Workshop On Hadeeth Part 3

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.


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

Shake d'amato Jane has given us a very enlightening lecture

00:00:07--> 00:00:20

previously on the subject of hobbies. And as we said at that time, although he did give us quite a bit still, it was just a drop in the bucket, so to speak,

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

compared to the amount of knowledge that the science contains. So we want to inshallah pick up from where he left off.

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

And I hope he can remember where he left off, because he masala he didn't give us quite a bit. And we hope that inshallah everyone was just focused and open up and listen and learn the Salah because we

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

know him from the left, and developers of cinema.

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

Of

00:01:02--> 00:01:05

course, this is our, our last session in

00:01:06--> 00:01:08

this workshop on added so

00:01:09--> 00:01:13

I mean, our goal is to answer every single question you have about tennis today and finish up

00:01:14--> 00:01:16

everything you ever wanted to know.

00:01:17--> 00:01:20

But we all only have an hour and 10 minutes to do.

00:01:22--> 00:01:24

Let them I ended up

00:01:25--> 00:01:36

basically what I was talking about last time is the ways or the means by which I looked at how it's Allah preserved the sun and edited those facilities from the time of the problem.

00:01:38--> 00:01:44

Well, those times is that I talked about in those aspects that I talked about recording headings, and the science of generalist ideas and so forth.

00:01:45--> 00:01:48

hamdulillah by the mercy of Allah subhana wa Tada.

00:01:49--> 00:01:54

They developed further as, as needed, and so forth. And the goal, actually, of those

00:01:56--> 00:02:07

scientists, and those aspects of the history of hedis was to make sure that the process in them was preserved, and was preserved property and to sift.

00:02:08--> 00:02:48

And it's something which I'm sure, Julian can talk about with respect to Christianity, and to make sure that what happened with respect to Christianity didn't happen with respect to Islam, that you have all this body of literature and you have no idea what is authentic and what isn't authentic. So a handler, the goal of this science was to sift the material which has been properly preserved from the time of the funhouse assylum to sift that material from the material that had not been properly preserved, either because people were mistaken or not very careful, and their niche narration and also to surf the material that had been or people had tried to add to the authenticated material.

00:02:49--> 00:03:01

By means of forgery, caddies, and fabricating heads and so forth. Well, we didn't get to actually the fabrication of anything when that that began. But that should have been and we had time, we should, it should have been something covered in the previous

00:03:02--> 00:03:06

two lectures, because we only had one. So that's part of the reason why

00:03:07--> 00:03:08

it wasn't covered.

00:03:09--> 00:03:14

What I would like to do today, in order to cover some concepts that I would like to have

00:03:16--> 00:03:19

any of you familiar with and tell us though this when you leave here, you will have

00:03:20--> 00:03:32

a basic idea about the sciences and in what were the criteria that the scholars have headed to use and sifting through the material. So what I would like to do today, inshallah

00:03:34--> 00:03:35

is basically I'm going to

00:03:37--> 00:03:50

discuss what is meant by an authentic hadith, what the scores mean, when they say that this led to the hate, or the sadness assessment, and what are the conditions that they lay down for it? And as I said,

00:03:52--> 00:03:59

and it has many questions that people have about Eddie, especially here in the United States, where we don't have that much literature available.

00:04:01--> 00:04:20

And so therefore, I hope inshallah, that if you have any question as we're going along, if it's completely not related or not the time for it, I will just tell you, I will discuss it, we will try to discuss it later. But otherwise, I hope inshallah, that you will feel free to ask these questions that you might have related to Harry is related to Harry literature, for example, that's available in English and so forth.

00:04:21--> 00:04:25

Well, our final goal, originally was to,

00:04:27--> 00:04:40

to show the importance of the science of headaches and processes. Because this, this Harry says, as we would have talked about the importance of the sooner it is Harry, it's really our, our, our genes, our religion.

00:04:41--> 00:04:44

Well, I was going to take one example

00:04:45--> 00:04:53

of the headings as bonuses for them to show you know, how important is this topic, how it does, how it relates to our daily lives, that would relate to our Deen

00:04:54--> 00:04:59

and that was I was going to take an example and as I said, we probably will not have time for this potential.

