Principles Of Fiqh Part 2

Jamal Zarabozo


Channel: Jamal Zarabozo


File Size: 10.48MB

Episode Notes

Share Page

Transcript ©

AI generated text may display inaccurate or offensive information that doesn’t represent Muslim Central's views. No part of this transcript may be copied or referenced or transmitted in any way whatsoever.

00:00:02--> 00:00:08

Let me clear up a couple of points from from last time. The same By the way,

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

my book

00:00:17--> 00:00:25

last time, I hope you got some benefit from the from the hour and a half. It wasn't meant just to, to kill an hour and a half. But

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

after what we went through yesterday, if you pick up any book

00:00:32--> 00:00:38

and from the beginning, when they define, you'll be able to tell where the author's coming from, what kind of point of view

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

he's coming from, and how he how it is how he defines this sort of stuff and what he will cover. I assume you all remember this from last

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

from last time, this is the definition of what

00:00:56--> 00:00:56


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

is the definition of a soul.

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

It also says the definition of a soul, Danny, you're your one leg out of the class.

00:01:08--> 00:01:08

The definition of

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

the science

00:01:12--> 00:01:16

of the camp, by the way, I found what we mean by here.

00:01:18--> 00:01:20

When we were when we

00:01:21--> 00:01:29

were talking about whether something is way different MOBA or ROM, or Sahara was whether something is obligatory or

00:01:30--> 00:01:38

or forbidden or sound or void. Anyway, as I was writing on the board, there was some discussion above this word.

00:01:40--> 00:01:44

Should it be feminine, referring to gamma or masking them referring to em?

00:01:45--> 00:01:53

Well, I found this in five books. This is this is the traditional Sharpie Assouline definition of so you can find it in many books.

00:01:55--> 00:01:56

And all of them had it.

00:01:58--> 00:02:14

And in the suitcase book, German Joanna the the one who wrote the commentary, Mandala he wrote clearly, as if you knew we know, someday, someone like me was going to try to teach this and someone like our brother would try to refute me

00:02:15--> 00:02:21

vertical, Janice is referring to him. So that is the correct definition. There's a small point but I thought I would

00:02:24--> 00:02:25

get it out of the way.

00:02:28--> 00:02:31

So to review, we didn't say this explicitly.

00:02:35--> 00:02:37

But there's some things as I said, I want to clear up from last time

00:02:39--> 00:02:43

the census that is the definition of which we went over last time

00:02:48--> 00:02:50

sip tells us if something

00:02:56--> 00:02:57

is white

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


00:03:08--> 00:03:11

or permissible or what

00:03:13--> 00:03:13

is five

00:03:14--> 00:03:16

haram forbidden or disliked

00:03:20--> 00:03:21

this also tells us

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


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

is bound

00:03:31--> 00:03:31

by that

00:03:33--> 00:03:34


00:03:38--> 00:03:41

or and this is for the heavy and the class

00:03:43--> 00:03:43

or irregular

00:03:46--> 00:03:52

meaning that any other that has the only have sound and voice

00:03:56--> 00:04:00

also the sciences that also includes the particular

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


00:04:06--> 00:04:07

evidences for

00:04:09--> 00:04:10


00:04:17--> 00:04:20

Okay, the particular evidences for practical matters.

00:04:22--> 00:04:23

That is what

00:04:24--> 00:04:25

these are the things that

00:04:27--> 00:04:29

we learn and these things

00:04:31--> 00:04:33

we're not going to be studying here, right?

00:04:34--> 00:04:37

This has nothing to do with what we're well, I shouldn't say nothing.

00:04:39--> 00:04:42

Everybody has this definition of this.

00:04:45--> 00:04:47

So did you write this down?

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

How much trying to avoid writing in Arabic? After

00:05:11--> 00:05:13

Seoul, South Korea, this is what we talked about last time.

00:05:16--> 00:05:20

I mean, this is like review of last time. So this should come out quickly.

00:05:26--> 00:05:27

That's pretty quick once you say

00:05:34--> 00:05:35

how to drive,

00:05:36--> 00:05:38

how to drive legal rulings?

00:05:55--> 00:05:57

Remember, my husband's definition

00:05:58--> 00:05:58

of assault is?

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

Also who's qualified to use those.

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

What's up?

00:06:34--> 00:06:35

the giving of this one?

