Principles Of Fiqh Part 5
Date:
Channel: Jamal Zarabozo
Series: Jamal Zarabozo - Principles Of Fiqh
File Size: 19.14MB
Related
- Sajid Ahmed Umar – The 10 Days Of Dhul Hijjah
- Tom Facchine – Reforming the Self #15
- Abu Bakr Zoud – ‘With difficulty comes ease’; The story of Hajar, Ismail and Zam Zam
- Muhammad Salah – Fiqh Of Love Episode #5 Why Do We Marry Part2
- Hamza Yusuf – EP02 – Pillars of Practice – Part 1 of 2
- Ibrahim Nuhu – Ramadan Daily #04 Master Of The Day Of Judgment
- Hussain Kamani – Beginning Of Guidance 16
AI Generated Summary ©
The speakers discuss the history and importance of the concept of the mother of the child, with a focus on the history and importance of acceptance of scientific and political evidence. They stress the need for acceptance and broad support for scientific research, while also acknowledging the need for acceptance of evidence in schools and political proceedings. The speakers briefly touch on the concept of "ile hungry" and its use in scientific research, with a brief discussion on the importance of finding the right point in a statement and clarification. The segment also touches on the use of "one point" in scientific research and its implications for personal and professional life.AI Generated Transcript ©
So let's pick up some points about the letter or the methodology.
Again, what is the methodology? And it's been quite some time on it last time. So I hope
everyone knows
what's different between the coupon
and
theologians?
What's the method of the method?
When it comes to?
What did we do last time? We spent about an hour and the last the last 45 minutes?
Showing that there's a couple of approaches to
it. Okay, what is the process of Boko Haram?
And why was Othman so separately? Well, it's definitely done.
Okay, not necessarily, by the way, but they take the opinion of the opinions of them. What is your honey for Mohammed or Mmm, abusive?
Okay.
They start with these opinions, and they go back from these opinions to figure out what is the soul of the Hanafi? Mother? You know, why would you do it that way?
What might be the reasoning behind that?
Okay.
Not only that, according to the Hanafi school is the greatest book, however the
world must have
any they should call him or her because they considered me to have to bet.
So if you want to call his mother, you have to figure out what to do
and considered right for you.
You have to figure it out.
Now, I know last time he said that,
he said, How
can he be considered a scholar if he didn't give his
reasoning?
But when you're asked a question,
and you give an answer to a question, there's actually two points. First is the way of the Hanafi, or the dolphin way of learning.
The Rocky way of learning was different from the jazzy wavelength.
For example, remember,
he used to lecture to the students
come to class, this one
and the illmatic lectures. And in fact, they were very sad to see.
And they would be very happy if someone is some foreigner.
Someone who's not regularly from the meeting would come and ask him a medical question.
That was the jazzy way of teaching it. How is the situation?
What was the Iraq Kuwait,
like our informal
and in the Iraqi way,
basically, is they have a group of people, and they throw out a topic.
And they discuss the topic, everyone gives their views. And the chef at the time, and when it was Abu hanifa, when he was alive in his
last years, many years, he was the chef of the time. So they would discuss the point. And then he would at the end, he would give his conclusion.
So when he gives his conclusion, he wouldn't necessarily repeat what everybody said. But he would give us a conclusion. Now, if you're a writer, and
we want to describe, what are you going to record, what's the most important thing to record?
The most important thing to record is the conclusion.
You're not going to have for example, minutes of the meeting where you include everyone's everyone's Okay,
that's one point. Second point. If you're asked a question, for example, if I asked you
is the prayer obligatory which is
okay, why?
Okay, what what is in the Quran?
Okay.
Okay, that's the end of your
end of the answer.
In other words, if someone gave you an answer, if you went to a scholar, and you said to him, you know, the perfect for any suggest because the law says,
Yeah, we're living in a monopoly
Would you accept that from
Kissing, talking to him.
Okay,
but what's missing? I mean, everyone would give you the evidence, and it gives you the conclusion.
But what is missing?
What's missing is the rule or the methodology that you apply. And that's what I tried to figure out.
So the rule that you're applying,
and that case of mine was that Allah subhana wa Jalla orders it, I'm assuming this is what the rule is.
Allah subhana wa, tada orders us to do something.
And we know based on Quran and Hadith, also, a little bit from Arabic language, we know that in order implies obligation. Okay.
So you left out that that the reason you left out methodology, but no one's gonna question you.