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

At least some of you will walk away with some material that I have here. Not all of you.

00:05:06--> 00:05:13

But I was going to discuss the headings about whether or not it's permissible for a wife to spend her own wealth without her husband's permission.

00:05:15--> 00:05:32

And there's about five headings related to it. And I discussed them in detail. And this in this article. And for two of the headings, for example, here's the change of two of the headings. And we could have gone through this, this kind of thing, but as time

00:05:33--> 00:05:37

shala, we'll figure out some way to distribute these equitably, Abdullah already has been copied.

00:05:39--> 00:05:40

And that's probably staying with it,

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

it will often come up.

00:05:46--> 00:05:52

So let's make a move to the board and start discussing what scores mean by

00:05:53--> 00:05:56

and some of the terms that they use with respect to authentic any

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

basically

00:06:08--> 00:06:12

wants to take all the edits literature, which is divided into two categories,

00:06:13--> 00:06:19

I think which are acceptable, acceptable, or multiple, and Hadees, which are rejected.

00:06:22--> 00:06:26

Right now for the time being, we're just going to worry about edits which are accepted.

00:06:27--> 00:06:29

And as well as heady divided

00:06:34--> 00:06:36

by acceptable heavies into two categories.

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

The

00:06:47--> 00:06:57

my Arabic handwriting is very forceful, I'll do my best to write as little as possible in Arabic, but they are the two terms that we're discussing here. And

00:07:03--> 00:07:05

if you take any report, any kind of narration

00:07:08--> 00:07:09

for example,

00:07:11--> 00:07:13

if I were to tell you something, if I were to tell you

00:07:15--> 00:07:16

something I mentioned last time,

00:07:17--> 00:07:23

the Gettysburg Address of Abraham Lincoln, if I told you that Abraham Lincoln said, I said, he gave the speech,

00:07:24--> 00:07:43

his famous speech for sports seven years ago and so forth. This is the kind of narration or kind of kind of report that wants to know just logically speaking, just thinking about this matter, what are some of the questions that you would like to know and even we touched upon this briefly last time? What are some of the questions that you would like to know about the source

00:07:45--> 00:07:48

of that report to tell you that Abraham Lincoln system says

00:07:49--> 00:07:51

and it was what are some of the questions for example, that would come to your mind

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

Okay, so for example,

00:08:13--> 00:08:16

suppose I told you that my father told me, Abraham Lincoln

00:08:27--> 00:08:28

I would like to know

00:08:29--> 00:08:37

your characters that do not align then go on to the next. Okay. All right, so we take me

00:08:39--> 00:08:43

I'm just going by what you folks are saying it was right or wrong in the words of the Sunday

00:08:44--> 00:08:46

he wants to know about my character.

00:08:50--> 00:08:53

And you said What was the name? And you said Yeah, what

00:08:55--> 00:08:56

time is

00:08:58--> 00:09:01

now rich, okay. So I told you this My father told me to

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

wait it out.

00:09:18--> 00:09:19

First

00:09:22--> 00:09:23

majority

00:09:25--> 00:09:26

report the same thing.

00:09:27--> 00:09:29

But is that necessary for it to be something

00:09:30--> 00:09:36

by just getting from the budget came from the bookstore right now. So can I told you Oh, they have this magnificent over this.

00:09:38--> 00:09:39

thing you look at

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

me where you can buy it. It's

00:09:44--> 00:09:46

really give me three or four other people.

00:09:52--> 00:09:53

necessary to have many

00:10:05--> 00:10:06

Even though he using that example

00:10:09--> 00:10:12

without even concern people,

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

okay, what would you say your life is something important?

00:10:17--> 00:10:21

Yeah, I suppose so it is a fire so I'm gonna get out right now.

00:10:22--> 00:10:23

You're gonna see what

00:10:24--> 00:10:29

needs to be confirmed by three or four other people. That's, that's an important thing let me confirm it by three or four on the

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

back.

00:10:37--> 00:10:44

Okay, so you want to know all of my, my soldiers back to Abraham Lincoln so we have like Walter

00:10:46--> 00:10:48

courser from his father

00:10:51--> 00:10:53

and his father Ernest from us grant

00:10:56--> 00:10:57

narrated from

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

okay. So, do you all know

00:11:03--> 00:11:05

the character as you all know the character of all these people

00:11:09--> 00:11:10

are in a little trouble here.

