Jamal Zarabozo – The Modernist Movement Part 5
AI: Summary ©
AI: Transcript ©
Now we'll
put in a woman senior
view from the from the No, this is our
first lecture in this series
about the Neo modernist movement
who are from outside,
we get we begin by giving a history of the development of the movement. And then we talked about the influence that this movement has today.
And then in the third lecture, we retreat we critique the basic premises are the philosophy behind the movement.
One of the last lecture, we discussed their methodology.
In this lecture, we're going to discuss some of the specific arguments that are presented by many of the people of the Australia.
And in one sense, this lecture is probably the most important of all, five, so far,
because in this lecture, and I'm going to be presenting some arguments, which many people who are not actually
part of the modern this movement, they are influenced by these arguments,
simply because they perhaps are not studied some topics in detail. So, therefore, they are easily fooled. And they hear these arguments from someone, and they believe in these arguments, and they turn internally. And it gives these arguments God is after them.
So in that sense, and it is actually for for those of you who don't really care about the modernist movement, and I don't think it's important, isn't probably the
most important lecture, as I mentioned,
as I mentioned in previous lecture,
and it to be
an it's a point of view of the diamond thinking that you need to be considered one of the modernists
you'll be considered part of this morning.
And it doesn't mean that you have to, for example, for this lecture, I wrote down 25 of their major arguments need to be modern, this doesn't mean you have to have all of these 25 specific arguments that fit on this point, I disagree with them and other who gave a list of the
characteristic and arguments that they have. And in the agenda movements and the basis behind it. And what it is exactly, this is the main Hager way of thinking, well, if you have that way of thinking, regardless of whether you have all of these ideas that some of them are presenting, or some of them are even just a few of them. And it is the way of thinking, which is kind of linear movement, versus the way of thinking any which is more dangerous than these specific
things. And many people are influenced by these requirements, we have to discuss them and refute them. And it's similar to the case
of the modular. And if you look to the modular, basically, they agree on the five, the five basic premises are observed.
And then after that,
you cannot find to
agree except on those five basic premises. So it's not necessary for people at the same moment
to agree on specific arguments, but their way of thinking.
And there were there any damage would be similar would be the same.
Originally, I broke down the into the
these arguments is about 27. As I mentioned,
I broke them down in a very nice way. I thought then as I looked at it before this lecture, and actually it's not a very nice way the way that I broke them down. So I'm going to I'm not actually going to be lecturing in the order that they that I prepared my notes. So please, excuse me, sometimes it looks like I don't know what I'm doing.
To begin with, we'll actually we'll move from one area to the other any problem I think that
comes over
to begin with in the areas
The operator of the area of belief
instead of just for society having the sun and Mohammed acid, we discussed the review, none of them really discussed Africa and the principles of Africa.
And those actually,
what's the reason behind the reason behind that anyway, most of them do not do not discuss arcade as such, because he does something very unimportant to them. And what a person believes in general for this movement, and isn't that important to me, I need to talk to some people will tell you this athlete is the most important thing in them, if your athlete is correct, then inshallah the rest will follow. That can for them, they are mostly concerned about things in this life.
And how to arrange the person just like little property that to them is not really that important. So therefore, they usually did not discuss matters of appeal. But
even though that's the case, you can still see in some of the writings, many things which touch on the idea or on topics related to either
one of these was discussed next time of this test.
And that's the idea of whether
or human reasoning takes precedence or what has been related from the problem from a cinema, which one of these should take precedence or not?
Why Actually, this is a question of Aikido. And it is actually a question about a they discuss it a lot, and not in the scientific way. But almost all of the people to the common, almost a common denominator among all of the the modernist movement, they say without question as it was as Mises points since the time and probably hundreds of them, and it will say it as if it is something given that the law often takes precedence over and nothing was mentioned earlier, organic Mohammedan was early in sadc. Magazine earlier this year, he had an had an article again, where he said this and often and he clearly takes precedence over an apple or Apple judge it
was I said, inshallah, with that point, next time,
whenever next time, maybe
we discuss the
single agenda, or the characteristics exam, and the sooner roadmap compared to the characteristics of the Astra near moment.
Much,
much of what they talk about, actually has to do with assuming
was a mixture, I'm going to give quite a bit of time to
the to the suiting up, as I mentioned earlier,
one of the goals of many of them, is really to remove the tumor from its proper place in Islam. And also with respect to the Quran,
or with respect to the field, they also,
of course, have a number of statements that we should the number of arguments that we should consider. And it with respect to
your many lectures, and when you when you read many books that people who are influenced by this movement.
And they may not say this explicitly, but it's very clear from their argument, that the criticism, or the system of hedis,
nothing hadn't been that hasn't been used in the old days,
is not sufficient.
And what they did in the past is not sufficient. And we have to look at it again, that in the life of modern science and using what they call and they borrowed this term,
directly from the critics of the Bible. As I mentioned in the second, the first lecture was the relationship between the modernist movements in Christianity and Judaism, also within an ultimate within Islam, what it says we have to use, the higher the higher what is called the higher criticism of Hadoop. And you hear this a lot in there and many of the lectures and it's clear, when people take Hadees that are considered say, for example, from say Buhari and say Muslim,
whether or refuse them as in the example that we gave earlier, will result in German data, what they're saying, in essence, john, is that the way or the conclusion of these earlier scholars, even though there is demand in the Hadith from scholars of Hadith, and their methodology was not sufficient. And we have to look at Hadith in a new way nowadays.
But if you look very closely, for example,
if you read
if you read germander, if you read all of these have a husband karate, and he's not one of them has come up with a complete or consistent methodology of criticizing
and they all they say that Jan is clear from them that we have to look at Jesus, and he again a new way, but they never offer you any what is the new way or how is
We should then just headed into claiming that the way of old scholars was not sufficient. And in fact, if you look closely at their, at their writings, it seems simply that they take Hadees that they like, and they reject it that they don't like.
That's the new higher criticism.
There's only exception to this is the Devon able to find was again,
suicide at McLaren, the one of the founding fathers of the of the Athenian movement.
So for it to be accepted has two preconditions.
Number one, it must be consistent with the spirit of the Quran.
Number two, must be consistent with APA and human experience, human reasoning and human experience. Were third and must not be contradictory to established historical facts. These are the this is
what they're inherently that in the first lecture. And it is one of the founders of the afternoon
when he rejects many ideas, and in fact, he rejects most of them as a source of law in Islam, where he claims that these are the conditions Yanni using higher prisons, and those are the conditions that the headaches must meet.
