Islam Modernism Part 3

We'll continue on

Socrative we started a long time ago

from the Neo modernist movement

hamdulillah last time we

we discussed the basic premises or any of the basic concepts underneath or underlying and the movement itself

whether any of those concepts or those premises any of you if you see or if you read someone who has been influenced by this movement

and he does not actually state those premises is a misunderstanding, and he does not actually state those things explicitly that we talked about

last time, but you can see from his reasoning, that in fact Can he believes in those premises that we predicted last time.

Anyway, we mentioned that any mistakes will come about through different different ways.

One is this if the premise is wrong, as we talked about last time, secondly, also the methodology is incorrect.

Or the methodology basically is how, and you move from point A to point B, for example,

and even sooner, for example, is really the methodology of self care and how to go from any work all the evidences to the same conclusions

are related to the methodology that the serrania movement uses that really important how they mislead people and poor people by any trying to show that they have a specific methodology

and thereby animus leading the people to the wrong conclusions. But, in fact, they claim to be anti scientific, they claim to be here, and using their apple and having a any consistent approach. But, in fact, if you study their their methodology, and they are very far from

being applied,

in most cases, the the methodology is

inconsistent or that they have no basis or no proof

for their way of thinking. inshallah, today, what I'm going to mention,

and in some of the some of the ways, some of the ways and means or some of the methodology that some of these people used to mislead

some of the Marine

Corps, as I mentioned earlier, and it doesn't mean that everyone who belongs to this role, and uses the

principles of use of these means, nor does it mean necessarily, that anyone who might fall into this category use these kind of approaches, isn't necessarily

an effort to make the introduction long enough to take it up to the time of the exam, because we want to break within but that's all I can say.

Let's move on to some of their some of the ways some of their methodology

and especially when it comes to headings, as I mentioned earlier, this especially the topic of proceeding and heading, and this is an area which the any they play around with the most.

Sometimes, many of them end they insist that what we have to follow is the Quran, because it is authenticated from the public comments

and only authentic ideas.

And for some of them, Yanni, they have actually written this journey what they mean by authentic editing is something like 14 or 20 in selected heavy

and it to them the Bronson is Daniel Quran and 2011 it

bothers me I need to claim this we have to make sure that we follow only what is authentic from from the from the present moment.

And then this would imply that they have some way of judging it.

And if they feel we should only follow what is authentic from the public comments. And in this implies that they have some way of judging

either the judge at least according to the opinion, in other words, according to the methodology of the scholars,

or the judge is in a different way, where they do not accept the realism.

And they reject the ways in my head up and they give many reasons for why they reject the way magazine and all of these reasons damages or claims that they make, which are not true. But I don't want to go into this area in detail because actually in this particular

lecture, they say for example, that the the hydrovane

And if they just look at the snap, or the tip of the chain of the headings, and they will not worry about the meaning of the edits or the method,

while they make this claim saying that therefore we will find, for example, inside of a pod inside Muslim and others, and you will find headache ridiculous meaning but since this knot looks good,

have you seen it?

Well, those who took the class in

luminary have a few here shala they know that that's not that's not to say that anything from the course and so on.

And it is studied, not only it's not, but they also study the listening. And in order for it to be acceptable for editing, and in the message or the text of the edits has to be such that it cannot contribute to salon, it cannot contradict strong sources. And they're not there to not be some kind of hidden defects in it. Because I said Johnny, the most of the riders,

when you see them Yanni discussing, and discussing whether it is offensive or not. And if they do not follow the conclusions of the scholars of headings, but at the same time, none of them have ever come up with a new methodology, a new way of looking at is the new way of thinking. In general, basically, they just judge it based on the outcome. And it will tell them, what sounds good to them they accept and what doesn't sound good to them, and

they reject. So I think I gave an example of that.

And in the in the second lecture

about

any one of the humans better with pleasure. And this is similar to the arguments

concerning the headaches and polycephalum that many people will not prefer, any of the repairs are in the hands of a woman love there are ruled by by women.