00:11:12--> 00:11:13

What was he famous for?

00:11:15--> 00:11:17

He was very famous for drinking.

00:11:18--> 00:11:23

That was his claim to fame. He was president united states also but he was more famous for

00:11:25--> 00:11:26

now.

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

Okay.

00:11:32--> 00:11:34

fundamental principle

00:11:38--> 00:11:38

okay.

00:11:39--> 00:11:40

So far once we have

00:11:41--> 00:11:42

sufficient

00:11:48--> 00:11:54

Okay, so you don't want to just know their moral character like we talked about yesterday, when know their moral character as well as

00:11:56--> 00:11:58

whether or not they have permission.

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

Right.

00:12:03--> 00:12:10

No one knows their moral character we know that their permission does not have to be for everyone or 90% Okay.

00:12:13--> 00:12:14

So if someone is unknown

00:12:18--> 00:12:21

So, you want to know every narrator you want to know

00:12:23--> 00:12:26

their moral character and you want to know whether or not the provision

00:12:28--> 00:12:31

and what about checking the the sources

00:12:33--> 00:12:39

like in this particular case, what do you want to know about the chain in particular decides who the people are?

00:12:47--> 00:12:47

What happened

00:12:52--> 00:12:53

that they all met The Revenant

00:12:54--> 00:12:55

at all we all met

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

each other so if I told you this

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

Yeah, so if I told you that my grandfather didn't meet us grant

00:13:11--> 00:13:14

you're gonna bring him in listens conditions? Yeah. No,

00:13:15--> 00:13:17

you don't understand him I'm Muslim.

00:13:20--> 00:13:22

It's like it's conditioning

00:13:25--> 00:13:27

if it's possible that he knew the bottom

00:13:31--> 00:13:34

I mean, that's the number high meeting and living in

00:13:36--> 00:13:41

Tokyo but Milan Harris was the person use the word and he did not make syphilis, which don't worry about any of that.

00:13:43--> 00:13:45

But if he just adapted or something like that,

00:13:46--> 00:13:47

definitely

00:13:49--> 00:13:51

using is not a lot.

00:13:55--> 00:13:59

So you're talking about a particular type of headings. Don't worry about that for the time being

00:14:02--> 00:14:04

Is there anything else that we need to know?

00:14:09--> 00:14:10

Okay, that would be proficiency.

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

Anything else?

00:14:30--> 00:14:42

Okay, there are things that not only do we look at this chain by itself and this narration, but we also want to make sure that this chain or this narration is not contradicting something stronger.

00:14:43--> 00:14:45

So for example, suppose I told you

00:14:48--> 00:14:52

that according to my father from his grandfather's was us Brent is to Gettysburg Address.

00:14:55--> 00:14:59

And yes, we know from many many many sources, unquestionable sources

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

The amount of sources on question was actually with Abraham Lincoln, who

00:15:06--> 00:15:08

made the statement made that speech.

00:15:09--> 00:15:17

So this would be a sign if it contradicts strongest sources, that would be a sign that there's a defect. There's a problem in the narration,

00:15:18--> 00:15:19

what else

00:15:22--> 00:15:23

he throws

00:15:28--> 00:15:31

at this problem, why don't make sure there's no problems in it?

00:15:34--> 00:15:37

Just kind of redundant lm problems.

00:15:41--> 00:15:44

Okay, let's, let's leave it for that.

00:15:46--> 00:16:00

This is now what the scholars have had is basically they look towards the day, and they came up with similar similar conditions, the same kind of thing. If a report comes, how are we going to know that this report is authentic? So for the Hey,

00:16:01--> 00:16:02

they said that it has to meet

00:16:04--> 00:16:05

five conditions.

00:16:10--> 00:16:11

The first one is the chain.

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

The chain of authorities, like what we talked about here has to be unbroken.

00:16:22--> 00:16:25

Okay, the changes we're talking about we're talking about does not have to be.

