhab the magma can be transferred from one Imam to the next, without the need for the approval by other Halliwell act, they actually state this without the need for approval by a lot that has been us and decide between Abu Bakr and Homer and the village they had.
And beside that all Maria Lohan
instructed them to choose one of six people and that the image they had among themselves and they chose us man
and Belka
which is a mammoth and matakana
by basically domination, someone dominates, they become an Imam, and they become the rightful ruler,
even if he rebelled against the rightful ruler,
but he dominated. So, he may have been a facet yesterday, but today is the moment you may draw for him, but that is the tradition that is it.
So and we have to respect is their reasoning, you have to respect to their reasoning.
In the whole world, it was completely anomalous, what happened a bit after the Prophet sallallahu Sallam for 40 years, this was not the case in Persian, this was not the case in the Byzantine Empire, this was not the case anywhere, this idea of people choosing their leader is like a very, was a very sort of
extra work extraordinary idea.
Now you have pressure from the past, you know, like Arab culture, you have prayer pressure from the sort of geographical context, you know, Byzantine Empire and Roman Empire, and all of this pressure, you know, amounted to departure from that model from that time,
which happened after 40 years, and ever since we have been in a constitutional crisis,
as a as a nation.
Because belcarra meant that if you dominate you are the rightful Imam that would allow every sort of like that will allow the use of force to be the last determinant of who the rightful him is, and it becomes a gamble. Like, if you are defeated, you will, you know, be the insert and treble or the band that depends on whether you have the power or not.
If you are, if you win, you will be the rightful Imam. So it's a big gamble. So you can imagine if the our baskets for instance, lost the war against nomads, the whole history would have changed. Diabetes would have been always remembered as Buddha in certain trebles.
So
that's it,
you know, this, this, this or that.
Now,
let's finish that tradition. And then we can talk about unless it's disambiguation.
So, now, this test what to whom, they said Liberace.
vacher
karafin.
So, it then, these are the, basically the sort of
the,
what, the procedures for MMR to be established. Then if we have those procedures that a mammal will be established for someone from cries
with
different circumstances, they actually show flexibility with us because they accepted the Ottomans.
And that they have they had ways that to justify this the professor solemn said if it isn't obvious anyone
who was a slave who then became an
Salif haven't had a conversation. You listen and you obey.
Then
they said vaca,
which means male
and they have not really traditionally come from
My eyes on this that much, but I'm quite sure that you will have scholars in in places like Pakistan or Bangladesh where they have the head of the state as a woman, they you probably have some scholars justified and certainly, you know, people who are inclined more and more sort of inclined to modern interpretations will be able to justify or even in Egypt, because it for instance shahana has already said that it is okay and Bill pace was a great leader and so on and so forth.
Had they actually showed flexibility of this a long time ago.
Because he has a clearly stated Barranca,
whether he is righteous and wicked,
I tell him, that they they be compromised on this.
Because we like after a lot of ferocity.
It was rare that you get a you know, a Khalifa who is also a scholar. At the same time, it was not unheard of, but it was rare.
gaffin means competent, you know, competent, and competent here. They also showed some compromise here and like in interesting ways. Like if you're in and out of insanity, they'll say, most of the time, are you saying are insane if you're most of the time saying they'll let you go past
which allowed for us historically to be ruled by completely deranged people, like in hacking the umbrella who burned the
Holy Sepulchre
and brought about death and destruction for Muslims for 200 years. Although, to be honest, it was a very, it was basically like an excuse for the Crusaders to
to conquer
the Ottomans. But
and certainly it did not justify any of
their huge sort of
massacres and oppression
and transgression. But again, at the same time, you would allow you allow someone who is deranged to rule over you. He is the same guy who burned Cairo, by the way, he burned Cairo down.
So anyway,
they say that if
they say that if you don't have arms and legs, you're not, you're not good enough to be any man. If you don't, you couldn't have basically weak vision. But if you're blind, no, and certainly many of you will not many of you, but some of you may remember the old sort of Egyptian sort of Islam as that he had the group's having this huge controversy over a mammoth mammoth I see here and, you know, the leadership of the blind, the leadership of the captive to is to be a big controversy between a Jihad and tamale Islam and so on.
But then they said, if, if you don't have taste or smell, that's fine. We don't mean that.
If, if you're most of the time, insane, but you get in and out of it every most of the time saying that you're in and out, that's okay. We can let you be
if you are,
what if you if you have a like a love hearing problem, but you still can hear
you'll be fine.
So, they they Yeah, so, they show the life flexibility with this competency. They showed flexibility with this they showed flexibility with this traditionally they have natural flexibility with a male female issue, but in modern times, they have shown flexibility with this
kurachi traditionally they have not but in not modern times, in you know, for several 100 years they have under the Ottoman Empire showed flexibility here. So now if you are established as a rightful ruler,
rightful owner, not necessarily just but try it for the ruler.
You cannot rebel against you
the most and then in order for people to be Beauvoir, we have to have them rebel against them.
rightful ruler, whether he is wicked or good, they have to have some sort of
some substantiation for their rebellion. And they have to have they miss any of these, they are not the Beauvoir that we are talking about them in this particular chapter.
And you will find that, you know,
certainly, and I'm trying to keep myself also in mind, I, I, you know, I love I embrace our tradition, beyond your imagination. And I believe that it is beautiful.