Okay. Now, the second part now that we figured out that we think we figured out your methodology is that that's not sufficient for us to derive, for example of man's never going to drive
can take long.
First of all, we reclaim that he says that an order implies.
Again, he didn't say, right.
Maybe perhaps he never said
and that's what the shower Leola wrote. He said most of the points that that was what he was talking about. Also was naming something.
So we did most of the differences between the canopies and the Sharpies, which some of them we're going to discuss later. Some of these are some of these principles that make heavily different from the Sharpies, he said that Abu hanifa never since.
And they're simply based upon the reasoning of the
conclusion, and came up with it.
We're not we're not finished with
Is that sufficient?
Can we say, based on what Othman told us that anytime there's an obligation? I mean, anytime there's a command and implies obligation?
No. So what do we have to do now?
No, no, we're talking about here. So that's easy. That's the point. They don't, they don't look to the sun that they've kind of got yours. Or Oh, honey,
what they'd have to do is they have to look at all the statements they can find from you.
in which there's an order and you make a conclusion.
If they do that, obviously, they're going to find that in some cases, there's an order, but Abu hanifa did not say that the action was was obligatory.
Okay.
For example, you gave us a we'll give an example of that 30 years, this after you finish.
In the Quran, Allah subhanho wa Taala uses an order from fish that you should go out
in the land, but no, one of the LMS
is no one
that's always excluded. Because you can never,
ever say for sure what they might come up with. No one says that the biggest there is. So now we have to go through all of our statements
and see where there was an order. And he didn't say that the action is obligatory. And we have to figure out what are the exceptions?
And why are these
in order to come up with
and that's that's kind of the way
and if you pick up the happy book, like goes on the book, supply goes on the list I gave you and in many times they look more like books or something
that is going to teach different
different points that are being discussed in order to come up with
with his sort of
that
the later if you remember the handout from last time, which was a list of books,
the later half as many of the later had a piece they took a new approach which was combining the poetry of
theologians on the moon and the focus.
But those are the later
half.
And finally, is there any benefit to this approach?
If there are any benefits with
different words
actually even
One is inductive and one is either
one, you're starting with the conclusion, and working your way back, just to
see the other end in some of the other books
by the moon, they rarely discussed.
And that's maybe to give an example. There's almost pure theory.
And based on Chrome
now the beta books that combine both, they tried to go from the ferry down to the sub.
That's what I said, you have to assume that the Hanafi madhhab, is correct.
That's why I said this in the book by Luca, Luca, that his statement is not strange. If you think about where he's coming from. He was an American.
You think about where he's coming from when he when he says that any verse or heat that goes into our mother is either abrogated or must be reinterpreted.
I mentioned that
they are assuming they have to assume
that the head of the mother of is correct.
The others, all of the others are almost completely independent of
any others, for example, a mama's boy, if you read his book,
which is considered one of the standard works of close up from the caffeine and have, he disagrees a lot within them.
And that is the nature of the other work, they are not confined to matter, they are free to use their mind to come up with any conclusion that they want. But this is not the case with the heavy metals.
And, and as many scholars including Amazon, Hanafi, scholars, and so on the a lot. This This way, the Hanafi way was developed in order to defend the humans.
So they were some writers I see. And they they were, they were sticking to their mother. And this way was developed in order to defend them.
Without
that, basically, except for maybe as a voting
member who see, the others were basically
trying to show or trying to defend the heavy weight, and coming up with their own food,
of course, is one of the greatest koca of history is the image of himself.
So we benefit, we not happy
thing, we
then have nothing other than listening to.
Okay, we're not happy.
We benefit from that, because we can learn from
this because it does not have doesn't mean it's always wrong.
I mean, we agree we benefit from the reasoning about what it is. And in some cases of reasoning might be better than the other. And therefore we accepted this.
No,
no, no. There's no such thing as
the door to his dad was never closed and
the best work that came after the so called door fish to have
and even those people who believed in the blade, and they said that
the police are blindly following a school
because to them, and also, Herman was one of them. Was that he? And he could have demo So the trick is like
there's no such thing as
we're not talking about
when we
had a few minutes
day
But what happened?
And
that's true, but not.
I mean, what I'm trying to say is that the discussion,
even the arguments about what is correct.
And you know that people are free to discuss this.
This continues until today.
Because
that's, that's a different problem. That's a different problem. They were prevented from preventing it from implementing it. Okay.