00:06:36--> 00:06:36


00:06:38--> 00:06:39

did we say?

00:06:43--> 00:06:45

Check to see if last time was really with them or not.

00:06:47--> 00:06:48

That's how to drive.

00:06:51--> 00:06:53

Number two who was qualified to

00:06:56--> 00:06:56


00:06:58--> 00:07:00

Okay. What, what

00:07:01--> 00:07:02

is very important also,

00:07:04--> 00:07:05

according to our definition of

00:07:06--> 00:07:08

what is and

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

is not

00:07:11--> 00:07:12

an acceptable

00:07:14--> 00:07:15

form other than

00:07:26--> 00:07:28

what is and is not an acceptable form of evidence.

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


00:07:34--> 00:07:36

And there's one more that we didn't really

00:07:38--> 00:07:40

I didn't really mention yesterday.

00:07:46--> 00:07:48

That is the relationship

00:07:54--> 00:07:55


00:07:58--> 00:07:58


00:08:00--> 00:08:01

types of evidence

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


00:08:09--> 00:08:10

the correct evidence,

00:08:11--> 00:08:12

thank you.

00:08:16--> 00:08:18

To get out of the way so you can take a picture of the board.

00:08:24--> 00:08:24


00:08:30--> 00:08:32

We use the term loosely.

00:08:38--> 00:08:39

Now, for example,

00:08:41--> 00:08:46

some types of evidence are stronger than other sets of so there's a conflict between two sets of evidence

00:08:48--> 00:08:50

tells you which one takes precedence over the other

00:08:56--> 00:09:04

three and four just tells you what is an acceptable form of evidence or what isn't? Number Four ranked them in order of strength.

00:09:05--> 00:09:12

For example, the Hadees which is much awaited or has been narrated by many people on each chain is the type of person

00:09:13--> 00:09:15

so as the head eat, which is

00:09:16--> 00:09:21

both of them are evidence. But if there's a conflict between the two, which one is stronger?

00:09:23--> 00:09:26

So as opposed to tells us which one is stronger, which one takes preference.

00:09:29--> 00:09:34

Now these four except for the last one, they should have been clear from what we talked about last time.

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


00:09:37--> 00:09:40

So this class is not about this stuff. Over here.

00:09:41--> 00:09:42

is about the stuff over there

00:09:46--> 00:09:48

that clear Any questions about that?

00:09:54--> 00:09:56

Yesterday, there was after class

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


00:10:04--> 00:10:05

Which one?

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

This one?

00:10:11--> 00:10:13

Again, this is just the Hanafi.

00:10:18--> 00:10:21

Question. You look very confused brother.

00:10:27--> 00:10:29

How come they're all from the same university as you

00:10:34--> 00:10:39

left out the name of the university, you told me to leave our names because of the tape. But they're all from the same university.

00:10:43--> 00:10:55

Okay, after after the class on Tuesday, there was a couple people made comments after the class that showed me that is one of the points that they have to clarify.

00:10:58--> 00:11:01

This one number one, number one here is talking about

00:11:02--> 00:11:04

the blood for the legal Maxim's.

00:11:14--> 00:11:25

As I said last time, legal Maxim's actually is not a good definition for what we're talking about here. And apparently, from what I heard after class,

00:11:26--> 00:11:30

I should clarify this. The difference between three things.

00:11:34--> 00:11:35

One is the

00:11:47--> 00:11:49

money right from the other side?

00:11:53--> 00:11:54

No, because I'm going to read here.

00:11:56--> 00:11:59

I want to call this now General, legal maximum.

00:12:01--> 00:12:02

Legal max.

00:12:16--> 00:12:18

Okay, let me erase them first, and then I will

00:12:20--> 00:12:20

get to the

00:12:23--> 00:12:24

other one is glide.

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


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

up here.

00:12:33--> 00:12:35

Okay, these are

00:12:37--> 00:12:39

since you said in Turkish, you have the word step I'm going to use to

00:12:40--> 00:12:41

go this step.

00:12:44--> 00:12:44


00:12:48--> 00:12:55

And then we have a beloved up here. So they don't remember how to spell the word in Arabic.

00:12:57--> 00:12:59

All right, it's in English. But what?

00:13:00--> 00:13:02

I'm going to call this one little.

00:13:10--> 00:13:15

Okay, let's talk about what's the difference between the three of them. And then we'll

00:13:16--> 00:13:17

talk about

00:13:19--> 00:13:22

those to be clear to you what we're going to discuss in this class.