But when it comes to our political philosophy, I think it is very underdeveloped. And you could notice the frustration on my tone. But please don't don't misunderstand this to be to mean any disrespect. They were working under different circumstances, whatever it is that we,
our failure to develop our political philosophy is what makes me frustrated, I understand that they work under pressure, I understand that they have different circumstances. And I understand that they have accepted
sort of that they have some that are or is sort of exceptional circumstances
that we have turned into over centuries, and I'm not talking about contemporary people only. But over a century, we spent centuries we have turned into collateral into tr, we have turned in the exception into the default. And we have turned the theories into why as well.
If you look at how they start, how they sort of established procedures for a man ship, it is about theory. It's about you know, between between man between us, and then you know, whoever dominates it study, it is that if that is being justified.
And certainly, certainly
you will
have with hindsight you will retrospectively
or nefarious respectively. When he wants to justify this, he will find textual reports, some people made up textual reports, we know that what used to exist, but you may find the extra reports that are actually traceable to the prophets, Allah and interpret them in a way that fits your worldview. Engineering,
reverse engineering that completely fits your worldview, and completely, completely allows you to be at peace with your reality, you know, because it's just, you know, these are times where the whole world
lived under monarchies, and you know, you know, the, the evil triad and Europe and, and all of that stuff, which made people rebel. And so that was the world around them. Now, you're looking at it from a completely different perspective. So, you know, and you're looking at, you know, democracies here and there and people holding their leaders accountable and institutions, separation of powers and all of that stuff. But during the time of a novena, Kodama, Where was that? I mean, you know, separation of powers, I guess, uses all that these were monarchies, they were being attacked by the Crusaders, they're being attacked by Richard the lionhearted. They wanted to maintain the solidarity
of the Muslims, and they wanted me So, that completely different perspective. So we have, despite our frustration with the departures that our tradition had,
see in our experience, from the scriptures, and from the Islamic ideals, we have to maintain our respect for our Imams and scholars. If you if we compromise that it will, you know, it will be a snowball and it it will end up
we will end up in a very, very perilous, dangerous undesirable place.
Okay.
Now, then, these Baja, these are the rules for these Beauvoir. And then we can come back and talk about
what we think about, you know, the way forward for these Boca who fulfilled these conditions.
She said what I
It's been
a while I owe to Harada one iota has I'm sorry Allah de la Yogananda man. Well, I just met Andre woman put it I mean home was sila coffee and I was only Allah. those of them who are a treat should not be pursued, and those who are wounded should not be killed. their property is not seized as war spoils, and their families are not enslaved. those of them who are killed the should should be washed, shrouded and have agenda as a funeral prayer offered for them
very kind, because many times those Beauvoir that were considered the Baja were of the best of this own. You know, because at the end of the day, and Jose in rebelled Ignizio barrier rebelled of the Ramadan alas has rebelled, him and the camera the best the cream of the crop of the tambourine.
Mohammed bin Abdullah Al Hassan rebelled Sahaba nurses akia
you know, whose rebellion has been supported by Abu hanifa and Malik, Ibrahim, Eben Abdullah Hassan rebelled.
So we're talking about the cream of the crop, the people who are a build during the time of the righteous generations, were the cream of the crop.
But anyway, so what are the man I had? I hadn't I hadn't for a guy in a female UCLA for halal harbor monopsony, oh, man, neither of the two parties is held liable for damage to lives and properties that the cause the during the war.
Now, whatever you have caused, during the war damage you have caused, this is basically like the civil war in America, when they decided that the way forward is basically to just move forward.
And this was extremely smart America would have never been one country had they had the Norse. I mean, and certainly,
you know, there, this has many aspects, I guess.
But But in general, in general, had the North use the their victory to humiliate the south,
it would have never been in one country.
Likewise, they say that if there is rebellion, the way forward is basically not to look backwards. Whatever happened, this happened, let's move forward, let's subdue the rebels, the insurgent rebels
in the interest of the union and move forward. So neither of the two parties is held liable for damage to lives and properties that the cause the during the war.
In fact, MMR era Viola and who or Alia viola, and who said Whoever finds their matter with someone else, they are more entitled to it. So, you know, after Jamel, some of the people who were fighting and getting started on the amanu,
they found a tribe, like a part, a huge part that the people who support the value we're using to cook food, so someone from the opposite army recognize that it is theirs. So they demanded to take it back. So they said to them, now are they one, they said to them, give us time to finish cooking and we will give it back to you. And they insisted to take it before they finished? So they spell to the food and they took their part.
So it just shows you that
they were very visionary people by the way, because that is it takes a lot of courage and it takes a lot of forbearance and I've had to do this now we want to bring healing.
Not more division.
Then the SEC said when alcohol Bava Highland deny him is a cat and lgct now krogen lamb you are Darla em What are all adelphia la him What a young casu or while I own Kudu man help me hack me him in law my own Fadiman happening fiery
whatever the rebels have taken while and power is that God
or
dizzier
Orca rods, is not collected from them or from those who paid them. The judgments issued by their judges are not reversed, except in the same way as judgments of any other judges would be. Okay. So these people were in control, the bocce were in control over a certain area. They acted like rulers, they had those rebels were in control of a certain area. They acted like rulers, they collected the jizya, fraud and soccer. They set up judges, those judges adjudicated over many cases for years. Now, we recapture that region. What do we do with all the judgments that were passed? By the judges? We keep them?
Unless they
unless they can be revoked by any, you know, even by our judges?
When can we be revoked by our judges, even if they were passed by our judges? If they are in complete conflict with, you know, the clear explicit text or the consensus?
But if there is so much they had possible that they had, we don't reverse the rulings?
We do not pre collected as a cap current or does Yeah, that they collected? We consider them to be just
sort of we consider all of this to be valid.
Now as a cat, all you need to do like what if we're if the FBI agents of the rightful Eman come to you, you only need to say as
they took it,
Abdullah normally used to give his a cat or not.
