The Modernist Movement Part 4

share this pageShare Page
Jamal Zarabozo

Channel: Jamal Zarabozo

Series:

Episode Notes

Episode Transcript

© No part of this transcript may be copied or referenced or transmitted in any way whatsoever. Transcripts are auto-generated and thus will be be inaccurate. We are working on a system to allow volunteers to edit transcripts in a controlled system.


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

We'll continue on,

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

long time ago,

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

last time we

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

discussed the basic premises or add a basic concept and remove the underline and the movement and so

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

whether

00:00:46--> 00:00:51

any of you if you read someone was blueprint movement

00:00:52--> 00:00:59

and he was not actually staple sentences is a image not not actual facial things explicitly that we talked about

00:01:00--> 00:01:04

last time but you can see from his reasoning was, in fact Can he

00:01:07--> 00:01:08

critique

00:01:13--> 00:01:13

that

00:01:14--> 00:01:17

we're gonna go through different different ways

00:01:23--> 00:01:26

the methodology is incorrect

00:01:27--> 00:01:31

or the methodology basically is how and remove them from

00:01:39--> 00:01:42

how to go from any work

00:01:43--> 00:01:45

to the conclusion

00:01:48--> 00:01:48

that

00:01:53--> 00:01:57

misleads people and poor people by and he tries to show the

00:01:58--> 00:01:59

methodology

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

and

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

the people to the wrong conclusion that in fact can be any scientific claim to be

00:02:11--> 00:02:14

and using the apple and having a consistent approach

00:02:16--> 00:02:20

where D and E are very far from

00:02:22--> 00:02:23

being applied,

00:02:28--> 00:02:30

that they have no basis

00:02:33--> 00:02:35

for further

00:02:38--> 00:02:39

dimension.

00:02:40--> 00:02:45

And in some of the some of the some of the some of the methodology that

00:02:47--> 00:02:47

people use,

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

and uses

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

murder,

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

anyone who might fall into this category kind of isn't necessarily

00:03:18--> 00:03:21

an introduction, to take a look to the

00:03:30--> 00:03:34

to to some of the some of the some of the methodology.

00:03:35--> 00:03:45

And especially when it comes to I mentioned earlier, that discussion, the topic of discernment. And this is an area in which we ended it with around with the milk.

00:03:47--> 00:03:48

Sometimes,

00:03:50--> 00:03:54

that's what we have to throw around, because it is authenticated.

00:03:58--> 00:03:58

authentic

00:04:00--> 00:04:01

and

00:04:03--> 00:04:05

genuine, authentic.

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

And

00:04:17--> 00:04:18

make sure that people

00:04:24--> 00:04:27

in this room imply that they have been joking.

00:04:32--> 00:04:35

And English implies that we have some error of judgment

00:04:38--> 00:04:42

to the tune, in other words, according to the methodology of the

00:04:49--> 00:04:49

magic,

00:04:51--> 00:04:52

and he will reject the way the

00:04:53--> 00:04:54

provider rejected.

00:04:56--> 00:04:59

And all of these reasons damages or claims have been made which are not true.

00:05:02--> 00:05:04

And is indifferent, because

00:05:11--> 00:05:15

then he will just look at the Internet or the chairman.

00:05:16--> 00:05:19

And we will not move without the meaning of that, or the method.

00:05:22--> 00:05:24

Time for examples I

00:05:33--> 00:05:34

took the class in

00:05:37--> 00:05:37

the future

00:05:46--> 00:05:47

and less

00:05:51--> 00:05:52

and, or at least to be expressible

00:05:57--> 00:05:58

economic contributions,

00:05:59--> 00:06:05

economic contribution from sources, and they're not diverse enough to be some kind of human effect

00:06:11--> 00:06:42

when you see them Yanni discussing and discussing whether it is authentic or not, and it will do not follow the conclusions of the scholars of heading. But at the same time, none of them have ever come up with a new methodology, a new way of testing, it is the new way of judging. In general, basically, they just adding based on their Apple, and it was sounds too good, what sounds good to them they accept and what doesn't sound good to them anything they reject? Well, I think I gave an example of that.

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

And in the, in the second lecture

00:06:46--> 00:06:47

about

00:06:48--> 00:07:03

any one of the humans go with lecture, and this is similar to the arguments of Hamilton design, concerning the headache and follows a cylinder that can help people not prosper, any of the there appears on the hands of a woman there are ruled by by a woman.

00:07:04--> 00:07:08

And he goes through the value and measurements data, we can easily do this.

00:07:10--> 00:07:10

From

00:07:12--> 00:07:19

any from a completely opposite point of view, when nothing the truth of the matter is I mentioned, I think in the second lecture, is about

00:07:21--> 00:07:26

having the, according to the score of the ADC is not accessible as a narrative heading.

00:07:27--> 00:07:34

Why any statement down is a very strong statement. And in fact, it is either and it was a mistake, which we're not cool with.

00:07:35--> 00:07:42

And I look for apples, Oprah, and many of the books have had you. And here's the Sahaba, which is hydrating, consider all the Sahaba

00:07:43--> 00:07:46

are good or, and every one of them either.

00:07:47--> 00:07:49

None of this happened.

00:07:51--> 00:07:55

But that is the point, the point I'm doing to appellate judges,

00:07:57--> 00:08:15

because that is purely on the fact that you're going to him there have been delivered such as Margaret Thatcher and Gandhi and goes to my head, that he was Peter Crawford. So therefore, he's saying this, in my view, yeah, these are women who will lead people on the people. So therefore, the ideas must not be authentic.

00:08:17--> 00:08:21

So he said, we have too much of a clock watching this waiting for

00:08:22--> 00:08:24

the will get in herself, and you're

00:08:26--> 00:08:30

freaking out, because dinosaurs will make you make the event. And he was

00:08:32--> 00:09:01

gonna disappoint before they stand up. And he is judging a scan is very simply on is up. And saying again, in my opinion, I see something that contradicts his ideas. And therefore he he rejects his headache. We can discuss this Danny points in greater detail, what is the what is the definition of that, from Islamic point of view, as I think I mentioned in the second lesson, and it is not just an increase in GNP or something like that. But it is yanyan applies both for that. And this jr will

00:09:03--> 00:09:15

need to reject the adage which is for him into his body on the basis of what you've seen from Buddha Meyer and Margaret Thatcher and to claim that people had to learn under them. And he this this is really the way we're thinking of

00:09:16--> 00:09:22

it, take some example into them that example looks good, and therefore they judge the basis of that example.

00:09:34--> 00:09:37

And the point, the point that I'm trying to make here is

00:09:39--> 00:09:47

that this is one of the words that they can mislead people by their methodology by their by their arguments. And it is

00:09:48--> 00:09:51

only have to follow which is authentic from the headings of the problem.

00:09:53--> 00:09:53

But then

00:09:54--> 00:09:59

it is not worth the magazine throughout all the years has said but instead

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

And to them what is authentic, genuine means their their opinion, or what sounds good to them. So probably one of the most extreme. And this

00:10:10--> 00:10:14

this way of looking at career was the man

00:10:16--> 00:10:19

who was teaching at the University of Chicago for many years.

