Mohammad Elshinawy – [Ep. 08] Mind Your Head & Excuse – Managing Our Disagreements

			Salam Alaikum Bismillah Alhamdulillah wa salatu salam ala Rasulillah. Welcome back to managing our
disagreements. Okay, so these next two episodes, I'm calling the Mind your head, meaning how can we
be more thoughtful and more consistent, like methodical on how we react to the different types of
differences and disagreements? Because we've been introduced to the four categories, which I've
categorized as for just for simplicity purposes. But still, at times, you know, we're not consistent
enough in how we go about treating each of these. And so I want to sort of give us a framework on
how to proceed with a checklist of sorts. And in that way, we'll have a uniform standard, and also
		

			have some intellectual humility. Where are the stop and go points in these discussions? So
Bismillah, here's the framework, mind your head, be careful how you're thinking about it. Number
one, is there a difference here of variety or a difference of conflict? Is it a matter where the
Dean basically gave us options? In that case, full stop, we have no right to referee between them.
In the sense of criticism, they're not right and wrong. They're right and right, leave it alone to a
little bit more detail to that go back to the episode but in, in essence, I leave this one alone,
period. I accept them all. Then, if we move on and say it is a difference of conflict, there's two
		

			or more clashing views that both can't be right at the same time. How do we deal with that? Well,
we're going to have to now stop and say, this clash, this conflictual disagreement, is it excusable
views or inexcusable views? If it's excusable views, full stop again, and we say, am I a layperson,
someone who's not trained in the Islamic sciences, or a Mayan, which deadhead an independent
researcher, someone who's actually able to exert an effort which day Jihad right to arrive at my own
conclusions? If I'm a layperson, the scholars all agree, I don't have the right to have an opinion.
Because I don't have evidence. My evidence is basically the scholar that I happen to have access to
		

			at the moment, because I can't wait forever for an answer. And so I take their answer, because
they're more likely correct than me, because I need an answer to practice it, not allowed to promote
it, definitely not allowed to defend it. That's it. If I'm an independent researcher, that has the
tools to be able to compare and contrast the arguments being made by all sides of the disagreement,
then in that case, I have the right to promote a view. But I still don't have the right to impose
the view. I am acting upon what Allah who observes my heart knows, I believe, is more convincingly
made of an argument. That's it, I am no way able to know for certain, which is the right view, I'm
		

			obligated to follow my conclusion and what I believe to be the more right view, more likely to be
correct view. Nothing I say can conclude this debate. Nothing I say, will be in the form of
denouncing others or making an accusation against their religious commitment, or so on and so forth.
So for its variety, you leave it all alone. If it's excusable disagreements, the layman does not
have the right to promote any view, because he doesn't have evidence. His evidence is the scholar
that he was able to exert his effort to reach. That's it for his own personal practice. The
independent researcher has the right rather the obligation to follow his conclusion. And the
		

			scholars also agree that he does not have the right to impose his view on others or denounce other
excusable views positions on the subject. So let's be consistent here. Let's make sure we're
following that protocol. And in the next episode, we will mind our head about the other two
categories the inexcusable disagreements and the matters of collaboration unification. Yes, sir
knows. And Allah azza wa jal knows best