Jamal Zarabozo – Introduction To The Science Of Hadeeth Part 8

Jamal Zarabozo
Share Page

AI: Summary ©

The speakers discuss the importance of understanding headings and headings in various fields, including real estate and professional life. They stress the need for adequate information for the jury, the use of negative language in media, and the importance of researching and reviewing works of a scholar. They also touch on narration and the use of narratives in media, including the potential for mistakes and surprises. The conversation touches on the use of negative language in media and the importance of knowing the history of narrators and the use of informational media.

AI: Summary ©

00:00:08 --> 00:00:10
			It was a pleasure.
		
00:00:17 --> 00:00:19
			Before we, before we begin,
		
00:00:23 --> 00:00:24
			we're going to begin with an editorial No.
		
00:00:29 --> 00:00:35
			Just in the future, you ever hear anyone say that there's no need to study or what?
		
00:00:37 --> 00:00:39
			You should be ready with a response or
		
00:00:42 --> 00:00:42
			response.
		
00:00:58 --> 00:00:59
			First of all,
		
00:01:00 --> 00:01:02
			if you want to find a read of us, as soon as
		
00:01:03 --> 00:01:07
			you're going to have three to help you, in any book,
		
00:01:08 --> 00:01:10
			you're going to find these terms that we're talking about.
		
00:01:14 --> 00:01:15
			You're gonna find terms like
		
00:01:17 --> 00:01:18
			what would happen?
		
00:01:21 --> 00:01:32
			Yeah, know how much weight to put in need and what they seem trustworthy or not. So as soon as the
second sort of exam and quarters, the revelation, any book you read on the Sooners want to have
this.
		
00:01:34 --> 00:01:42
			Secondly, all the other sizes related to the theme are built upon the sentence of aluminum heavy,
		
00:01:43 --> 00:01:50
			any book that we're going to have to have heavy, that has heavy, it's going to use these terms to
pick up any book are
		
00:01:52 --> 00:01:55
			going to have a reason it is going to use these terms. And even if
		
00:01:57 --> 00:02:00
			they tried to discuss these, these terms,
		
00:02:01 --> 00:02:03
			because they are theorists, they don't do very good job.
		
00:02:05 --> 00:02:08
			And in any book and also, we'll read chapter on Jeff, what did
		
00:02:10 --> 00:02:11
			he do? He
		
00:02:16 --> 00:02:17
			didn't say
		
00:02:23 --> 00:02:26
			some exclusion is not a possibility to another.
		
00:02:29 --> 00:02:30
			Third, third,
		
00:02:33 --> 00:02:34
			that
		
00:02:40 --> 00:02:42
			doesn't matter what anyone
		
00:02:43 --> 00:02:43
			argues.
		
00:02:48 --> 00:02:56
			Some people that use the terms of remedy, when they write about something, they use the terms
incorrectly and they try to fool the reason
		
00:02:57 --> 00:02:58
			like someone writing about.
		
00:03:00 --> 00:03:01
			It says that the certain
		
00:03:02 --> 00:03:03
			we'll learn later when
		
00:03:04 --> 00:03:07
			he was the chairman correctly to try to prove his point.
		
00:03:08 --> 00:03:11
			Okay, so in order to catch those things you have to know about the
		
00:03:14 --> 00:03:17
			second point is all of the other sizes, use these terms and
		
00:03:19 --> 00:03:22
			whether it's similar to theater or history, theater,
		
00:03:24 --> 00:03:27
			you're going to come across these terms in almost any book related to
		
00:03:29 --> 00:03:37
			the fifth floor. Also, as we know, the orientalist. And some ignorant Muslims are attacking this
woman.
		
00:03:38 --> 00:03:46
			And the only reason the only way to reply to them and they're in a good knowledgeable matters by
studying these things.
		
00:03:49 --> 00:03:50
			Also,
		
00:03:52 --> 00:03:53
			is a way of,
		
00:03:55 --> 00:04:02
			of increasing your your pain or your certainty that Allah subhanaw taala preserved this Deen. And
the way that the human
		
00:04:06 --> 00:04:07
			brain works was
		
00:04:10 --> 00:04:10
			that
		
00:04:13 --> 00:04:13
			because
		
00:04:16 --> 00:04:20
			somebody who already means that all, everything is ready
		
00:04:21 --> 00:04:22
			for it, and
		
00:04:23 --> 00:04:24
			so on, and so
		
00:04:27 --> 00:04:32
			forth. I mean, that doesn't make sense. Because the same formula is the same
		
00:04:33 --> 00:04:34
			for everything.
		
00:04:45 --> 00:04:56
			The first point was that as soon as the second source of Islam in any time you want to find out what
this one is, you're going to have to read having any book of headings is going to contain
		
00:04:57 --> 00:04:59
			the set of terms that we're using when we're studying
		
00:05:02 --> 00:05:03
			Third point.
		
00:05:05 --> 00:05:08
			Third point is some people use these terms when they write
		
00:05:10 --> 00:05:14
			about PIP or other things in the use the terms either incorrectly or without knowledge.
		
00:05:19 --> 00:05:19
			points.
		
00:05:21 --> 00:05:23
			Those books now the the big collections
		
00:05:24 --> 00:05:27
			that they were only my
		
00:05:30 --> 00:05:30
			ministry.
		
00:05:32 --> 00:05:35
			And nowadays they were the only you can publish
		
00:05:36 --> 00:05:39
			and to suppose somebody is supposed to know how to
		
00:05:42 --> 00:05:45
			cook, the chef mentioned that it's already their
		
00:05:48 --> 00:05:49
			whole life
		
00:05:50 --> 00:05:51
			doing this
		
00:05:54 --> 00:06:00
			there are some heavy, we can still study nowadays and read. And even more importantly,
		
00:06:03 --> 00:06:06
			you need to understand what he said about those, those headings.
		
00:06:07 --> 00:06:11
			And in order to understand what he said about the headings, you have to have some knowledge about
		
00:06:12 --> 00:06:15
			the for example, you don't only think about headings, you consider setting
		
00:06:16 --> 00:06:18
			as important. So you take any,
		
00:06:19 --> 00:06:22
			and after the headings, this is what often
		
00:06:25 --> 00:06:25
			happens.
		
00:06:27 --> 00:06:28
			What do you think about that?
		
00:06:30 --> 00:06:34
			You just got to skip it. You got to find this statement and books
		
00:06:35 --> 00:06:35
			and books.
		
00:06:37 --> 00:06:42
			And all the other sciences are built upon, actually, you cannot avoid them.
		
00:06:51 --> 00:06:52
			anybody tried to
		
00:06:57 --> 00:06:58
			make whatever they want?
		
00:07:03 --> 00:07:04
			There's no question that it's
		
00:07:07 --> 00:07:08
			all generations.
		
00:07:09 --> 00:07:13
			But I'm not talking about those specialists. I'm talking about this the common person like you or
me.
		
00:07:15 --> 00:07:24
			I can be just the vocal like purple sooner that everyone uses and discuss some of those terms and
some of the things he says and some of the heady and he will help you be familiar with
		
00:07:25 --> 00:07:33
			real estate. What do you think? Sometimes the author himself doesn't know what to think. But he
quoted it from some book. And he put it the
		
00:07:34 --> 00:07:38
			the thing that actually wrote this office and what the author thinks
		
00:07:45 --> 00:07:45
			they use
		
00:07:48 --> 00:07:48
			sometimes
		
00:07:51 --> 00:07:53
			to differentiate between different specialisms.
		
00:07:59 --> 00:08:00
			So in the future
		
00:08:02 --> 00:08:03
			don't have to look for me
		
00:08:05 --> 00:08:06
			or make a statement like that. Just
		
00:08:08 --> 00:08:09
			go ahead and respond.
		
00:08:28 --> 00:08:28
			Much.
		