00:10:21--> 00:10:36

And initial clear without any, any assessment, we are misters, and especially things that most of the adults are not authentic. And for many reasons, he claims, but he doesn't mean that we should reject them or

00:10:37--> 00:10:48

any of them anatomy is something we should accept it and take it as heavy, 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 just reject

00:10:50--> 00:10:51

it, that was the

00:10:54--> 00:10:58

person claims to be here. And he is one of the people who really, he called me.

00:10:59--> 00:11:30

And he said that Islam needs to be modernized, to be modernized, and this is this journey of modernization of ideas. Now, at the same time, although they claim that this is a methodology, and we only have to attend a khadeem, especially heavy book deal with actual practices, and and assuming for example, with respect to address with respect to matters, and so forth, and if they don't like the editor, or they don't like headings, which have specific meanings to them, they prefer the headings, whichever comes up of general principles, like in the Mullah Albania,

00:11:32--> 00:11:33

the kind of

00:11:35--> 00:11:37

some of the like very clearly that

00:11:39--> 00:11:47

this week, definitely just the Quran and the very few of the edits that are actually authentic. And some of them even reduce them to like 14 or something.

00:11:49--> 00:11:50

Same time.

00:11:51--> 00:12:03

And one thing very interesting I needed to see is in their approach. And again, you'll find this in almost all their fruits of their writing. And it might be it might be a lot and because they're actually specialists, and

00:12:04--> 00:12:07

whenever we make this claim that's really helpful for what is authentic.

00:12:09--> 00:12:13

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

00:12:14--> 00:12:24

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 supports the argument then they will use

00:12:25--> 00:12:26

we

00:12:27--> 00:12:31

go example here in the small sweater someone give a lecture

00:12:32--> 00:12:51

some of the life Gani democracy a lot. So to support this idea, again, it is everyone should go to both in the in the election of someone and the election of belief or whatever. And he is trying to argue that men and women are equal and so forth, that everyone in society should be allowed to vote. And so he called it

00:12:52--> 00:12:54

the story of

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

Jesus.

00:12:59--> 00:13:05

And he during the time that Othman was selected as editor, and in the storyboard of this app,

00:13:06--> 00:13:13

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

00:13:14--> 00:13:16

and based on on his findings,

00:13:17--> 00:13:21

and he chose that person, or that person at any

00:13:23--> 00:13:47

other time that comes from the same person. And one of the same person who said that we have to be careful only to use authenticating, which is brilliantly there's nothing wrong with that. But the point is that when I when we are useful for them, such as this incident, analysis results, tool, story, anybody when it's useful for them to use the tool to support them and have

00:13:48--> 00:13:55

perhaps the ultimate justice common, not more common with respect to the position of women in Islam.

00:13:57--> 00:14:05

And the film as a nation, and also the position of women in Islam, there is a threat to discuss the moral contract to bring about the changes the most

00:14:07--> 00:14:13

effectively to women in Islam. And these same people should only use authenticating

00:14:15--> 00:14:16

to

00:14:17--> 00:14:26

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

00:14:27--> 00:14:31

what is the story of when a bug was on the member?

00:14:33--> 00:14:38

Any advise the people ran about the matter and tried to restrict the amount of money that is to be given?

00:14:40--> 00:14:47

Where the woman came to him and said, Can you help me do this kind of analysis and even if you gave them

00:14:48--> 00:14:55

any large amounts of gold, you should not think about them. And so I'm gonna assert that the armor of the women is correct, and I'm going to

00:14:57--> 00:14:59

enable use this again, the same people instead, we should always use the

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

nicotine, they use this story over and over again to prove the position of a woman and that they should have any this. There are any even during the time of Ramadan, they feel free to go up to the COVID, and so on. And it just might be true but the story isn't true. You cannot use the destroyer, which is not true as, as approved, especially any when they say that we have to be careful only to use what is

00:15:24--> 00:15:25

authentic.

00:15:26--> 00:15:29

Also from the sample, they use the story of

00:15:30--> 00:15:34

an elephant mispronounce the woman's name to alert them so

00:15:37--> 00:16:13

Minnesota and it will reduce the Florida's ownership I was appointed by Obama as one of the one of the history and one of the people who rose in the market and make sure that there's no cheating in the market. And make sure that the only people who lose the weight correctly and there's no telling what's going on in the market and they enforce with this model, I go into this story. And it's coming from the same people who say we should be careful in adults and use only what is authentic. And again, the definition, the definition of authentic is something that they never define. But they use this story again, which is not not authentic, is the suppose this woman can be in the governance

00:16:13--> 00:16:45

and so forth. And but the evidence for that, then is not authentic. I'm not talking about the points itself about what for example, is the woman's role and so forth. That's not my point. My point is that they are and is the same people. So we should be careful. And using headings, and judging a lot in life and so forth. And rejected is this magic thing throughout all the years that are authentic. and it is saying thank you for turning around and when it's when it's convenient for them, or in other words when it supports them. And you're very quick to use me and you tend to use storage and to prove

00:16:47--> 00:16:55

their point of view. And it just shows an inconsistency of course in their in their model. And sometimes even miss you dealt

00:16:56--> 00:17:01

with an issue doubt their intention. And when they say something clearly, that we should be careful only

00:17:04--> 00:17:15

at the same time. And using any IDs which are not authentic rosters which are not authentic to support and what they're trying to do. And it just makes you question even Yanni word, really the person and what he's trying to do and

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

and what's the glue in reality.

00:17:21--> 00:17:24

And in other words, another approach that they use many of them

00:17:25--> 00:17:28

and this is also very dangerous and tricky.

00:17:29--> 00:17:43

Because when Annie by doing this and you can come to a place and you can give a lecture to people getting completely different views, and all of that and you leave them Jani, all of them with the with the impression that what you said is correct over what you meant actually may be

00:17:44--> 00:17:48

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

00:17:50--> 00:18:03

and using various terms without actually defining them. And without actually defining them from a planning point of view. And has given so here what I'm wrote about the nanny concerning the attributes of Allah.

00:18:06--> 00:18:09

And he has to design mocha from the cinnamon after December 2017.

00:18:11--> 00:18:15

Many people begin to use Danny terms for looking handle data or

00:18:17--> 00:18:25

data, which are not actually found in the Quran are similar, and will discuss whether or not or not and what Allah has been, has been clear truth

00:18:26--> 00:18:34

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

00:18:35--> 00:18:35

Well,

00:18:37--> 00:18:47

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 that's correct. For example, I need the three famous terms of

00:18:49--> 00:18:53

a democracy and freedom and equality.

00:18:55--> 00:18:56

So the fact that tune in because

00:18:57--> 00:19:06

of the slogans of the Masons. And the first thing is, when someone when a speaker comes or when any speaker can speak, and Islamic speaker uses these terms.

00:19:08--> 00:19:14

The question he has to answer himself in the question and the answer that he has to give to the people work does he mean by these terms?

00:19:15--> 00:19:22

And if you talk about democracy, and he just leaves it open like that, without defining what does it mean by democracy, he actually added democracy

00:19:23--> 00:19:36

as from a Western point of view, or and when this is where it was developed. And this is where the concept comes from. The mama karate claim to Arabic and it comes from our democracy.

00:19:38--> 00:19:42

And democracy actually is a Western, anti Western concept.