You know, like some Harry died, who took over for first for some time, and he used to send the agents and they would pay there's a captain of that hurry.
So all you need to say they took it. We don't have to establish any proof carriage and this year, because they are compensation for something, you need to establish proof. You need to show
proof that they collected the jersey as a cap is an active portion anyway.
But that's it.
So we don't want to reverse the rulings.
Can we validate whatever sort of
sort of
practices,
government practices
of theirs, when they were in control, and when they had power?
So let me
go over.
We'll draw a line now. Now I'm going to speak my mind.
So what is
what is this, like what?
Certainly, the Muslim Ummah has been in a constitutional crisis for about 400 1400 years.
So it's not It's nothing new.
Because the legitimacy of that the dominant sort of ruler will make, you know, the legitimacy of the governance, government up for grabs all the time, or whatever, again, dominate.
It's such a prescription for like, crisis.
Because the FAST Act that we are calling fast today, because they are rebelling against the rightful ruler will become the immediate moment in tomorrow that you will have to pray for, and so on. And that is the dominant, sort of
that's the dominant view in the tradition.
As we said, or let's just go back, and anyone who wants to leave, please go ahead because I'm gonna take some time to explain this issue in some detail.
So
now,
does Islam have any system of governance
people have different
To ideas about this.
We have, just like usual, we have three different categories of people. We have people who are secular
and Masha that would
basically also
support like a more secular perspective.
And they are my say they are trained to be mushy, so we will have to call the Messiah.
So, according to this line, there is no system of governments prescribed by Islam.
And who would pioneer or champion this?
in that tradition, you don't see a lot of people. I mean, unless you're talking about people that you philosophers, and you're talking about Aquinas suffer you're talking about, also had a jeyes that said that there is no Imam ship and there is no requirement for membership in Islam, and so on and so forth. But
But in general,
this is more of a secular discourse that is supportive samish. If she if any of the rise of Rahim Allah
is the one who's usually remembered here, to be in support of this position, that there is no system of governance in Islam whatsoever.
It's Jeff Hardy of the radicals and has had
a good decent as Harry Shea, who learned in Oxford as well.
You know,
and,
and he was from the Upper Egypt, and he was not to be righteous, by the way like people who have met him particularly closer to the end of his life. They have basically reported that this was a righteous man, a good man, righteous man, half of Allah Salawat you know, and so on. So Shahada Razak wrote a book after the is the lava was basically avoided or the falafel was terminated by
has been at the halotherapy in Turkey. And he wrote a book called that Islam will also help and Islam will also and how come
so Islam and basically theories of governance or ways of of governance. And in this book, she
argues that there is no prescription whatsoever in Islam for how
to rule. There is prescription for justice, there is prescription for kindness, there's medicine for this or that but there is no prescription whatsoever. Islam does not provide guidance in this regard. khilafah is not does not have backing in the Quran and the Sunnah, the system of khilafah does not have any backing in the Quran and the Sunnah.
Now, it is said that a shake it up the rasa, it is said that the Shikari of the Rosa was under the influence of sort of party politics in Egypt. And because of medic for IOD, who is king for the king for the time was an Egyptian king wanted to claim that he left after turkey gave it up. So King flat said, well, it's about time for Egypt to resume its place in the Muslim world, as the center of the heart of the Muslim world. And then he had interest in claiming the khilafah after turkey gave it up. Now there was a sort of internal sort of politics in Egyptian politics, and show how many of the Razak was against King four ad. And he did not want King squad basically to get that honor
of being the halifa. And they say that he wrote that book, it is quite clear that Shekhar abdulrazaq, saying, who is a sort of
a controversial moderns figure in Egypt? Let me say
we're friends. And it's quite clear that even tossin himself admits to have contributed to the book. Now the thyroxin write the whole book or contributed or just contributed to the book. It is controversial, but I don't think that he just wrote the whole book. There are different reports here. And people narrate different things, even from personal communications with Chicago abdulrazaq.
But let's say that, in the past in contributed to the book or the moderns in Egypt, contributed to the book
And there were and Chicago towards the end of his life, basically,
this about much of what was written in the book.
Now, to be honest with you, and the tourists are the Dinos, many or zadina lost money, who was a prime minister in Morocco, who is an Islamist and a good man.
Certainly, he has great history,
wrote a book called double Islamia, Muhammad Mkn, and wrote a book called The dmcs at Amazon law fast, and wrote several books that are very close to the heart of the Raj x thesis, his thesis, and those books are very close to, or, as thesis theses in those books are very close to 70 of the rasa thesis. So should we put him here? Or should we put him here? Or should we put him in the middle? You know, why is it that Islamic in general were much kinder to him because he is one of them.
And although his thesis is counter to sort of
Islam as the agenda
is just that he
usually, you know, personal relationships, don't think that everything is is just merely intellectual. There is a huge room for sort of personnel.
And that may also be a little bit unfair because sub Dean was Manny.