Well, the problem is that if you study these conditions,
you can ask yourself, and it works, the difference between these conditions
and the conditions that have been applied,
and even the time of employment.
Number one, and he says must be consistent with the spirits of the poor.
Well, that's an interesting,
interesting condition. Because only if you're going to lay down conditions scientifically, any of the conditions should be rather specific.
What is the spirit of the product?
And how can you define the spirit of the product.
If you go through the Quran, for example, you'll see that this
journey, the Quran, for example, emphasizes that believers should be forgiving, they should be merciful, and this kind of thing. So you can say that it is in the spirit of the Quran, that we should be forgiving and merciful. And the brothers should be any Brotherhood in the man that we don't have love.
And you could claim that this is part of the spirit of the Quran.
So based on this premise,
and this is part of the problem of the of this movement, that idea movements are not specific, and they leave the door open for almost anybody.
If you take this premise and go through the ideas of the problem system,
or you go through the headaches of tab 123 people did not go with the policy, tell them for the rest of the group.
What is the politics in them do to them? After they came back to me the
departments I send them, and he told the people to make digital or not to have anything to do with them, even there was during that period.
And you could argue on the basis of this, that this goes against the spirit of the future rather than that way just because he committed a mistake or he was lazy.
And he were promised they are the enemy. This is not a sufficient
condition to criticize edits, because there's no definition for the spiritual.
Well, if we look to them, what have you seen, what they said
is that if any headache is shared, it will be rejected. Whichever means if it contradicts anything stronger than for example of a headache contradicts before on both against the clear meaning of the Quran. And there's no way you can any reconsolidate the meanings of the two then the editors rejected. What this is one of the conditions of the hydretain scholars have had these degraded heavies Ladyman was provided by Muslim versus actually stricter than just as Ronnie said.
And in his his condition. The second condition he said it must be consistent with Apple and human experience
must be consistent with Apple and human experience. Were any problems course with this?
With this condition, first of all, well, there's two problems
because it contains two main terms up in the human experience. And the first problem is who's after.
Now we're talking about suicide and that sounds awkward. Danny, what goes against what he believes what he thinks is correct. We have to reject.
And then the problem again is if you just if you leave it open to Apple, and it has many there's many things even in the Quran itself, that people are my projects
that go against any help people understand what is happening in this room. We'll get the
roll Mr. Harris. Anyone who studies the signs of the fabricated head is
also the
Although today's discussion is first of all, of course, much closer or much longer
than what
this was a sponsor.
And it was said that if there's any Hadees that goes clearly against
Danny's any irrefutable, irrefutable, we women, and it's something that is clear, there's no way that it could be
it could be violated, or something that they know for sure was correct. If anything goes against this, then also they will reject it. So this is a sign of a headache, which was fabricated. For example, there is the third, that after 100 years, the day of judgment will come.
So the scholars who lived 200 years after the Prophet that said that this edit cannot be corrected,
and besides the fact, of course, it's almost all fabricated, I did have some problems with the chain. But this is also a principle Have you been to look at the,
at the, at the test to see if that actually goes against what they know, we're also human experience
also can be very tricky.
Because human experience, it can make you deny something which is actually true. And actually those ideas of the provinces in them,
which is, and he shows us this very clearly, that there can be a time when you see something in your life, or you experience something but because some conditions are different, or some anyway, some difference between what's your experience and what to put on or what the headings said.
I knew what you saw will go against what the Parana with the headings. But you have to realize that there's some reason for it. And you cannot just on the basis of human experience, when it rejects what we're looking for on what the content
and the headings are supposedly made that very clear, is one of the one of the Sahaba came to him and told him that his grin on his stomach was bothering.
So the proper question for them what
the Bible says them and told him to give that man Honey,
I need a 10 inch apart for from Danny.
Well, this happened three times. What did he say in the lead up
to the cola
policy thing worth over 200. That is that is true.
But Danny, the summit of you brothers on In other words,
if you if you study this idea, and think about this idea, first of all, it might not have been the person's stomach this morning.
And he may have had pains on here, or on the side could have been kidneys or the liver could have been anything.
Or in fact that he might not even had any pain, but he felt psychologically that he had something and in many things someone could experience. And based on that experience, they reject something either in the Quran or
so human experience by itself man is not
we have to be careful about that, because it is not. It is not sufficient. And especially, there's one thing very important that the occupy movement has to have to consider and have to be aware of with respect to the Hadith of the Prophet Mohammed.
Because the problem
and this aspect was pure and understood by the stories of
the prophets, I seldom was not speaking like any one of us.
The protocol kirlian was speaking. And he was being guided by God and given revelation
from Allah subhana wa Tada. And many of the things that he said during his time, when he only, for example, have only recently been proven.
And in the process doesn't talk about things related to the unseen elite. The power system talks about things related to the shittier person and talks about things related to science, which is the only reasonable group. So in speech, we cannot judge it just like anybody else's speech.
And because he is talking about things that, for example, at that time, when the scores, I did not know that it is true, in the same way, but we know what is true today, for example.
And it earlier, people they rejected headed to the process, and I'm about the dog looking in abroad that how it should be clean, and so forth. Of course, recently, we know that the kind of worms that the goat contains
on his tongue and if you look in your bowl, it was very important that you clean the bowl properly. This is a matter of the last time we checked here because they do not understand that we have to realize that when it comes to the proposal, we may not be able to understand everything that you said. Basically, those things related to the unseen are things that we haven't proven or experienced yet, and those things related to the shittier. So therefore, it's very important that we look at this now this is one of the reasons why this knot is very important. I need to look at who we are
getting this information from, to make sure that these people are reliable and they're not making mistakes. And therefore, when we make sure that this is correct, even if that it has some meaning that we cannot completely understand, and we don't have the right to reject it, because we're not talking about any human being speech, we're talking about the speech of the problem I'm assessing. Well, this is an A, this is a very important point. And it is, as many people forget, because they're judging the hedis and promises to them as if we're judging your statement or micro minority, human beings.
Secondly, and this is related both to or to now, also related to food. And besides questioning, the Hadith of the Prophet Mohammed says,
it's very common for the people of this moment to question the role of the Sunnah industry itself.