00:19:43--> 00:19:46

And if you don't use the word democracy, if you mean by the working class

00:19:48--> 00:20:00

and because the western concept of democracy and how can we 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

00:20:00--> 00:20:09

Do I need to cook? So you say that Islam is democratic. And in and you say, actually, some people do go through really extreme here. And they say that the tour of

00:20:10--> 00:20:14

the show was a term during the time of the problem, Homicide dilemma and democracy is a term known

00:20:15--> 00:20:22

as in many books, between the founding fathers and Ms was supposed to shore up a consultation, and today was the same thing as

00:20:24--> 00:20:39

when you when you use these terms, the one who you're playing again, because the one who knows the systems around, it will say, inshallah, this isn't what you meant, but were the one who doesn't know that this term is wrong, he'll say, yes, it's nonsense, the democracy didn't

00:20:40--> 00:20:43

talk about it. And the idea he was making means getting democracy.

00:20:44--> 00:21:11

So he has to be very careful to define that executive. And if they use vague terms in the heat of propaganda without saying exactly what they mean, about democracy, or freedom, and freedom from the western point of view. And 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.

00:21:12--> 00:21:20

And so when you say freedom in Islam, that's not what you mean. But at the same time, you have to explain to me, what you mean, equality, the same?

00:21:22--> 00:21:30

Can in Islam, is there equality between men and women in the same way that they tried to make equality between men and women here in the United States? Is there equality between an Australian law

00:21:32--> 00:21:33

an Islamic State,

00:21:34--> 00:21:43

and you have to then you have to define what you say, or another term, which I'm sure many, many people don't know what that means. But it is used by many of these. And he is

00:21:47--> 00:22:02

one of them here, and he gave a lecture and he used this we use the sparrows maybe 10 or 15 times. And he's saying that we have to judge everything. Within Yanni the concept of several masala and different sets of words is beneficial to the people and what is harmful.

00:22:03--> 00:22:11

Now is there any Islamic law lays down any definition of what kind of muscle how we can accept and what kind of muscle and in the shallow end doesn't exist.

00:22:13--> 00:22:17

And we have to be more specific, especially if we're talking to people who do not have a background.

00:22:19--> 00:22:38

And it because if we're talking to people who don't have that kind of background, then when they when they need to talk or read a book, and they look at something and they think there's something to it, even if that's the type of Muslim, Islamic and he does not consider or rejects. And he will argue for it and say me based on this person's reading.

00:22:40--> 00:22:42

Also any another another phrase?

00:22:43--> 00:22:44

Yeah,

00:22:45--> 00:22:59

that's a bit into that. That's one of the one of the coaches at this school, and why so many people are divided about it. Because when you use these, obviously any, when you use these terms, we could look at and say, well, the brother makes sentences.

00:23:01--> 00:23:36

And if we have any good has not been for the person will say Oh, when he meant the most when he said democracy he said when he said freedom Yeah. And even when he said he called him and so forth. lakhiani This is not actually what he said, you are assuming something for the person, which is not what he actually says, What is good Danny to have this good suspicion about your brother. But sometimes Johnny is approved, or the reality of the situation is the opposite. And it doesn't take any if he does not. He does not define the term properly. And if he's trying to use it,

00:23:39--> 00:23:43

were another and another way of the of this, this matter

00:23:45--> 00:23:45

of this moment.

00:23:47--> 00:23:52

In the piano when they discuss a topic, they do not present all the information that is available on the topic.

00:23:53--> 00:24:01

And then when they discuss the topic, for example, they do not present everything that can be found in the salon about desktop, or they will not present everything done

00:24:03--> 00:24:13

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

00:24:14--> 00:24:19

their way of thinking. For example, in the minaret magazine, one I showed.

00:24:21--> 00:24:26

I guess in the second lecture, Danny, I brought the copy of the minarets magazine, they should have some pictures from

00:24:27--> 00:24:35

that magazine. And one of the personal answer questions for them. His name is Jordan. And he was he was asked about an AI.

00:24:36--> 00:24:55

And someone wrote in as I said, by the way, is the characteristic of modernist moments that anything that we can witness anything that we cannot test and actually physically see. And we really have a tendency to reject when I is one of those things that they reject, not believe in generally and either modernist people belong to the school in general.

00:24:56--> 00:24:58

Going back to the time to

00:24:59--> 00:24:59

say that

00:25:00--> 00:25:07

Front enable do not do not believe in the things which are unseen. And one of the things that you do not believe in, is alive.

00:25:08--> 00:25:19

Well, this person and he was asked a question, someone wrote a letter to the magazine, he asked the question about today, and I heard many Muslims and from overseas mentioning this topic, and believing in this and so forth, and I find those beliefs and it

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

was a lie.

00:25:28--> 00:25:35

Like, like democracy, and the West has their own idea of life, which is not necessarily the same as the Senate, but that there would be any sort

00:25:37--> 00:25:39

of translating, either like,

00:25:41--> 00:25:45

well, this person, and he called Jordan and his answer, and he didn't present any headings.

00:25:46--> 00:26:01

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

00:26:03--> 00:26:06

And he had he presented all the headaches that he presented as a problem.

00:26:07--> 00:26:14

And perhaps with any disease, it is not true. Although he gave some explanation for the headache, this would have been

00:26:15--> 00:26:22

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

00:26:24--> 00:26:37

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

00:26:38--> 00:26:43

And he didn't have to bother with what the public has said and said they just don't, they just mentioned

00:26:45--> 00:27:10

from a scientific point of view, of course, is is not correct. And if you want to study any topics, then 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 make your conclusion. And you're not the other way around, have your conclusion and rejects the data. Although this is a good truism on economists, as economists say any of your data or numbers will tell you what you wanted to see. And

00:27:12--> 00:27:17

the person who was looking for the purest Danny who will approach the topic, and the opposite man

00:27:21--> 00:27:22

was and is looking to the money.

00:27:28--> 00:27:30

something nice about these lectures, we have lots of breaks.

00:27:38--> 00:27:44

And it was restricted, the points are just mentioned about not presenting all the information on the topic.

00:27:45--> 00:27:49

And obviously what what I was referring to in that case is for example,

00:27:51--> 00:27:55

this man did not mentioned he hadn't heard about the iron which are authentic, and

00:27:56--> 00:27:58

for example can be found

00:28:02--> 00:28:04

is something can be true.

00:28:06--> 00:28:14

And we'll find that even even the present all the muscles within to specific targets.

00:28:16--> 00:28:18

And even then, sometimes

00:28:19--> 00:28:23

some of them wish to avoid the actual meaning of the text.

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

Then what they do is they force their interpretation upon the text.

00:28:30--> 00:28:52

Or we talk about the history of the development or the development of the moment. And we talked about the Vasa data. This was one of the one of the approaches, especially first with respect to the fraud, because we cannot deny any verse in the Quran like they can or like they try to deny it. So those are with respect to Iran.