Some of them, not all of them, but in general, during the period of the darkest times,
they were prevented from
applying it in public, but not about writing about it.
That's one way to escape that policing, that the police situation is in your book, you write about it under different topics. And you're making a new wish you had but no one noticed. Because you're not going to the Martin thing. It's in football.
But that's all we're gonna cover about the history of
that plenty, three lessons, two and a half minutes. Any questions about it?
Before we begin the load? evidence?
Question. Now.
Let's move on.
Basically, there's four types of evidence that are agreed upon by all the scores.
What are those words come directly out of the human service.
These are not necessarily the only sources of food, but these are the four agreed upon sources and the other sources kind of kind of fit underneath.
For example, there have been a they put lots of stress on statements of the hava
mall. My argument is that the statement of Zahava comes under these,
I mean, in this word,
once it once it
comes basically over here, because the reason that the Sahaba are given the status that they're given, is because
and it is based on the fact that they got the teachings from the Prophet Mohammed.
And therefore, they are understanding this and that, and when they act, it is considered to be under the guidance of the of the some of the problems
of the for example, muscle muscle has not here, but also
our muscle has
it in a little way. And
and you could argue this
and there's one verse in the Quran, basically, that covers all four of these
images to be you know, this is the explanation of this verse in the Quran.
one verse points to all four
for
one verse,
I prefer
they still continue to.
Okay, the first which is
sort of
with numbers.
I hate that when people ask me in the lecture, yeah. What's that? What number
so the verse says, Are you will believe obey Allah and the messenger, and those in authority among you. And if you differ in any matters, then take it to Allah and His messenger.
So it says obey Allah,
clearly obeying the Quran
and then it will be the messenger.
And then here comes
what it was
for
I'm an admin
for example, if the scores agree on something there you should follow them
more so than
and then things in exactly the same.
Okay, what does it mean you need to if you if you different something refers to Allah and His Messenger okay? It means that while their life you take it to the pub,
but after their death, any of you different something, obviously if something is clear from the Quran, Sunnah, you can differ. Okay. So if you're deficient in something, you should be something not clear from a chromosomal. So when it says take it to the chromosome, that means that you are going to have to take your case and look, apply it to what the Quran says. So that covers
so
is disappeared. So we can change the name of this class, and we'll set this up to see it. So we're just going to do the state of Wonder
now that
the Texas evidence
can be divided into many different categories.
One
is transmitted
versus
as opposed to not versus
what do I mean by transmitted
disease
transmitted
as opposed to versus what I mean as opposed to
an athlete?
What's our
evidence
to understand marriage we have drawn
a deal
something transmitted
once it's finished, and it is final.
The point about these three
is that regardless of whether we actually understand them completely,
regardless of whether we can rationalize their existence, we have to follow
these these types of proof we have to follow regardless of whether we have a complete understanding of them.
In other words, these are unquestionable authority.
They are established to be true, they are unquestionable authority.
They cannot go to the province as an example. And say that I don't understand is heavy. So I don't see how this heavy could be applied nowadays. So now for something I am therefore reject the unquestionable authorities that we have to submit to until the DOJ.
Okay, how about rational?
Okay, pretty much, pretty much, many of the others.
Everyone's favorite now.
If you don't understand these terms completely now.
Now there's also some other kinds of trends and reports but they are not of the same authority as these.
For example, if given
the transmitted food but it doesn't have carries the same weight.
Now the question here is, is Apple or rationality
by
source of law
and it can you base something
Usually on Apple arrest press
No.
So, how are you how are you going to do it?
Okay.
And all of these types of proofs, directional proofs are actually dependent
upon the relationship to the transmitted
as one person wrote in the book of
talking about
the pub. So that again difficult wrong by the way,
he said these are all, basically rationalist doctrines.
Then he writes rational rationality alone is not an independent proof in Islam. In other words, you cannot come up with something and just try to prove it rationally and expect or saying that this
should be applied.
So, this is why rational proofs cannot be totally separated from the transmitter pool. And the classic example of this.
Obviously, you cannot make
without reference to sentiment,
you're making chaos and what
you're basing your fears obviously on a verse in the Quran or Hadith.
So, all these rational proofs for rationality is not by itself an independent proof they are dependent upon their relationship to the transmitted food. Otherwise, if you can find evidence for some rational argument in the Quran,
then you could argue that that is to be followed.
Talk
about power.
Okay.