And to claim the carrier a great part, perhaps the majority of the subnet actually is not to be considered part of the city as
one of their one of their claims. And before I get into that, let me just note some, some statements here. First of all, this was the essence of Juma talk that he gave in the summer conference in Stanford, California in June 1988. Danny's essence was trying to show that there's many, or there's much of the sunlight is not actually sure yet not to be full
of mystery in our he wrote this most likely most of what has been narrated from him and from the policy concerning the matters of this room. except we're about that. And I'm
not sure what he means by that is my shift in Arabic language, what you meant by that he wasn't sure what he meant by that. And in any case, the thing that's most of what is narrated from the provinces, and then that is related to the junior is that most of us is not part of the Syrian,
Mohammed Amara, and He even went further.
He said that's what can be concluded of the sooner that is related to matters of the ESA. And any matter of this world is not deep.
Anything related to this Junior has not been
and therefore it was even during the problems
even during the province famous was a matter for sure up for writing write for he had for acceptance for rejection for additional change, even during the time of the
well husband throb in his lecture.
And in his lecture to University of Khartoum about this area.
When it seems very clear that happens Robbie is trying to make the students who are listening to him doubt the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad says, This is the only conclusion that you can get from his,
from his, from his lecture that close to the source No, it's no guarantees as soon as the source of art is the second source as well. And it deals with more details in the Quran. But it also has much more room for human involvement. First of all, humans must distinguish between what is strong and what they're weak at.
Secondly, the to assume that contain laws to be followed by everybody and things that the politician in general as a human and things that the process will entail as a runner after the hedgerow which are not meant to be followed. And therefore, again human beings have to make he has to see which one of these
are you any witness before before. Certainly, he said, although the student has more details than the
changes in time place, and new events in life make it very difficult to derive new rulings from it, because there are no or little similarities in this.
One, this ad in this statement actually is trying to say anyway, if we try to follow the sooner because of your events and time and places, and we tried to make graphs based on some that will be very difficult to follow. And then finally, he says that the singer is partly independent source and partly implementing to put on and he says, as a dealer, before you start Are you there are many contradictions and Hadith which lead to the conclusion was one of them must be abrogated. But this cannot be done without determining and in the history of the abuser. And all of this.
All of this discussion from Robbie, what was the lengthy passages I summarized here, and it seems very clear that he's trying to reduce the importance of the sooner and especially the sooner in Islamic law.
With this,
and in this concept of this way of thinking also has been
some source for this ending and the Jewish and the Christian Aphrodite movement because
And it was important for the Jews and the Christians to try to differentiate between what was human and what was divine in them.
And they came to the point they realize that much of what they believed in actually isn't divine sources, but it is from humans.
And in fact, when their peace, when the Christian faith leads them they own the Jewish rabbis agreed upon the claims of revelation from Allah that everyone
has to accept. So therefore, there was a strong moment in both the Jewish and the Christianity modernists moment to distinguish between the human and the divine, in their, in their religious and this era passed on to the, to the,
to the Muslim modernist movement.
and older, we didn't have that problem that existed in the Jews and Christians, but they're trying to differentiate between the human and divine and Islam First of all, by by trying to differentiate between the Birmingham assassin as the Messenger of God and as a human being. And also, as I'll discuss later, we have done, they're trying to differentiate between the Sharia and the threat of the Boko Haram, which is a silly Shama I will, I will discuss, gentlemen, if we have done
any run this point with respect to the, to the terminal departments within them, and what actions it is and what statements are considered part of the Sharia.
We discussed this in great detail in the class last year.
One of unfortunately, one of the worst, because it is now one of the worst books,
or one of the worst passages that you will find on the topic of, of our little servo the actions of the provinces. And then when the worst recessions have been,
we will have collapsed.
And he writes news presenting basically there, the modernist
view or the sooner
we approve, basically, we offer about five proofs, that the sooner is not all to be considered part of the shittier.
One of their posts is that the province incident did many things.
And in many actions, that report to the human nature, which actually he could not really do anything about,
such as how tall he was, how short he was, with filler, Harry had these characteristics, or the way he moved away, he's still doing any of these kind of things would actually,
according to the scores of these things, I'm not meant to be portable, they're not necessarily any that you have to follow them. But they are simply a
sign that these things are oriented, permissible. Well, if you take these actions, and you say that they are not part of the shitty app, what do you mean by that is they are not meant to be poor? What does that mean? There's nothing wrong with it? Well, if you say they are part of the shit in the sense that they prove that these actions are optimal that this is also correct. But the problem of lasagna, people, most of them, they take this as evidence with Danny showing this reaction to the promises. And part of the tuna is in fact not to be taken as part of the shittier. Well, in fact, this is something is MOBA certainly is mobile, and there's evidence that it was permissible. This is
actually rolling this video
is one of the words of the Sharia. And so therefore, even these actions are part of the city. And
secondly, they take as a proof, and you're very famous headed for the policy
concerning the enemy before the Battle of other when one of the Sahaba aquaponic system they were they were willing to take a certain position.
And one of the hover asked, Is this a revelation from Allah or any disposition, something that all of us have had with dialectology to take this position?
In fact, your opinion and a strategy war
was a process and then told him that it was his opinion in a scheduled war, to learn for the mandate in that case, and we should move over there because it's a better place. Well, first of all had to decide it is not authentic study this idea, this idea is now the tentacles rejected by the Dalai Lama, in other words, a well known story in the books of theater, but the books of theater do not have the same standards for recording things.
And even very loosely including many things which are not authentic, like many even things which are known to be fabricated, you can find it in the books. Therefore, Johnny, the story isn't authentic. Obviously, we cannot use it as a proof
that any there's some aspect of the sooner that you do not need to need to form. But even even if it were authentic, even if it were true,
what is the proof from what is the object, the proof that they want to or they want you to drive from it? Is that the policy I send them maybe she had some time and
We're not obliged to follow the detail. This is only the conclusion that they want to want you to come up with. Whether it's the debate among the scholars whether or not the promises that have actually made this too hard or not, most of the scholars say that the process and him didn't make it.
And effective living claims that this is the type of guy that type of worship of Allah subhanaw taala, to make his dad to exert yourself guiding to find the truth concerning a matter. And so he said, the focus has been embedded like any other human being as a form of the event.
We're but the point is that all of this goes resistance, Allah subhanho wa Taala urges us to follow them in order to take in an example.
As I mentioned earlier in the earlier lecture, and it says almost nine without Oregon's US department, public system and take him as an example. It is inconceivable, from our lesson how to read data to make clear or to accept something the politician did, which was wrong enough, correct.