00:28:54--> 00:29:03

And when the Quran ruled against what they want to believe or what they want to think, again the fourth interpretation from the Quran and the declaration. So,

00:29:04--> 00:29:13

in the first lecture with respect to Mohammed Abu For example, when he said this, the jinn are the modern day Miko, and because he did, it

00:29:15--> 00:29:18

believes in the sense of dancing around

00:29:20--> 00:29:27

interpretation for the gym. Another example, which is related to the following concepts that we use

00:29:30--> 00:29:31

in the second lecture,

00:29:32--> 00:29:41

is the case of the corporate Sudoku, claiming any of the two women should play in the mall. And when he discussed the idea

00:29:42--> 00:29:48

that it's best for a woman to pray in her house, and it's even better for her to pray in the private

00:29:49--> 00:29:53

room of our house. We mentioned earlier that he said the reason for

00:29:55--> 00:29:59

that woman is because she did not have the proper clothing to go outside and so

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

Because I

00:30:01--> 00:30:06

was telling that woman in particular, that she was desperate to pray

00:30:07--> 00:30:09

in her house, what at any

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

given point is forcing his own interpretation upon that he doesn't say that whatsoever. And there's no evidence for what he's saying, what he says does not present any any evidence for that repetition of this particular heavy

00:30:27--> 00:30:31

thing, and even if they do present, they try to interpret the results.

00:30:32--> 00:30:37

And in such a way that they basically force their own interpretation on the on the analysis, and even

00:30:39--> 00:30:54

you actually present all the source all the texts related to them, when they get to the point that they present the materials and they try to interpret in their own way. And they have difficulty doing that. Then the third outlet

00:30:55--> 00:30:59

methodology, is to say that an apple takes precedence over

00:31:01--> 00:31:01

any

00:31:02--> 00:31:06

human intervention takes precedence over what has been narrated

00:31:07--> 00:31:08

from the public.

00:31:09--> 00:31:12

So there is any contradiction between the latter

00:31:13--> 00:31:23

and nothing between any what we what we as human beings, with our intellect believe is true. And as an any any contribution between that

00:31:28--> 00:31:42

takes precedence. And what has been important has to be rejected, as untrue in the case of it, or it has to be again, you have to make a report to give it some meaning consistent with what we believe is true. And as I mentioned, Danny, early this year,

00:31:46--> 00:31:59

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

00:32:02--> 00:32:05

as well as a completely rational religion.

00:32:07--> 00:32:12

Rational you will not find anything in Islam that goes against Western rational thinking.

00:32:14--> 00:32:14

And

00:32:15--> 00:32:19

when I first became Muslim, I heard, I heard this from many, many,

00:32:21--> 00:32:26

many, many, many brothers, and not realizing exactly what we're saying.

00:32:27--> 00:32:32

Because if you show that it's not the rational religion, if you mean by that, that

00:32:34--> 00:32:48

any human good science and everything this rule came from will listen to Allah, and the Quran, and the ideas in front of them also came from Allah subhanaw taala. And therefore, you're not gonna find any contradiction between the two. And it was nothing wrong with that.

00:32:49--> 00:32:53

But if you mean by that, in Islam, we study everything, including the text and including

00:32:55--> 00:33:05

an irrational way and left yet and we don't think is correct, according to our intellectual reject, this is something else. And this is completely,

00:33:06--> 00:33:09

completely unexplainable. But those people who

00:33:12--> 00:33:18

they never authorized to do any strong proof that usually we film it, as simply well known and something good

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

laughter takes precedence over

00:33:23--> 00:33:25

the later lecture only when we compare

00:33:27--> 00:33:35

to the, to the modernist moments with this question, in more detail and in the position of Lacan with respect to what has been

00:33:36--> 00:33:42

narrated from the, from the thermometers, and then he was talking about the Quran or talking about

00:33:45--> 00:33:46

the next step.

00:33:47--> 00:33:48

Besides

00:33:50--> 00:33:54

that the doctor takes precedence. Another way of avoiding that what the text actually

00:33:56--> 00:34:07

another way, another way of avoiding actually implementing what the Khurana what the idiot says, is to say that, as Muslims were supposed to take the spirit of the religion and not

00:34:09--> 00:34:11

not be too much worried about the detail of

00:34:12--> 00:34:28

what was discussed concept also are very many books that I've heard from many, many writers that were more concerned about the scope of the religion, and not as concerned with the, with the specific law. Well, that was likely

00:34:29--> 00:34:41

a lot and this problem, and it's very possible this is the some of the Muslims have an interest throughout history by the Christians on this point, because the Christian Ghana completely took the spirits of Christianity and

00:34:43--> 00:34:53

this is something real going in the modernist movement and Christianity. And although it may have influenced the cost of the machine

00:34:55--> 00:34:57

and if you look to the front and if you look to the area,

00:34:58--> 00:35:00

it was very clear that we

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

We're supposed to put both the spirit and the detail laws into consideration. Not just concern yourself with the state with

00:35:08--> 00:35:28

with respect to the spirit of the law, as in even in the birth in which Allah subhana wa tada is sending us this Gani piety is facing east to west, Allah Subhana, WA tada continued that will fight during the Friday is believing in certain search and also establishing the slot, and things of that type and so forth. These are the different aspects that we cannot

00:35:29--> 00:35:32

we cannot ignore one of the

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

one of the examples where they use it

00:35:38--> 00:35:43

principle, we take the spirit of the law is with respect to

00:35:44--> 00:36:28

what is the women supposed to wear, there are many of them have argued, and, unfortunately, 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 authors, they argue with the Quran. Basically, it's telling us that the woman should dress modestly. And we should concern ourselves too much with the details of that dress. And what is the meaning for example of agenda, what is the meaning of command and so forth. And today, we're saying that this is not what God wants from us. This is not the meaning of these words in the Quran, Allah subhanho wa Taala is simply telling us that the women are supposed to be dressed in a modest

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

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 of the law.

00:36:38--> 00:36:42

Another another aspect of the, of the methodology,

00:36:43--> 00:36:45

which when interpreting such texts.

00:36:50--> 00:36:55

And this actually was related to what we talked about last time, so I'm not talking about in detail today.

00:36:57--> 00:37:01

And that is sometimes they claim things as scientific fact when in fact they're not.

00:37:03--> 00:37:11

And they tried to sit opposite persons over nothing, they read the Quran and Hadith, in the light of these so called scientific facts, which are not,

00:37:12--> 00:37:14

as I said last time,

00:37:15--> 00:37:18

in detail lessons over against

00:37:20--> 00:37:22

another aspect of their of their methodology

00:37:24--> 00:37:30

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

00:37:32--> 00:37:35

on a table, which is true, but what they mean by that is something else.

00:37:36--> 00:37:38

They do not mean the same thing that the scholars

00:37:39--> 00:37:41

who originally made those statements.

00:37:42--> 00:37:49

And perhaps one of the classic example of that is the statement that the door is broken.

00:37:50--> 00:37:55

And it's never closed. There's no such thing as we can no longer make any more today.

00:37:57--> 00:37:59

You know, the the scholars of Islam.

00:38:02--> 00:38:02

In

00:38:08--> 00:38:19

such a statement, there's no question that the group is open, and allow them to do is open until the day of judgment. But what do you mean by that? What do you mean by that?

00:38:21--> 00:38:23

She had or if she had is open to anyone

00:38:24--> 00:38:28

you mean by that? is open on any question.

00:38:29--> 00:38:33

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

00:38:35--> 00:38:38

And it wasn't till after you came, and we're

00:38:39--> 00:38:47

in which the quality qualifications for making it more narrow, and only specific people should were allowed to make it.