And anyone who does that with respect to
what anyone who does what he says?
Or you just know,
you don't understand is out during an accident?
He said, he said, suppose
what about the opposite way? That you go through these rules?
And you judge it in the likes of apple?
And you decide whether to accept or not?
What do you say exactly?
We have it on tape, by the way.
You don't find something
and you go
and you don't even
measure.
We have witnesses.
As
I'm speaking out for him, like the heresies made ahead of us,
speaking very much just to be if you're at that point, it means you're not good.
Enough for every aspect of life. If you go to the person and you don't find anything.
This means
something wrong with you.
Oh, there's many, many verses.
Okay, I don't accept that verse. Because I believe this verse is not referring to the Quran. If you read the whole I'm not referring to the Koran. But anyway, that's another argument.
But back to what you originally said
that you cannot just be on the basis with one except
there's one exception. What's that?
What about
now, there's one exception with respect to this and that and of course, it has to be done by the experts, and heavy and that is if there's a heavy
that undoubtedly goes against,
like what I wrote 30 irrefutable laws or something different.
We can deny without any question that there was not a theory on our part. But something that we can deny without being quick. Like a Hadees that says that after 100 years the day of judgment will come what we know now 1400 years ago
okay
this is a sign that the Hadees the separatists
ever been to Josie wrote an ad that clearly goes against what we know to be correct. Get noctor select some people with the headache
of the fly.
And if you put the fly is the fly get your drink he just put it in completely. And he This is now a theory to say oh, this heady doesn't make any sense. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about something that is proven. That is not correct. This is a sign that
they but obviously with respect to the Quran, and it has no
arguments.
Because we know that all this is correct.
For sure.
No, no, no, no, they'll fabricate I said that's the sign that the editor fabricate.
The Headless nurse doesn't mean anything. The Headless nurse doesn't mean anything.
Suppose Okay, I'm going to fabricate a heavy Okay, so I pick the best is not adequate. Obviously.
The Golden thing is I take a knife from sad from homicide from from
so if I'm going to fabricate it, I'm going to give it the best thing I can
Yeah, I've you know, I'm a fabric I
have you know that the fabric is one of the ways that knowing that I'm a fabricator is that I transmit techies from people who are trustworthy, trustworthy, and their ideas are known and they're unfortunately the ideas that are no not
okay, let me put it let me let me put it this way, a different way. Okay. When this causes headaches, like the ones you mentioned, when they did it, they also use this.
So for example, if
it contradicts the Quran
contradicts the Quran are confident that they will reject it.
No,
anyone can make mistakes.
I gave one example about the segment coming 100 years after the prophet and we know that's not true.
And it contradicts
No, there is no
okay.
Because
as I said,
if the rejection is based on a theory, we don't accept we don't accept or reject that is not sufficient grounds to resist
when you say that, no one
is one
who says
okay,
this
assembly line
this rule that has some some evidence for us in the from the damages
Wow, that's heavy man.
And I think this rule there's some
we know that what the what what the Bible says Dylan, for example, that is true, then we know that what he's saying is revelation from Allah subhanaw taala.
So if that's the case, if we if if someone says that he says something that we know for certain
It's
not based on the theory again,
definition of a theory means it's testable. Something is a theory means you don't know whether it's true or false. So
think about an established fact.
What you mean by a sentence like most scientific facts are theories? They're not facts.
Okay, okay. I'm not saying I'm not saying logic as, as the science of luck. Okay? I'm saying, for example, like the example I gave, if someone tells you,
there's someone tells you that the Prophet said that the date is normal for 100 years after his death,
if you if you want to look at the tape, and now, obviously, there's other things, it's like they pointed out to pointed out that he goes ahead, the person that is headed comes from most likely is going to be questioned runaway. And there's other signs involved, but forget that. This is not a question of logic or not.
Common sense.
If I, if I told you that the Prophet said after 100 years, the day of judgment will occur.
And we know now, after 1400 years, it hasn't occurred.
So we reject that, not based on on
if you want to call it the science of logic, but it's based on something that's
the logical problem is is the science of logic
and common sense.
Sometimes the logicians are the last ones to have
to study logic.
Okay.
I'm sorry, what was the
panel?
Okay, I'm just talking about one small point. So for example, the fact that if there's someone whose character is
not good, or we have some doubt about his character, this person brought about the deposit comes to you. And you have to confirm which also gives us similar means. So now, so if you learn about different rules,
there's evidence for every rule, we discussed some of them last year.