00:16:30--> 00:16:30

Second,

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

every narrator

00:16:39--> 00:16:42

every narrator, must be morally acceptable.

00:16:47--> 00:16:51

Or arenaria, they call him every narrator has to be

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

or

00:16:55--> 00:16:58

a person of righteousness know from Islamic point of view? What does that mean?

00:17:06--> 00:17:10

From the service point of view, we don't take knowledge of religion

00:17:11--> 00:17:12

from

00:17:14--> 00:17:15

a major stance,

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

okay, he does not commit major sins.

00:17:26--> 00:17:27

Madison.

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

Now,

00:17:32--> 00:17:33

what else?

00:17:35--> 00:17:37

Well, that would be pretty good. That

00:17:41--> 00:17:42

is not known.

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

Windows.

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

Or in order for him to be sensible his behavior must be such that he does, he does not do things which are considered socially unacceptable.

00:18:13--> 00:18:14

mature adults

00:18:15--> 00:18:16

what else

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

that we're just talking about.

00:18:21--> 00:18:23

But also, I mean, it's good that he performed the work isn't

00:18:27--> 00:18:28

something none of you mentioned.

00:18:32--> 00:18:51

And he performs the way he performs the obligatory deeds. And he remains away from the aromas as far as we can see. And also, he's not known to be someone who is doing things that are socially innocent. Because if he's doing things that are socially unacceptable, and if he doesn't care, enough about his own reputation and his own

00:18:52--> 00:19:04

destiny among the people, then we cannot trust that he cares about any carefully about what he does, he makes sure that he narrates correctly, and he will not be spotted to be a liar, someone who committed a mistake.

00:19:09--> 00:19:18

Well, let's say for the time being, just to make you all happy, he should be free of the dark. But that's not necessarily 100%. Correct.

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

And there's no reason for that. There's some reason why there's not 100% correct, but let's not worry about that as an introductory course.

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

Greg,

00:19:31--> 00:19:32

what else?

00:19:37--> 00:19:44

So every narrator against every narrator, not the majority of the narrators and so forth. Every narrator must be

00:19:46--> 00:19:48

what they go for.

00:19:54--> 00:19:57

And we talked about yesterday how they used to test

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

humans

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

narrator's to make sure there's a warrant provision.

00:20:05--> 00:20:06

What else

00:20:15--> 00:20:18

can be normal? What Nicole should do

00:20:24--> 00:20:26

the modern day meaning of the word shift.

00:20:32--> 00:20:42

So those means they cannot contradict stronger thoughts. Examples, the example I gave you this, my grandfather said us, Greg was the one who gave the

00:20:45--> 00:20:52

inners burger dressing and we have 150 reports that it was Abraham Lincoln, this is considered chef or contradicted, stronger.

00:20:56--> 00:20:57

And what's the last one?

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

Without we know

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

the thing is, that's

00:21:12--> 00:21:17

what what it means here in this particular case means a hidden, damaging.

00:21:33--> 00:21:34

Oh, you don't have to explain it.

00:21:36--> 00:21:37

I can give you an example.

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

means it cannot contradict.

00:22:15--> 00:22:24

Let me give an example. Let's make sure you get it is done correctly and the chain has to be unbroken. Every narrative has to be honest, every narrative has to be bogus.

00:22:26--> 00:22:28

can be no, no no.

00:22:30--> 00:22:41

Don't do like one person is taking down JSP unbroken every year as the eyes of every new area devolves there has to be to the SPL. This is not the masquerade.

00:22:43--> 00:22:49

Example of what we mean by hidden defects is that if you look at an a particular hoodie,

00:22:51--> 00:22:58

if you just look at it, like like a beginner, and it was look at it, everything looks fine. And then it looks

00:22:59--> 00:23:04

good. If you study it in more detail, you'll find that a mistake has been made in the narration.

00:23:06--> 00:23:07

So for example,

00:23:09--> 00:23:13

let's say like we have the chain of generators, from A to B,

00:23:14--> 00:23:16

to C to D to E, well actually,

00:23:17--> 00:23:19

let's take an actual example.

00:23:28--> 00:23:31

Sometimes a common case of something which is

00:23:32--> 00:23:37

considered Milan or Milan, would you considered having a free router forward?