And Ariana rascals was a righteous man, you know,
it's difficult anyway. But, but Sam dinos, man is trajectories of the North Manny's sort of work was trying to bring Islam normalize Islams place in the public space. That was his agenda. That was his life calling to normalize Islam plays in the public space. So that is why critics are kinder to him, I will be kinder as well, because history does, you know, you're your own work and your own sort of
calling and live should affect how we perceive your thesis, but the curse of the last man his thesis is very close to see if it otherwise. So it is, and there are many people
can I make it just here, like somewhere here, because it's it comes, it has different motives, different incentives, and
also, slight differences between the the the two
feces. Now
you have then on the opposite side, you have people who say that Islam gave us a detailed prescription of
in terms of governance, and that would be many of the traditions, many of the Messiah,
whether they are called the duck lady or saharawi, many of the traditional Messiah, whether they are the conventional or the sort of the people that are called Islamic or they are all Islamic, let's call them Islamic, because whether they are traditional, or whether they are awakening type machine, if they are still coming from that paradigm, they're coming from the same paradigm. And they say that Islam actually provided a very good sort of detail.
manifesto for governance like you could just and this, you know, some of those which I went as far as saying
like and this is one of the, you know,
one of the good mesh if the very brilliant mesh, if contemporary mesh, I have a Dr. Muhammad yesterday
who goes as far as saying that there are 12,000
plus textual reports
basically governing that area, slamming governance or this is the governance systems in Islam. Certainly when you say this, the secular people when they just completely frazzled because 12,000 that means that there is no room whatsoever, except for focus
Have you seen to be looking at chains of narrations and sort of non human mukalla from a form of haka there is, and this politics will be dominated by Boko Haram had this in serving and rooms, talking about, you know,
jehadi and mfu, Africa mukalla, and stuff like this, hey, it is like a scary thing to them.
But that's a good sizable portion of the Messiah. Now there are Messiah for that column in the middle, and there are thinkers and Michelle icon. Many people that come in the middle of this, and they want to say, and keep in mind, we have to say this to simplify, it is never three prime. It is a spectrum. spectrum. When we say 123, that is us trying to simplify things. That is why I'm telling you, sir, Dino's many would not be here. So maybe here, somewhere, it's a spectrum, put him on the spectrum. So, yes, there's some regulation or
the Rosa.
Was there a certain threshold afterwards, they said that we can apply
laws or statutes outside of the paradigm of Islamic
tradition, for example, like, was it after the application to the moon? No, it's not about her duty, or it's about Islam and system of governance.
You know, like,
monarchy, parliamentary presidential,
you know, institutions, you know,
constitutional sort of stuff,
Islamic systems and governance, in general. And then you will have to say, if here make for instance, a chef Mohammed Abu,
who is 600 dinars money or Dr. Sandra Diaz money is, is influenced by him, but he took it a little bit further, and see if I'm gonna have a laugh,
I'm gonna have to actually is closer, you know, somewhere here also
can laugh, he's here save myself to two is always the shape of an answer.
At some point is here.
You know, one of the most significant people
likely the most brilliant of them was not a traditional safe, but was a father of law in Arab countries, most of the Arab countries and some Muslim countries as well. His name is of the resaca sonori of the rusnak Bajaj snorri.
So, this Egyptian fellow
was actually extremely brilliant. And he
is, he studied at Sorbonne and our friends, not Oxford, but as PhD thesis was about khilafah and how to bring a an alternative. So, he's building on the system,
he is developing the system, he is not casting it away, he is not throwing it away, he is trying to develop it.
And that is what he did in general, in his basically, approach, I mean, you could certainly there are things that determine the results and Maria can be wrong about of course, but in general, that was his approach. It is basically to build to adjust
for the circumstantial variables. And his idea about the khilafah was a genius idea of Johnny harmless repay, which is something like the European Union. He thought of this before they are in Union by many decades, to bring Muslims together, and to have some semblance of unity, whether this is unified currency, whether this is you know,
whatever, some semblance of unity, cooperation under a union type of union, that will allow different Muslim states
sort of enough independence, to not feel suffocated because certainly, people in Bangladesh in Morocco, they have different sort of geographic cultural, contextual, like variables and that
to be ruled from one area by someone who is in the other area is going to be
difficult. So he wanted to say bring
under one umbrella, there are certain things that will give us that semblance of unity
you know, maybe Mahara different Costa Rica, you know, so So how do you say, in English, like defense treaties among themselves, maybe unified currency. So the Organization of Islamic Cooperation is actually have the reserve personhood, his idea, but he wanted to develop this more to become more meaningful and more significant. Likewise, when it comes to Islam, and also the ogmore of Islam and Muslim and hockman systems of governance, he had the same idea. This group of people are saying that there are
signet, there are general principles, not that are significant, that make some systems of governance compatible with Islam and some incompatible with Islam. So you could say that there is guidance, Islamic guidance concerning systems of governance, but they are the guidance belongs to the provide the principles, not detailed, specific,
you know, restrictive rulings, although, in some things there will be specific rulings.
Of course, you may notice that this is where my inclination, that sort of group in the middle I'm inclined to their thesis. This comes from a concept that is established that there is a difference between the Habad that's an idea.
If you read the tours or the Dinos Manny's book in Islam, Islam, Allah Humala, Mkn, he does actually have a chapter on this, that is
nice, helpful, he quotes me they may and sotheby and early
on the difference between that and a lot he had, that in the acts of worship, you have detailed specific rulings that are straightforward, and there is not much room for rationale
sort of what
departures you know, from the detail the specific rulings?
Because I bet that is just about you know, seeking the pleasure of Allah subhanaw taala, but when it comes to the area of a hobby towards comes in the area of usually translate customs, which just means wherever the affair
there is not that you know, and there are guidelines that sort of, you should not
rails on both sides, guardrails, but no specific rulings and the US is what the default is, if you just do whatever you want, unless there is prohibition, whereas the default here is have
you can't do anything unless you have proof on its validity.
That area of the shirt, the systems of governance belong here or belong here, of course belongs here. How but but in the area of are the Is it one uniform a category one on differentiated category?