So anyway, the important thing to realize here is that this is the transmitted truth, or unquestionable authority. And we have to accept them. While the other rational proofs, they are not independent proof, they are still have to refer back to the transmitted proof.
no reference to it.
There's no money in the game.
If you're going to make a statement or claim something you have
to be
right.
So someone tells you something and he gives you no evidence for it, no acceptable evidence and you don't accept what is
the kind of situation
with a spectrum of presets.
There's, there's a type which is clear from the Quran, and the Sunnah.
There's a tag which is clearly rejected from the Quran.
And there's a tag in between
the tags in between is what they call Muslim.
But even that ties in between actually had some evidence, for example,
evidence may not be great, but you can see for example, many NGOs when they talk about this concept, Muslim Ursula, they talk about the
Sahaba collecting the Quran.
The the Prophet president did not do it.
There's no clear evidence from the Quran that they should have done.
But there's many evidences that for example, the was the duty of the Sava to pass on that was the duty of the Sahaba to preserve the game is the duty of the Sahaba to study the Quran. And
so when you collect the Quran, you're actually doing something that is benefiting all of these Islamic principles.
So and you will not find
that there is no you cannot find any evidence for it unless you like
Any other question?
Yes, as we go through these so quickly, but
but that's fine because I don't have much material anyway. So I'm trying to
another category another way of dividing up evidence is to be
independent
evidences
are as opposed to
dependent.
This is vs. But I don't really mean versus
what do we mean here?
It is completely different from this one. One way of looking at what's another sense, it's almost the same as
if you remember what I was saying about.
That's what I'm trying to get to.
Okay, you know, what independent means. And you know, what dependencies are?
Okay. There's some pieces of evidence that if you're given those pieces of evidence,
there are sufficient in themselves.
They're not necessary, but they're sufficient. not always necessary. But if you're given that evidence is sufficient and doesn't need any other, for example, the Quran
What about
an independent source or as a dependent source?
Suppose you're from the mother
or the school?
That does it, every exam must have some basis for some evidence from it.
Okay, some people say that every man
was one of them, has to have some support, or be based on something
every man
hate that when teachers do that on the board, when they write, start writing, and then they put words before and after? Because always when you're reading your notes,
everything must be based on that, honestly.
That's what I've been saying is this, for example, he said something rather based on it. We may have lost the Hadees
I don't agree with that statement. He says we may not know or at least we may not know the basis for us.
But we have
been thinking about this knows is my independent or dependent.
But
once they've heard me
it is no longer rest upon the Quran.
So it is in the
know what it was made is an independent source. In other words,
no.
Know In other words, with respect to
something you don't have to know what was the source of
your
cause?
Yes,
that's why if you're from the school
that's why the
Okay, from the defendant school, over here.
Over here, obviously, every source of law or every form of evidence that needs to have some proof for it from the Quran was in there.
So pretty much the same as what we had
is the dean of the school so
that
is
a that is not necessary. For the it must be based on
others, actually the other dogs and from another point of view, they argue actually, that it's not possible that you're going to have love is not based on
that. I should tell you
Not only now but maybe when we get to the
end
we'll get to that.
Trying to prove his school obviously, we know what schooling is that
as a system sort of thing, there has to be evidence stated in the case of ID and
the
fogging of the of the of the alcohol drinker there is evidence
because it was based on fear. Which
which pipeline?
What do you mean by which, for example, in this case, okay, then
that was made during the time was that the one who drinks alcohol? What is the punishment for the one for example? Okay, first of all, what was the punishment during the perfect
time deposit, and during the time of the book,
The punishment was not fixed.
Sometimes it was 40 bugs, sometimes it was less than fences more,
because I
wasn't
looking for these things.
But it was
it was bigger than what we're discussing.
And it wasn't.
Okay, so you're saying this is my grandson?
Now, that's if you said
that, okay, you say there's no evidence for it, but in fact it
But let's get back to this,
he made an important point.
Because of
all the tools and all the
rest,
there is some evidence
that
On that note, I explained that for the consumption on the house with him,
and so, that was it was
there will be no punishment.