00:23:41--> 00:23:41

source

00:23:43--> 00:23:48

is what you can find sometimes you will find them authentic statements of hobbies.

00:23:49--> 00:23:50

Like Abdullah bin

00:23:51--> 00:24:03

Abdullah bin Massoud one time says whatever the Muslim see is good, that Allah visit is good. And whatever the Muslim see is bad and Allah subhana wa tada considered considered the best.

00:24:04--> 00:24:06

This is a statement of a salvia.

00:24:08--> 00:24:15

Now, this statement is confirmed by chromosomes. So in other words, we have our narrator going back

00:24:16--> 00:24:23

and these narration or this narration meets these conditions. So we say yes, this is an objective statement of optimum.

00:24:26--> 00:24:31

Now, some people that made a mistake, while narrating this statement from a filament muscles

00:24:33--> 00:24:43

and by mistake instead of stopping at the filament Masud when they give the chain from B to C to D, and slipping instead of stopping as soon as they made the mistake of saying,

00:24:44--> 00:24:45

for example,

00:24:46--> 00:24:47

or from the process.

00:24:51--> 00:24:59

So, by the way, I don't know how much terminology you'd like to get in, that sort of thing. But if something is the narration that goes back to

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

The hobby to companion

00:25:02--> 00:25:07

and does not go beyond that it is a statement or an action of a hobby of a companion.

00:25:14--> 00:25:17

So for example, in this case, the narration is much closer to the narration from

00:25:21--> 00:25:26

with someone by mistake narrated as a statement of the problem 100%.

00:25:27--> 00:25:29

And when something is narrated or trained,

00:25:31--> 00:25:32

it is called my book.

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

Writing in Arabic in English doesn't make much sense to me.

00:25:46--> 00:25:50

So now, in this particular case, if you just took this narration

00:25:51--> 00:25:54

of this mistake, going all the way back to

00:25:55--> 00:26:01

study this narration by itself, you find this a sense that it can proceed from C to D. So

00:26:03--> 00:26:11

looking at this new narration, I'm telling you to mistake but just looking at one new narration, would you say that it meets the first three conditions?

00:26:14--> 00:26:16

How'd you know? The first the

00:26:18--> 00:26:19

first three

00:26:21--> 00:26:22

was the fourth one.

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

But the first three conditions doesn't meet the first three conditions.

00:26:30--> 00:26:31

How do you know that?

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

You know that because I told you that we have

00:26:35--> 00:26:39

someone makes a mistake and there is the to the problem.

00:26:42--> 00:26:43

So how are we going to spot that?

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

Like,

00:26:49--> 00:26:50

nobody can No.

00:26:56--> 00:26:57

Not

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

at all. Not from one

00:27:03--> 00:27:03

another.

00:27:08--> 00:27:09

No, no.

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

No, no.

00:27:13--> 00:27:14

This

00:27:15--> 00:27:16

snap came and said

00:27:17--> 00:27:20

we cannot surrender which is nice.

00:27:22--> 00:27:31

So what we have to do, and by the way, the science of edler the science of spotting these kinds of defects is considered the most difficult sciences, science of the sense of headed.

00:27:33--> 00:27:42

And very few scars, only the leading scholars to really experts in the field like hottie and shefali, Medina and others similar to them.

00:27:44--> 00:27:55

So what we have to do and what they would be used to do is you take now this narration and you look to see how everybody else narrated the same thing. So we look for change, coming back from

00:27:57--> 00:28:00

you look for change coming from a film in the film through the students.

00:28:01--> 00:28:04

You look for change coming from through this student

00:28:06--> 00:28:13

all the way back through you yourself, until you can trace and see what effect is the situation.

00:28:14--> 00:28:24

And you will be able to able to spot where the mistake came from this this person made a mistake and married all the way back to the quality system when in fact it just stopped a

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

while back one of the one of the scores.

00:28:33--> 00:28:35

I remember correctly, I'm pretty sure this was

00:28:37--> 00:28:46

even my money. One time we sat with the students of a scholar named hammer in cinema.

00:28:47--> 00:28:50

And he said I have the books of Hamad bin cinema I want to read them to you.