00:13:30--> 00:13:30


00:13:31--> 00:13:33

No, no, here it means.

00:13:34--> 00:13:39

That's a very good translation for the other to the other appear.

00:13:41--> 00:13:44

No, it doesn't seem like Good. Good. Okay.

00:13:47--> 00:13:52

So this is a study of those four things. Number one is referring to an allied alien.

00:13:54--> 00:13:57

Okay, this chord are independent

00:13:59--> 00:14:01

and dependent in the pendant.

00:14:04--> 00:14:05


00:14:08--> 00:14:08


00:14:17--> 00:14:21

In a second that will give for an event that will give examples

00:14:22--> 00:14:22

of that.

00:14:27--> 00:14:35

I'm going to give examples of this and when I give examples, it'll be clear what I mean by sub Maxim's or a Cohen Sapir

00:14:37--> 00:14:45

require the supreme court or a ruling that applies to many cases. independent of the of the topic of

00:14:47--> 00:14:49

what we're really talking about many cases

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

are based

00:14:56--> 00:14:59

or that are based or the go back to

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

The same

00:15:07--> 00:15:09

on the same deductive analogy or

00:15:17--> 00:15:20

for example, who can we make apple of course

00:15:28--> 00:15:29


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


00:15:38--> 00:15:40

not an English class This is me This is a class in English

00:15:43--> 00:15:45

the big difference between the two

00:15:50--> 00:15:51


00:15:57--> 00:16:03

okay for example let's take an easy one dining necessity necessity renders

00:16:04--> 00:16:10

any provision things illegal makes them makes forbidden things legal that is one

00:16:15--> 00:16:17

necessity renders prohibited things permissible

00:16:21--> 00:16:23

in English and English

00:16:25--> 00:16:26


00:16:45--> 00:16:47

okay necessity renders prohibited things from

00:16:53--> 00:16:55

now this is an example of

00:16:59--> 00:17:00

this is a fighter

00:17:02--> 00:17:10

now, I said this is what we mean by many cases that are based on the same analogy. In other words, whether you're talking about salon

00:17:12--> 00:17:18

or you're talking about fasting or you're talking about hex or you're talking about any many different topics

00:17:20--> 00:17:23

I mean, assuming you can apply this principle

00:17:27--> 00:17:29

for example, with respect to prayer

00:17:31--> 00:17:33

Yanni someone

00:17:36--> 00:17:41

has his arm cut off for example, from here and he'll be excused from putting his hands here

00:17:44--> 00:17:56

also in the case of hex, he has some particular conditions he will be excluded from certain things. So, this is a principle or Maxim that can be applied in almost any any topic.

00:17:57--> 00:18:08

Okay, so therefore it is called a Mac more quads are disappeared. Okay. This is not the type of thing we're going to be sitting here.

00:18:09--> 00:18:14

Okay, unless we get to the end of the class near the end of the class, if you look at the reading list,

00:18:15--> 00:18:15

I devoted

00:18:17--> 00:18:20

a separate lecture for that but I don't really believe we'll get there but

00:18:22--> 00:18:23

it is actually not a topic.

00:18:25--> 00:18:27

But it is an interesting topic. That's why

00:18:29--> 00:18:31

that's why if we have time, we'll get to it later.

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


00:18:38--> 00:18:38


00:18:50--> 00:18:50


00:18:52--> 00:18:58

With respect although someone has cut off from here, and he doesn't have to wash obviously.

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

Okay, because of because of necessity.

00:19:11--> 00:19:12


00:19:16--> 00:19:17

The first point

00:19:18--> 00:19:21

and seven points to call out is that

00:19:24--> 00:19:25

human beings have

00:19:30--> 00:19:39

no, I just I said it's independent of any sub question. We're going to get to examples of it. Okay. Just be patient. Okay, another example another.

00:19:42--> 00:19:48

Another example is hardship. Similar to this Yanni hardship to get the get facility.

00:19:50--> 00:19:50

What is the

00:19:56--> 00:19:59

hardship if something is difficult than the law and it makes it

00:20:01--> 00:20:02

That's quite clear.