Now,
because this was tested as to how to how to be treated,
and so, we are looking for
that impact fact, the fact
that the explanation was given that punishment of offenders is helping shape
and so
according to
that, know, you have that
punishment somehow
and we have a practice
that we have concrete evidence in practice.
matter
the case you're referring to as a different case, the case referred to as a case where someone drinks and it's not proven explanatory that
that's what the heck is about is about the effect is a very harsh
which most of the sources on software abrogated by the person and said, if the person drinks one, you should fly him to drink again, you should throw them to drink again, you should probably take the first time.
This has been an episode
and I think you'll find this in
English.
Okay, so back to this now back to
the made a prayer on what you mean now's your own
image analogy of fatherhood is
that the Father, the one who made karate is supposed to be taught at times.
So it says the one who drinks
he speaks and when he speaks to Mexico, so he should be. So that is the punishment that they agreed upon. Before that time, it was like
yesterday
as best they can.
So the question is what that is actually based on? No, no, no. You said no before 911. It says that when the person drinks, he starts to talk. And he when he talks, he's saying things which
I don't remember his exact wording, but it goes like this.
Now, but then
there's the retreatants
is a limit prescribed by law.
But that
cannot be done by fear.
In other words, you apply the same rule to a similar situation,
which is slightly different than what they when they say that you cannot make by hand or illegal punishment, like those described in the Quran, but he had a thing that you cannot bring a new
punishment, or a new fact. And it was something that Allah subhanaw taala does not prescribe.
But if you have a case, which is similar to the ones that I've described,
then you may use the symphony.
See the difference between the two? Okay, for example, what God is not
prescribing for what? Quick?
Okay, remember, for example, we cannot, we cannot now make a specific shape is 40 or 60. Unless it's based on
we're saying we have a similar case like it, saying that the one who drinks next, so therefore, we function the same way.
See the difference between if someone kills or someone wants to kill, party to kill is not directly mentioned in the crime.
But if someone has a hand in killing someone else, even though he's not the killer, according to our hotel, he gets the same husband.
He did not make the no punishment, but he's saying that this has applied to this case.
This is called
blind had.
No, once this was made, you have to vote.
I was trying to give an example of ignite which is not based on
some old
example said every is not based on promises.
It's not the one who drinks alcohol, it was
based on the punishment for column ad.
similarity is in the sense that
the episode value statement
doesn't mean
that's why I'm avoiding
the type of pleasure
to be punished
by Coca Cola calling.
From the other side, this is what
you gave us.
It doesn't have to, doesn't have to have a source and
we'll get to that more when we talk about if we ever get to
talk about
Oh, after any more questions about independent dependent, dependent are these similar.
Okay, the third category
is definitive.
visibly look over there for growth and for the minus sign. Now, I'm putting plus
Okay,
buddy love No, what's the word spec of the Sydney?
Hey, this is Eric, this has been me.
Okay means it can only have one. Basically,
there's no question about what it means.
speculative mean, it's an open to interpretation.
Okay, it could have more than one. So some posts are definitive
and their scope. For example,
what's the punishment for in an
English?
Okay, the word 100 slides to strive for and exploiting?
Would you say that speculative?
And assuming you're not from some branches? Would you say that speculative or dependable?
Okay, there's 100 means 100. There's not much you can do it.
Okay. But there's other verses that
any there's a word and the word has more than one.
So this is called thicknesses. Okay? Now, there's some more points that we should
consider here, spec definitive is not open to questions.
not open to interpretation, not open to
interpretation.
So obviously, if she had
it, she had only occurred with respect to the second
one.
There's no such thing as this guy when it comes
to guns.
We're talking about
a verse in the Quran. The words of the Quran have one minute or two, they're more than one. They have one more than one meaning
that they don't.
Okay. Okay.
Okay, I'm not sure how to handle that question. Was that?
So speculative, holy take place.
That only take place?
Yeah, but that doesn't, that doesn't affect the fact that the deal is still definitive.
Okay, I see what you're saying.
Okay, I see what you're saying.
Okay.
I know how fast you but I see what you're saying.
evidence.
Okay. Now, another point to remember that some people and especially nowadays, unfortunately,
when we say that something is speculative, it doesn't mean anything when we say that something has been mean, that it's open to many opinions and all those opinions are acceptable.
That doesn't, that's not what I mean. Number one, for example, a verse in the Quran may be speculative by itself.
If you just take it by itself, it's a second.
But if you look at it in the light of other verses in the Quran, or the son of the Prophet says,
it can become perfect or definitive.