And he This is known as people felt about the bubble system and his actions, and his speech and his statements, his actions in the period as forming this, and that also no such thing as a sort of surprise disappeared, or what the things that almost man would die, from the problem hunter villain, and all of these things that have just improved. So even if the politics and the media,
and even if we ignore that debate, and we say that he didn't make it to the head, he probably almost nine without orders have to obey Him, meaning that if he ever made he had and he was incorrect, and is it dead, then all this kind of data would have would have corrected him
of his mistakes. So therefore, any of the tools that they're trying to drive from this discipline system, and maybe it's again, it's not our obligation to photos. And she has, first of all, as I said, the, the story they present is not authentic. And secondly, and whether or not you made it to the head, it doesn't matter, because having made
lots of what data would have, would have corrected
for what it is that they use.
And enter probably
the strongest, strongest evidence has to do with the
headings of cross pollinating The details are that good enough?
Well, I just had is Apollo seven.
And he stated explicitly to sell into Sabah that you are more knowledgeable of the affairs of this Junior of your junior than I am.
What have you said in his head, he is very clearly the first of all, and he the way they always present it, which is not the authentic way of the scholars of Hadith scholars edited upon is that the poet says Helen told them not to cross pollinate the big trees, and that the alchemy of the year should be greater. But they did not cross pollinate them. And then they came to the prophets, I send them and told them that
for many days, they said that their output was less. And he said, it said to them, that they are no more knowledgeable in the affairs of doing it. And then the problem.
First of all, as I said, if you look to this headache, the way it has been authentically narrated the prophets, I tell them NATO ordered them
need to stop what they're doing, nor did he tell them that it would be better for them not to do it. But if you simply start Danny, perhaps, if you leave it, it will be better. So the process and and neither ordered them, nor did he put nor did he tell them specifically that
what they're doing is incorrect. Secondly, also a very important aspect of this, retirees and their argument is what is the process and the mean by the affairs of your union?
First of all, you This is the only heading that we can find in this niche that supposedly the provinces that I'm talking about some of the above this of this Junior way told them that they are more knowledgeable in this union. And here.
We're looking at this headiest and we study all deadheaded we see that for example,
things which are based on human experience, which change over time the politics and them did not
run into some detail as to how to how to make arms how to how to grow, how to sew or how to make clothing. And you will never find any ideas of this nature in which the provinces sit and discuss
why actually this idea can be used as evidence against them, when you think about in this manner, because
we seem to not discuss these aspects of the duty. So then the question is then what did he discuss? He discussed the dean and everything he discussed as part of
everything the policy has been discussed as part of the deal, because he did not he did not discuss or talk about these aspects that are related to jr which changed or
Time and which are based on our experience. So this actually added to the Netherlands with the provinces. And he did not concern himself with the things of this dunya. And when he stated he made a statement in order, or statement of fact, that it was something related to the deen, which we must believe in. And we must
also, with respect to the ideas concerning medicine, enable us these areas.
I wrote an article on this topic. So I'm not going to discuss in detail but basically, what they're saying is that there's some headaches with the processing of about medicine that they don't believe in. And this is evidence that we don't have this as many things that, that we don't have to for that there are, well if you study all of the ideas that they criticize. And by the way, Maurice bouquet is one of the people who criticize these ideas. And unfortunately, his book, The Bible, Koran and science is given as a book of Gallup, although the section is very bad. And if you study all of these ideas that they talk about, they are either things the modern science knows nothing about, or
the modern science has proven today.
And if for example, the ln
any modern science hasn't disproven these things. Well, he includes these as those IDs, which are slowly going against modern science, modern science has never disproven these kind of orbits, that the
what the heat of the summertime comes from the
present.
While this head is
talking about the relationship between the heat of the summertime and the Hellfire, and is there any scientist nowadays who says that, on what basis to be criticized, does he know the relationship between the heat of the summertime and the Hellfire, and he has no way that he can, he was the head is his trauma, that these people say that this head is against modern science.
I just got
the last the last way that they tried to avoid again, applying this
agreement with as many aspects of the seminar which are not part of the shittier.
They divide what the policy has been embedded into different than it was divided in life into different aspects. For example, he was the man he was judged. He was military leader, and he was deposits were the messengers. So they're divided. And they said, Well, obviously these things and he that he was a military leader, a judge, and so forth. These things are not meant to be any teachings, divine teachings, while those things that are mentioned your brother are meant to be divine. First, what are there things
about it, nothing related to relate to walk and reflect what they did here. And this is not uncommon for them
was recorded. Mm. And
one of the one of the members of the medical school?
Well, he's one of the people who talks about this idea. He's the he's the one that they always brought in immigrants.
As I mentioned before, about the new claim, when they refer to him probably didn't read what he wrote. It just taking from, from other books, the copy meant one thing, whether you're applying it to a different way. The corruption is the one who divided
the person's life and said that he did some things as a man, he does something with drugs and so forth. And they were saying that talking, he did these things at that time, and they are not meant to be part of the Sharia. Where he was saying is that if if someone is in a similar situation, as a judge or ruler, so forth, he has to act in the same way. But someone himself is not free to do those things. Unless he has the permission of the mirror. That's what the problem is, is that these actions, you do not do it just on your own. And if for example, killing someone could murder or killing someone who has committed
and it's not a few figures, but it is up to the man or the hack him to say that this person has to be killed and killed. But if someone is hack him, then he has to follow with a bonus incentive dividend. That is worth.
Like I said, Danny, the twisted completely what the what he did, to try to say that all of these affairs, they have no guidance for us. We're not
whether conclusion about actually the seminal differences in them whether we're talking about his actions, or we're talking about his statements. In fact, all of the sudden that is a form of the source of lower part of the city, where even birth action candidates who are not
necessarily supposed to follow their mentors Good luck. And even those actions.
They are at ease as soon as a proof for them that they are mobile for permissible actions and so therefore, they're all supportive of the city
to move on to too soon.
As I said, the notes are not ordered in the way that they think they should be. Now, when I think about
if we move on to, to a certain
one, one of the major arguments that they're making is this we need to make it's behind us.
Well, this idea was first presented by Mohammed FM in his,
in his book,
the reconstruction of religious thoughts in Islam,
or
something like that dude, and could have been
also in the first edition of a magazine called the Muslim mosque.