And in both value and women. And it is the case,

from

any from completely opposite point of view, when most of the cases remember, as I mentioned, I think in the second lecture, remember we said about abubaker having the feeling it says according to the score of the IDC is not acceptable as a narrative.

Why and he was a mechanic is a very strong statement. And in fact, it is either a mistake, or any it is not true whatsoever. And I look for a broker and many of the books that I do. And here's the Sahaba, which any editing considers the Sahaba are good or, and every one of them is either. Also any none of the scholars have had it happen to say that about the book. But that again is beside the point, can you do what I'm doing to how he says that?

Just because that is purely on the fact that, according to him, there have been moments such as Margaret Thatcher and Indira Gandhi and go to my hair, and most people prefer. So therefore, he's saying that in my view, Yanni, there are women who will let people on the people prosper. So therefore, the Hadees must not be authentic.

So he said, we have too much of our club workers here just waiting for

the Bolivian intercept. And

one second time, they will make you make the event. And as I said, let me just finish the point before the stand up, that he's judging me based simply on his office, saying that and in my opinion, it is something that contradicts his study. And therefore he, he rejected it, we can discuss this end points in greater detail, what is the what is the definition of collapse, from Islamic point of view, as I think I mentioned in the second lecture, and it is not just an increase in GNP or something like that. But it is yanyan implies both the left and the junior well after was to say I need to reject the editor, which is the party on the basis of what you've seen from Buddha Meyer and

Margaret Thatcher and to claim that their people have latched on to them. And he that this is really an is a way of thinking of latonia It takes some example into them that example looks good, and therefore they judge

them analogy.

And the point, the point that I'm trying to make here is that they claim and this is one of the ways that they can mislead people, by their methodology, by their by their arguments. And they claim this really helps to follow what is authentic from the headings of the problem.

But then can you work in in a sense, it is not what the scholars have had it had you been throughout all of the years have said but it's their journey to them what is authentic, is genuine meets their their opinion, or what sounds good to them. So probably one of the most extreme and he this this way of looking at it was the man

who was teaching at the university

In Chicago for many years,

and he's pretty clear about his journey, he accepted the argument that the most special things that most of the segments are not authentic for many reasons, he claims. But he said to me, that doesn't mean that we should reject them all, it says clearly is the meaning of something good, we should accept it and take it

regardless of whether it is authentic or not. And if we don't like the meaning, and if we find that the meaning is not good, we must reject

this person claims to be. And he's one of the one of the few people who really he calls himself a monk. And he says that Islam needs to be modernized, to be modernized and uses his journey of modernization.

Now, at the same time, many, although they claim that this is a methodology that we only have to use authenticating, especially having to deal with actual practices, and assuming, for example, with respect to respect to matters, and so forth, and if they don't like these headings row, they don't like headings which have specific meanings to them, they prefer the headings, whichever, for example, general principles, like in the middle of Albania, and he this is, this is the kind of having to deal with

some of them any day like very clearly that

is the idea that we accept, we accept the Quran, and we said very few of the ideas that are actually authentic, and some of them even reduce them to like 14 or 20.

Go at the same time.

And one thing very interesting any that we see in their approach, and again, you find this in almost all their proofs of the writings. And it might be it might be a lot and because they're not actually specialists in it. Rather than explain this, we only have to follow what is authentic.

At the same time, the use, we can use whenever it is helpful for them.

And at the same time, they make all these claims that we have to follow only what is authentic. And when it seems convenient to them, or when something support their arguments, then they will use

it. For example, here in this MOS would someone give a lecture,

someone who likes democracy a lot. So to support the idea that everyone should get a vote in the election of someone in the election have a limp or whatever. And he is trying to argue that men and women are equal, and so forth, and everyone in society should be allowed to vote. And so he called it

the story of

breathlessness.

And he bring the scientists of man was selected as funding.