Okay, in other words, one verse in the Quran may use a word that has different meanings. What's the meaning of that word? Well, because why the verses explain or explain and so forth. So just because something is speculative,
by itself doesn't mean actually that we don't know the meaning of it. Or it's open to interpretation, not always, because it might be explained. If it is explained then it becomes
if it is explained, it becomes
sent
by another person, by heavy provide man.
Okay. Now, also, just because the evidence is speculative, it doesn't mean that our conclusion regarding that evidence is not definitive.
This is important point.
Just because the evidence is speculative, it doesn't mean that our conclusions
are the rules that we get from the evidence are not definitive.
What I mean by definitive here is that what the puppy does,
this is the job of something
is that he looks at the different evidences and he can show that one of them is stronger than the other. Even though the evidence is might be speculative, the conclusion is different.
cannot show which one is definitely stronger of the different opinions and what
are the three possible things or meanings for something? If the puppy cannot show, which one is definitively stronger than what does he do?
Know, he must not say anything.
He must not say anything, and in his conclusion has to be has to be different.
If you cannot wait between the two, you should not be in?
No, no, that's, that's what I'm saying. And if he cannot, the three things that he cannot say which is stronger, that he should not say?
No, that's my point. That if you can make
using the principles of the ruling is no longer dependent. It becomes
dependent. Let's take an example.
In the Quran
is talking about
talking about for example, if you don't have
to remember
reverse which area the beginning of the process
is talking about the cases in which you may make
a case for
Yeah, before that.
mentioned, for example, when you
Okay, when you say one or
two minutes.
Okay, what do you think? This is okay, this, you know, the first thing we're talking about talks about this.
If you if you, for example came from the bathroom, or if you're sick,
or if you did this thing will translate for the time being.
Now,
this is not the right thing.
If you test women,
these are the things that means you have to make. In other words, if the heart is broken, and since you don't have water in this case,
okay.
So what about this evidence? Is this obviously from everyone's reaction? Is this the definitive evidence or the second?
One?
Okay.
Okay, okay.
Just a second. Now,
the problem here is that this works, it's open to more than one.
So if it's open to more than one meaning it becomes
But does that mean necessarily that the conclusion we're going to make from this is going to be speaking to them or not? Yes, that we can if we can show
you this one opinion is stronger than the other. Okay. Now, most most of the most of the things and
most of the conclusions and
conclusions
are mostly speculative or definitive,
definitive.
Some people nowadays, like absurd, they're claiming that they are mostly speculative.
But in fact, that is not the case.
Well, just a living thing in his introduction to consider to be
heroes, the vast majority of the points that people are in need of and asked about are confirmed either through textual evidence
or is not.
There's only speculation in dispute in a very in, in very few things that people are needed.
Many of the disputed opinions on matters that rarely occur, what the people need them knowledge concerning what is obligatory upon them, or forbidden or permissible is definitely known.
What is known as the dean by Aurora also sparked,
everyone knows that.
And he goes on to say that there's something of the gene of the religion being known by Aurora or necessity, or something, and that you have to know this is a relative term for someone who's noticed them or better than living in visit. Now, you will not know many of these things. But for the Allah,
for Allah, almost everything is perfect.
You will not find any Allah Who doesn't know for example, the promises
or the deposits of the sound to the bed or the product.
This is something they call
me.
Okay?
Which one weighs more? Okay, showing or finding which one weighs more,
weighs more? Which one is stronger? Okay.
Yes, I know.
And what does this mean? What does this really mean?
Doesn't mean believe.
It
means something confirmed in the person's mind says no religion.
And this is what the what the okay.
And with most of that, you come to this conclusion that the property is able to show
which is stronger without increasing. So although many of the evidences are speculative, as in this example, we'll go through
kind of the conclusions are
thing.
In general, there will be
there'll be there'll be different, yes, one of the scores, Mr. points or something like that. But when you see that you missed the point, it's clear that she missed the point. Okay, one of the best books by the way, for this kind of discussion of this book by the death of Mr. Head, and in which he discusses the the reasoning behind
the conclusions of the essay.
This is definitive in using the principles of a solid step one of the arguments control can be shown to be clearly or without questions.
But
now,
now, using this principle, and he states that there is clarity that this is the correct point. Now, if you miss as I said, If you missed the point, you missed the heavy for some layer, which is coming. That's something else,
then it's easy to go through documents show that was
the point is the conclusions in general, especially among the AMA, and most of them are not something yet.
Because
no, I didn't say that.
at all, what they said is something different because they said any reverse.