And it was four articles one by
the mafia, one by Mahmoud Abbas,
one by Mr. Kemal, what are the one by several, all of them saying the same thing that we have to make if he had no future?
karate has to be
returned, if you assume it's a city, where he makes the same argument that we have to make he had in the future. But as soon
as those of you who took a wonderful class should know,
the sets of five or maximum, and you can still use and should be abundant. But the question is, the question to them is, what do they mean by making each?
What do you mean by three? When you say you want to make it's
not one of them? Not one of them discuss what it means to make a sentence.
And you read for example, husband, Travis, both pamphlets, and either actually shorter, smaller
features actually that you need, not once,
not once does he define what does he mean? Or what does it What does it involve making to deal
with some of them out discuss the system
or some of the critics dissolve in any movement they discussed and he worked as a means to make it stand.
Well basically means one of three things
to make each channel sort of different might mean to introduce some miracle.
Some new principles that are new legal, Maxim's that did not exist before.
And you could pull that external sources that someone comes up with five and now that no one else ever had before.
Where are these these writers and you're worth about less than a moment for them to say, they said that until now, they have never seen any of these people present any new files, any new maximum?
Oh, by the way, and he just says, as a footnote,
I'm used to writing
lots of footnotes.
And
where do they
actually come from?
It is an important point, because we're always talking about making standards and changing and quiet. And you should realize where these guys come from.
And any sort of triple supposed to have some evidence for whatever it is for us is either from the Quran or from the editors policy in Salem, or from the Arabic language or from irrefutable laws. What they mean by repeatable logic, basically, are those things which are clear to everyone. For example, if two people make he had on the same question, and he had to make an opposite, one of them must be wrong.
And if someone talking about for example,
someone says his words if the other one since I'm one of them must be wrong, and he This is the kind of code built on irrefutable, irrefutable logic. So they're going to come up with these neilpryde which admittedly have not, they have to derive from the Quran or some not for Arabic language, anything not even not just come up from your own any thinking with some new.
Secondly, what they might mean by that is that we do not make a prediction.
And if we only accept someone's argument that he has some food,
well, we talked about in the class, and it was so clean and jerk but there will never actually suddenly
if you study the history of girls who definitely never
there was nothing.
There's nothing wrong with with this. This is what they mean by she had nothing.
No other scholars would agree with him that there's no completely helpful for people according to the evidence is determined by the third possible meaning and this is definitely the meaning that the use of Okada, we had in the in that article that he wrote in most Muslim and more often.
That is to expand the use and the meanings of some of the products
and to discuss in more detail their means.
And the first example that you
have Danny what what what are the some of the ways that we should change
Give a new meaning to
either expand or reduce the use.
The first example that he gave was what sooner is part of the Sharia and Watson is important.
That was the first example, where examples are similar to that, and you should ask yourself, what does he mean by that? Why did he do that?
If you read the books, and also, they're saying one of two things, either all of the sudden as part of the shittier, or all of a sudden accept very little funding.
So he's saying now that we should rethink the meaning of the spider, and how it is to be applied economy, one thing, that's what is part of the what part of the summit is considered Sharia must be reduced.
And because you haven't already at the maximum, so, if you think we have to rethink the meaning of what he was saying, actually, that what is part of the shooting that must be reduced, was probably in his lecture,
but he wants to he thinks that he
should be based on to a maximum of two principles.
And he says this
is
the basis for is definitely said they should be based on two fronts.
One is
the tub, and masala masala.
These are the two principles that he said.
And he said the only with these two, we will have an ozone wide enough for the tip of general life in Islam. And this will lead to metallic.
And it is to
know if you studied
any First of all, these are kind of exceptional, bright principles, then you refer to these when you're up top and finding the answer anywhere else.
I mean, this is
not actually basic for us. And so this is what needed
to be based on these two. Now the question is why do you think that earlier for ponder earlier to mean to not
emphasize these two principles? And the way that happened with Robbie? So they should be interesting? And why is it that they are so minor in all the books, some books, don't even discuss these two,
don't even accept these two, even the first principle that
the basic ruling concerning something is about his permission, even if it's not something agreed upon. And in many brothers say it is if it's something you read, it is not something beautiful.
So the reason they don't stretch these two principles, is because as I said before, and in the importance of the provider, the maximum possible sort of quantum karasuma and Arabic language and review of religion and workplace, there's different give these two principles. And isn't it more important to fronto Bell learn to go to signal and that if Allah subhanaw taala, and the politician said anything, and you have no right to say anything was a full on is revealed in their language, and yet he has to follow the principles of the Arabic language and so forth. And all of these clauses will discuss they are given emphasis in the forum, so not much more than these tuples that
he says, Danny,
to bring them up.
And for it to be a real tough, local to our life today, it should be based on this.
This is the closest thing that I can say to him to being
whenever asked aspects of it, he had no sort of depth
is that everyone should be free to make it to
interview them. Anyone was free to make it.
It wasn't till an amateur band came along. And says that in order to make it to the edge, you should have some knowledge. And these are some of the things that you choose.
And have been through others claiming that in the early years now. And if people gave freely on the basis of the writing of their opinions of
what you studied the
life of the Sahaba
and it is before the most careful and making sure they didn't say anything unless it was based on some songs.
And if you say something to speak without and this is something that they wanted to do.
The first time he first said what sky would give me shade, and what the Earth would give me home if I should speak about the Quran without him.
Or another narration of I should speak about what I put into my opinion
with the Sahaba if someone came to them for footwork, and usually they were trying to tell them to go for someone else.
Remember, of course the famous story of a nomadic and someone asked him I don't know how many questions into almost all of them. He said I don't know. His reply hasn't Robin
Who cares if you know and I just made
the claim and he got the membership, he was the first one, to lay down limits as to who can make it to the head or not. This is claiming actually that the set of rules people more him that is free for anyone to make. Well, this goes completely against
the history of of those early generations. Well, they said earlier,
and they are one of their arguments all sorts to distinguish between the tip, the tip of the bar and the Sharia of Allah.
This is one of their
one of the arguments. In fact, we have, some of them wrote articles with executives, and in the city of Allah
was with many of their arguments.
And as with many of their arguments, there is some truth to what they're saying. But unfortunately, usually they apply, or what they mean by something wrong.
And everyone knows that there's a difference between what a spotter made, and what isn't the
difference between an image Everyone knows that, but how have you applied it
a duality.
And who lived early in the century in Egypt, he stated that a monkey can change a ruler,
what they can change to help him even if that ruling is the text of the blonde. And
because of the change in certain
places the lack of money in the supply of the Mexican goods that he was exchanged, then also the hopper may change the ruling matrix. I think this is the maximum
maximum, but we have to realize what is the meaning of that maximum. And what I mean by that. And rulings are
those that come directly from the text of the Quran.