00:38:49--> 00:39:01

We'll discuss this in more detail. This is not true, obviously. And even before the time of Eminem, Chevy discovered, we're careful about who would be allowed or who should be scattered, who should not make it, she has a good point

00:39:02--> 00:39:09

that she had the ability to get it open and anyone should be allowed to make a chair. Whether he's despairing, he knows about

00:39:10--> 00:39:31

whatever is not important. They're claiming that anyone should be allowed to make a Jihad and many times they made with or without any doubt about what other times they kind of tried to couch it in. And other terms were perhaps when we discussed that point in more detail, I would bring some quotes from some of these authors. I have in here somewhere

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

to be maybe.

00:39:36--> 00:39:39

Also we need to this point is on what questions do you make

00:39:40--> 00:39:52

when you say the door is open? does that imply that even if there's that there's some text, some Quranic verse or some of the elements to the form that we can still make it.

00:39:55--> 00:39:59

Some of them may not show that explicitly, but in their writing to consider

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

One of the classic examples of data which has just been repeated in the condition

00:40:07--> 00:40:09

is with respect to, for example,

00:40:10--> 00:40:19

and who has the right to make the lock and whether the lock should be left in the hands of the judge and taken out of the hand of the husband. And clearly, or I should

00:40:20--> 00:40:26

a man marry more than one woman. And which is something right from the Quran episode.

00:40:30--> 00:40:34

Some people, the most recent case I seen was in Vegas.

00:40:38--> 00:40:39

This is my expert on

00:40:42--> 00:41:01

the most recent issue of the magazine, again, the same argument was made in a conference someplace on the position of women who said that we should respect the rights of democracy. And we should respect the the practice of facility, which is exactly this kind of methodology where it was said that when a message

00:41:03--> 00:41:05

is open, and we may even make it

00:41:06--> 00:41:07

on question,

00:41:08--> 00:41:10

the bronzer affordable to

00:41:12--> 00:41:16

another, another statement, similar to that.

00:41:17--> 00:41:26

And this term is kind of funny, because the one that they usually refer to, including the statements given a fire within a fire and

00:41:27--> 00:41:28

lemon water.

00:41:29--> 00:41:32

And it was broken when a fire, the first

00:41:34--> 00:41:40

touch was supposed to change with time and place. And if the conditions change, the first watching.

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

Anyway, he wrote on this point for I think about six pages or so. And it's actually more than

00:41:47--> 00:41:54

that, I think, many of you, modernist we get to this point from someone else, and they never actually read the book.

00:41:55--> 00:42:00

Where are you with enough time to change the template and the long path?

00:42:02--> 00:42:07

So the problem is that this statement is true, there's no question that software changes within play.

00:42:08--> 00:42:10

But what kind of football we're talking about?

00:42:11--> 00:42:15

Again, this, these people proceed to apply to almost anything.

00:42:16--> 00:42:26

That's what was correct during the time, the proper agreements are done to to harbor the terrain and so forth, things have changed now. And so therefore, the vessel has to change, and will change again, and not only with respect to

00:42:27--> 00:42:30

things related to customer, but also with respect to the soul.

00:42:31--> 00:42:38

With respect to the soul, as someone who clearly stated we don't want this to happen, and we want it in lieu,

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

we have

00:42:40--> 00:42:41

clearly

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

defined facets completely enough just

00:42:46--> 00:42:59

one portion of it even a client makes it very clear that when you think that the person who has to change the template is not talking about things which are confirmed by the Quran sooner, we find most photographers are simply on the customer.

00:43:00--> 00:43:04

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

00:43:06--> 00:43:07

if the customer wants

00:43:08--> 00:43:14

to make a certain statement, that means a business meeting is concluded and they both accept the business even

00:43:15--> 00:43:16

when

00:43:17--> 00:43:21

when the customer should be that effective in his name, then that didn't include

00:43:23--> 00:43:30

the customer first, again on the on the culture on the time and the place, not very strong. So not based on on this as if you make this

00:43:32--> 00:43:46

conclusion. So things change over time. And this statement loses meaning and doesn't mean any more that the business dealings concluded, then the festival has to change, then now if you make the same statement, it doesn't mean that the business is concluded. So

00:43:47--> 00:43:56

we're talking about what you stated explicitly. If you continue to read what he says he's talking about the tower which are built on custom, which are not based on the source,

00:43:57--> 00:44:12

these things have to change over time, according to the conditions of the environment of the people. But unfortunately, they said they take this statement and occur the first few paragraphs on what you said and they apply it to everything and it will apply it

00:44:13--> 00:44:14

they apply to

00:44:15--> 00:44:16

they apply it to

00:44:19--> 00:44:23

a job they like to apply even to the rules related

00:44:24--> 00:44:28

to the collusion. So this is one of their approaches unfortunately.

00:44:30--> 00:44:31

And they

00:44:32--> 00:44:37

well known famous alumna who made the statement that when they do their own interpretation, which

00:44:38--> 00:44:40

especially in the Copa didn't go

00:44:45--> 00:44:48

along with this also another person who see

00:44:49--> 00:44:52

from the from the school

00:44:53--> 00:44:55

or the people who have been influenced by the school

00:44:58--> 00:44:59

to peace of mind

00:45:08--> 00:45:12

Do you have a tendency to put and to follow

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

in Arabic

00:45:16--> 00:45:21

and muka opinion and strange opinions and opinions have been rejected by the majority

00:45:22--> 00:45:26

have been rejected because the muscle because of text what's wrong

00:45:30--> 00:45:34

with it means the brain and they try to revive these things because they are consistent with

00:45:36--> 00:45:36

their weight.

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

They tried to claim that this is not my opinion, but this is left for example, and it hasn't said or so on

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

in the past, where I want to

00:45:48--> 00:45:50

admit it was International, I'm not sure.

00:45:52--> 00:45:56

Maybe someone can correct me. Because if you follow the mistakes,

00:45:59--> 00:46:00

if you follow the mistakes,

00:46:02--> 00:46:03

because for example,

00:46:06--> 00:46:10

when it comes to the Wii, which is actually a type of alcoholic drink,

00:46:13--> 00:46:16

step when it comes to some kind of

00:46:22--> 00:46:24

theme, color.

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

Without

00:46:33--> 00:46:34

put you put you

00:46:41--> 00:46:48

where the point is, and if you follow the mistakes, if you just look for different scholars, and you follow them as fate.

00:46:49--> 00:46:56

thing is that for and then we'll be breaking the rules, which is the title one, and you'll be seeing at the same time and

00:47:00--> 00:47:01

all these mistakes

00:47:02--> 00:47:09

will try as I said there said they are strange opinions or their opinions rejected, because it will go against

00:47:10--> 00:47:22

everything that people have disclosed that admitted such as in America, the Medina square, who also rejects the idea of being any number of liberal scholars also said that this was a mistake of have already started. But he

00:47:29--> 00:47:30

and we'll do x

00:47:31--> 00:47:31

from the

00:47:42--> 00:47:56

end, if you read if you read the writings of many of these people, again, they're trying to open the door to all sorts of different opinions, saying that we should open the door to these opinions and see which opinion is most suitable to us today.

00:47:57--> 00:48:02

And as I've talked about many times before the principle, if you're going to follow any step of

00:48:03--> 00:48:03

the

00:48:06--> 00:48:17

opinion, which you find is true, you don't follow the opinion once you find it easier. And Muslims to follow the tour, and we're not obliged to go

00:48:18--> 00:48:22

with the easy. So there are plugins for these kinds of opinions, which is

00:48:24--> 00:48:26

famous for writing about singing.