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

Can you have something you don't have to get to the point of Mura? If something is hard on the people, then also you apply the principle that you try to make it easy

00:20:15--> 00:20:15

to get

00:20:19--> 00:20:28

that that's the same thing. Okay. So basically, what we're saying is we have many different cases, we're applying the same, what we're really doing is we're applying the same analogy.

00:20:30--> 00:20:32

Okay. And the same way that if someone doesn't have an arm,

00:20:34--> 00:20:38

so suppose he doesn't have two arms? That obviously, he doesn't have to

00:20:40--> 00:20:42

wash them when he's making wood? Oh,

00:20:44--> 00:20:48

no, no, he doesn't have them. Obviously, the same person doesn't have to throw

00:20:49--> 00:20:50

the stones.

00:20:51--> 00:21:08

Right. So we're talking about things that are applied in any area, or not actually in any but in many areas, as opposed to disappear, what they call little Maxim's of the law that are just in a particular particular section of,

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

for example,

00:21:13--> 00:21:20

if something has a little bit of magetta, or a little bit of impurity, and a very small amount of impurity, it doesn't make

00:21:22--> 00:21:24

any the whole thing impure. Okay,

00:21:26--> 00:21:43

we can apply that to many things, we can apply that to water, if you have a big thing of water, has a little bit of impurity doesn't make it impure. If you have food as a little bit of impurity, it doesn't make or I mean, if you have clothing, for example, and just a little bit of impurity.

00:21:47--> 00:21:51

Now, why is that a bother to not provide it?

00:21:52--> 00:21:53

Or is it one of the beloved?

00:21:56--> 00:21:58

To think what is it here for what they said about that?

00:22:01--> 00:22:02

Hey, just for what

00:22:04--> 00:22:15

it is just related to pick up the hot or the topical Sahara. So if you have some principles that are just related to one topic, like purity bahara, for example, because that was

00:22:16--> 00:22:17

not quiet.

00:22:19--> 00:22:26

Now, if you have for example, what was the one you gave me a story, he's one of the brothers who, because of him, we're going through.

00:22:30--> 00:22:31

I forget what you said.

00:22:32--> 00:22:35

But for example, with respect to court cases, there's specific

00:22:37--> 00:22:43

rules that you apply for that you can apply, which only applies to court cases, they don't apply to anything else. So therefore critical

00:22:46--> 00:22:47


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


00:23:08--> 00:23:12

that has a limit, meaning it is limited to a particular topic. And

00:23:14--> 00:23:15

that's what they mean by

00:23:17--> 00:23:40

the word this just refers to, and you can have a go of it that is just related to Sahara. And it is a maxim, but it's only applied with respect to not a flight with respect to buying and selling or marriage or these other things. While I should be in general, obviously, it doesn't have to be every topic, but it can be applied to many topics.

00:23:44--> 00:23:50

No robot is related to a specific topic as an example,

00:23:54--> 00:23:55

it could be related just to sort of

00:23:56--> 00:24:00

it could be related just to buying for specific types of buying.

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


00:24:05--> 00:24:08

numbers two and three are as I said, we are not going to be studying them.

00:24:10--> 00:24:12

Now let's go back to what we are going to be sitting

00:24:32--> 00:24:34

as I said, they are legal Maxim's

00:24:35--> 00:24:39

there are legal Maxim's that are independent of any question.

00:24:43--> 00:24:45

For example, if we wanted, I think I gave this example.

00:24:47--> 00:24:50

If we want it to go from the verse that says, a payment

00:24:52--> 00:25:00

plan is a cat and we want to go from that verse to see what is the legal conclusion that we can get from

00:25:01--> 00:25:02


00:25:03--> 00:25:04

so the first step

00:25:11--> 00:25:13

as I said, we did this last time

00:25:22--> 00:25:23

just taking that part of the verse

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

Okay, this is this is actually a particular

00:25:30--> 00:25:31

evidence for something

00:25:34--> 00:25:37

okay? Which is in the

00:25:39--> 00:25:42

in the definition I erased the list

00:25:46--> 00:25:47

okay, how do we get from that

00:25:48--> 00:25:51

to the conclusion to the prayer

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

and the cat

00:25:56--> 00:25:57


00:25:59--> 00:25:59


00:26:12--> 00:26:15

some okay Furukawa, okay. First thing,

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


00:26:19--> 00:26:22

verse we see that the verse

00:26:23--> 00:26:24

is in the imperative form,

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

which in Arabic is what?

00:26:32--> 00:26:34

English summer case is in the form of armor.