00:08:40 --> 00:08:43
			All right, yes, because I'm looking at my notes. So
		
00:08:50 --> 00:08:51
			we will assume that
		
00:08:54 --> 00:08:58
			now we come to the next question is how can someone be confirmed as
		
00:09:22 --> 00:09:23
			By the way, there's one question that
		
00:09:25 --> 00:09:26
			we'll discuss
		
00:09:27 --> 00:09:28
			maybe next time.
		
00:09:48 --> 00:09:51
			Northern. So how can someone be confirmed as
		
00:09:53 --> 00:09:53
			we
		
00:09:56 --> 00:09:56
			indicated two weeks
		
00:10:02 --> 00:10:03
			I don't know why but
		
00:10:09 --> 00:10:10
			now you look into
		
00:10:19 --> 00:10:20
			No wonder
		
00:10:21 --> 00:10:22
			students do support
		
00:10:25 --> 00:10:26
			being confirmed is
		
00:10:30 --> 00:10:32
			one of the ways is by
		
00:10:42 --> 00:10:44
			what do I mean by that and discuss
		
00:10:51 --> 00:10:58
			his position in transmitting heavies and being as well known, there's no question about
		
00:11:00 --> 00:11:04
			it for example, admin handle whatever he was asked about.
		
00:11:06 --> 00:11:08
			About the top given
		
00:11:09 --> 00:11:09
			away
		
00:11:19 --> 00:11:19
			from
		
00:11:21 --> 00:11:26
			from level headed, what are the scores of hate, the name is pronounced something.
		
00:11:29 --> 00:11:29
			And sometimes
		
00:11:31 --> 00:11:33
			most of the time the people have had a different
		
00:11:37 --> 00:11:41
			way in Persian means the devil system. So they don't like to call
		
00:11:43 --> 00:11:45
			me actually
		
00:11:47 --> 00:11:48
			was asked to talk
		
00:11:50 --> 00:11:53
			to us well, people like he asked
		
00:11:54 --> 00:11:55
			us
		
00:11:56 --> 00:11:59
			so people like email medic, even Jaffe
		
00:12:00 --> 00:12:20
			the other great schools of Haiti, they are confirmed, they're well known. And also one thing about
being famous is that if they do something wrong, that's going to be spread. If someone like medic,
was seen drinking wine, some guy everyone's going to know about, everyone's gonna say that.
		
00:12:23 --> 00:12:35
			So we added being famous also keeps the person away from doing that. And he has this dead as
positioning as responsibility. So he's even more careful about doing calm because he knows everyone
is watching.
		
00:12:36 --> 00:12:36
			Okay.
		
00:12:38 --> 00:12:39
			So that's one way what's the other way?
		
00:12:48 --> 00:12:49
			Good thing is
		
00:12:54 --> 00:12:57
			first of all, this division, he says other rules
		
00:13:10 --> 00:13:11
			don't condition was missing there.
		
00:13:19 --> 00:13:20
			And he's someone that we know
		
00:13:22 --> 00:13:23
			what what do we talk about less than?
		
00:13:29 --> 00:13:35
			One of the one of the things we talk about is the condition for the one who was making Jeff attend
the event.
		
00:13:36 --> 00:13:38
			This is efficient, to be a critic.
		
00:13:48 --> 00:13:50
			question, Is that sufficient
		
00:13:52 --> 00:13:54
			to know Him and not as low?
		
00:13:55 --> 00:13:56
			We're just talking about this.
		
00:14:15 --> 00:14:19
			Either Okay, can I start saying that no later in
		
00:14:22 --> 00:14:23
			life, what do
		
00:14:25 --> 00:14:25
			you have
		
00:14:27 --> 00:14:34
			to meet the other conditions? So not another, or other I don't think that he said, but other people
who are qualified
		
00:14:35 --> 00:14:36
			in general, I totally get that.
		
00:14:40 --> 00:14:46
			Other people who aren't qualified in the sense of what that is saying that is that is not just
		
00:14:48 --> 00:14:50
			people who are qualified in the science of jeopardy.
		
00:14:56 --> 00:14:57
			Danny, the critic.
		
00:14:59 --> 00:15:00
			Not the
		
00:15:00 --> 00:15:00
			The
		
00:15:01 --> 00:15:03
			Critic is qualified to be critical.
		
00:15:04 --> 00:15:07
			Someone was qualified to be credit grade the person has been.
		
00:15:10 --> 00:15:13
			And is one so critical. You should know.
		
00:15:20 --> 00:15:21
			Someone who
		
00:15:37 --> 00:15:40
			is once a visit that one critic
		
00:15:41 --> 00:15:42
			says so and so is
		
00:15:44 --> 00:15:44
			sufficient.
		
00:15:57 --> 00:16:00
			sufficient if there's no one who makes the trade for the front.
		
00:16:02 --> 00:16:02
			There's no other
		
00:16:07 --> 00:16:09
			no other nothing who needs to do no other critical needs
		
00:16:24 --> 00:16:27
			as a good way most most
		
00:16:29 --> 00:16:35
			something like this one is sufficient. And if there's no contradiction most leads to
		
00:16:37 --> 00:16:38
			at least two credits.
		
00:16:39 --> 00:16:43
			Like the witness said, you have to have two people
		
00:16:44 --> 00:16:45
			making pythia for him before
		
00:16:47 --> 00:16:47
			they make clear.
		
00:16:49 --> 00:16:49
			Over.
		
00:16:51 --> 00:16:55
			Yes, you mentioned some we mentioned Sofia natori.
		
00:17:05 --> 00:17:09
			I'll give you I have a table. I didn't bring it because people never look at it.
		
00:17:11 --> 00:17:14
			I have a table of the major critics of each generation.
		
00:17:22 --> 00:17:23
			We're not talking about a
		
00:17:25 --> 00:17:37
			victim confirmed. Okay. A few of them things. Without any contradiction, we will discuss
contradiction. The two scholars to credit scholars have Jeffersonian status, then we
		
00:17:40 --> 00:17:42
			know, the question, though,
		
00:17:44 --> 00:17:52
			the question that comes up is this disease to critics? Do they have to explain why it is adverse to
make the jury for me this?
		
00:17:59 --> 00:18:00
			Is your students.
		
00:18:09 --> 00:18:10
			If for example,
		
00:18:17 --> 00:18:18
			someone has to explain it.
		
00:18:19 --> 00:18:22
			If I say Neither do I have to explain why?
		
00:18:25 --> 00:18:27
			It is, I think five opinions on this.
		
00:18:32 --> 00:18:35
			Well, okay, we will we will extend the question to also
		
00:18:41 --> 00:18:43
			the first opinion, opinion of the
		
00:18:45 --> 00:18:46
			majority is
		
00:18:48 --> 00:18:50
			that we're sending this to both.
		
00:18:51 --> 00:18:53
			So in the future, we don't have to discuss
		
00:18:54 --> 00:18:54
			again,
		
00:18:56 --> 00:18:57
			if you make
		
00:19:08 --> 00:19:10
			up the three per hour
		
00:19:15 --> 00:19:20
			as you said in the video, the majority of the scars of the spin. That's what I wrote down
		
00:19:25 --> 00:19:26
			must be explained.
		
00:19:41 --> 00:19:43
			What's the why is this such a popular opinion?
		
00:19:49 --> 00:19:51
			To say someone is asking what are you saying at
		
00:19:53 --> 00:19:56
			all? So if you're going to explain it, how are you going to say
		
00:19:58 --> 00:19:59
			the effect
		
00:20:00 --> 00:20:01
			The month of Ramadan.
		
00:20:04 --> 00:20:04
			He doesn't
		
00:20:06 --> 00:20:09
			he doesn't lie, he doesn't cheat. She doesn't make it easy.
		
00:20:10 --> 00:20:13
			So the point that they're making is this idea that is
		
00:20:16 --> 00:20:18
			well known, what makes a person?
		
00:20:19 --> 00:20:24
			And so therefore only if they're going to explain it, they're going to need 10 pages for each at all
because that
		
00:20:25 --> 00:20:25
			so
		
00:20:27 --> 00:20:30
			bored of us. Why do they think the generator must be?
		