00:48:27--> 00:48:28

And lengthening

00:48:39--> 00:48:42

hadn't been everything, then maybe we could say okay, well, it hasn't been everything.

00:48:44--> 00:48:47

But we're doing things that they like. And they

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

have it hasn't. And he says as long as it's especially with respect to seeing his ruling on this, because he rejects from South Korea, which is to be authentic, when the squares have

00:49:02--> 00:49:04

not been authentic, or not the correct thing

00:49:06--> 00:49:08

to try to open this door with respect to

00:49:10--> 00:49:12

the total drain.

00:49:13--> 00:49:17

Describe who lived during the time of Amazonia

00:49:19--> 00:49:21

in the same year. And the very interesting

00:49:23--> 00:49:26

what you said not the hackers presidents or anything else

00:49:27--> 00:49:28

doesn't matter

00:49:29--> 00:49:30

to everything else.

00:49:34--> 00:49:47

Have refuted his views. And in fact, his views really have been lost and many people didn't even know about the strange reading that he had, until recently, of course has been revised. Because this exactly was very convenient for the modern.

00:49:49--> 00:49:58

knuckleheads, President or anything. So if you find you find that the process coming around, but it's good for people you decide that it's good for the

00:49:59--> 00:49:59

president

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

That can become no longer

00:50:03--> 00:50:11

a matter of the way to try to open the door for all of these different opinions and ideas, which are not authentic, which is the

00:50:13--> 00:50:15

witness of the moment. Rama,

00:50:16--> 00:50:19

Rama, further rejected or authentic.

00:50:22--> 00:50:23

When he heard about the Hadeeth

00:50:25--> 00:50:27

among a group of in the 73 groups,

00:50:29--> 00:50:47

all of them are now required step one, the homicidal him and his companions are thorough, and he tries to try to reject the addition in the same series of articles basically saying that we should be open to more difference of opinion and we should accept other people's opinions and not

00:50:50--> 00:50:55

necessarily what we find in the news is open. And he was happy, he has to reject it, because the study was

00:50:57--> 00:50:59

that it was only one exam. And all the

00:51:02--> 00:51:05

reasons for repeating this editor are not going to impact

00:51:07--> 00:51:08

the Australian

00:51:14--> 00:51:15

for repeating the city, and again,

00:51:27--> 00:51:28

we just needed some time.

00:51:30--> 00:51:37

And he's only the only thing I could really, really try to like to get for this last category. It's not a nice setup, but it's the only kind of

00:51:38--> 00:51:39

sometimes

00:51:43--> 00:51:52

sometimes it is clear that this is what they do. And if you don't, don't bring on certain points, they don't bring any, any evidence

00:51:54--> 00:51:58

that they tend to make a claim in the show. On this point, basically, they are

00:52:03--> 00:52:05

talking about the separation of men and women.

00:52:07--> 00:52:17

And in fact, he was talking specifically about the mind conditions and how the mind runs, like the way they're run. And he segments a situation a minimum, and he

00:52:18--> 00:52:21

statements about the separation of men and women, and his idea

00:52:22--> 00:52:25

of why we should not have separation between animals.

00:52:27--> 00:52:30

We love our wives. And we don't want them close to us.

00:52:32--> 00:52:34

Rather, the person who said this

00:52:35--> 00:52:37

was written in about 40 books

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

in Arabic.

00:52:40--> 00:52:42

And he used to be the editor of the magazine

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

would like

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

to since we like our rise,

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

why should you

00:52:57--> 00:52:59

think of any other topic to put this under

00:53:01--> 00:53:03

the we will not do any,

00:53:05--> 00:53:14

we will not win anything they could they could make one thing, that this is based on some rational argument that simply if we like it, and we don't see anything wrong with it, I assume that's what he means also, there

00:53:18--> 00:53:20

should be no separation between men are also

00:53:22--> 00:53:38

very short chapter on seeing in his book, sooner, you get the same person basically saying that I listened to this song, and the song he got away with somebody. You didn't mention that in the book. But

00:53:42--> 00:53:49

why are these people so strict about switching people of a different country? So why are they so strict about it? I'm

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

not any candidate, kind of

00:53:59--> 00:54:03

any social news, there are some kind of evidence that were against what what

00:54:04--> 00:54:04

was

00:54:09--> 00:54:11

true. In some cases, that is not true. And

00:54:13--> 00:54:15

there's nothing in there nothing.

00:54:16--> 00:54:17

There's something wrong with this.

00:54:18--> 00:54:25

facility. There's nothing in the process and medicine, this is all we find. And also we don't see anything wrong with it.

00:54:30--> 00:54:36

And the fitness facility to show that there's something wrong with you cannot just say well, I don't see anything wrong with it.

00:54:38--> 00:54:42

And finally, the last point that I will I will mention today

00:54:44--> 00:54:46

because I'm exhausted and

00:54:48--> 00:54:56

that's what I mentioned in their methodology. Of course they have a very or they have very little respect for the opinions of the

00:54:58--> 00:54:59

rest

00:55:00--> 00:55:03

Or the terrain or anyone other than because

00:55:05--> 00:55:06

again, it's We are,

00:55:08--> 00:55:12

we are men, the men should be able to reject whatever they

00:55:15--> 00:55:17

want to wear. This certainly isn't to the sector. This

00:55:19--> 00:55:30

was the Sahaba Boudicca, also we have to compare our nose with their nose and our couple with a couple of days. In fact, we should put ourselves in the same position as the as,

00:55:31--> 00:55:32

especially since

00:55:33--> 00:55:41

this generation is his generation. And then one afternoon one afternoon, and it was means that we should have some respect to that generation. And not just especially

00:55:42--> 00:55:47

the generation of the Sahaba, who were brought up by the villain under the under his guidance,

00:55:48--> 00:55:51

and who wrote the Quran and who thought

00:55:53--> 00:56:16

around being feminine. And we cannot deal with their opinions, if they are anyone, just like anyone else. We know their position, we know their position with respect to our lesson, and what data and what data is pleased with them. And so therefore, we should respect their position and not deal with them, just like there are some individuals from the time before, which is what the one of the one of the growth in

00:56:17--> 00:56:20

the game earlier this century was great.

00:56:23--> 00:56:25

And it was kind of the approach to the center.

00:56:27--> 00:56:30

It was very dangerous. And I would expect, especially from

00:56:31--> 00:56:32

considering so people

00:56:33--> 00:56:35

have a better understanding of

00:56:45--> 00:56:46

the person's account.

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

Welcome back to

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

the operation of the OPC.

00:57:44--> 00:57:44

What do you think of

00:57:52--> 00:57:53

the situation

00:57:58--> 00:58:00

today that we need to take part in

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

a system?

00:58:04--> 00:58:04

Where

00:58:07--> 00:58:15

we're probably the best answer for that question, especially with respect to the, to the less developed countries is this.

00:58:16--> 00:58:21

The thing that requires us and the reason that we're in so much debt actually is because of

00:58:24--> 00:58:32

America, their payments that they made was with payments on the on the interest, and it is not payments on the on the actual principal.

