» Earn on-going rewards and help us do more! «

An Exposition of the Evidence – Debate aftermath

share this pageShare Page
Mohammed Hijab

Channel: Mohammed Hijab

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.


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

Hello again. Hi guys doing alright so quickly.

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

I've got three sources for you.

00:00:05--> 00:00:23

That is an exposition of the evidences that relate to the debate that was the A plus where he obliterated himself where humiliated himself where he decimated himself and violated himself finished himself. Because he's a man with multi layered self delusion. He's a man with

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

the with delusions of grandeur. He's a man who's unaccomplished in every sphere

00:00:31--> 00:00:37

of life. But moving on now cumulation is done, self immolation has been complete.

00:00:41--> 00:01:13

Moving on, the point I wanted to make is just this is just a discussion about the exposition of some of the evidence that I've put forward. So one evidence I talked about is even more data about the general tendency of the earth of the roundness of the earth of the early times. Now, if you look at the first tweet that I've put in the comments section, and also description box below, you'll find here, the reference to everyone out there where he says that actually the majority of scholars of his time said that the earth was round, okay. And he was at the time of animal handlers, the companions, he was not a terabyte, by the way, there was a mistake, but he still love the self. So

00:01:13--> 00:01:44

he was still in, you know, first few 100 years on the Prophet Muhammad Salah Salaam, obviously, I haven't been humbled by 241, he died 335. So he wasn't the seller. And he did say about the redundancy of the The second thing we talked about is in chapter 25, verse number 61, I made the claim that there's two ways of reading this CRR Jen, which means son, that, that Allah created all of these things, the constellations, and so on, and then he said, the sun and the moon. So there's one color, as we know, there's multiple ways of reciting the Quran. And all of them are harmonious and complimentary, not

00:01:46--> 00:01:58

contradictory, and unharmonious. So, the second way, which is to Hamza and kisatchie, as you can see here, underneath in the description box in the second tweet,

00:01:59--> 00:02:18

is Soldier Soldier is the plural of the Western Arjun, and Suraj means son, so the plural that has many sons, which is in line with a general 21st century cosmological picture, I'm saying that that's the only interpretation, maybe you can interpret it as stars no problem. The idea is, is definitely linguistically facilitated that you can say that these are many suns. Why? Because it's the

00:02:19--> 00:02:55

it's the plural of the word search. Alright, so we said, number one, is, even when others quote his first tweet, second tweet, the sun. And the general thing i'm saying is that the Quran is applicable for seventh century and for 21st century, I'm not saying that it's not a bold concordance claim that the Quran is saying things as actually like a scientific textbook and so on. I'm just saying it's harmonious with with the seventh century, 21st century and everything in between. So that was the claim I'm making. You can't use science to disprove the Quran. For reasons related to this, but also to the philosophy of science, the fact that science is not called incorrigible, etc, it's something

00:02:55--> 00:03:06

which is not meant to produce a set of eternal truths in that sense. So that's the first argument. The second thing I talked about was dead, the hawk movie, and so on. If you look at the third tweet below,

00:03:10--> 00:03:15

here, it's very important to talk to mention that we're not talking about them. That often.

00:03:16--> 00:03:35

It's very clear, we're not talking about the default, the penal or the had punishment applied to the mortality. We're not we're not talking about this. We're talking about the fact that the Prophet Muhammad SAW Salam in the treats of her day BIA, he was conditioned, yes, to not return any more tent that goes to them.

00:03:36--> 00:04:07

He was conditioned to not return any more Ted, that goes to the disbelieving lands. And he accepted that condition. So what my point was, is that this sets the precedent, okay, this sets a precedent. Now, the question could be asked, well, is this only those who are there? Okay. And they don't have to be returned or include those on the way and those who are going there? Well, either way, if, if we accept a, which is those who are there don't need to be returned back. And that doesn't need to be

00:04:08--> 00:04:53

done. That's a wedge, a wedge of action, which has been made mothball which has been suspended by the by the contract, right? So if if one word you can be mortal of the contract, then the question is, why can't we extend that word, even if you don't accept the fact, even if you want to say that the must is not clear that the text is not clear about those who are there and those who are on the way? But the point is the principle is in place that HUD can be suspended hat can be suspended? Yeah, a penal law can be suspended, based on based on what based on the fact that there is still up in the contract condition in the contract. And it's not a bottle shot. It's not a full stop is the