00:20:33 --> 00:20:34
			A First of all, I only need one
		
00:20:38 --> 00:20:40
			bedroom necklace mistake.
		
00:20:42 --> 00:20:48
			What else was another point that critics had in mind why it's a chicken,
		
00:20:49 --> 00:20:50
			chicken and also two
		
00:20:54 --> 00:20:55
			other critics saying
		
00:20:57 --> 00:21:07
			not just protected, but also because sometimes when it comes to the jury, especially for those fixed
scholars, they might reject someone. And the reason they reject them is not sufficient.
		
00:21:12 --> 00:21:16
			For example, one who talks too much they rejected the score, because he talks too much
		
00:21:18 --> 00:21:18
			suspicion about
		
00:21:22 --> 00:21:24
			so therefore, they must be explained.
		
00:21:31 --> 00:21:32
			That way, why, for example,
		
00:21:34 --> 00:21:36
			you might find some narratives that
		
00:21:38 --> 00:21:39
			other scores meet the dream for
		
00:21:42 --> 00:21:49
			what happened was either that was not explained, and others or their nature was not that effective
to
		
00:21:51 --> 00:21:53
			have the second the
		
00:21:58 --> 00:21:59
			second is the opposite of that.
		
00:22:01 --> 00:22:02
			is you need an explanation.
		
00:22:11 --> 00:22:12
			You don't need an
		
00:22:18 --> 00:22:20
			editorial comment at the beginning of
		
00:22:22 --> 00:22:32
			the class, I mentioned that people will sort of they have a tendency to discuss these points also.
So this is the opinion of him, I was hoping that he
		
00:22:38 --> 00:22:38
			will have.
		
00:22:48 --> 00:22:49
			Okay,
		
00:22:50 --> 00:22:52
			so this is basically the finish.
		
00:22:56 --> 00:23:03
			And the problem with this routine, and they said they are mostly theoreticians, they're not
actually, in fact, they did not actually practice
		
00:23:08 --> 00:23:09
			resuming last
		
00:23:18 --> 00:23:18
			joint.
		
00:23:36 --> 00:23:37
			me Wow, can they say that?
		
00:23:45 --> 00:23:47
			They don't considerably but what they say and if people might be
		
00:23:49 --> 00:23:54
			not shy, but they might hesitate to say something bad about someone else. So
		
00:23:55 --> 00:23:56
			Muslim nation
		
00:23:59 --> 00:24:00
			that is not a strong opinion.
		
00:24:05 --> 00:24:05
			Next,
		
00:24:06 --> 00:24:09
			of course, we have the courts and Muslims because the thing is this.
		
00:24:17 --> 00:24:21
			Okay, third opinion is you need an explanation for either
		
00:24:30 --> 00:24:31
			what's the reasoning and
		
00:24:33 --> 00:24:36
			the reasoning for explaining duties is the same as the
		
00:24:37 --> 00:24:40
			same reasoning applies, but why do they also the outcomes
		
00:24:50 --> 00:24:51
			or
		
00:24:52 --> 00:24:54
			perhaps also, there's some degrees of
		
00:24:57 --> 00:24:57
			this
		
00:24:59 --> 00:24:59
			Yeah.
		
00:25:00 --> 00:25:01
			degrees. That could be
		
00:25:04 --> 00:25:04
			really, really?
		
00:25:10 --> 00:25:15
			Well, the basic argument is that this person may make that year for the wrong reason also,
		
00:25:16 --> 00:25:22
			we set up here in lightweight degrees for the wrong reasons. Here we might make, like the person who
said,
		
00:25:24 --> 00:25:26
			about one of the narratives, admittedly,
		
00:25:29 --> 00:25:31
			one person called jacobians. We
		
00:25:33 --> 00:25:43
			said about MLM units, I heard that people saying that he is weak. But that's only because the car
sit with his father. And if you see his beard, the length of his beard.
		
00:25:48 --> 00:25:51
			So he's saying, and if you look at his beard and his nose, he must be.
		
00:25:52 --> 00:25:55
			So in other words, he's making daddy for the wrong reason.
		
00:25:56 --> 00:25:57
			What's the response to that?
		
00:25:59 --> 00:26:02
			And how do these people respond to that? I
		
00:26:06 --> 00:26:07
			mean,
		
00:26:08 --> 00:26:15
			yeah, they say this is the case, however, they respond to the argument. Maybe the data is for the
wrong. And they give that
		
00:26:18 --> 00:26:22
			love that it's very rare. But what are the conditions for that? For?
		
00:26:24 --> 00:26:25
			That?
		
00:26:28 --> 00:26:30
			Guy, obviously, this person was saying, Yeah, you can see his beard and
		
00:26:32 --> 00:26:40
			he doesn't know anything about jet with daddy. Right? So the problem is not that he's making that
deal for the wrong reason. The problem is he's not qualified to make that leap.
		
00:26:42 --> 00:26:44
			So the answer to that is, although this is a good,
		
00:26:46 --> 00:26:46
			because it's
		
00:26:48 --> 00:26:48
			always good to be safe.
		
00:26:52 --> 00:26:54
			staples, of course, when
		
00:26:55 --> 00:26:56
			you just say,
		
00:27:09 --> 00:27:10
			part one,
		
00:27:12 --> 00:27:13
			you have to explain,
		
00:27:14 --> 00:27:15
			either.
		
00:27:19 --> 00:27:21
			And this is the opinion of
		
00:27:23 --> 00:27:23
			the book.
		
00:27:48 --> 00:27:49
			What about the
		
00:28:00 --> 00:28:00
			people?
		
00:28:02 --> 00:28:03
			And many of those who need
		
00:28:06 --> 00:28:10
			this, as many of those who mean that these are like the shocking
		
00:28:16 --> 00:28:17
			most of the others?
		
00:28:22 --> 00:28:27
			No, because he's the only one who has written a complete book about almost every aspect of
		
00:28:29 --> 00:28:30
			the book about traveling.
		
00:28:32 --> 00:28:33
			He has a book about
		
00:28:34 --> 00:28:39
			taking heavy he has a book about someone people who used to know how to visit the Forgotten
		
00:28:40 --> 00:28:44
			almost anything you could imagine he hasn't had the book of us. So he
		
00:28:45 --> 00:28:46
			should remember his name.
		
00:28:50 --> 00:28:51
			What is
		
00:28:54 --> 00:29:00
			enough for this condition for the critics has to meet for him to be sifted,
		
00:29:01 --> 00:29:02
			explained.
		
00:29:05 --> 00:29:06
			Does anyone understand
		
00:29:10 --> 00:29:20
			the reasons for the reasons for tabular well known among the scores. So the score is someone knows
me there's no reason to ask him to explain
		
00:29:26 --> 00:29:26
			that but
		
00:29:27 --> 00:29:30
			we know not to be like manic
		
00:29:35 --> 00:29:36
			isn't explained.
		
00:29:37 --> 00:29:39
			That's why the explanation is always better.
		
00:29:41 --> 00:29:44
			But here's what if another theory was also one of these.
		
00:29:45 --> 00:29:46
			This opinion he wrote,
		
00:29:54 --> 00:29:58
			it is not necessary to mention the reason in either case
		
00:29:59 --> 00:30:00
			because of the
		
00:30:00 --> 00:30:03
			person is not an expert in the field that has done with that deal will be rejected.
		
00:30:05 --> 00:30:08
			And if he is an expert, then there's no need to ask him about
		
00:30:14 --> 00:30:18
			that he knows that he was
		
00:30:22 --> 00:30:23
			assumed that
		
00:30:25 --> 00:30:26
			he would
		
00:30:27 --> 00:30:27
			give us assume that
		
00:30:29 --> 00:30:29
			we will
		
00:30:33 --> 00:30:40
			be the scholars of Kava danila. You can check what you said with what other scholars saying if they
disagree a lot.
		