And in the story goes after

everyone's door and Medina, at the end a group of men and women who they think should be selected.

And based on on his findings.

He chose that person or that person

where they presented this or this argument come from the same person. And one of the things person who said, you have to be careful only to use authentic ideas, which is brilliantly there's nothing wrong with that. But the point is that when when we had a for our use of for them, such as this incident, analysis is not the true story, anybody when it's useful for them, they will use it to, to support them and

perhaps, also look just as common, if not more common, with respect to the position of woman in Islam.

And the seminars I mentioned and also the position of women in Islam, the the two areas that they tried to discuss the most, in fact to bring about the changes the most,

particularly to women in Islam. And it is same people who argue that we should only use authenticating, they almost always broke down into

two stories from the kind of in support of their view that women should play an active role in politics and so forth. What is the

what is the story of when Obama was on the new book.

And he advised the people Yanni about the matter and tried to restrict the amount of money that is to be given.

For the woman came to him and said, Get me How can you do this and I'll let the kind of data put on the human if you gave them

a large amount of gold is enough to get back from them. And so I'm gonna assert that the armor of the woman is correct, and I'm going to mistaken and if they use this, again, the same people say we should always use authenticating. They use this story over and over again to prove the position of a woman in the tissue as any this they are and even during the time they feel free to go up to the police and so forth and so on. I mean this might be true with this for those of you cannot see

Use the Restore, which is not true as as approved, especially any when they say that we have to be careful only to use what is

authentic.

Also, from the time of armor, they use the story of

an elephant mispronounce the woman's name to Alaska.

And they will use the story that only Chevelle was appointed by Obama as one of the one of the history and one of the people who lose in the market and make sure that there's no cheating in the market, make sure that the only people who lose weight correctly and there's no any monster going on in the market and reinforced with the motto. Again, the story is coming from the same people who say we should be careful and address and use only what is authentic. And again, the definition, the definition of authentic man is something that they never define. But they use this story again, which is not not authentic, is a to prove that women can be in the government and so forth. And but

the evidence for that, and is not authentic. I'm not talking about the point itself, about what for example, is the woman's role and so forth. That's not my point here. My point is that they are. And the same people will say we should be careful in using it. And judging the light of modern times work so forth, and reject that eases my routine throughout all the years that are authentic. And it is the same people turn around and when it's when it's convenient for them. Or in other words, when it supports them. And they are very quick to use me and instance use stories to prove

their point of view. And it just shows an inconsistency of course in the middle. And sometimes then it even makes you doubt

even makes you doubt their intention. And when they say something clearly, we should be careful only a set of ideas. And then the goal though at the same time. And using any ideas which are not authentic or stories which are not authentic, that's a perk and what they're trying to do. And it just makes you question even the only words really the person and what he's trying to do and

and what's the reality

and another another person to use many of them.

And this is also very dangerous and tricky.

Because and by doing this, then you can come to a place and you can give a lecture to people with completely different views. And all of that and you leave them your name all of them with the with the impression that what you said is correct, although what you meant as you may be

completely incorrect. And this is the the practice of using terms

and using vague terms without actually defining them. And without actually defining them from Islamic point of view. And he didn't say he wrote about the concerning the attributes of a loved a society.

And he has to decide what the problems are for them. And after December 17.

Many people begin to use the term for Alyssa Hannah with Allah or subequal. Let's begin with data, which are not actually found in the furano signal. And they discuss whether or not data has these, as these characteristics

was given to me and pointed out ghanians in order to say that this statement is correct or not, the person actually has to define exactly what you mean by

the page. And he actually he's not saying anything, and he's allowing the people themselves to determine what they want to see, or what he wants to think is correct, for example, and in the three famous terms of

democracy, and freedom, and equality

says effective schools is the source

of the slogans of the nation. And the question is, when someone when a speaker thumbs or when any speaker speaks, and Islam speaker uses these terms,

the question he has to answer himself in the person any answer that he has to give to the people, lessons you mean by these terms.