00:28:51--> 00:28:52

And he's one of the students.

00:28:55--> 00:29:04

Cinnamon I said I have these books that come out I want to read them to you. So that student asked him Have you read them to any of the other students

00:29:05--> 00:29:06

of color?

00:29:07--> 00:29:10

He said yes. I read them to 17 of his students.

00:29:13--> 00:29:15

You can see that I'm not exactly in love with this anyway.

00:29:17--> 00:29:36

We're not firstly are headed No, they've been collected. Once he says let's say he said I read it to 17 other students so I asked him why do you want to read to me now said because American cinema used to make some mistakes. And I want to distinguish between the mistakes that come up in cinema and the mistakes of his students.

00:29:38--> 00:29:41

So in other words, there's some headings that he studied and collected from other scholars

00:29:42--> 00:29:43

in cinema.

00:29:45--> 00:29:49

And he knows that some narrations are coming from comments and similar which are wrong.

00:29:50--> 00:29:52

So he reads all of his

00:29:53--> 00:30:00

students who are together as the same reading as it goes less than a cent leads to more you know who was president

00:30:00--> 00:30:10

That reading, when did he make this reading to the chef and who else was present, so forth. So he takes all these things of students, if they all agree on the state of the state, then he knows that the source of mental state.

00:30:13--> 00:30:23

But if he finds that one of them, is narrating it incorrectly, and the others aren't narrating it correctly, or the same way, you know, the devastation is not venomous, but it's from that particular student.

00:30:25--> 00:30:29

And that kind of thing they used to do, in order to spot make sure that there's no

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

hidden defects that has been

00:30:34--> 00:30:35

that has been passed on.

00:30:37--> 00:30:40

So these are the five conditions for our headings to be considered.

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

Now,

00:30:49--> 00:30:51

with respect to hedges, by the way,

00:30:52--> 00:30:55

when we talk about the study of this net,

00:30:59--> 00:31:06

we're talking about the study of this now we're talking about particular particular types of studies. And these are the kinds of studies which are

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

not.

00:31:08--> 00:31:10

And if you're not new to us,

00:31:12--> 00:31:14

you can divide these into two categories.

00:31:26--> 00:31:27

If I had a separate area,

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

it does not it was subject to this character.

00:31:33--> 00:31:51

When you say that, how do you dismiss was that it means it has been narrated by so many people, and each generation is each link, that there's no question that they, and it is not possible that they all agreed upon a fabrication, because maybe they all come from different places, and so forth. And it's not possible that they all made the same mistake.

00:31:52--> 00:31:56

So if you get a narration like that, for example, the Quran as a whole is narrated like this.

00:31:57--> 00:32:08

So if you get narrations of that nature, then you don't have to study this now, because you have so many people narrating it is not a subject of what we're talking about over here. They were talking about just what they called

00:32:15--> 00:32:20

the headed miss these five conditions by itself is called the head and

00:32:21--> 00:32:25

in particular, it is called the ages it

00:32:33--> 00:32:36

Haley that he means on its own merit this particular he

00:32:38--> 00:32:45

has met these five conditions. Now, by the way, and this is an important point to keep in mind

00:32:47--> 00:32:50

is that the first three conditions is the change is unbroken, that every narrative

00:32:51--> 00:32:53

and every narrative.

00:32:55--> 00:32:59

And these three conditions are not that difficult, at least for

00:33:01--> 00:33:04

this three conditions are not that difficult to determine.

00:33:05--> 00:33:07

But the last two are very difficult.

00:33:09--> 00:33:17

Now, some, some writers are headed some scholars at the last minute don't have the time or the ability to check the last two conditions.

00:33:18--> 00:33:20

So, they will study just the first

00:33:21--> 00:33:22

three conditions.

00:33:25--> 00:33:30

And when they study the first three conditions and they say this, they see that these conditions are met.

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

They also this is not it

00:33:41--> 00:33:42

Hey.

00:33:44--> 00:33:49

Now there's a big difference between saying this not as the head and between things the head is the site.