00:26:37--> 00:26:38


00:26:39--> 00:26:47

Secondly, we apply the fighter solely, which is the independence of any question.

00:26:48--> 00:26:49

That's the imperative

00:26:54--> 00:26:55


00:26:58--> 00:26:58


00:27:05--> 00:27:06


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


00:27:11--> 00:27:12

one of the causes

00:27:16--> 00:27:22

that an imperative implies obligation has nothing to do with any particular question.

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

Okay, look like things just a little bit.

00:27:29--> 00:27:37

majesta doesn't affect anything. It's not like things that if you have hardship, you make things easier. Does independence have any questions?

00:27:38--> 00:27:40

You can almost say it has nothing to do with

00:27:41--> 00:27:43

almost, but of course, we wouldn't say that.

00:27:47--> 00:27:50

This is the kind of thing that you study. And

00:27:53--> 00:27:57

you study the dealer and zero and what is

00:27:58--> 00:28:02

for example, in this case, this is a verse of the Quran so when

00:28:03--> 00:28:04


00:28:05--> 00:28:07

we study what is or what isn't a form of

00:28:08--> 00:28:10

evidence, what isn't acceptable.

00:28:11--> 00:28:16

Now without Of course, this is getting rather advanced. We haven't gotten there yet. But would you say a verse in the Quran is the text of the

00:28:19--> 00:28:20

get right?

00:28:23--> 00:28:24

As it's late at night for you people are

00:28:34--> 00:28:35

imperative flies.

00:28:38--> 00:28:38

What you mean in general?

00:28:40--> 00:28:47

Okay, I will discuss it in more it is a big topic, but we'll discuss it in more detail later. Now in this in this example,

00:28:48--> 00:28:53

is something that we should not have written down here somewhere. Okay.

00:28:58--> 00:29:01

Okay, first thing to note, is this, this step right here?

00:29:02--> 00:29:03

That part of

00:29:07--> 00:29:12

me preceded this verse thing. So that was the cat is in the imperative. What do we get that from?

00:29:16--> 00:29:19

Okay, this is from the Arabic language, actually, it's not part of us.

00:29:21--> 00:29:22

And we know that from the Arabic language.

00:29:24--> 00:29:24


00:29:27--> 00:29:28

The second

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

second step, as I said, this is the general principle of the legal Maxim

00:29:36--> 00:29:38

Okay, that we use to derive this ruling.

00:29:39--> 00:29:42

The ruling itself the conclusion is this part of

00:29:45--> 00:29:55

No, actually the ruling itself, I need the conclusion from a particular evidence to a conclusion. And this is actually the conclusion is

00:29:56--> 00:29:59

no point and it is prayer.

00:30:00--> 00:30:11

Again, as I said, Kenny, I said before, this tells us what is wedges, or whether something is working for hot or macro MOBA. So we're saying that something is legit. So we know that that is.

00:30:18--> 00:30:23

Yeah. And in order to derive the conclusions, we have to apply these.

00:30:28--> 00:30:33

Okay, now getting back to a question that was raised, and also what Hoffman said earlier.

00:30:35--> 00:30:36

Maybe I should leave

00:30:38--> 00:30:40

all of these affiliates

00:30:41--> 00:30:42

and also

00:30:44--> 00:30:46

they have to have some evidence for them.

00:30:50--> 00:30:51

And they are not just something

00:30:55--> 00:30:58

that we just make up. You have to have evidence for them either.

00:30:59--> 00:31:00

From the Quran

00:31:03--> 00:31:03

from the Sunnah.

00:31:07--> 00:31:09

From the Arabic language

00:31:15--> 00:31:17

number four from

00:31:18--> 00:31:19

how should I say this?

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


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

This is the

00:31:33--> 00:31:35

luck here. So I don't have to write what these are.

00:31:38--> 00:31:39


00:31:41--> 00:31:44

general, legal maximum, Max

00:31:48--> 00:31:50

does not generalize the squares

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

for those who

00:31:53--> 00:31:53


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


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


00:32:03--> 00:32:04

irrefutable luck

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


00:32:07--> 00:32:11

error airfuel app is not apple in the senses, you know, it is

00:32:12--> 00:32:13


00:32:16--> 00:32:20

For, for example, and obviously, the more proof that something has,

00:32:21--> 00:32:28

the stronger it will be considered. Some coders really have an approach and all of this.