And if he's talking about democracy, and he just leaves it open like this, without defining workers, you mean by democracy, you actually need democracy.

As from a Western point of view, or any this word was developed in this work? The concept comes from

karate claims in Arabic and democracy.

And democracy actually was a Western, anti Western concept. Well yet if you want to use the word democracy, if you mean by to work, and so on.

And because the western concept of democracy and how come you are the one who has the right to lay down this legislation as the people shot, and if this is what you mean by democracy, and

so when you say that Islam is democratic, and in and you say, actually, some people, they're both really extreme, and they say that the Jura

shuttle was the term during the time of the problem it says 11 democracy

The terminal as

well as in many books thing that brings down the promise of dilemmas was sure, of consultation and today's The same thing is the most.

When you when you use these terms, the one who you're playing again, because the one who knows the systems are wrong, he will say inshallah, this isn't what he meant by were the one who doesn't know that this term is long, he'll say yes, to some sense of democracy. distributorship also talks about, and he and he will think it means any democracy. So we have to be very careful, you need to define it exactly. And if they use vague terms in the lead, of course, again, without saying exactly what they mean, about democracy, or freedom, and freedom from the western point of view, and it weren't when the movement for freedom actually begin. It was actually freedom from the laws of the church.

And what they meant by freedom originally in Europe is freedom from obeying the laws of God.

And when you say freedom in Islam, this is not what you lose. But at the same time, you have to explain and it's this elite, what you mean, equality, the same?

Can in Islam, the equality between men and women in the same way that they try to make equality between men and women here, and in that case, is there equality between an Islamic law

and in Islamic State.

And he has to again, you have to define what you say, or another term, which I'm sure Danny, many people don't know what that means, but it is used by many of you, and is different masala was

one of them here, and he gave a lecture and he used this to use this page, maybe 10 or 15 times anything that you have to judge everything. Within Yanni, the concept of subtle massaging

of words is beneficial to the people and what is harmful.

Now is there any Islamic law lays down any definitions of what kind of muscle how we can accept and what kind of massage and in the shadow education sector,

and we have to be more stringent, especially if we're talking to people who do not have a background in sort of the process.

And because we end up talking to people who don't have that kind of background, then one day only when they need to talk or read a book, and they look at something and they think there's some muscle hard to work, even if that's the type of muscle has this Islam and he does not consider or reject. And he will argue for it and see and it becomes this person's writing.

Also, again, another another phrase.

Yeah.

That's

just one of the one of the approaches of this school. And why so many people are divided about it, because anyone uses obviously, I mean, when you use these terms, we can look at and say, well, the government sentences

and if we have any good

for the person will say Oh, when he meant the most when he said democracy, he said when he said freedom, yeah, and even to the system when he said because he misses and so forth. lakhiani This is not actually what you said, You're assuming something for the person, which is not what he actually says, What's a good ganic to have this good suspicion about your brother. But sometimes Danny the truth, or the reality of the situation is the opposite. And it's just his mistake, and if he does not, he does not define the term properly, and if he is trying to use this discipline

or another and another way of the of this, this model

or this moment

is again when they discuss a topic, they will not present all the information that is available on the topic.

And when they discuss the topic, for example, they will not present everything that can be found in the front about that topic. Or they do not present everything from

about that property. And it will simply present that information that will support their way of thinking. And they leave out any debt which goes against

their way of thinking. For example, in the in the minarets magazine when I showed

I guess in the second lecture about the copy of the minarets magazine that shows some pictures from

that magazine. And one of the person who answers questions for them his name is Paul Jordan. And he was asked about an ad.

And someone wrote in as I said, by the way, is the characteristic of modernist movement, that anything that we can witness anything that we cannot test and actually physically see. And you may have a tendency to reject Well, I am one of those things that they that they reject is a must believe in generally and in the modernist people belong to the school in general.