00:30:43 --> 00:30:45
			But what's the what's the bone with this?
		
00:30:48 --> 00:30:51
			Why is this not the opinion of the majority?
		
00:30:57 --> 00:30:57
			All the other
		
00:30:58 --> 00:31:00
			human errors can be
		
00:31:04 --> 00:31:07
			when you when you talk about the
		
00:31:08 --> 00:31:09
			matter of
		
00:31:11 --> 00:31:19
			the matter of applying principles. And if you do not show people how you're applying the principles,
there's no way for us really to see whether or not you're
		
00:31:31 --> 00:31:31
			headed.
		
00:31:37 --> 00:31:37
			Now
		
00:31:40 --> 00:31:44
			it says that the if someone is categorized as
		
00:31:48 --> 00:31:49
			someone
		
00:31:52 --> 00:31:53
			categorize
		
00:32:02 --> 00:32:05
			and then someone says so it makes the date for the same person,
		
00:32:07 --> 00:32:10
			then the jury will not be accepted without explanation.
		
00:32:24 --> 00:32:31
			Someone has stated but in scores to be added, then the judge will not be accepted without
explanation.
		
00:32:32 --> 00:32:32
			Makes sense? The
		
00:32:35 --> 00:32:37
			first thing that we've discussed so far that makes sense.
		
00:32:43 --> 00:32:44
			What's the problem with this
		
00:32:46 --> 00:32:49
			from what somebody said to be
		
00:32:50 --> 00:32:51
			the problem was is is it
		
00:32:53 --> 00:32:55
			not a big fan the whole
		
00:33:02 --> 00:33:05
			me buy this is not some cover all the possible cases.
		
00:33:10 --> 00:33:14
			To make sense, the best thing is that this one goes with this
		
00:33:16 --> 00:33:19
			person. The first one is going to
		
00:33:20 --> 00:33:22
			give us the corollary to the first one
		
00:33:23 --> 00:33:24
			because by itself is an
		
00:33:25 --> 00:33:26
			uncomfortable
		
00:33:31 --> 00:33:38
			one says that the jury has displayed in all circumstances that is
		
00:33:39 --> 00:33:42
			what what is what is basically saying is that the jury
		
00:33:44 --> 00:33:45
			will not be accepted.
		
00:33:46 --> 00:33:49
			In general if someone has stayed together except explain
		
00:33:55 --> 00:33:57
			as these are proven.
		
00:33:58 --> 00:34:01
			For example, he has in mind that about shopping
		
00:34:07 --> 00:34:10
			to see I mean what's what's the evidence for that because all
		
00:34:18 --> 00:34:21
			scores are more jealous of each other than the goats.
		
00:34:31 --> 00:34:33
			Go to the zoo we see that some of the
		
00:34:44 --> 00:34:46
			European and American
		
00:34:49 --> 00:34:49
			Zoo
		
00:34:59 --> 00:34:59
			all right
		
00:35:00 --> 00:35:00
			Got
		
00:35:02 --> 00:35:03
			any questions about
		
00:35:14 --> 00:35:14
			this one is
		
00:35:19 --> 00:35:19
			because
		
00:35:22 --> 00:35:23
			there is another one hate them
		
00:35:26 --> 00:35:26
			against
		
00:35:32 --> 00:35:34
			certain terminology for example, if I say
		
00:35:35 --> 00:35:38
			hi, that means many other books.
		
00:35:40 --> 00:35:41
			That means,
		
00:35:42 --> 00:35:42
			if you mean
		
00:35:44 --> 00:35:44
			and also you're
		
00:35:47 --> 00:35:48
			not alone
		
00:36:02 --> 00:36:03
			The first one
		
00:36:05 --> 00:36:06
			that they used to make
		
00:36:08 --> 00:36:09
			doing this and this was
		
00:36:11 --> 00:36:12
			definitely funny
		
00:36:14 --> 00:36:14
			things.
		
00:36:18 --> 00:36:19
			Remember, most of the
		
00:36:20 --> 00:36:24
			things are happening while the people are alive. So they have the chance to respond.
		
00:36:31 --> 00:36:32
			agrees with the first
		
00:36:37 --> 00:36:37
			one.
		
00:36:40 --> 00:36:49
			Again, it has to be doesn't have to be something that nobody says. Yeah, I think as always with the
second point is with
		
00:36:54 --> 00:36:55
			any questions about
		
00:36:57 --> 00:36:58
			how to confirm someone?
		
00:37:07 --> 00:37:18
			Yeah, Danny, the way someone is confirmed to be either either by fame or by to critics of sustaining
him to be under that, that I will have to be explained or not.
		
00:37:20 --> 00:37:21
			When we come to
		
00:37:24 --> 00:37:30
			the same thing applies to scores make him do they have to say are not the same?
		
00:37:34 --> 00:37:34
			There are
		
00:37:35 --> 00:37:38
			two ways either by being by two
		
00:37:43 --> 00:37:44
			perfect except
		
00:37:45 --> 00:37:46
			what is the minimum?
		
00:37:48 --> 00:37:53
			Okay, they differentiated in between. It's not always good.
		
00:37:56 --> 00:37:57
			When when there's
		
00:37:59 --> 00:38:00
			one or two mistakes
		
00:38:08 --> 00:38:12
			he was from the people who asked them and he was from the scholars room.
		
00:38:28 --> 00:38:30
			Yeah, you can find it in the in the books of
		
00:38:32 --> 00:38:32
			the Bible.
		
00:38:33 --> 00:38:34
			For example.
		
00:38:42 --> 00:38:43
			Debbie has something like 25
		
00:38:46 --> 00:38:51
			books, six books, there's something like 12,000 15,000
		
00:38:58 --> 00:38:59
			nowadays more
		
00:39:01 --> 00:39:02
			so than any
		
00:39:12 --> 00:39:12
			job.
		
00:39:15 --> 00:39:16
			Go back to the
		
00:39:21 --> 00:39:26
			critique and you are using the knowledge of the earliest sometimes to discuss them that maybe
		
00:39:27 --> 00:39:34
			earlier scholars mentioned, discuss, they discuss it again to make sure that their opinion was
correct and see if they need me because what are the
		
00:39:45 --> 00:39:47
			people that I trust
		
00:39:58 --> 00:39:59
			has the
		
00:40:00 --> 00:40:02
			25 volumes, published
		
00:40:07 --> 00:40:08
			25 points.
		
00:40:10 --> 00:40:14
			Some of these have not been discussed, some of this has not been discussed.
		
00:40:19 --> 00:40:19
			To me,
		
00:40:21 --> 00:40:23
			hates me, he discussed many of them.
		
00:40:26 --> 00:40:27
			But he did not really discuss them in detail.
		
00:40:29 --> 00:40:33
			There's even a Muslim, the last one No. Bye.
		
00:40:50 --> 00:40:52
			This is the largest Muslims that we know.
		
00:40:55 --> 00:40:58
			And many of the ideas that have not been published
		
00:41:03 --> 00:41:03
			yet
		
00:41:28 --> 00:41:28
			last year,
		
00:41:32 --> 00:41:39
			particular game, and in the future is different from any of the other books. Yeah, that's right.
		
00:41:44 --> 00:41:45
			Any other questions?
		
00:41:50 --> 00:41:52
			So, somebody
		
00:41:56 --> 00:41:59
			also has a collection for
		
00:42:04 --> 00:42:05
			food.
		
00:42:06 --> 00:42:07
			It also is also
		
00:42:15 --> 00:42:16
			importance of
		
00:42:17 --> 00:42:17
			playing.
		
00:42:30 --> 00:42:33
			Listen, I wanted to say that it's also
		
00:42:41 --> 00:42:41
			Yes.
		
00:42:46 --> 00:42:49
			If you remember electrical problems before it came as
		
00:42:51 --> 00:42:59
			one of the major reasons, some of them did not know how to use and other people know, or they knew
it through a weak chain, and therefore they didn't apply. Well, other people knew
		
00:43:03 --> 00:43:03
			would be
		
00:43:06 --> 00:43:09
			the subject that shifts the title of the lecture.
		