00:32:30--> 00:32:31

To give an example,

00:32:36--> 00:32:38

when we talk about this,

00:32:39--> 00:32:40

you can't hear

00:32:43--> 00:32:44

I'm sorry.

00:32:46--> 00:32:47


00:32:49--> 00:32:52

I'll give you I'll give you three and you give me the proof cover that

00:32:54--> 00:33:01

there is no, when you talk about when we study at the end of the course, about tech leaf or who's responsible.

00:33:03--> 00:33:04

There's a fighter that says

00:33:06--> 00:33:08

there is no

00:33:09--> 00:33:10


00:33:15--> 00:33:15


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


00:33:20--> 00:33:21

one can bear.

00:33:23--> 00:33:24

How do you spell bear in this case?

00:33:31--> 00:33:32

That's an animal.

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


00:33:36--> 00:33:37

Okay, so we

00:33:38--> 00:33:39

want to prove for this time

00:33:40--> 00:33:41

what I mean?

00:33:43--> 00:33:56

Okay, and the three or four verses in the Quran giving the same meaning? Likely Hola, hedonist. Any logos? Okay. Very clear. This spider is derived from that evidence.

00:33:58--> 00:33:58


00:33:59--> 00:34:00

I'll give you another

00:34:04--> 00:34:05


00:34:09--> 00:34:10


00:34:12--> 00:34:13


00:34:16--> 00:34:17

What's the proof of that?

00:34:20--> 00:34:22

Okay, that's proof from every language.

00:34:24--> 00:34:25

But the proof from soon

00:34:34--> 00:34:35

so this one otherwise has lost the proof.

00:34:39--> 00:34:46

Okay, yeah. There's a heavy deposit that says when I already used to do something, then do something to the

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

to the best of your ability.

00:34:51--> 00:34:52

What does the province

00:34:54--> 00:34:56

say about Miss fleck for example,

00:35:01--> 00:35:10

When he when he said when he says this janilla devore not to be a hardship on my own, I would order them to use the miswak before we split off

00:35:11--> 00:35:15

his statement is telling us that if he orders us to do something it's his obligation

00:35:17--> 00:35:19

Okay, how about

00:35:22--> 00:35:23

an order

00:35:25--> 00:35:26

must be

00:35:29--> 00:35:30


00:35:32--> 00:35:33


00:35:39--> 00:35:41

improperly What does that mean?

00:35:48--> 00:35:51

nor it must be performed promptly what's the proof of that

00:35:53--> 00:35:54


00:35:55--> 00:35:56

irrefutable logic

00:35:57--> 00:36:00

I don't think Arabic language was

00:36:03--> 00:36:13

exactly do something and if you tell for example your servant to bring you a glass of water and after two weeks he comes with a glass of water and he obviously had a he did not

00:36:17--> 00:36:24

respond to command prompt in the Arabic language and in order is supposed to be performed prompt

00:36:28--> 00:36:30

Okay, how about this one

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


00:36:43--> 00:36:44


00:36:46--> 00:36:47


00:36:49--> 00:36:50

conclusions about something

00:36:55--> 00:36:58

obviously conclusions about something one of them must be wrong

00:37:10--> 00:37:11

irrefutable laws

00:37:13--> 00:37:15

same was the principle that says that

00:37:16--> 00:37:20

slavery cannot be ordered to do something and not to do it at the same time.

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


00:37:34--> 00:37:34


00:37:42--> 00:37:45

if if the explanations are competitive, they're talking about a verse in the Quran

00:37:47--> 00:37:51

if the Quran is open to more than one meaning or the explanations are compatible,

00:37:53--> 00:37:57

and he then you might, but here that's why I said they come to opposite conclusion.

00:37:58--> 00:38:01

They're explaining a verse in the Quran they come to opposite conclusion. I don't think

00:38:08--> 00:38:16

they use different approaches and one says that philosophy and the other one says this is wrong. Can you know that that one of them has to be wrong?

00:38:19--> 00:38:21

At least one of them is wrong.

00:38:30--> 00:38:30


00:38:36--> 00:38:43

Anything about your process this this to me says that as the opposite conclusion about something one of them must be wrong.

00:38:46--> 00:38:49

This shows you Okay, this shows you how dangerous it is to use

00:38:51--> 00:38:52

something as clear as this

00:38:54--> 00:38:55

should be one.