Going back to the time that our

society and fun and they do not they do not believe in things which are unseen. One of the things that they do not believe in is an anchor

for this person, yeah. And he was asked the question, someone

wrote a letter to the magazine, he asked a question about the rain. I heard many Muslims from overseas mentioning this topic and believing this and so forth. And I find this belief on

Google I

realized, like, like democracy and the the West has their own idea of life, which is not necessarily the same as the Senate, but doesn't tend to be any record

of translating either life.

Well, this person and he pulls in his answer, and he didn't present any ideas.

He didn't present anything from the Quran, he simply wrote Chinese is the belief in the evil eye, has been common among many cultures. And one of those poetry was the Muslim culture. And it is not generally necessary for us to believe in something which is simply cultural.

And he has he presented all the edits that he presented the headaches and problems, Amazon, and perhaps their journey to Edison true, although he gave some explanation for the headache, and he was this would have been

enough, maybe that's not acceptable, but much better than what he did. And this is one of the ways that they avoid Johnny,

getting into arguments or getting into opinions that they don't, they don't approve of, simply by not mentioning, any, they don't mention all of the all of the pros. And so therefore, they are any, they are free, not to

any, they don't have to bother with what the Father says instead, they just

mentioned

from a scientific point of view, of course, this is not correct. And if you want to study any topic, you have to study all of the data that you can find about the topic, and you have to weigh what is correct from that data. And based on that data, you will make a conclusion and not the other way around, have your conclusion and reject the data, although this is among among economists, as economists say any piece of data, our numbers will tell you what you want us to say.

But the first enable is the person who is looking for the truth and he will approach the subject and opposite men

wasn't looking to the money. And

as one thing nice about these lectures, we have lots of breaks.

And it was restricted the the point that was mentioned about not presenting all the information on on the topic,

and obviously what what that was referring to in that case is for example, this is Mandy not mentioned

about language authentic,

for example, can be found in inquiry,

is something something true?

Well, can we find that even even the present all of the muscles within two specific topics.

And even then, sometimes with with the and some of them wish to avoid the actual meaning of the test, then what they do is they force their interpretation upon the test.

We talked about the history of the development or the development of the

movements. And we talked about the master leader, this was one of their one of their approaches, especially at first with respect to the Quran, because they cannot deny any version of Chrome like they can, or like they try to deny it. So therefore with respect to Sauron,

and when the Quran goes against what they want to believe, or what they want to save, again, the forced interpretation from the Quran, an example that we saw,

first lecture with respect to hamanako, for example, when he served at the gym, or the modern day microbes, and because he didn't

believe in the things of density, right. So he and he gives the interpretation for the Djinn. Another example, which is related to the problem comes up.

I think in the second lecture, was the case of the corporate civically, claiming any of the women should pray in the mosque. And when we discussed the headings as opposed to say that it's best for a woman to pray in her house, and it's even better for her to pray in the privates

in a room of her house, we mentioned earlier that he said the reason for

that woman is because she did not have the proper clothing to go outside. And so for therefore, the film was putting that woman in particular that she would is best for her any to pray

in her house.

Yanni, basically it's very clear that season four is forcing his own interpretation upon the idea that it doesn't say that whatsoever. And there's no evidence for what he is saying, while he himself is not presenting any evidence for that, repetition of this particular idea. So, even even if they do present in the source, they try to interpret the the source.

And in such a way that they basically forced their own interpretation on the source. And even if they do actually present the source all the text related to it, then Yanni, when they get to the point that they present the materials and they try to interpret in their in their own way. And they have difficulty doing that during the third outlet that they use in their methodology is to say that the Latin takes precedence over nothing. And even human intellect takes precedence over what has been narrated

from the problem.

So, therefore, if there's any contradiction between the locker

and nothing between any what we what we as human beings, with our intellect leave as soon as

any any contradiction between that in what is stated in the Parana with the state of medical problem, I'm assuming that a lot of takes precedence. And even what has been reported has to be rejected as untrue in the case of it, or it has to be and you have to make that we have to give it some meaning consistent with what we believe is true. And then when we came here early this year, the data clearly stated.