And things that are based on those directly from the text. And those that come from its Jihad which are not directly from the text, but are based simply on muscles are the muscles are the central point.
Now obviously this second category
and the The second category of both both categories see the multiple How are the benefits of the people.
But with respect to the second category, and you
must have a specific demo. And this might change over time, that rolling may actually lead to some harm or agree with me this second category may be changed.
But as for the first category, and even the source from the promotion, and rolling is based directly on the source of the Quran, Sunnah, these in themselves bring about Muslim ha by their nature,
under any circumstance, except for those few cases of a literal relativist.
And actually the largest doodle of Dora a part of the city as a part of the suit. So it's not actually even an exception. So there's no way that anyone can claim the peace laws leads to most of them, which leads me to the lead added to Muslims, and the Muslims. What the Sharia means by Muslims, not necessarily what the people like. Messiah is in, for example, things like freedom, inequality, such and such. But most of the text is the two most the things that preserve the deed, the religion, and life and outcomes, and familiar relations and
nuts
and rope, and it is in the realm of and these are the things that the Sharia brings about under all
circumstances. Well, all of the text, all of the resources that are on our mercy, will not will not put up
with these things and cannot be changed under any
circumstance. the only the only the only things that can be changed are those it's the head of the LMR that were based on Mr. Harper, which is an exam where everyone agrees that these things may be changed.
But
any do what some of the modernists for example are doing to be are trying to say is that even those things which are fixing the problem and found them in the in the source of the Quran, Sunnah even these things should be changed in the name of Messiah. Well, this brings me through another one of their another one of their principles.
And that is the Messiah is the overriding principle.
Any the overriding judge depth or depth is much
wider basis on the arguments of someone who existed at one time.
His name is
Rita and Muslim. And he says that mufflers overriding principle and you can go against the null source in the name of
well as I mentioned, and their medical treatment methodology
And it is very common for them to take opinions any which are pseudo, very strange and go against what
they said. And he is one of the people who said that muscle heart is the overriding
theme if you want to read about Muslim Han about the book and how the scholars, and he refuted him, and it is well known. Well, as I mentioned before, I do have
his book, and he has the worst decision.
And
also, it's not a coincidence with the same colors in his book. I forget the title, but it's about any those evidences which are
disputed, disputed among donor, in other words, not accepted by all the elements.
It is no coincidence that he is the one who brought on top of your data out of the holes of the dark and printed as part of this book.
Well, this is Danny, again, part of his message with me, he gives us he gives us an idea of value equality, that things are respected scholars actually share with respect and so on and so forth. Why no, we have to be very careful and very much aware of these kind of
also added some,
some arguments of their own towards the top people.
And as opposed to this position that
takes precedence over Mrs.
Weather first wrote,
it's the head of
what they claim that the third did not follow the muscles.
Instead, he followed to become popular nowadays in the spirit of the shittier growth of the
world they prefer that are to actually take two incidents from his life.
One is
to not give the cat to
an English and he knows it's hard to be reconciled.
And he will not give it or not give the path to this.
But he's people argue that this was his he had his going against the new sources.
These people don't exist right now. But there's no better
way we are known as a kid in Boulder, and you give me your Duquette. And I don't give it to the Mr. Kane, because there was no mess. Okay, now you're saying that I'm going against your thoughts and making sure that on the basis of massage, is saying that these people don't exist this time. They don't exist at this time. Obviously, you don't give them with us, he wasn't going against the muscles.
If those people existed, or that time or later time, you could give them a month, okay. Secondly, they said also that during the time of growth, he did not cut the hands of the people.
And the people who stole during the time of drought, he did not put their hands because the situation of Italian they said again that this is the HDR bomber.
And he's going against the suit.
And actually your honey this again,
this argument can be used against them, because in fact, honor
top was a blind also. Because when the source the Hadith of the Prophet says and then tells us to leave the other not to plant a dog in case of any doubts.
And if there's any doubt about the situation, the adoption of
webinarjam comments commenting on what I
did, he said the belt and although support scales was much greater than the delta of all of the examples.
And these people were forced into doing their thing because of the drought and because of the situation in
both of these examples and in the thing that they present as using
the source and he made it on the basis of multiple arguments against is enough is enough. Secondly, the second
proof that they give you proof and besides the book is writing
is the example of enamel sharpening. That when he moved from Iraq, to Egypt to change many of his Patel many of his opinion was this sermon diverged from many brothers in the mosque.
I needed
one shall be removed from an opportunity to change the power
to change when you move from one place.
The question is Was this the case was with
the certainly the case that he moved from Iraq to Egypt and he changed him and Fidel because of the New Living circumstances in Egypt.
When it came to certain details,
as well, they have to be recorded.
When, when the majority moved to to Egypt, he wrote a new edition of the Babylon book.
Well, they have been recorded that he absolutely forbade anyone report from the old.
And it seems clear to some of the statements, that he changed his patella not because of the different circumstances, but because he was wrong before and he may switch.
So it's not a situation as examine business improve this given circumstances are different. Now what this is not what happened to him with the membership.
He changes that though, because he found he was wrong
in his own photo, and plus, by the way, should realize at the same time he rewrote his book, and
it changed some of it.
Obviously, when you move from Iraq to if you don't have to change your sort
of your citizenship nowadays, but that's not the suit.
And it was because he changes so that some of his conclusions were different.
So there are arguments against him, I'm sure there was an example, a clear example, that power law
allows for change, because it's time in place, and it is not acceptable.
Well, finally, they tried to present a new claim, as per the supporting evidence that this was also a mental claims idea that the muscle has overriding. And even if its muscles from the front, we should we can override those muscles in the name of Muslim?
Well, as I mentioned before, if you read all over the world, on this issue, not just a few days, you will see the changes that are changing your patella because of change of time and place, it makes it very clear that there's two types of roles.
One of those things that cannot be changed. And the other thing that can be changed, was just like all the other models
and basically directly Omicron sooner, they cannot change? Well, I think we, as I said, I have 25 of their arguments, I discussed maybe about six of them or so. But I think because of the time possibly is already bad.
Time to stop them open the floor for discussion.
We can all go home right now.
The brother mentioned that.