00:38:56--> 00:38:58

If the premises are different.

00:38:59--> 00:39:00


00:39:03--> 00:39:05

They might you may

00:39:06--> 00:39:07

you may

00:39:11--> 00:39:12


00:39:14--> 00:39:22

the truth is one. If they come to the opposite conclusion, one says the thing is haram, the other one says this was one of them has to be wrong.

00:39:27--> 00:39:28

They say My boss is

00:39:29--> 00:39:34

not talking about the same topic, regardless of how they get to their conclusions. Doesn't matter.

00:39:35--> 00:39:42

Just Okay, just forget this for a second. If they're talking about the one topic, who cares how they get to their results.

00:39:43--> 00:39:46

If they come up with different results, one of them has

00:39:47--> 00:39:48

nothing to do with

00:39:50--> 00:39:58

because the logic says if you go from the same, okay, and that's why I said not logic I said irrefutable logic which is different from much

00:40:00--> 00:40:04

Logic there's many points in logic one stop scanning which are questionable.

00:40:05--> 00:40:15

But related to the chromosome that we relate logic to the chromosome that there's some points which are irrefutable. For example, the truth is one, you cannot say about the same thing

00:40:16--> 00:40:18

someone says is haram, the other one says,

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


00:40:28--> 00:40:31

No, it doesn't have to be. No, doesn't have to be this.

00:41:00--> 00:41:02

Okay, one of them isn't. One of them is wrong.

00:41:07--> 00:41:22

That doesn't, that doesn't matter. We're not talking about Danny is the most type Danny, wrong in his approach or as the atom, we're not talking about it, we're saying that one of them must be wrong. Because pictures cannot be both halal haram at the same time. There cannot be

00:41:25--> 00:41:35

any journey before this century, according to our calendar refutable logic, it cannot be unless there's some new logic nowadays that ilias knows that the rest of us don't know. And it's gonna

00:41:39--> 00:41:40

be really

00:41:42--> 00:41:43

hard to work.

00:41:45--> 00:41:45


00:41:46--> 00:41:52

I'm talking about if you're talking about one topic, and you come to opposite conclusions, and one of them must be wrong.

00:41:56--> 00:42:05

So obviously, this point of wanting that, obviously, the first resources, or the first three schools are much stronger than the fourth proof.

00:42:09--> 00:42:10


00:42:11--> 00:42:16

However, this may ask, let's confuse everything, everything a little bit more.

00:42:17--> 00:42:24

There's a, there's, well, let's, let's stop there. I think we've done enough damage for for today.

00:42:25--> 00:42:31

When asked this question, but I don't know why I'm gonna ask this question. Is this clear? everything clear? Now.

00:42:32--> 00:42:42

So much of what we're going to be studying, we're going to be setting the agenda and the code and the core it has to have some evidence for it. And these are the sources of evidence.

00:42:48--> 00:42:49

Why is the difference one?

00:42:52--> 00:42:54

Oh, my boss, he explained that to him and

00:42:55--> 00:43:05

he said, You and I, we lived at a time when we know what the revelation is talking about. There's gonna be people coming later, we're going to interpret according to the divine, they don't know what has been

00:43:07--> 00:43:15

revealed about and when they read, only interpreted to according to their right, or their opinion, they're going to differ and they're going to fight

00:43:19--> 00:43:20

with respect to

00:43:21--> 00:43:25

sound it still doesn't affect the scanning one of them is wrong. So how about

00:43:50--> 00:43:51

something What

00:43:53--> 00:43:56

are you trying to say that we should never use Quran as a delivery?

00:44:01--> 00:44:03

Okay, this course

00:44:04--> 00:44:16

this course is going to tell us how to understand the Quran according to the Arabic language, okay. And it is inshallah going to make things clear. And the Quran is not a book, just anyone can come and read it.

00:44:17--> 00:44:22

But it's revealed in Arabic language, and it has yonny principles. And when we talk about

00:44:25--> 00:44:30

it, we'll go back to the sounds of Sahaba and see why they had some difference of opinion. But it still doesn't

00:44:32--> 00:44:34

affect anything we've discussed before.

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

It is

00:44:40--> 00:44:42

still going both of them.

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


00:44:49--> 00:44:50

Okay, so

00:44:52--> 00:44:56

how do you do it? Was they just been excuses for more