Is there a difference between beer in Lachlan and cam in Missouri Urbana? Is there a difference between cross fertilization of palm trees and the rulings of we are basically or camel ri or horse enough? The rulings that pertain to selling dates and to basically guessing the sort of the amount of the dates on the the trees in exchange of flesh dates for
dried dates and there is a way which one have
which one the professors and I'm say about antebellum Morrison Yakubu now the affairs of your dunya better
cross fertilization. What is the difference between cross fertilization and was that
one
Dealing with others.
No one is just, you know, when there is a moral value when you expect that there would be higher uncharred good and evil.
Then Islam will have to have some say in it. Because mataranka fairen illa Allah Allah yamantaka Sharon Illa Hassan, the prophets Allah and left us Allah Mahajan, Allah Allah can Arya, Lazio Van Halen, whenever there was good the prophets of Salaam pointed us to it.
And wherever there is bad, there is evil, he warned us from it. But again, at the same time because of because politics is not like a bet that and there are huge circumstantial variables, then that guidance came in the form of principles
and principles that are comprehensible or incomprehensible, comprehensible.
And in this case, the macaque acid are the objectives would be consequential or inconsequential, consequential.
And you want to realize and cultivate those macrossan. So you want to understand that comprehensible or effective causes, so that you're not limiting yourself to the rigid specific rulings, but you're able to accommodate the difference, the variables.
So in the RV, yet here, whenever you whenever you can think of higher and
then the Islamic, there is no Islamic guidance in this regard.
There is no Islamic guidance in terms of, you know, chemical equations.
You know, so if you add phosphorus to whatever,
magnesium, what do you get?
stuff like this, we would expect the Islamic guidance there. would you expect the Islamic guidance in terms of, you know, building bridges, for instance, or solving it problems,
or things of that nature? Not really, okay, because there is no hierarchy there. It's not about food and shelter here, this is there is no moral value. Here. It's not loaded with any more value, but whenever there is more value, when there is higher unsure, you will expect some Islamic guidance and this is when the guidance can come in the form of detailed rulings, such as an IRA that or principles. Now, CSR, in terms of the things that are governed by governed by principles, not detailed rulings, the CSR belong closer to about that, like marriage, or does it belong closer to how the year you know, chemical equations
belongs closer?
That it's not like marriage, where it belongs closer to about that, no, it is belongs closer to it yet.
So, meaning what is less regulated,
it is less regulated, there are general principles, but it is much less regulated by the textual proofs, there is much more room for rational thinking, for developing our political philosophy and so on and so forth. Therefore, whatever we talked about here about the issue of rebellion
against the hack, and
the problem arises, and the contention between the different Islamic groups and secularists and Islamists and so on, is because of rigidity, and because of their lack of epistemic humility, lack of epistemic humility, particularly when it comes to them to religious people.
You know, dogmatism is really a problem. And when you basically expand the certainty that you must have, with regard to the existence of God, and His Majesty and beauty, to become a way of thinking for you, like you're always trying to look sort of so confident, uncertain and so knowledgeable and so on top of it, that whenever you find mush, I have different worldviews discussing the issues. You think, you know, these people are talking different languages. Why is the depth gap between them is so huge?
Because of this because of the lack of epistemic humility
Because they want everything to have the same sort of
certainty
that the rest of the, you know, the matters of our key the you know, our Kennedy, Manny said,
and then we have basically conflicting reports, you will find them not having netten, no matter where they're coming from, they will never have an issue, because they can always twist it denier sometimes lie, sometimes basically cut and paste
sort of leave out, the little part of that doesn't that is a little inconvenient, or that would require a little bit more work to explain. And that'd be like that is basically
the common behavior of people across the spectrum.
So, when it comes to horizontal hacking now, we said that you have a cafe, you have Li del, and you haven't.
And when it comes to exam, if you have the one who is consistently
and you have the one who's randomly
they agreed on this,
although they still agreed on this, but it depends on your ability
and certainly this applies to Muslim lands, you know, this applies to Muslim majority countries and Muslim that
they agree on this that it is impermissible. They disagree here. So when our political philosophy it boils down to Harrier juicer furusato hockin Zara juicy, juicy lucifers
and what do you dichotomize a very nuanced issue
then you will have all the shouting and screaming between the two groups. And then everybody will be basically committing those sort of intellectual atrocities.
With without like an ounce of conscientiousness.
Okay, so, when we talk about this issue here, we have to ask who,
why,
and how.
And the final one
cost,
consequences cost. So who's who? Why
should there be a difference between you know, and we're talking about the diarrhea and we're not talking about random?
We're talking about someone who's like jet like consistently, or like bad for the country. So should there be a difference between
individuals? Should that how do you think the prophet SAW sanlam
be understood to differentiate between an Hollywood actor The old man the old man that hired him?
Can the old method hire him fire him well in the hunt, but he must have no unless he asks to be fired.
So if you have a hacking Jeff and Halliwell
must not fire him unless he asks to be fired. Of course he's not going to ask
is so that you say that you're using money as you do? insert analyzed with a level so they have the right to basically remove him
if he asks for it, otherwise, no, that's added.
So you're basically holding the old man becomes a captive in his opening statement.
This is there is you know, because of quad kizil
quad.
This is the Mexican mess, you know the Aztecs they have this God. And then when the Spaniards landed in Mexico, they thought, you know, it is like,
like a white the white God with white beard and so on. So they the Spaniards, they looked like
kids of quad
and then then surrendered.
I would say that if we treat our rulers like is
our destiny will be like the destiny of the Aztecs.
It's just like, it's amazing.
Anyway, but
I
think I think of the French Revolution, think of the French Revolution. Is there a difference between groups of people rebelling? And think of the French Revolution, who started the French Revolution?