Concerning
the condition first you must be consistent with the Spirit of God must be consistent with open human experience, that these are acceptable conditions. And we should understand them in the light of what humans
are looking at. This is clear
makhan rejects almost all heading for the prophets
based on these two principles, but in fact not. And he is someone who was perhaps the person who rejected more
than any other of the Iranian level.
Almost over Eddie,
what's up? Secondly, my point was that the conditions of the of the magazine are much stronger and consistent, logically acceptable than more than this.
And when you say the spirit of the Quran, as I mentioned them, how do you think said that if it contradicts the Quran, that the spirit of the Quran because what is the Screaming Frog? There's no such thing as as good as even this term, we don't feel the poverty if you don't hear this other thing, it is something that has no meaning to it. It's been like pointed out the mahadevi thing.
They said that if it contradicts the Koran
in any way, and there's no way to reconcile the two, then that Edison's rejected is one of the principles. Also with respect to data, the second condition must be consistent without going in human experience. As a third, again, we have to be careful on this point, because what do you mean by open unless all the human experience that is a public health insurance daily that you may experience something and it actually goes against what the Parana what the head is and what the head we can put on third, because when you experience something you're not experiencing with the full knowledge of everything that's going on. You think you know what's actually happened while in fact
you may not know.
And with respect to personal edits that you mentioned, this is something
about upgrading to
the heavens and earth on a buffalo and so forth. And it isn't something well known among the scholars.
This is a fabricated heading because they applied the principles. And yeah, my point is that these know these principles, much better than not linear movement and all those other people today who are criticizing How do they know these principles and apply them much stricter than what the people today are talking about that the people today are choosing particular ideas that they don't like and rejecting them, and saying that these are principles, while the storages of headaches were much more objective, and apply these principles to our heads? And if the need met those principles, etc. And if they did not meet those principles, they rejected it and they categorize
what is the degree of of weakness of particular enemy, with respect to somebody seems to go against the plan.
And if if you study with that about those headaches, you'll see that in fact, there is no contradiction between the parameters. And it's very easy to reconcile the two ideas.
ever worked the book refuting the martyr Villa and now a lot, many are bringing the same arguments.
And he actually refused many of these arguments that we're hearing against today. Well, if we take this view of heavy handed, and somehow we don't understand it completely, and we're not willing to study it,
to see how it's consistent with the fraud, are we automatically rejected? What if we applied that principle to the fraud, much of the fraud would be rejected, because the face value much of the fraud contradicts other parts of the film. That's
another book that we looked at which
he also wrote a similar,
similar book, and we have to look at things in greater detail, not just look at it, and say, Oh, this,
this editor, there is great in so many ways. The Quran says in so many ways, there must be inconsistent, therefore reject, and also the purpose about different days in different ways that the Earth was created. And if we do not think any more deeply will not be able to understand.
Anyhow, back to two statements are consistent, whether Mr. Hyde uses that term, and the other man who wrote the commentaries on it, these are the people who studied the edits in detail, and found in fact, the ideas which are accepted as authentic by the volume of edits in the group agreed upon by their own amount, there are in fact, not inconsistent with the quantity.
The question is, and hasn't read the statement about whether everyone should be free to make it sad that he perhaps mean by that, that everyone should be free to give his opinion as a type of Shut up. And we will respect and look into opinions over. This could be a possible explanation for what he said. And he said, that the one who was scripted it was in a machete by saying that you have to have specific knowledge. So I'm sure there was talking about he had he wasn't talking about this giving right in a matter of short answer he was talking about he had, has an attribute related to him and said that he was the first to put restriction on it seems clear to me that he was talking about he
had, as we noticed, and not just the fact that you might throw too many people in there.
And if you left out that part about the membership fee, then we could say, this is what it says included, the part about the membership, the membership, was talking about very specific type of HTML.
The question is whether there should be an organized group of scholars who are given the responsibility making if she hadn't be happy today, and the questions come up to them.
First of all, with respect to the first aim, and you may manage to have requirements, both today and every generation, to whenever generation, you're going to come across things, which may not necessarily be a clerk in the pharmacy. So therefore, we need scholars to discuss those things in the light of the promise and to make their decision concerning those matters. And it's not necessary to have a specific body of scholars that we that are organized, but if that will, that will help if the government can arrange that the
body of scholars that will give the tower and any makes it easy for them to discuss among themselves and to go through the references and so forth. This is something that there's no question that that's good. That would be helpful at the same time with the body of scholars Mecca sutra.
without missing any we could look together and say we're the
center, propeller Council.
And it verifies Well, it's not it's not legit
on other people to follow them, as well as they have some reason to think that they're wrong. But
they can see where the state accepts their first one the pledges as well. Then if you remember that they didn't have to be.
The person has the the quote from husband probably about as soon as
he, the questioner says, I said that makes people need to see what that quote was, and is the only thing
I can get out of it. And it's clear to me is that it makes people doubt,
saying there's lots of eskoleth and contradictions and ideas. And the only way to solve them is by the principle of
aggregation. And aggregation can only be proven by determining history what the thing is logical contradiction between heydays. And actually, we have no way of resolving them because of
this principle, we remember when which one took place historically. Secondly, he said, because of all the changes in time and place and new events, it's very difficult to apply this in cinema today.
Thirdly, he said, anything that similar contains certain laws to be followed by all and what the province is intended as a human what you did with the rule after the his age, well, we have to determine which of these we want we should accept? And
finally he said that, and it will scholars have to distinguish between what is strong and what is weak headed. And if these are some of the same arguments that even the most critical cleaner use to try to make people go to the cinema. And it to say that it's very difficult to play the scene. And now you're saying, We're implying that well, if it's very difficult to apply to something now, Allah subhana wa, tada, what the board has to vote and assume that, in fact, it's very difficult to apply. So perhaps what we consider the center all of those things isn't really what we're supposed to what we're supposed to follow. And you just kind of argument yet, it's clear what I'm making clear to me,
what is the
agenda?
what they said is that
they did not, they never presented any way of judging you. So if I tell you that we should have set them at ease and rejects them at ease, but we're not accepting the way of everything, which is what both of them said.
And then all of a sudden, I reject some headings, and oh, and I accept some headings without ever saying these are the conditions or this is the methodology to apply.
What can you conclude about my methodology?
Either I don't have the methodology, or I don't want to give it to you.
Okay, please, adequate, it means
judging,
clearly on an apple.
Okay, the overriding principle, because he said himself that Apple judges know, he said himself.