00:58:38--> 00:58:50

situation, but probably as a nation as a whole if you study the concept of Aruba, and if you study the power that these nations would have, if they really tried to flex their power in the face of

00:58:51--> 00:58:54

in the face of the IMF, in the face of the World Bank and so forth.

00:58:55--> 00:58:56

to actually take

00:58:58--> 00:59:10

the earthquake route is something as in many cases, the people who are brought to the city where they are getting kicked back themselves, they're getting benefits and so while the fact that it's harming the country will benefit

01:00:23--> 01:00:23

Don't know

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

what happened?

01:00:42--> 01:00:43

The question was referring

01:00:48--> 01:00:48

to the woman

01:00:50--> 01:00:51

versus who the person is about.

01:00:56--> 01:00:59

At the woman has a long note that

01:01:01--> 01:01:10

the sugar is permissible for the, for the man or the husband to have intercourse with his wife, when she has when she's in bed,

01:01:12--> 01:01:15

you're assigned things to show that this would be harmful to

01:01:20--> 01:01:22

the contradiction here between

01:01:24--> 01:01:25

science and weapons

01:01:28--> 01:01:30

and respect to

01:01:31--> 01:01:32

with respect to same

01:01:33--> 01:01:37

thing, the integration of aluminum is harmful to her.

01:01:39--> 01:01:42

I've read some things on this topic, and I haven't come across that.

01:01:47--> 01:01:49

So the first question is whether or not that's true.

01:01:51--> 01:01:52

From what I've read and seen that

01:01:54--> 01:01:55

the starting point is with

01:01:58--> 01:02:04

the shooter, meaning what's wrong as soon as is not exploitable, that it is permissible for a minute.

01:02:08--> 01:02:14

This is the opinion of the difference opinion about some fatalities, sympathize,

01:02:15--> 01:02:22

sympathize a witness or a situation for a long period of time, then it will be kind of hardship upon the man

01:02:23--> 01:02:24

to develop.

01:02:25--> 01:02:28

part, the man in that case will take precedence over the harm

01:02:29--> 01:02:36

that may come may come along. So you're not talking about a case where the source of the text of the crime, actually,

01:02:38--> 01:02:39

this is again, something

01:02:40--> 01:02:52

that you're not finding explicit about, as far as I know, from what I've seen, and reading of arguments to her that there is no proof that woman in that situation is harmed by having intercourse.

01:03:11--> 01:03:12

Good.

01:03:18--> 01:03:18

weekend

01:03:26--> 01:03:27

to be

01:03:36--> 01:03:36

electric

01:03:37--> 01:03:39

convention is not correct.

01:03:59--> 01:04:00

The person is, and

01:04:02--> 01:04:04

it is really a movement that should have

01:04:05--> 01:04:06

leadership.

01:04:09--> 01:04:09

Who I believe

01:04:11--> 01:04:13

First of all, not every movement has to have

01:04:15--> 01:04:19

some movements that kind of occur by almost by most

01:04:20--> 01:04:22

you know, for example, at the French Revolution,

01:04:24--> 01:04:36

the French Revolution, things were happening there was no and you have a few people who were speaking the leader of the moment, this is a woman and this is what you're asking for good things happen because of the

01:04:37--> 01:04:38

events that occurred.

01:04:40--> 01:04:41

So when we talk about

01:04:43--> 01:04:59

talking about one movement with one leader, and such, but we're talking about a group of scholars, who has this way of thinking who are influencing others, in other words, they each have their own words, and they each have their people that they're influencing them during the second lecture.

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

I,

01:05:03--> 01:05:05

in the second lecture, I split the mission,

01:05:06--> 01:05:15

some of the leaders of this movement or some of the people who are, or have this approach to Islam, and they're influencing us, such as Turkey.

01:05:16--> 01:05:18

And the United States and

01:05:19--> 01:05:21

Robin, we mentioned and

01:05:23--> 01:05:24

talking about one moment saying that

01:05:28--> 01:05:33

he called himself a modernist, and he said, this is what he said. But at the same time, you cannot say this,

01:05:34--> 01:05:35

modernity with

01:05:37--> 01:05:37

my husband

01:05:39--> 01:05:39

in

01:05:47--> 01:05:49

democracy is no place.

01:05:57--> 01:05:58

The Hong Kong,

01:05:59--> 01:05:59

democratic

01:06:16--> 01:06:20

democracy has no place in Islam. And to the left is

01:06:29--> 01:06:35

what I said, basically, just to use the term democracy, you have to define exactly what you mean by that term.

01:06:36--> 01:06:42

So if you mean by the term democracy, what the West means by that, as I mentioned, this is actually a technical

01:06:44--> 01:06:46

term democracy, and perhaps there's not

01:06:47--> 01:06:53

a different term. But if you use the term democracy, and you define it in such a way that is consistent with it,

01:06:54--> 01:07:24

then there's nothing nothing wrong with that, although I still I think, would be best not to do that. Because democracy has a certain meaning to people has a certain history as the first version, these principles are not consistent with Islam. So therefore, do not use the term democracy. The government should call themselves a democratic government, and they define democracy in such a way that it is consistent with Islam, then there's nothing, nothing, nothing wrong with it.

01:07:34--> 01:07:34

He will

01:07:38--> 01:07:50

never regret saying that the people are not the loggers. The people something to elect representatives, to, to to be the leaders of the people and implementing the

01:07:51--> 01:07:56

service is different from from democracy. In the

01:07:57--> 01:08:00

United States. Democracy is not a democracy, Republic.

01:08:05--> 01:08:13

governments of the united the Congress of the United States wanted to change the constitution, want to do them to get rid of the Constitution, they would have that right.

01:08:16--> 01:08:22

For the elected official, they will not have the right force to do away with the product to do with

01:08:23--> 01:08:23

the laws.

01:08:25--> 01:08:33

That is a big difference between the two with respect to how to choose a lever, or how to choose who should be the members of

01:08:37--> 01:08:37

the left

01:08:39--> 01:08:45

hasn't really restricted to one or two ways, but in general has lifted the open

01:08:53--> 01:08:54

price in Canada

01:08:55--> 01:09:01

reading or not interested? We're familiar with some of the diagrams for those people who have voted

01:09:03--> 01:09:05

in a mirror. And

01:09:07--> 01:09:08

this is not the best way to do this.

01:09:10--> 01:09:12

Maybe it's not the best way because it's not the

01:09:14--> 01:09:18

other document that they said that this is perhaps the permissible

01:09:19--> 01:09:20

method

01:09:21--> 01:09:21

for

01:09:23--> 01:09:31

defining democracy in such a way that people are going to be elected to lead others and there are elected to implement the Sharia

01:09:35--> 01:09:36

might be

01:09:39--> 01:09:42

discouraged today in my opinion cannot be discussed.