Members of the Parliament, the parliament.
It was started first at the parliament in the house of the people. You know, this was a revolution, despite all of the atrocities that were committed to during the French Revolution. This was a revolution that was started by 100 100.
You know, so there is a there that's one difference, who's rebelling?
Or who's firing him, who's deposing him?
And why? And that is when an amendment Duany that makes the distinction and has the acid omen. Keep in mind that will come to it later.
But
according to the chef, per diem, it is permissible to rebel against the unjust ruler, according to our hanifa according to just saucers interpretation of Abu hanifa, another type of Abu hanifa clear Moussa Baba hanifa and his practice is the permissibility of rebelling against the unjust ruler, he supported mahama to have enough says aka he supported
Zeid Holly
his his statements, his actions are quite clear, that that is permissible. The same applies to the mathematic who support mommas or have enough says okay and said that the people of Medina that the buyer that you have given to a man swore was by Art mokra by under coercion and it is not a valid one. So, so, basically,
the question of
why and the distinction between
Java Albacete, random, occasional life not too bad, versus, you know, the shattered ladies tashera and Fiske toward Livia, Hamilton men and so on, and this is the one that we're talking about, that you could rebel against, and how how is it is is
many times people who say that you can to rebel against the ruler, they want to suppress any dissent
without you know, asking that question, what is it that the what is it that they have prohibited Is it the armed
struggle
or rebellion or is it pop populist or popular
uprising?
Is it several
sir sort of this scent? Like how how are you going to prevent this when the Prophet sallallahu Sallam said
if
ever Almighty on an akula does large amount of volume *a to the Amina or you know hydro Jihad
say inshallah Hamza Raja Raja Ram commander some fun India family one half a patella hybrid you have kilometer How can I answer some questions
tomorrow tomorrow
what and that the the tons of reports about you know, condemning evil and commanded and supporting God and even with with how can you know the best you had or the best form of jihad is to speak the truth against the
unjust ruler and things of that nature. So, this rebellion is it armed or basically civil dissent and popular uprising and so on. Some people would like to extend this from arm to any form of dissent and that is just other nonsense.
So these are and then at what cost? What cost that is why the movements when he also nbrc he makes the free eighth or between. He says
if it's from if it's what is expected from
deposing him, is worse than it walked out what that existant
reality, then you refrain common sense, of course, you know, but if it is not, if it is believed that a walker is worse than moto rocker, then you depose him. So, now this is who is the posing here? This is
the very people who gave him the contract, the very people who gave him the contract.
Why are we having so much disagreement nowadays because there was a switch in the fourth century, in the first three centuries,
the dominant view among Muslims was the permissibility of rebellion.
The dominant view among Muslims was the permissibility of rebellion. And we have talked about Hassan Ave by Mohammed Abdullah bin Hassan Ibrahim of the Roman Empire last us and the Pura. So we're talking about the Sahaba, the cream of the crop of the tabular in tabular data in these people that not only allow it, they actually rebuild, rebuild, and then came, you know, after many defeats of the rebels, after they were defeated, many times the insurgent rebels came up with the Mujahideen bursary emoticon them, and reported consensus that it is not permissible to rebel against the unjust ruler. He died in 360, after hedgerow.
He was a great scholar, but at the end of the day, he was mostly he comes from an area that is deeply traumatized by defeat, that imagine happened to the euro and basara, for 1000s of them, they were MasterCard, they were defeated very badly. And it's an area that is traumatized. At the same time, how could you report the consensus when you were extremely geographically limited, like, you know, you're in the fourth century, and you're reporting the census about this issue. It a man or woman has says had he been mute, it would have been better for him to not speak that falsehood, because he knows that, I mean, if ever, you know, the American hasn't used to have his own
way of expressing himself.
So he says that, you know, having known that more than one kid at his mark, after having known that the one who did nice and it's now a scaffold, and having known, you know, all of the, all of the precedents, you know, from a
surveyor and etc, etc, etc. and claiming it as consensus after knowing this, it would have been better for him to be mute, than to speak this falsehood. So,
so then he, then we have a shift, where, traditionally speaking, the majority
sided with the prohibition of rebellion against the unjust ruler, the even within them as I have that were
heavily You know, they're a mams supported was money with with resources, the Imams recruited the mams recruited
insurgent rebels, and then you have this switch over time.
And then you have like, just as was reporting what to remember hanifa actually did and, and said, and so on, but you have someone like remember how he was a great hanafy as well leaving, like a different interpret, sort of propagating or promoting a different interpretation. And then under pressure in every, you know, society, the scholars are under pressure. What would you do? Do you think that there would be pressure for them to say it is okay to rebel against the unjust rulers, they're living under unjust rulers most of the time, so there has to be consideration for the pressure. So under pressure it became as if it is a done deal. You know,
that it is forbidden. Now, am I saying it is not? Am I saying that you should, we should rebel? No, I'm not saying this. Of course not. I am not supporting rebellion against unjust rulers. I am saying that this jet is mmm Nur. this dichotomy is to unbecoming unbefitting of an oma like us. We have to develop our political philosophy.
fee to be more nuanced than just saying just remember to take in consideration who, why, how, and at what cost, and to have a nuanced approach to the reports. Because if you claim that those reports are quite clear, extremely clear, whether you are on this side or that side,
you're not being honest, if you claim that the reports are quite clear, if you forbid, you know, rebellion against the unjust rulers, and you claim that the the reports are quite clear, and there is there is no room for controversy, then you are ignoring some reports.