For many, many people, many people are under this impression. And in fact, this impression comes from the one of the sources for this impression, which is something that I had heard from many people after I became Muslim, is that

Islam is a completely rational religion.

And Islam is completely rational, you will not find anything in Islam that goes against

rational thinking.

When I first became Muslim, I heard this, I heard this from many, many people. This they were many, many, many brothers say to me not realizing exactly what they're saying.

Because if you say that Islam is the direction we're looking at, you mean by that, that

any human that signs and everything in this world came from Allah subhana wa Tada, and the Quran and the Hadith and Protestantism, also came from Allah subhanho wa Taala. And therefore, you're not gonna find any contradiction between the two. And it was nothing wrong with that.

But if you mean by that, in Islam, we study everything, including the text, including adding to promises in an irrational way. And what we don't think is correct, according to our intellect, we reject this is something else. And this is completely,

completely unacceptable. Well, those people who say that the novel takes precedence over nothing, they never are correct in any strong group that can usually be exceeded at something well known as something given

lots of experience over in a

later lecture when we when we compare them in a similar way, to the modernist moments, we'll discuss this question in more detail and in the tradition of Latin, with respect to what has been

narrated from the from the covenant, even talking about the Quran are talking about

the next tip.

Besides, besides saying that, that often takes precedence, another way of avoiding than what the text actually says. Another way, or another way of avoiding actually implementing what's the Quran, or what the idiot says, is to say that, as Muslims, we're supposed to take the spirits of the religion and not the, and not be too much worried about the details.

What is this concept? Also, I have written many books, I've heard from many, many writers that were more concerned about the spirit of religion, and not as concerned with

with the specific laws. What is most likely

a lot in this problem. And it's very possible that

the some of the Muslims have been influenced throughout history by the Christians on this point, because the Christians and it completely changed the spirit of Christianity. And

this is something we're going to monitor his movements in Christianity, and although it may have influenced the,

also the Muslim modernists and if you look to the front and if you look to the editing process, and then it is very clear that we're supposed to take both the spirit and the detail laws into consideration not just concern ourselves.

With respect with

respect to the spirit of the law,

as in even in the verse, in which God is sending us, any piety is not facing east to west, Allah subhanho wa Taala continues that verse by feeling as if it is believing in certain states, and also establishing the philosophy and things that happen. So far, these are the different aspects that we cannot,

we cannot ignore one of the

one of the examples where they use this, this

principle, and we take the spirit of the law is with respect to his hair.

What is the Muslim women supposed to wear? They'll say, many of them have argued, and unfortunately, as I said, many of them and many of them, because I'm not talking about one or two authors here, I'm talking about the large number of artists, they are you with Ron basically telling us that the woman should dress modestly. And we shouldn't concern ourselves too much with the details of that dress. And what is the meaning for example,

what is the meaning of command and so forth. And they were saying that this is not what what data wants to know, this is not the meaning of this verse in the Quran, Allah subhanho wa Taala is simply telling us that the women are supposed to be dressed in a modest way. And this is based on this principle that we take the spirit of the laws and we don't worry too much about the details

below

another, another aspect of the of their of their methodology,

which when interpreting such texts,

and this actually was related to what we talked about lunch will not talk about in detail.

And then sometimes replaying things as scientific fact when in fact, they are not science.

And the judge says this is article six prisons are nothing dangerous, the Quran and hiding in the light of these so called scientific facts, which are not sensitive, as I said last time,

in detail lessons over and over again,

when other aspects of their of their methodology

is that they have a tendency to prove some of the football and some of the leading scholars of Islam

quoting any table, which is true, but what they mean by that is something else.