00:43:10 --> 00:43:12
			And he did not discuss that.
		
00:43:24 --> 00:43:26
			Okay, here's some miscellaneous questions concerning
		
00:43:29 --> 00:43:30
			like a pop quiz.
		
00:43:34 --> 00:43:35
			The narrator
		
00:43:37 --> 00:43:37
			either, so
		
00:43:40 --> 00:43:42
			may you conclude the TSP me?
		
00:43:54 --> 00:43:56
			Okay, let's put it this way. This class will look older than
		
00:44:01 --> 00:44:06
			the person who stepped up but he stayed with me for a very short time we're not experts.
		
00:44:07 --> 00:44:11
			Or he was very young when he is with the Zodiac. Why did you stay long? Did not
		
00:44:14 --> 00:44:14
			not long.
		
00:44:21 --> 00:44:25
			So this person has stepped up. But yeah, I mean, most of us.
		
00:44:27 --> 00:44:27
			We don't
		
00:44:31 --> 00:44:32
			examine from
		
00:44:33 --> 00:44:34
			Well, this
		
00:44:35 --> 00:44:42
			is a special report the great scores of all of them, we can break down their students into these
categories
		
00:44:46 --> 00:44:55
			in general, but when it comes to his narrations from he is one example of the scholar by the name of
pushing and pushing
		
00:45:07 --> 00:45:07
			Ah
		
00:45:20 --> 00:45:22
			machine you will find this array
		
00:45:24 --> 00:45:28
			is better but you'll never find use one of these two you'll never find
		
00:45:31 --> 00:45:36
			because in the heaviest of Azov he was not strong and he was very young and efficient.
		
00:45:37 --> 00:45:40
			So we do not accept this Henry Ford inherited from
		
00:45:42 --> 00:45:44
			us that he might have
		
00:45:45 --> 00:45:49
			after he left he lost some of his mental capabilities made more mistakes
		
00:45:51 --> 00:45:52
			but we said sometimes
		
00:45:54 --> 00:45:57
			that reversal universal class
		
00:46:00 --> 00:46:01
			is older than five
		
00:46:09 --> 00:46:17
			but what you're what you're what you're describing is something in the later years anyway, we said
we just give him a book. And he has the right to read from that book.
		
00:46:18 --> 00:46:19
			Okay, now we're talking about 30 years
		
00:46:26 --> 00:46:27
			before he became good and it
		
00:46:29 --> 00:46:36
			takes a little while to get to start to peace of mind is not mine. Who
		
00:46:38 --> 00:46:41
			gave me what the head is now with this man. And even if you wrote them down,
		
00:46:42 --> 00:46:53
			some of you will write them down long and so forth. But if after one year to keep doing it, you
start recognizing the change who was whose students you don't make them up you know, who was
		
00:46:54 --> 00:46:55
			Yeah, you know, the who's who
		
00:46:59 --> 00:47:05
			are they in general, but they stayed with us it for a long time.
		
00:47:09 --> 00:47:11
			And they are experts.
		
00:47:12 --> 00:47:21
			I stayed with him for years and he has a bad memory. But when you give him the same thing for 40
years every day he starts to pick it up. So these days in general, but
		
00:47:33 --> 00:47:34
			what
		
00:47:41 --> 00:47:45
			does that mean? He's the power we suppose any no matter who we never
		
00:47:46 --> 00:47:50
			know for example, sorry, we can divide by categories.
		
00:47:55 --> 00:47:56
			For example,
		
00:47:57 --> 00:47:59
			okay, she was a student that was earning
		
00:48:02 --> 00:48:05
			and love is a third party which you'll never see her shame.
		
00:48:08 --> 00:48:09
			Yeah, for these people,
		
00:48:11 --> 00:48:11
			only
		
00:48:19 --> 00:48:19
			about
		
00:48:21 --> 00:48:22
			you will find
		
00:48:24 --> 00:48:25
			the finding
		
00:48:26 --> 00:48:31
			the first category, the second category, you will not find them.
		
00:48:35 --> 00:48:38
			The third category there are basically we can call them
		
00:48:40 --> 00:48:45
			and you will find people in this category of adults and the third many in books.
		
00:48:47 --> 00:48:47
			Okay.
		
00:48:49 --> 00:48:52
			The four categories are people who are life in general
		
00:48:58 --> 00:48:59
			will define
		
00:49:00 --> 00:49:00
			the general
		
00:49:03 --> 00:49:03
			overview
		
00:49:09 --> 00:49:10
			for one
		
00:49:12 --> 00:49:13
			zero
		
00:49:19 --> 00:49:26
			and the last category are people who are rejected under any circumstance, liars fortress of hate any
		
00:49:29 --> 00:49:30
			muscle keep
		
00:49:31 --> 00:49:31
			that.
		
00:49:35 --> 00:49:35
			What's the
		
00:49:39 --> 00:49:40
			difference between
		
00:49:41 --> 00:49:49
			someone who has a little weakness and he's supported by other people that exactly the same way? We
may raise his head to a higher level.
		
00:49:51 --> 00:49:52
			But this category No.
		
00:49:57 --> 00:49:59
			This isn't going to say oh, you
		
00:50:05 --> 00:50:11
			What did they wish? They are people? Not good characters. Now they can say, you know, I'm one of the
somebody students
		
00:50:21 --> 00:50:22
			they said was
		
00:50:28 --> 00:50:29
			they are
		
00:50:33 --> 00:50:34
			talking about this category.
		
00:50:36 --> 00:50:36
			Second,
		
00:50:38 --> 00:50:40
			okay, this is for not a long time.
		
00:50:43 --> 00:50:47
			They did not stay with somebody for a long time. In other words, their knowledge
		
00:50:50 --> 00:50:53
			but the knowledge and other people's ideas are good.
		
00:50:59 --> 00:51:00
			For
		
00:51:01 --> 00:51:11
			me, it depends on the person, some people are experts, because he, he will memorize what the person
said. Other people know, they have to say
		
00:51:13 --> 00:51:13
			so, depends on the
		
00:51:19 --> 00:51:22
			like to welcome you to the continuation of our English
		
00:51:33 --> 00:51:34
			was the question
		
00:51:36 --> 00:51:41
			the narrator does not need a stable cutter Samuelson. Can we conclude that he is not?
		
00:51:43 --> 00:51:43
			Happy?
		
00:51:49 --> 00:51:50
			Okay, let's
		
00:51:51 --> 00:51:51
			add the medic.
		
00:51:53 --> 00:51:53
			Again, there was nothing
		
00:51:56 --> 00:51:57
			to include just
		
00:52:00 --> 00:52:03
			to include the all authentic had you throw something there isn't?
		
00:52:07 --> 00:52:07
			suppose
		
00:52:09 --> 00:52:10
			there's no one who's scoring
		
00:52:13 --> 00:52:21
			any merits? Someone who doesn't mean? Like for example, definitely or someone who I have no doubt
about?
		
00:52:23 --> 00:52:24
			has told me.
		
00:52:26 --> 00:52:27
			So in other words, he didn't give us the name.
		
00:52:32 --> 00:52:34
			Any someone I have moved up.
		
00:52:40 --> 00:52:41
			The question
		
00:52:42 --> 00:52:43
			is What about the
		
00:52:46 --> 00:52:47
			champion?
		
00:52:55 --> 00:52:56
			Because he has won?
		
00:52:58 --> 00:52:58
			Because
		
00:52:59 --> 00:53:00
			he will not say anything.
		
00:53:01 --> 00:53:02
			Knock.
		
00:53:28 --> 00:53:28
			Here's a question that
		
00:53:32 --> 00:53:37
			someone might be important to remember. Because what he knows about him
		
00:53:39 --> 00:53:40
			but someone else
		
00:53:43 --> 00:53:45
			someone else that may have
		
00:53:46 --> 00:53:50
			some information that the membership doesn't have. Right?
		