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

Hello

01:10:20--> 01:10:21

no

01:10:35--> 01:10:36

no

01:10:37--> 01:10:37

no

01:11:15--> 01:11:16

or

01:11:21--> 01:11:22

recall

01:11:24--> 01:11:25

and

01:11:30--> 01:11:31

elaborate

01:11:45--> 01:11:47

talking about these moments

01:12:10--> 01:12:19

think we mentioned in the last lecture that this view of the millennial movement is basically what we cannot see

01:12:21--> 01:12:23

is to be basically rejected

01:12:24--> 01:12:25

with respect to

01:12:28--> 01:12:32

imaging some examples of Power BI as some

01:12:33--> 01:12:41

dye itself has some relation between it and the soil and this can happen enough when you see it will have an effect

01:12:59--> 01:13:00

in my opinion

01:13:03--> 01:13:03

mentioned

01:13:08--> 01:13:09

that

01:13:10--> 01:13:10

I think

01:13:16--> 01:13:19

we have to do these kinds of movements

01:13:20--> 01:13:21

show them how

01:13:25--> 01:13:28

to get him on a station which is

01:13:35--> 01:13:35

very light

01:13:41--> 01:13:41

he said

01:13:52--> 01:13:52

the

01:13:53--> 01:13:54

American

01:13:55--> 01:13:55

flag

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

modernize

01:14:02--> 01:14:03

take two parameters

01:14:05--> 01:14:11

maybe we can get more of the Americans or other people to have another mission

01:14:13--> 01:14:15

This is their way and then

01:14:18--> 01:14:20

we have a proclamation

01:14:22--> 01:14:23

we know what is the difference

01:14:25--> 01:14:30

nobody will stop it or try to get them to slam

01:14:31--> 01:14:33

cannot pay everything like

01:14:34--> 01:14:35

usually

01:14:42--> 01:14:46

listen to lectures, okay? But at the beginning

01:14:49--> 01:14:50

I mean it has to come gradually.

01:14:52--> 01:14:53

But this is my idea.

01:14:54--> 01:14:56

We live in a country which is not that

01:14:58--> 01:14:59

we have to grow yet

01:15:00--> 01:15:06

And then Don, who became a Muslim by himself is reading and asking

01:15:09--> 01:15:10

you permission.

01:15:15--> 01:15:17

Very hard, we never met anyone

01:15:19--> 01:15:20

of freedom,

01:15:22--> 01:15:23

if you want another

01:15:37--> 01:15:37

one, right,

01:15:42--> 01:15:43

make the plan

01:15:45--> 01:15:47

all these conditions,

01:15:48--> 01:15:49

and when you attack them

01:15:52--> 01:15:52

all,

01:16:10--> 01:16:16

basically, the brother was saying that in our situation here in the United States, and these people are calling

01:16:18--> 01:16:31

people to them. And so therefore their their approach is not to give them everything at one time, but to try to give them something that will make them appreciate them. And so therefore, I shall ever lead to them in an accurate answers, then shala, they will

01:16:41--> 01:16:42

develop the

01:16:44--> 01:16:48

name, which will allow them to see clear from some of the writings of

01:16:49--> 01:17:16

the therefore, we're trying to defend Islam from the from the influence or from the from gain, and for the weak in the face of Greek philosophy. So, therefore, they try to interpret them in such a way to show that it is consistent with philosophy. And the same is with the newer intention of the person is not sufficient, you must make sure that what he's doing and what he's saying is also correct. And he was

01:17:18--> 01:17:20

willing to put on the sooner

01:17:25--> 01:17:29

more interesting movement is to is to bring non Muslim

01:17:32--> 01:17:37

nations away with their limited law, correct, because the way that they're doing it is not the way of the

01:17:39--> 01:17:40

secondary plan as we know it.

01:17:43--> 01:17:45

And it is the teaching and the approach

01:17:47--> 01:17:58

in something accessible to all human beings, and there's no reason for us to try to destroy it, and so forth. And some of the points that we'll talk about are not related to practices, like whether you should work a job or not,

01:17:59--> 01:18:01

but actually go to the doctor.

01:18:04--> 01:18:08

Quran about whether or not you have to fly to France today is that you will deliver

01:18:10--> 01:18:13

especially with respect to with respect

01:18:14--> 01:18:15

and also with respect to

01:18:17--> 01:18:27

separate lines writings, mostly towards Muslims, is trying to show Muslims what is the truth that is not writing for Islam is writing towards Muslims.

01:18:30--> 01:18:36

Whereas now I know many women, a few women who suffer because of influences.

01:18:37--> 01:18:37

So

01:18:39--> 01:18:52

thing to any influence non Muslims. Although that wouldn't be correct. I wish we could say that. In fact, they are writing towards Muslims. And they're claiming that rhetoric is the truth. And we have to leave room

01:18:53--> 01:18:55

for them or whatever they want to call it.

01:19:14--> 01:19:15

This is one of

01:19:21--> 01:19:22

your

01:19:27--> 01:19:27

books in English.

01:19:31--> 01:19:33

And we're starting to show them the third

01:19:34--> 01:19:35

of the Muslims of

01:19:37--> 01:19:39

Sunni Islam and so what did

01:19:43--> 01:19:43

he get?

01:19:45--> 01:19:46

He will read it.

01:19:49--> 01:19:50

In English at all my reading and

01:19:57--> 01:19:57

reading

01:19:58--> 01:19:59

is using terms and read

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

until this

01:20:05--> 01:20:05

point,

01:20:06--> 01:20:14

if you tell him something and not true at the beginning, and then finally, then he finds out that what you said actually wasn't true. And there'll be a

01:20:18--> 01:20:21

question of whether a salad to learn how to foster

01:20:22--> 01:20:23

some of the modern hits that he had,

01:20:24--> 01:20:26

when it was one beveling.

01:20:29--> 01:20:32

And he was with us for about three years. And one

01:20:33--> 01:20:34

pointed out that he

01:20:36--> 01:20:40

was in a meeting or something. And Israel got very upset.

01:20:41--> 01:20:46

And he said, I was tricked into becoming, because I was terribly sad.

01:20:59--> 01:21:00

Are you going to get

01:21:05--> 01:21:06

better after that?

01:21:08--> 01:21:10

You could become a Muslim, I don't believe

01:21:14--> 01:21:19

respect to the practices. And if you teach in St. Louis, I mentioned that on many occasions, before

01:21:21--> 01:21:26

we in this country is in the works our workflow is all about is to teach people

01:21:28--> 01:21:30

and to to show them the truth.

01:21:32--> 01:21:38

Believe that, and you're able to show them the truth of that, and they believe in it, then the practices will follow.

01:21:40--> 01:21:42

And if you come to them saying that

01:21:43--> 01:21:48

irrational, we have the best economic system to treat women this way, instead of just you know,

01:21:52--> 01:21:56

Muslim women are the light to the medical system of Islam. But when it comes to that, I

01:21:58--> 01:22:03

would never understand it. And it depends without finding that you have to have a method. You might

01:22:05--> 01:22:05

not

01:22:26--> 01:22:27

to make an

01:22:33--> 01:22:33

argument.

01:22:35--> 01:22:38

And I have to go back I'm not sure how to respond to the

01:22:42--> 01:22:43

people themselves who are

01:22:48--> 01:22:51

not sure how to answer them or how they should.

01:23:05--> 01:23:06

So

01:23:08--> 01:23:09

those people that

01:23:10--> 01:23:10

have to go

01:23:18--> 01:23:19

to

01:23:26--> 01:23:27

the library to

01:23:28--> 01:23:35

get into to put into terms of speaking, the danger of speaking without

01:23:37--> 01:23:37

making sure that

01:23:44--> 01:23:45

this level did not go

01:23:53--> 01:23:53

through

01:23:55--> 01:23:56

related to gender