They do not mean the same thing that the scholars

who originally made those statements, men and bread, perhaps one of the classic examples of that the statement that the door just had to

adjust the door to is to have this never closed, there's no such thing as we can no longer make it you have any more to do for this statement, as we know, the scholars of Islam,

which you could come in

and abroad accept the statement, there's no question that the door is open. And it will be always open until the day of judgment. But the point is, what do you mean by that? Do you mean by that filming that the door he had or she had is open to anyone

you mean by that statement that he had is perfect on any question.

Some of these modernists, they claim that in the early years of Islam, anyone was allowed to make it.

And it wasn't till I remember shopping again.

In which the qualifications for making scad were narrowed. And only specific people

were allowed to make this to help.

With the second statement also in more detail, this is not true, obviously. And even before the time of human survey, the service, were careful about who would be allowed or who should make us get out and who should not make you have a good point is that he had the groceries he had is open and anyone should be allowed to make a scan. Whether he's a store he knows about

whatever is not important, they are claiming that anyone should be allowed to make it to her. And many friends they made this clearly without any doubt about what other times we can try to couch it in. In other terms. Perhaps when we discussed that points in more detail, I'll bring some quotes from some of the graphics I have in here somewhere.

Also related to this point is on what questions you make.

When you say the broker is open. does that imply that even if there's a new service that there's some text, some Quranic verses and Hadith of the Prophet Muhammad says elements to the point that we can still make it Yes Have

some of them may not say that explicitly, but in their writings, you can see

one of the classic examples of that which is

Since repeated in the recent issue of security is with respect to for example a thorough and who has the right to make them up and whether its electricity gets in the hands of the judge and taken out of the hand of the husband and poorly. Why should polygyny

men marry more than one woman which is something that

is observed and

some people have written in the most recent cases, he was in safety, that the most recent issue

this is my expert on saving

the most in the most recent issue of safety magazine, again, the same argument was made in a conference someplace on the position of women is now that we should restrict the rights of the law and we should restrict the practice of fertility. This is exactly this kind of methodology, where it was said that we may make the

the verb which is open and we may even make is to add on questions

from therapeutical source Coronavirus.

Another another statement similar to that.

And this term is kind of funny, because the one that they usually refer to including the statements, they are given a time, you're going to find in this book, lemon water.

And in real estate

or effect was supposed to change with time in place if the conditions change the technician.

And he writes, he writes on this point for I think about six pages, or at least more than

I think many of these modernists they just take this one from someone else and they never actually read the book.

Where are you with enough time said with a bachelor has changed with time place? And the quote, long passage from an assignment he said.

So the problem is that this statement is true. There's no question that changes with them.

But repenting repenteth footwear we're talking about,

again, this, these people take it to apply to almost anything.

That what was great during the time of the Prophet agreement, the time to harbor, the terrain and so forth, things have changed now and the ripple effects of that change. And they change it down. And not only with respect to

things related to custom, but also with respect to

with respect to look

at some of them clearly stated we don't want to get in in Florida, we want it in

there stating it clearly has a very famous passage completely, not just for this one portion of it, it makes it very clear that when he's saying that the customer has to change the template he's not talking about things which are confirmed by the Quran and Sunnah. He's talking about the towers are based simply on the testing of a piece.

For example, if the customer people with respect to business units

are the professional people that if they make a certain statement, that means the business meeting is concluded and they both accept the business unit

when

then the customer should be that effective and amazing that didn't do this.

But this is a tough road to get in on the on the culture on the time and the place, not based on the source not based on Quran or Hadith that says if you make the statement to do, nothing is complete. So things change over time. And this statement loses means and doesn't mean any more that the business even is concluded, then the feds will have to change that now if you make the same statement, it doesn't mean that the business unit is included. So he

was talking about what he stated explicitly. If you continue to read what he said, He's talking about the tower which are based on custom, which are not based on the source. These things have to change over time, according to the conditions of the different environment. But unfortunately, as I said, they take the statement and occur the first few paragraphs so what he said and they apply it to everything and you deploy it as

they apply.

They apply to

a job the flight needed might apply even to the rules related

to the open source. So this is one of the