00:53:52 --> 00:53:55
			So in other words, we know all you have is a scholar.
		
00:53:56 --> 00:53:58
			So General tab you also.
		
00:53:59 --> 00:54:07
			But when Yanni he says about someone that if he doesn't name that person, the problem is that it
might be someone who he considers
		
00:54:08 --> 00:54:10
			that he may not be.
		
00:54:11 --> 00:54:17
			So although the score disagree on this point, some people aren't like you, they will accept
		
00:54:18 --> 00:54:19
			the score.
		
00:54:20 --> 00:54:23
			But the safer the stronger opinion
		
00:54:24 --> 00:54:28
			that he has a question that he has. If he does not mention him,
		
00:54:29 --> 00:54:30
			then strong opinions.
		
00:54:33 --> 00:54:42
			Now there's some source, some scars only. Next question, isn't it a famous case? person?
		
00:54:44 --> 00:54:44
			famous case
		
00:54:46 --> 00:54:48
			His name is somewhere in this chapter.
		
00:54:49 --> 00:54:52
			Job is the only scholar who said this person is the
		
00:54:55 --> 00:54:58
			Narrator The oldest scholar who concluded that
		
00:55:06 --> 00:55:08
			And even though we
		
00:55:10 --> 00:55:11
			remember
		
00:55:16 --> 00:55:18
			when he said about delivery, shall we?
		
00:55:20 --> 00:55:21
			Some people say
		
00:55:23 --> 00:55:27
			they said that he was talking about his uncle.
		
00:55:32 --> 00:55:33
			Suppose an adult
		
00:55:37 --> 00:55:39
			the only one who says that what's
		
00:55:46 --> 00:55:47
			missing is
		
00:55:48 --> 00:55:51
			an example of a case where
		
00:55:52 --> 00:55:59
			this is evidence that we should not accept anyone statement if he says Danny had any book or without
mentioning who the person
		
00:56:00 --> 00:56:02
			that he was the question of which he had.
		
00:56:03 --> 00:56:05
			My my point was, there was a person that
		
00:56:07 --> 00:56:10
			doesn't even let time because that matters.
		
00:56:12 --> 00:56:14
			In general, there's the
		
00:56:16 --> 00:56:24
			gun in general, people know who who is talking about his students, no one was talking about, for
example, the mathematics that
		
00:56:26 --> 00:56:27
			means arbitrary
		
00:56:31 --> 00:56:32
			destiny is
		
00:56:41 --> 00:56:42
			so they know how to example.
		
00:56:44 --> 00:56:45
			Economic
		
00:56:47 --> 00:56:50
			students know who we talking about. That's a different game.
		
00:56:56 --> 00:56:58
			In front of me right here, what did they say?
		
00:57:02 --> 00:57:05
			Everyone knows who's talking about. So it's like giving
		
00:57:06 --> 00:57:07
			more of a
		
00:57:08 --> 00:57:12
			don't even use his name anymore. You just call him that?
		
00:57:13 --> 00:57:15
			Everyone knows. So let's just in one
		
00:57:22 --> 00:57:25
			case, and if the students know what he's talking about, then we can.
		
00:57:34 --> 00:57:36
			Yeah, so for me, I read the
		
00:57:39 --> 00:57:44
			shows, and I have no idea who is talking about. I would have to say I cannot be selfless.
		
00:57:45 --> 00:57:49
			I don't say if we don't say but I cannot make judgment on it until I find out who that person.
		
00:57:53 --> 00:57:55
			And that's the footnote right here. It says
		
00:57:57 --> 00:57:58
			suppose the
		
00:57:59 --> 00:58:04
			narrator narrates and someone you mentioned that person, for example, suppose
		
00:58:06 --> 00:58:07
			that doesn't mean?
		
00:58:12 --> 00:58:13
			Does that mean that she is
		
00:58:17 --> 00:58:19
			the closest competitor?
		
00:58:20 --> 00:58:20
			Because
		
00:58:23 --> 00:58:28
			I've never really had it from someone. Does that mean in my point of view that this person was
supposed to do that?
		
00:58:38 --> 00:58:39
			That means
		
00:58:44 --> 00:58:48
			someone's narrating and someone else with authority imply that this person is
		
00:58:50 --> 00:58:50
			even if
		
00:58:52 --> 00:58:53
			it doesn't happen?
		
00:59:07 --> 00:59:09
			Okay, let's go to the File.
		
00:59:13 --> 00:59:13
			system.
		
00:59:25 --> 00:59:26
			Principle
		
00:59:27 --> 00:59:33
			isn't the case. But if someone has stepped up and he knows about general varies from someone else,
		
00:59:34 --> 00:59:35
			does that mean the other person
		
00:59:41 --> 00:59:43
			may say yes. Did you say
		
00:59:44 --> 00:59:44
			did you
		
00:59:47 --> 00:59:54
			know? In a way, okay, you say yes. To this, you will say no, why not? Because he could
		
00:59:57 --> 00:59:57
			not
		
00:59:59 --> 00:59:59
			be
		
01:00:00 --> 01:00:00
			To
		
01:00:07 --> 01:00:07
			condition
		
01:00:19 --> 01:00:20
			okay.
		
01:00:23 --> 01:00:24
			Okay shouldn't be saved that
		
01:00:32 --> 01:00:35
			this would make any sense at all everyone I come to
		
01:00:42 --> 01:00:45
			on Monday I gave a lecture about Ecuador
		
01:00:47 --> 01:00:52
			I mentioned some then on Thursday if I mentioned these areas I don't have mentioned again but this
one's
		
01:00:54 --> 01:00:54
			super tuition
		
01:00:57 --> 01:00:57
			earlier
		
01:01:00 --> 01:01:01
			somewhere
		
01:01:06 --> 01:01:09
			that first of all with respect to weakened areas
		
01:01:14 --> 01:01:15
			as someone who has asthma
		
01:01:16 --> 01:01:17
			but not 100%
		
01:01:22 --> 01:01:28
			Okay, Johnny is its own little wallet in fact you will be called by
		
01:01:47 --> 01:01:49
			know why would I do races Hey you
		
01:01:50 --> 01:01:51
			got to
		
01:01:54 --> 01:01:56
			be honest but make mistakes
		
01:01:57 --> 01:01:58
			so why would I narrate this
		
01:02:00 --> 01:02:15
			maybe to support other teams okay is to support more now in order to know the penny in order to if
there is some other support someone has the same idea to a different department. So what do you have
to carry this week we still have to pass on this petty
		
01:02:17 --> 01:02:19
			we also do it through any sponsors mistake
		
01:02:22 --> 01:02:22
			oh thank you
		
01:02:29 --> 01:02:31
			meaning of it because
		
01:02:33 --> 01:02:34
			my wife
		
01:02:39 --> 01:02:42
			is weak when it comes to his policy
		
01:02:44 --> 01:02:46
			but he is I mean
		
01:02:49 --> 01:02:51
			he stays away from a more remote
		
01:02:52 --> 01:02:53
			as well as me
		
01:03:02 --> 01:03:02
			Yeah.
		
01:03:05 --> 01:03:06
			I mean, I can we assume that
		
01:03:08 --> 01:03:09
			No,
		
01:03:11 --> 01:03:12
			not me, not me. I'm
		
01:03:14 --> 01:03:15
			talking about the world.
		
01:03:19 --> 01:03:21
			Know what I'm saying? Is
		
01:03:23 --> 01:03:24
			we still married Is it
		
01:03:25 --> 01:03:28
			okay, because Danny we know that in
		
01:03:29 --> 01:03:39
			the comments he makes mistakes. So if we can remove this possibility of error by finding the same
people and they support each other that we conclude the script
		
01:03:47 --> 01:03:49
			because they thought that you said
		
01:03:52 --> 01:03:52
			Yeah.
		