And then you are claiming that those Sahaba and those tabular in the cream of the crop missed a very clear cause or the the clear implications of the reports that you have come to understand, and to be certain of, and to be quite clear on, things are so clear to you like the sun in the middle of a summer day. But they were not to Edna's surveyor and the Sahaba and the tiger in that were with him, or her saying, or, you know, the Cora, decree shall be inside of Nigeria, and even Abdullah and the people who actually fought you know, themselves now. They get stuck. And sometimes they try to figure out how to answer this. And then we get into tech fee. Because, you know, and some people,
because the tradition is heavily slanted, particularly later,
in favor of prohibition of rebellion against unjust rulers, many people that want to rebel, they get sort of forced into that fear. Those rulers are not Muslim.
And then you get into this problem, because that's the only way basically, they have the freedom to rebel. Those rulers are not Muslim. So why are they not Muslim? They don't rebel by that which Allah?
Yeah. So.
Okay, and they promote secularism. Many Muslims sympathize with Erdogan, including myself, I sympathize with him. I think he's done great things for Turkey. But he's promoting secularism. And they say that, you know, he's just doing it gradually, it's been 21 years.
Okay, you know, grad, you know, one generation is 40 years, but again, at the same time, you don't have to promote it.
You don't, you know, that the whole system that you're using is basically a modern European system. The fact that you have, like, sort of passionate speeches are the fact that you have some semblance of Islamism here and there does not change the fact that the whole system is this whole structure is not really so then then you fall into inconsistency or some people that like to be consistent and radical people always are very consistent. Because if you're if you're at one end of the spectrum, you're you're you're you're basically back is the wall you will be consistent. So
so then if you want to be consistent to make directory referred to as web and many people do, you know,
so if
that's the way you can actually continue to be consistent and be happy, consistent,
it's sort of atrocious, and he acts like how reckless and evil but but that's what some people do.
Anyway, so going back to this, you will have a hobbyist for instance, like
say a cool Amara telephone I mean, who motoneuron say Hakuna Amara.
Daddy funa men home for Tancharoen
from nabasa home
nabasa. Home, nada woman
as Allah home
woman, Ella home selling woman a lot of home
hallak
say a call Hello.
And in some reports, O'Meara
say hello, Mara. Mara Say hello. Three different types of reports. But this word is actually authentic. Chain wise is authentic Omar
Karuna mela falloon
well following I'm Ella Maroon
Amanda had at home Beata
home.
Amen.
O fi and Hulu for less about venture capital pardon me, man and Amara. Amen about that.
So
now Do you know how these are reinterpreted? They are reinterpreted, nabasa here.
Oh, so there will be Amara rulers
that you will recognize as commendable or can they can dimmable some of their practices or behaviors, who will ever know better whom who ever. And that will because that's the nature here, whoever in a better home will be.
Once it will survive will prosper, whoever separate separates or distance himself from them, well be safe, and whoever mixes with them will be destroyed. And these are two authentic reports.
Mr. Mattila de authenticated this report, but the train is authentic, can be figured out ways to reinterpret them. There will be uncertainly of the thing isn't Bukhari and Muslim. That doesn't have the word O'Meara halluf isn't Bukhari and Muslim, but the word Amara itself. And even if the word Amara is not their halluf, it means the generations and certainly if you're talking about fighting them, you're actually making it taking it a step forward. And you're fighting the whole society, not just
so. So there will be generations or O'Meara rulers who do what they don't yaku in a matter of our own, they say what they don't do when they do what they don't say. They're like hypocritical. In other words, whoever fights against them with his hand is a believer, whoever fights against them with his tongue is a believer ever fights against them with his heart is a believer, there is no belief after this. So the people who want basically to interpret this away, they will say, in a bedroom here, whatever this means price against them. When I bevere is basically opposition. And it is actually violent opposition.
But they say nothing here very sunny, he basically speaks against them. And then some of them will come back and say, you know, United is Nevada home, but he said he only in private, you can't
like so please get me an appointment with some
won't return. Yeah.
Okay, so how do we interpret this away? To interpret this, we figured out three ways to interpret this away. One way is
it is not as life remember some of the you know, the authenticated that has the O'Meara apart
and
and that's basically you know,
that that is basically it. And then another way, which is a little creative is no it is it is actually not vive but then to hire you change the moniker was your hand if you can, the specific Moncure not to depose the ruler, but the say the ruler, for instance,
set up shops to sell wine, you change that moniker if you can. And most likely you can't, because the ruler is there. And unless you depose the ruler and you change that moniker, you'll get arrested and there'll be be thrown in jail. But they're saying that this is what the Hadith means, you do not depose the ruler, but you change the specific moniker
that the ruler you know,
committed committed or other people who have committed so then
then
and then they have so what about all the history, they will have acrobatic ways of interpreting the whole history away.
acrobatic ways
their counterparts on the opposite side are not less
programmatic By the way, are not astigmatic By the way, because there is a genre of hobbyists that are established in Bukhari and Muslim against rebellion.
And, and there is, you know, the tradition is heavily inclined towards the prohibition of your river of rebellion. So you will have hobbies like asthma auto,
asthma, auto Tia,
Lil Emilia,
where n
Malak Wah bah bah bah
Well, have you thought about an assignment to Allah no nausea, and Amara, Allahu Allah and Tara go from our hand and the con men Allah Hi, fi him or her.
How these man attack on
what anthem
Jamia on Allah Rosalyn why had you redo and yeah Shaka asar calm while you're farakka Janata Khan factor
Hi this man.
hora men Amelie shy and your CRO, Sal Yasser
Allah He for in who man farakka al jamaah
fermata for Mita to
me that on jaha you
know we can go on and on there you know there is like a whole genre of hobbies and this halifa McCarty and Muslim highly authentic. So, you listen and obey to the ruler, even if he took your money and flagged your back.
