Mohammad Elshinawy – [Ep. 05] Excusable Disagreements – Managing Our Disagreements

			Salam aleikum wa rahmatullah Willa Hamdulillah. Salatu was Salam ala Rasulillah. Hola, Leo's IVIG
Marine. Welcome back to managing our disagreements we said that not every difference in necessitates
a disagreement, disagreements and differences are sometimes two separate categories. We spoke about
the variety which could be different paths on the same straight path of Allah different lanes. Those
are not to be disregarded to be criticized to be denounced ever. Today, category two of four, we're
going to talk about disagreements that are valid disagreements not to be disregarded. So they're not
variety. They can't all be right. They're conflictual. They're contrary opinions. Right? Wrong. Not
		

			right, right, right and wrong.
		

			But the problem and the reason why we call them excusable and valid disagreements, is because it is
impossible for us to know conclusively about this category of disagreements, which is right and
wrong.
		

			You're going to say Allah's religion is clear, absolutely. Allah's religion is clear in certain
respects. There are certain constants of the deen that are crystal clear. But Allah also could have
made everything equally clear but chose to make certain matters a little more ambiguous than others.
For a great wisdom a person can say like, why couldn't God just make it all clear? No, don't project
your assumptions on Allah. Allah created us with extensive wisdom, life is a test. Parts of that
test are conflicting views, even in the religion. Our greatest scholars, the scholars of the
companions had conflicting views. That's part of the test of life, to test whether we will cut
		

			corners and choose a view out there that he who observes our hearts knows we're not convinced of but
we're just low hanging fruit, if you will, convenience, if you will. Cherry Picking, if you will.
And also even when we are convinced of the view, will we be tolerant of the other excusable views
the contrary views because I cannot honestly say they are conclusively wrong. So I must tolerate
them. I cannot treat them like the crystal clear definitive matters of the deen, which is category
three, and we'll leave that for next episode in sha Allah. And so these are the valid differences of
opinion the disagreements that happened like how then haram preferred or mandatory that the you
		

			know, the Islamic schools of law, the mother who, for instance, are always talking about and just
realize that they are irresolvable in this world
		

			because of basically three reasons. Number one, they're always debating on did he actually say that
he's Salado, sir. And you'll say the hadith is clear. But is it even established? Is it clearly
authentic to begin with? There's going to be tons of room for back and forth there with a hadith,
even authentic hadith could have hidden defects that all scholars know that could render them
traceable, but not applicable. That's a study for a soul. Then level two is okay. We all agree he
said it Ali salatu salam, but what did he mean? And in fact, even the Quran has certain verses that
are not as clear as others. And so what are the implications? Was it meant to be an example was it
		

			meant to be a restriction? Is this absolute is disqualified? What are the implications of this?
That's the second. And then the third layer, which, you know, closes the door on oversimplifying
this, once you understand it is, wait a minute, okay. This is, you know, established text clearly
means this, hypothetically speaking, but there's another text that seems to be in conflict with it.
So how do we reconcile the conflict, different scholars reconciled it in different ways? One scholar
is gonna say, this first text was earlier no longer applies the new texts, the other one say no,
actually, this verse is general and that verses specific, right, so specific to the Prophet
		

			sallallahu, it was a lot more specific to a certain scenario in life, and so on and so forth. And so
between was it actually said, what does it actually mean? Wait a minute what something else was also
said that seems to contend with it. A person needs to humble themselves and say, this is the work of
the scholars. If I'm an independent researcher, in which the head, I am bound to what I feel is the
greater likelihood of being correct. without imposing that view on others. All the scholars agree
that that would be wrong. And if I'm not an independent researcher, if I'm just the person who asks
the scholars, then I'm doing that because the greater likelihood is this scholar Suraj is better
		

			than my hunch his conclusion is better than my
		

			assumption. And so that is the area of valid differences valid disagreements excusable
disagreements, valid differences of opinion. Let me stop there in sha Allah till next episodes that
I'm on a Corolla