01:03:55 --> 01:03:56
			Yeah, you want
		
01:04:02 --> 01:04:02
			to
		
01:04:05 --> 01:04:09
			narrate from night then we assume the night of must be
		
01:04:14 --> 01:04:15
			what was the mission?
		
01:04:17 --> 01:04:19
			Okay, I'm saying that if I
		
01:04:21 --> 01:04:23
			I still may narrate a four week narrative.
		
01:04:25 --> 01:04:30
			I still know people who are not especially if there are others but not
		
01:04:31 --> 01:04:33
			in order to know that every
		
01:04:34 --> 01:04:40
			guy needs the promise with his editors. We know that he must lie that he may have made a mistake
from
		
01:04:41 --> 01:04:43
			okay so he made a mistake.
		
01:04:45 --> 01:04:49
			Now we find someone else like I'm so similar to him make more mistakes.
		
01:04:55 --> 01:04:56
			Okay, now I never
		
01:04:59 --> 01:05:00
			will be there will be forever
		
01:05:01 --> 01:05:03
			But I have to pass it on to the next generation.
		
01:05:05 --> 01:05:07
			So what we find is that this narration
		
01:05:11 --> 01:05:13
			is supported by marriage.
		
01:05:14 --> 01:05:17
			So we can conclude that this is not one of life's mistakes
		
01:05:18 --> 01:05:21
			because episode supports him in exactly the same way that he
		
01:05:29 --> 01:05:30
			checks
		
01:05:32 --> 01:05:39
			So, since we have to check the other team that means we have to continue to pay so even though it
means we have to continue to
		
01:05:44 --> 01:05:56
			know what I'm saying went back to the original question is that we cannot assume just because I'm
sick as everyone I'm hearing from because I will still be narrating from week narrator's for this
reason
		
01:05:59 --> 01:06:00
			number two
		
01:06:01 --> 01:06:03
			maybe I don't know the corner
		
01:06:05 --> 01:06:06
			but I don't know if it's the corner
		
01:06:10 --> 01:06:10
			case
		
01:06:11 --> 01:06:15
			this case assuming you know that he hasn't already knows that he's weak but he's still there.
		
01:06:16 --> 01:06:17
			But he doesn't
		
01:06:22 --> 01:06:25
			know what are we gonna
		
01:06:26 --> 01:06:29
			get along as we give you all the information
		
01:06:31 --> 01:06:32
			we may not use it as a proof
		
01:06:33 --> 01:06:37
			Okay, the difference between testing and using highly sensitive words
		
01:06:39 --> 01:06:46
			because I don't know if we still or not I cannot use the Edit as a proof but I can pass it on as
information that this person says is so bad.
		
01:06:48 --> 01:06:50
			So the narrator or the narrator may not know
		
01:06:56 --> 01:07:01
			so therefore even though it doesn't mean that when I'm there any from all of them
		
01:07:02 --> 01:07:05
			there are some scholars of any of those who are known
		
01:07:06 --> 01:07:11
			they were known to only narrow a need for people with a considered visa
		
01:07:14 --> 01:07:17
			for example even medic with respect to the people who inherited from Medina
		
01:07:19 --> 01:07:24
			my mother would never marry anyone from the GM was weak he would only narrow
		
01:07:28 --> 01:07:30
			not that long at the week
		
01:07:32 --> 01:07:34
			no worries no worries you just apply this
		
01:07:43 --> 01:07:43
			week
		
01:07:47 --> 01:07:48
			even a
		
01:07:49 --> 01:07:50
			week
		
01:07:52 --> 01:07:52
			yeah, I
		
01:07:54 --> 01:07:55
			don't know.
		
01:07:58 --> 01:07:58
			I don't know.
		
01:07:59 --> 01:08:00
			Yeah.
		
01:08:02 --> 01:08:03
			That I will not use it as
		
01:08:04 --> 01:08:14
			he says I don't know. But I will pass it on to recorded my book and pass it on to other people. And
those people may know that person
		
01:08:18 --> 01:08:19
			of course No, I've
		
01:08:27 --> 01:08:28
			never
		
01:08:31 --> 01:08:34
			had it on with me I may not know that night.
		
01:08:39 --> 01:08:41
			And another reason that they used to do it
		
01:08:43 --> 01:08:44
			is to record the
		
01:08:45 --> 01:08:51
			knowledge to know the the chain in order to know the any of the
		
01:08:52 --> 01:08:54
			the way the head is assessed.
		
01:08:58 --> 01:08:59
			Give you a story from
		
01:09:00 --> 01:09:00
			blink.
		
01:09:02 --> 01:09:09
			Yeah, he used to record the history of mama and a van.
		
01:09:22 --> 01:09:24
			I used to record the
		
01:09:26 --> 01:09:27
			event. I can
		
01:09:30 --> 01:09:34
			record this Eddie, Eddie. And he used to tell these people this
		
01:09:37 --> 01:09:37
			man
		
01:09:42 --> 01:09:43
			this really
		
01:09:44 --> 01:09:46
			stupid head used to do these to keep an eye on the one who's recording.
		
01:09:49 --> 01:09:52
			So okay, so I'm in Hamburg as the mayor here. Why are you recording this?
		
01:09:57 --> 01:09:57
			Oh, okay.
		
01:10:00 --> 01:10:00
			appointment
		
01:10:05 --> 01:10:06
			he was one of the
		
01:10:12 --> 01:10:12
			event
		
01:10:21 --> 01:10:28
			so he asked him Okay, why are you doing this? So he entered him is it all about the love
		
01:10:33 --> 01:10:34
			for those who are listening
		
01:10:35 --> 01:10:48
			he said I write these pages and I memorize all these headaches and I know that they are fabricated
but they do so in order for no one to come along later and change this neck from service and
		
01:10:49 --> 01:10:54
			then wants to know exactly what it is Who are the people in this net How is it being
		
01:10:55 --> 01:10:57
			used service that
		
01:10:59 --> 01:11:01
			can be changed from event to
		
01:11:02 --> 01:11:05
			event was important to step two is
		
01:11:08 --> 01:11:09
			to just to know that it
		
01:11:11 --> 01:11:15
			exists to know any this person is weak very weak but he's narrating in this way
		
01:11:18 --> 01:11:20
			but also to know that they may take it for people who are not
		
01:11:22 --> 01:11:23
			to keep
		
01:11:26 --> 01:11:31
			the story about someone who has done something like 1500 petty nasty
		
01:11:33 --> 01:11:33
			all
		
01:11:35 --> 01:11:37
			now whenever you hear them you know they've ever
		
01:11:39 --> 01:11:39
			had, you
		
01:11:41 --> 01:11:43
			know, getting to know the weekend goes
		
01:12:07 --> 01:12:07
			what's up
		
01:12:17 --> 01:12:18
			from life?
		
01:12:28 --> 01:12:28
			So
		
01:12:36 --> 01:12:39
			let's binary from from Nice,
		
01:12:41 --> 01:12:42
			nice, nice
		
01:12:43 --> 01:12:43
			thing
		
01:12:45 --> 01:12:46
			is this guy
		
01:12:50 --> 01:12:51
			here first of all,
		
01:12:53 --> 01:12:54
			suppose you forgot that he
		
01:12:57 --> 01:12:58
			remember you told me this idea.
		
01:13:01 --> 01:13:02
			Maybe
		
01:13:03 --> 01:13:04
			five years ago, he said
		
01:13:12 --> 01:13:13
			and he told me that
		
01:13:17 --> 01:13:17
			you
		
01:13:20 --> 01:13:20
			the biggest one.
		
01:13:28 --> 01:13:30
			There's nothing wrong with that
		
01:13:31 --> 01:13:33
			situation, there are some headings you will find them
		
01:13:35 --> 01:13:38
			where the scholar says, for example,
		
01:13:40 --> 01:13:42
			the scholars named Sohail
		
01:13:46 --> 01:13:47
			who his students would
		
01:13:51 --> 01:14:00
			have forgotten, afterwards, used to narrate a name via narrated it on my authority, and he is
		
01:14:08 --> 01:14:09
			responsible.
		