You listen and obey to the people in charge, unless you see golf
this belief clear cut that you have like proof from Allah subhanaw taala on it being cough
whoever comes to you, why do you are together under one man wanting to
compromise your solidarity and disrupt your union kill him
whoever notices observes something he dislikes about his ruler, let him show patience for whoever separates from the community.
Even the hand one hand span even though the extent of one hand span and buys his he will die in a state of joy halaya pre Islamic ignorance
okay.
Unless you see cough, so that means Lj air volume is not cough, then you don't rebel. If there is no cough
even you don't rebel if there is a transgression, even if he took your money and flagged your back
if you see something that you dislike show patients,
if someone rebels kill him, if you're under one man and someone rebuilds given. So,
all of this
with the fact that you know the same people that well this regard the consensus are the people who use similar consensus is also and that is inconsistent, you know, so, every month I have a boss report that this consensus and now we are repeated, every time we are having 100 repeated. So, if these are your icons, and if the you know, you will just have to get give respect to that consensus, because you're using seminar consensuses, unless you will, you will provide justification.
And it is possible to provide justification, but we're dealing with a genre of just stronger hobbies that we will have to talk about. So, the to give a like an answer of no it is permissible to rebel against the unjust ruler that is dogmatic. Insufficient, not taking in consideration all of these hobbies there has
Should be a lot of work, basically to find a way to reconcile between all of those. And so, you know, how can we
basically understand this. So everyone has in, you know, in more than one of his books, provides explanation for each one of those, because if a house has a rational argument, he says, okay, you're saying that unless he shows this belief, we will not rebel against them, as you he took as his supporters and AIDS Jews and Christians
only, and basically, remove the Muslims from positions of power took as his aids, Jews and Christians and killed every Muslim man and raped every Muslim woman. Is that this belief?
No, it's not.
Okay. So, then what do you say you will let him do that
until he finishes you off. And then you would have sad like, like an eraser, Vicki, you have made them positive like an insane position.
And when he said pharmazie, non uttanasana, hamana helped Jani min. Min.
Min card with minimum federal crackdown like arrow
until we come down to one Muslim man being killed, or one Muslim woman being raped.
If they stop somewhere in the middle, there'll be inconsistent.
If they, so he has me in really brilliant. So he says that this man is basically and certainly there will be brilliant responders also. So they will they may say, you know, it's not the same, you know, killing one man or one woman is not like an uncommon Muslim men and women if he kills all Muslim men and women, we will know that the the, basically the basis of this is their Islam now grievances against this man and one on one. But if your husband says to them, what about 9/10? What about eight tenths of Muslims? What about one quarter of Muslims? One of what about like 100? What about 50? What about one? Where do you stop? So, you either say no, we will let him and we will naturally
adapt even if he killed us all or you will have to put a line somewhere. And if you put the line somewhere, there will be inconsistency between the before and after
you will not have any coherent argument
we will not have any coherent argument and there will be some inconsistency. So
then he says every one of those has to be understood within the context of everything else. So if he took your money and flogged your back, justifiably or even out of he had,
so he made it he had how many times the judges can make her interest he had or make mistake, and that it's the heart. So if he flagged your back and you know that you are innocent, be patient, because he did this out of his staff. So that's what even Hospice is about this. And for every one he comes up with a reasonable argument. The bottom line is
this is not a dichotomy.
There are many important questions to answer before you give, you could have a coherent
position on this issue.
Who, how, who, why and how. And at what cost, there is a difference between our luck and the rest of the people. There is a difference between someone who randomly make transgressors and someone who's transgressing all the time causing corruption on Earth. There is a difference between armed struggle and popular uprising. And there is a difference between when the motorcar is worse than the worker or the expected, you know, after rebellion is worse than the present or the present is worse than the expected. These are all things that have to be taken in consideration. Of course, the prophet comes, you know, to teach us
about moving from the wilderness disability. Of course, the prophet will have emphasis on these were feudal tribes, they have never known any stability.
So of course, the prophet will be preaching to them about patience, and about civility, and about union. And about all of these things, you know, to bring those feudal tribes under, like one system into a union, that was a huge undertaking, we do expect to the profits are going to have said these things, but we have to understand them correctly. And we also have to understand that the circumstantial variables and the changes in work conditions and build a coherent political philosophy, I think, as Islamist change is huge. And we need to work on the more on the spiritual aspects. Because this
infrastructure, the more of and the spiritual infrastructure is essential for change, I think Islamic need to have
changed their organizations into movements that spread.
Basically, horizontally, not vertically in the society, but permeate through the body,
through different institutions is we're not talking about the spending all basically teamwork or collective efforts. But we're talking about avoiding rigid hierarchies that will cause partisanship and counter as our efforts and responses let Islam permeate through the society like water and roses,
oil and olives,
move horizontally,
organizations that share a common vision, move towards a common goal, connected spiritually and emotionally, not
not organizationally.
And that is and then they have the, you know, focus on the spiritual and moral because these are the things that will
connect us. And these are the things that are not controversial and needed as infrastructure to build on them. Their social and political,
social and the political and Zan, differ, ideological
controversy struggles, until you have
a good system of governance. A good system of governance is
the the the aspiration of many, many people in the Muslim countries, not only Islam is the aspiration of many people, work with them towards that, and the ideological differences can be deferred until we have more civility and until we have mechanisms procedures by which we can resolve our conflicts without too much bloodshed and too much chaos.
That's a prescription for my my prescription
lenses.