Okay, this is a problem and methodology.
And it because you have to start with the headings and reversals first.
No.
their way of thinking is first, you have to assume that
they're not going to follow any rules they believe is wrong.
But we're talking about the scholars who wrote these books.
Who wrote his books on the
difference between
shibani statements abusive statements? These are all part of the
Yeah, but he's a little bit
much that he did not write a book like this.
Small but not like the ones I was playing
came up with
based on their food, and therefore you can say they're opposed to so which one is wrong?
issue themselves their book, you have to follow them
is really a mystery. There's another question. So let's go through this example to see how we can get from this
statement in the Quran, which is obviously
to an opinion, which is the number of shows
the thing
that's nice
about
what I was, oh, by
the way, you're the only representative of the 70 minutes
Oh, I'm sorry, I feel represented.
How do
you say
okay,
this means that you want a new sexual
because in the language it could either be in touch
or it could mean sexual intercourse.
The intensive form which implies in this case,
what
intensive, less common sizes what's going to
happen from both sides?
from both sides?
Yeah.
Sorry about that.
Okay, what's it America
the strongest opinion in the medical field has
been me North African.
Touching
not just with the infection, but with pleasure.
This is the strongest.
This comes from direct
Okay, this
one is this one.
One is this one. That's one of
the three nurses.
So what can we pretend to do?
Rather than capital
intensive
right.
Okay.
That was there taking v literal
Okay.
Now as I
was talking about
But
now as I said the verses that are supposed to be taking this by themselves and say this is tricky
so we have to go now from here to go through the heaviest of the bozos that have been explained
there's one heavy
heavy use of eyes
there when the public
used to pay
sometimes when he makes a bet he would
he would have he would have to move
so what does this mean?
Just a minute
what you really see why the
class is
so what about
your movies?
What does that mean for the three things that we have you
know anything about these two that he touched? I said he didn't make
okay know what it is to say that not at any time but totally defect which is going against him Okay. There are things that that had something covering herself so therefore
this is what they are
the offer no deliver that.
Okay.
Okay, third,
third, third. Or another thing to look at is how do you provide
another
that's a good point by the way, they have no evidence for this condition.
The second Have you ever like said
that suppose I sent him some of his wife
kids some of his wives and wants to pray without making Moodle?
Okay, what does this mean now?
According to the date, you read the books, have
you read the book, the clipping, any kind of pitching? implies?
What do we do with this every month?
We have no problem with this. Because
because we just make a new that's the way we do it every time because remember, we talking about the second half
of that. And that might not have been you don't have to make Moodle from
the Netherlands. You mentioned that he said if that is correct. And that is my mother You don't have to make
okay.
And he did not have enough information about
the scores of how do you say that this is authentic?
And there's very little there's no
question about
this
never existed
before and that's insane to force it upon us.
Another another question. That's another question. We're just talking about picking one.
Okay, let's get to it.
Yeah, if you if you if you do anything and you cause Maddie to come and you have to make
Okay.
Now what does that do for this
might have
questionable
according to the data themselves.
So this might have clearly against this heaviest of the bonuses and them?
No, no, the medical the medical thing that gives
me the pleasure, not extreme.
Okay.
So even the most dramatic and when it comes to this point, you just
wipe this off. He doesn't even bother to descend or possibly try to defend the
Have a two arguments as similar to it's a it's a double skinned argument, there's no evidence for it.
So now if we interpret this verse in the light of these two headings, which is how any the study is supposed to be done, and there's not a verse by itself coming from nowhere, but it's related to the life of the prophet in
the statements as Iseman, the other versus
what is the irrefutable conclusion about
what we're left with only one.
And I picked this example to show the Hanafi brothers the band that always against
the position of Abu hanifa.
Also, if you add this back to it, it just stinks from the head of
the
the verse itself is open to many different interpretations, like there's even more than these three.
And when you pick the verse as a whole with the rest of the city as the ruling or the verse becomes perfect.
There's no reason for any
differences.
Now,
this is a better example, because she's talking about something which is general, that has been very clearly specified by Heidi. But he talks about a situation where the public says him in his words.
But
the questions about this
class was so fast.
Yeah, because
his wife, actually,
without
the first can be the first
someone was coming in reverse could have one of
these traditions that Americans put on it. There's no actually evidence for either this one or this one, actually.
We're just talking about a touching woman.
a different point that he wanted me to make.
What's the minimum