00:33:54--> 00:33:55

Then unfortunately,

00:33:57--> 00:34:02

unfortunately, when people nowadays when many writers, especially in the Arabic literature, because

00:34:03--> 00:34:05

English literature we have reached this point,

00:34:07--> 00:34:15

especially in the Arabic literature, sometimes people go to some of the scores of headings and they say this they see that this hedis scoring Center has this notice

00:34:16--> 00:34:27

and they understand that to mean that the head is the head this is not correct. It is not one does not necessarily imply or the first one does not necessarily imply the second one

00:34:29--> 00:34:36

is the scholar only has the ability, or the time whatever to check the first three, then he will say that it's not as though he

00:34:38--> 00:34:44

does not mean that that is to say until you check and make sure that none of the last two conditions and environment.

00:34:47--> 00:34:53

So you must distinguish between the score of editing this is known as the hate and between him saying that the head is the state.

00:34:55--> 00:34:59

Now there's some there's some exceptions. There's some scholarship for some of the great scores of headiest

00:35:02--> 00:35:10

Let's say for example, historically, like even if it has, you said that there's not as the Hey, people take it for granted, that means also that the edits

00:35:11--> 00:35:12

but

00:35:13--> 00:35:14

I don't know if you can always do this,

00:35:16--> 00:35:17

you have to be careful about it.

00:35:19--> 00:35:30

So, for those your specialty, you will have access to some of the Arabic literature on it and so forth, you have to keep in mind this distinction if the score of heavy says is not as severe.

00:35:31--> 00:35:32

And when he says

00:35:33--> 00:35:39

one from the first one, you cannot automatically assume or conclude the second one.

00:35:44--> 00:35:48

So this is the first category of acceptable headings in schools. So, Haley, that's

00:35:52--> 00:35:55

another kind of acceptable headings as we said, is

00:35:58--> 00:36:03

now going back to our discussion of reports in general of narrations in general.

00:36:05--> 00:36:06

If you look at these five conditions,

00:36:09--> 00:36:11

are there any conditions here that you can perhaps

00:36:16--> 00:36:23

tolerate tolerate the violation? Not quite, but make it a little bit relaxed a little bit on

00:36:25--> 00:36:31

for example, the chain smoking Can you say okay, this is broken, but that's okay. We'll make it we'll call it has some sort of the hailstorm except

00:36:33--> 00:36:34

what

00:36:37--> 00:36:39

the missing link we don't believe in going over here.

00:36:41--> 00:36:48

If you have a chain which is which is broken, then that means someone is missing in that you cannot make any assumption about whether or not that person is awesome.

00:36:50--> 00:37:01

So you will not be willing to to make any any compromise when it comes to the first condition. They would have you find this the defects in it

00:37:02--> 00:37:03

as damaging.

00:37:06--> 00:37:14

We all have stuff in our lashes a little bit defective. We don't throw it away or since we see some defects. Can you compromise on this one?

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

I don't know your name.

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

Okay.

00:37:35--> 00:37:38

So what about every narrator being as

00:37:39--> 00:37:40

opposed to just a little bit?

00:37:42--> 00:37:43

Or you just drink a little bit?

00:37:46--> 00:37:51

By the way, what's the one of the basic principles here when we say that someone is hazard

00:37:52--> 00:38:06

it's not just simply that we want to make sure that he's a righteous person, but we want to make sure that he has the fear Oh, lots of hand without a demonstrates the fear of Allah subhanaw taala that he will not be willing to fabricate and to make up or distort the thesis processes.

00:38:07--> 00:38:16

Not just simply condition that Oh, well. Sounds good, doesn't it? No. And he wants to make sure that these people so that means even if someone is not a liar,

00:38:17--> 00:38:19

even if someone is not alive, but he's known to commit

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

other major sins that's enough for us to reject

00:38:25--> 00:38:27

and a Catholic automatically would be rejected.

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

Right?

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

What?

00:38:35--> 00:38:36

As a fundament

00:38:49--> 00:38:53

and it basically there's nothing to keep them from lying, especially lying about the problem hamsters

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

lying and hiding.

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

There's no support, sometimes conflict of interest.

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

So in other words, you should not take away from Janice Toledo's books about Islam

00:39:05--> 00:39:20

should not be considered a source of added source literature. Unfortunately, we even have conferences, Muslim conferences in which they invite non Muslims to come to speak to Muslims about Islam and supposedly educate them about Islam and Islam.