01:14:10 --> 01:14:21
			And they just want to pay the probability that the shift provided is greater than the probability
that the narrator says he heard from this year. How did they conclude that I'm not sure?
		
01:14:25 --> 01:14:28
			Because she has more than 10 students.
		
01:14:33 --> 01:14:34
			But what about the other case now?
		
01:14:38 --> 01:14:39
			Suppose suppose,
		
01:14:44 --> 01:14:44
			he says this
		
01:14:46 --> 01:14:47
			definitely
		
01:14:48 --> 01:14:50
			doesn't work. What's up
		
01:15:09 --> 01:15:09
			Well
		
01:15:11 --> 01:15:13
			econometric study showing this
		
01:15:15 --> 01:15:16
			now the other key
		
01:15:21 --> 01:15:22
			when I said I never said
		
01:15:25 --> 01:15:25
			that's the problem
		
01:15:27 --> 01:15:28
			What do we do in this case?
		
01:15:31 --> 01:15:34
			Can we can check to see who is correct but
		
01:15:36 --> 01:15:37
			the first case is he said
		
01:15:39 --> 01:15:42
			certain cases categorically denied
		
01:15:44 --> 01:15:44
			What
		
01:15:46 --> 01:15:52
			do we say that life can now we make it easy for him do we make me do it
		
01:16:02 --> 01:16:03
			okay what about the first equation
		
01:16:05 --> 01:16:08
			see now he can call me a liar and I can call him a liar
		
01:16:10 --> 01:16:14
			so what happens in a case like this we don't make the secret either one we know one of them
		
01:16:16 --> 01:16:21
			and if this happens a lot especially with a certain ship then we know that this happens
		
01:16:24 --> 01:16:27
			but at the same time we don't we we
		
01:16:28 --> 01:16:32
			wait wait for further clarification until other sources
		
01:16:38 --> 01:16:38
			No, we will not.
		
01:16:40 --> 01:16:41
			We will narrow it when there is
		
01:16:43 --> 01:16:45
			a mention but we will not say that
		
01:16:48 --> 01:16:49
			until we feel
		
01:16:55 --> 01:17:02
			and by the way that sort of put me down in a cod have all written books about people who narrated
hate and then later they forgot that
		
01:17:06 --> 01:17:08
			God is always the third
		
01:17:24 --> 01:17:27
			choice I suppose there's someone who has
		
01:17:30 --> 01:17:31
			that we don't know anything.
		
01:17:32 --> 01:17:33
			We just know for example a
		
01:17:37 --> 01:17:38
			ring the Royal
		
01:17:40 --> 01:17:41
			we don't know this person
		
01:17:44 --> 01:17:45
			always
		
01:17:48 --> 01:17:49
			you
		
01:17:57 --> 01:18:00
			know in this case it is like hit up a load face.
		
01:18:01 --> 01:18:04
			know who we are. We know who he is but we don't really know
		
01:18:13 --> 01:18:13
			the
		
01:18:16 --> 01:18:18
			35 different opinions about whatever it is
		
01:18:24 --> 01:18:25
			the important thing is to know
		
01:18:38 --> 01:18:39
			guys officer
		
01:18:44 --> 01:18:46
			eggs wages this month we're doing
		
01:18:48 --> 01:18:48
			have
		
01:18:52 --> 01:18:52
			come on
		
01:18:57 --> 01:19:01
			there anything wrong with taking away numbers getting paid?
		
01:19:11 --> 01:19:12
			A little bit
		
01:19:13 --> 01:19:16
			from the caller because they make a
		
01:19:30 --> 01:19:31
			third point.
		
01:19:33 --> 01:19:38
			I mean, do we accept them as our or can we can we say that can be sensible?
		
01:19:40 --> 01:19:44
			Okay, it is allowed to take money for teaching. Yes.
		
01:19:49 --> 01:19:57
			Long as a billion is good. You're going to take money because the promises system says the thing
that you have most like the most like big money for teaching
		
01:20:01 --> 01:20:01
			From the
		
01:20:03 --> 01:20:05
			Yeah, we don't care where the money is from right now.
		
01:20:08 --> 01:20:17
			Okay, what we can conclude concerning the one who takes money to marry, we cannot conclude that just
because it takes money is unacceptable.
		
01:20:30 --> 01:20:30
			Let's have a
		
01:20:34 --> 01:20:40
			look at like a teaching karate wants to make up the series to be a bigger teacher and have more more
people who
		
01:20:44 --> 01:20:49
			can most most of the earliest cause is headed by the way they supported themselves.
		
01:20:50 --> 01:20:52
			Because they were businessmen.
		
01:20:53 --> 01:20:54
			And then
		
01:20:55 --> 01:20:56
			there was like a
		
01:20:58 --> 01:21:01
			24 hour day, it was a 24 hour day and we would
		
01:21:02 --> 01:21:03
			use it.
		
01:21:04 --> 01:21:07
			Many of the teachers if they were
		
01:21:12 --> 01:21:12
			okay.
		
01:21:15 --> 01:21:18
			It'd be simpler than it used to have got one month one
		
01:21:21 --> 01:21:24
			pick up the phone and send me a fax
		
01:21:28 --> 01:21:30
			before any needs to have the right to edit.
		
01:21:32 --> 01:21:33
			A good cause disease is
		
01:21:40 --> 01:21:41
			the kind of thing that
		
01:21:42 --> 01:21:44
			goes to a farmer and so the
		
01:21:46 --> 01:21:50
			farmer may tend to go up to six, and they don't come back into learn
		
01:21:56 --> 01:21:59
			what you need to have and how much time it takes to get what
		
01:22:01 --> 01:22:02
			we were talking about.
		
01:22:05 --> 01:22:06
			was rich.
		
01:22:08 --> 01:22:09
			He used to support the students
		
01:22:17 --> 01:22:18
			because someone was good.
		
01:22:19 --> 01:22:22
			He would say I hate this person. And don't accept this for me.
		
01:22:34 --> 01:22:36
			Let me say
		
01:22:42 --> 01:22:49
			so yeah, just because just because someone is taking money any particular headache we can conclude
just because let me know.
		
01:22:55 --> 01:22:55
			Okay.
		
01:22:58 --> 01:23:00
			Well, basically I've been talking about
		
01:23:08 --> 01:23:08
			teaching.
		
01:23:20 --> 01:23:28
			Then in the early years Daddy, what do you mean by daring teaching is about the same thing, someone
systems and since a certain time that he will give any
		
01:23:33 --> 01:23:33
			nowadays
		
01:24:08 --> 01:24:10
			because there are so many,
		
01:24:49 --> 01:24:52
			especially if you're alive. Now when we look back at it,
		
01:24:53 --> 01:24:55
			and it looks more
		
01:24:57 --> 01:24:58
			difficult than was in
		
01:24:59 --> 01:24:59
			between
		
01:25:00 --> 01:25:02
			People who are actually involved in these things
		
01:25:03 --> 01:25:04
			are much clearer to them than
		
01:25:07 --> 01:25:08
			looking back
		
01:25:20 --> 01:25:22
			to be used as evidence for something
		
01:25:25 --> 01:25:27
			not to be a loser
		
01:25:40 --> 01:25:42
			at the difference between existing
		
01:25:47 --> 01:25:48
			versus former heading towards
		
01:25:55 --> 01:25:55
			that point
		
01:26:04 --> 01:26:05
			how can you make
		
01:26:06 --> 01:26:07
			a copy
		
01:26:09 --> 01:26:10
			of what you come up with?
		
01:26:18 --> 01:26:19
			Difficult
		
01:26:26 --> 01:26:27
			to shift students
		
01:26:38 --> 01:26:39
			to be surprised
		
01:26:42 --> 01:26:43
			because it's not easy to
		
01:26:49 --> 01:26:49
			use
		
01:26:53 --> 01:26:54
			to kick