So his overriding principle is that he's often what is his outcome? This is what he likes and what
he should he should point he points out his logical premises, that's his minutes. Otherwise, words, if you just want to tell you based on
what the job is,
and, you know,
based on his based on his actions,
for example, what he said about what he said about music when the guy came into his office,
I see nothing wrong and what's wrong, what's wrong with it?
That's what his that was his argument, that musical talent that
he actually wrote.
Sometimes, if you said yourself that if this actually happened,
you're
basically
different from the reasons that I said they seem to, I said, they seem to reject the headings they don't like. And except the headings are like,
that's what I say. You
know, they might, they might like it based on logical reasons.
Now, but what I'm saying is that is not the man heads. That is not a way of fighting especially for people presented as
Christian the Christian feminism has other movements that are more dangerous, has been
and I do not emphasize this in First of all, this was the theory
and the second part of this
I tried to show the influence that this movement has in the United States in particular.
And they are, in fact very strong in the United States, they're very strong in other parts of the Muslim world, but in particular, in the United States, and we have to be aware of this movement. And as far the movements and more than happy and blessed Oh, by the way, I'm very familiar with these
are the moments that you say are more dangerous to them, I'm more than happy to, if you give me any moments, you give me references, if I don't have them, more than happy to discuss any limits.
So this is just, you know, when you give a talk, you have to talk about something. So when someone speaks, you could ask him, why did you speak about this wedding to speak about this, this, and you have to talk about something? Well, I chose this because I think they are dangerous, especially in this country.
picking on people that basically
some of them, okay about that point about that point, wait for the seventh lecture.
And then you can present
that
you may have, like,
okay, and actually you can
do something about it,
you can have a chocolate, but there's always the look that you have to give them, especially
where
unique and
different
in that we see what problems we have to make ourselves or others
are basically.
And nobody talks about
driving people into basically the herd of sheep, okay.
Any further complete response to that, and those that are muted for the seventh lecture.
And if there are any, these people are clear about what they believe in,
why I'm discussing any words they are writing and stuff, and what they are saying and
what they are writing themselves and what they're thinking. That's my conclusion, from the many, what they are actually saying is their beliefs and what should be grounded in Islam. Why this is much different from going to other people, and saying that I think he acts this way because of this, and then
any, that's not my right.
And it's not in a public lecture.
Now, if you want
to talk about something, he should stop at about a different time.
But the main point, again, if somebody is working for us, right, but
if I if I feel that this person is more dangerous than I choose
to talk about,
when I talk about this, and when I talk about something, I have to present
evidence, if I do wrong, and that you discuss
that, that evidence that which I
trust my life, to talk about, that's very important.
Ready for number six,
that somebody is going to tell the dream was brought up. And he knows that they have personally talked with some of the people I mentioned, who brought this point up in the past.
And some of the people that I did not talk to personally, I know some shoe foods who spoke to them. And secondly, I'm not I'm not taking one sentence out of a book. Someone wrote many books, and then I'm taking one sentence out of one of the books he wrote, but I'm taking people who have this general trend, if I wanted to, I could just give lectures, all of these lectures about German people. And we could have 10 of those lectures about each one of them. I think these are general trends that they're having, and shall I'm doing my best not to take them
out of out of context. Thirdly, as I insisted with brother of mine last time, I'm not trying to judge their intention, as I said about the tequila, it seems from the writing that many of them had a very good intention to defend Islam. But at the same time, they in fact, were not following the great Islam and their teachings were not the right so the same thing about these people, man, I love to give them enough where it's not anything personal. But when it comes to its them, we have to not look at people as
As personal Well, he did this for me or he did that. But even if he did a lot, any of you doing also a lot of harm, he has to consider the fact that he's doing harm and must
not just be quiet about that. Well, finally, I expect to check tomorrow inshallah for the for the trip.
So it's going to be backplane first class
brothers coming, which has just been seconded that
we're known for, for what he did, in fact, he you can call him an extremist. And therefore, to put Zimbabwe and others in the same category, or in the same lecture in public and so forth,
isn't fair to them?
And if that that might be true, we needed similar ways, of course, a much more extreme than others. But the question is, what what was the main ideas what was the way of thinking that led Sarah MacLeod to his conclusion, some of the same ideas and way of thinking that design is presenting tomorrow is presented?
Again, the point is, is the Manhattan sometimes the one that is less obvious, is much more dangerous than the one who was most of us. That did not mention, for example, about the
discussion of the Koran, while all of you know and that area of the world, well, as soon as you hear this, and you reject them,
but someone Yanni, who is more careful than that, or I mean, look more careful, but doesn't go to that extreme. But he has some of the same dangerous ideas, he will be more dangerous. So if we don't even mention him and just talk about some stuff in front
end, he will be missing an important aspect.
For sure, and even different looking levels. And I believe I mentioned that in one of the earlier talks, not all of these people have the same ideas, and some of them are more extreme than others. But the point is that, what is their way of reasoning, which later on, clearly said, if we have to judge the Quran, Sunnah and the life of this civilization, and in fact, he said even in the life of European science, he did it Really? Well, this is the same kind of reasoning that we have to judge the Quran and Sunnah. By which is actually up in human reasoning. Remember, we did with the Hadith about the women were the same thing.
I'm not saying that they're all the same.
Some of them may call for any which is worth knowing others do not. I haven't called In fact, any of them. I never said any of those in any lecture.
This is my
I have, I have read through the three books, everything right is considered as a pioneer in bringing the Muslims of India to modern scientific education.
Right.
everything right, but he is not across the whole of the Indian subcontinent. He is not at all respected.
But he found it he fills himself as, as knowledgeable on Islam. He founded the university, to teach Muslims and also to teach his new brand of religion.
And people to this theory are still going to that school. And many of them are coming out with some of the same strange ideas without much fun begin.
And perhaps
it's not, you know, it's not
worth
extra considering that it's not the same as it was at Amazon. But if you read some of the papers in the, in the
there's a journal in the library here, something comes from Pakistan. If you read closely, those people who are from another university and what the right you'll see when many of them have this kind of way of looking at
to me within the
next few
University of
Maryland.
Now that I needed the only way that the person can progress and value the setting is novel by modifying
the formula
Before
becoming educated the Europeans
prevail and 20 years ago
was the hotbed for socialism and communism. You will find a lot of people
talking about the one thing and the history of the collaborative partners that
work.
But if you look at what's happening today, the good news is that
you will find people who are totally different. We reject
the socialist group is to dominate
and now
dominated but they are equal
the atomic