00:39:21--> 00:39:23

From his point of view,

00:39:26--> 00:39:29

unbelievable. No way. Unbelievable.

00:39:32--> 00:39:36

That's why all the famous books that I read they were collected by Muslims not by Hindus and Christians.

00:39:37--> 00:39:40

They were this condition of shadows

00:39:42--> 00:39:43

in your life that

00:39:45--> 00:39:47

doesn't make much sense to relax it.

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

Do you have any left?

00:39:52--> 00:39:53

What about number three?

00:40:02--> 00:40:04

Relax, relax that

00:40:06--> 00:40:07

flight

00:40:09--> 00:40:17

proficiency as a whole, not just memory, but proficiency also narrating properly is not like so narrating his writing is good if he's narrating from that writing.

00:40:27--> 00:40:28

let this one slide.

00:40:31--> 00:40:35

Because here we're talking about, we're talking about people.

00:40:38--> 00:40:42

We have we have people, for example, that that rarely make mistakes,

00:40:44--> 00:40:50

rarely make mistakes. And the mistakes that they make are very minor. I mean, you wouldn't notice them. And

00:40:52--> 00:40:54

then we have other few, how many of your students?

00:40:55--> 00:40:56

How many of you were students in your life?

00:40:58--> 00:41:01

Have you ever been in the class where you make one mistake, and the teacher tells you

00:41:04--> 00:41:06

that you've had a rough life.

00:41:13--> 00:41:23

So you have some stew, you have some narratives, Heidi, for example, that were experts who really made mistakes, you got to put them in a separate category from those who made a few more mistakes.

00:41:25--> 00:41:29

And you want to distinguish between their hobbies, you're going to call one category you're going to call their hobbies.

00:41:32--> 00:41:33

The other one?

00:41:38--> 00:41:39

Should I use your terminology? Will he

00:41:43--> 00:41:55

has compiled a good book? excellent book of vigor. I think it's available here in the soup, we'll make a free advertisement being sold somewhere in the soap book of Decker, what's the exact name

00:41:57--> 00:41:59

of authentic certifications with the public?

00:42:00--> 00:42:03

Well, in the book uses lots of

00:42:04--> 00:42:10

data to deal with these terms. And he used to come there. And it is the

00:42:12--> 00:42:13

translation that he came up with

00:42:14--> 00:42:16

his company, and he meanings good.

00:42:18--> 00:42:35

These are difficult terms to translate into English, especially when you're talking about what's the difference between the hay and so until you get to the book, you know that when you read somebody is talking about husband, he's talking about at least these five conditions, except for number three is nuts as well as

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

Now

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

suppose we have a hideous

00:42:46--> 00:42:47

which is the hats and hoodies

00:42:48--> 00:42:56

it means these five conditions according to our new condition number three is immediate bias by itself we call it testing.

00:42:58--> 00:43:00

In the same term we use before

00:43:01--> 00:43:06

meaning has been on its own merits, just by its own change, it is considered

00:43:08--> 00:43:11

now the only reason that we call it a hassle instead of saying what

00:43:13--> 00:43:14

it is this some

00:43:16--> 00:43:32

we have some fear about someone possibly making a slight mistake. And by the way, someone makes gross mistakes. If we don't say that his head either has gross mistake, someone who is weakness. So we have some fear that someone may have made a slight mistake. So we call his head is present.

00:43:34--> 00:43:36

Now suppose we have the same Heidi's

00:43:38--> 00:43:41

never is to James.

00:43:42--> 00:43:46

And because of this person here, this probably is not the best way to

00:43:49--> 00:43:53

take a more realistic example. Going back to the promises that we have, for example, different narrators.

00:43:54--> 00:43:56

And then after this chain we have scenarios.

00:43:58--> 00:43:58

Okay.

00:43:59--> 00:44:02

And everyone up here is faulty.

00:44:03--> 00:44:07

We're taking a simple example doesn't have to be of this nature, but just to make it very clear.

00:44:09--> 00:44:13

Everyone else fields of psychology but this person right here is a Pentacles