00:04:53--> 00:04:59

contract still stands. You see, this is the farmer This is the fruit that we get from that. Now, someone may disagree with this, and I know there are

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

disagreements in the scholarly circles. I know he hasn't had a completely different opinion to this, he said this is only applicable to the professor Selim and so on. There is definitely a difference of opinion, scope of opinion here. But this is the opinion that I follow. This is the opinion that I follow. I think this is the the best opinion. And also, not only that, but the most reasonable one for our times, especially considering the fact that there's an American hegemonic power. And we have to understand with the American hegemonic power, and what do you think you can do? What do you think you can do honestly, as a Muslim nation like Brunei, also, something else you can't do? much so it's

00:05:33--> 00:05:40

actually dollarized. necessity anyway, I mean, this is a point of necessity. And as we know, as will fit $1, to be a lot.

00:05:41--> 00:06:01

The necessity is allows that which is otherwise not allowed, anyway, I mean, otherwise not allowed, in ways to control the country. And the law is to be measured with its appropriate level of measurement. In other words, you don't go overboard, you do as much as you need to do. But this clearly, in the 21st century, where someone might say,

00:06:03--> 00:06:30

someone might say, well, how, how is the Sharia meant to be implemented, really, on the state level on the on the level of the state? We, when really, we're considering the hydraulic power of the America, America and the West and so on. What I'm saying is that there's, there's room for compromise. And this is the point guys listen carefully. The reason why the Mohammed Al Salam was who he was, the reason why the Prophet Muhammad wa sallam was who he was, because he knew when to fight, and he knew when to compromise.

00:06:31--> 00:06:39

And not only who went to fight and went to compromise, how to fight, and how to compromise and with whom to fight and with whom to compromise.

00:06:40--> 00:06:44

If you know in life, who to fight, how to fight, and when to fight,

00:06:46--> 00:07:03

how to compromise, with whom to compromise, and how to compromise, you will be successful. That's why even from a secular paradigm, even from a secular paradigm, yeah, you have to admit that the Prophet Mohammed Al Salam has become a cliche now like hot appointments, number one of the most influential people in the world.

00:07:04--> 00:07:22

But the point is, you have to admit that he was militarily successful, you have to admit that he was absolutely military, and why was he militarily successful? Because he made the right decisions. You can't be a military success by making frivolous and capricious and arbitrary ad hoc type decisions you can't.

00:07:23--> 00:07:28

And so that when the shooter allows all of these things that we've just mentioned, bring us a hadith.

00:07:30--> 00:07:31

Allah, Quran, Hadith

00:07:32--> 00:07:55

with the textual evidence of Quran, Hadith, I believe it's upon us as Muslims actually, to present the Sharia with the full scope of those nuances. Because when someone says, For example, well, what you know, would you want this killing of apostates and the look, we're talking about 21st century, if the prophets are solemn, within a span of his own life, was able to make compromises Yes, he was able to make compromises.

00:07:56--> 00:08:09

Subhan Allah, on such issues on such issues, while we were 21st century we can't we can't even use the scope of the jurisprudential maneuverability to make such compromises as well. And this is clearly in the deed.

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

So

00:08:11--> 00:08:41

we have to remember, we're living in a time of necessity, we are living in a time of Bharara and the dean came to protect five things. Okay, the five things that they didn't come to protect was the dean, the article, you know, sorry, the dean, the, the neffs, the article that Mel and I held that the religion, the dean came to protect the religion, the self, human, human self, yeah. The wealth of the individuals. The, what do you call it?

00:08:42--> 00:09:13

The aka the intelligence of the individual. And finally, they have the honor of the individual. So we always have to assess these five things. Yeah, in conjunction with what we're doing. It's not always Oh, you bring a hadith you have to bring a hadith in the context of what would the life what's the point? what's the what's the point of view, bringing me a hadith member? dellavedova Cthulhu? What's the point of view bring me to a different actually, there's context to that Hadith. And there's other Hadith, and there's other situations, what's the point of view bringing me the Hadees that whoever changed the deen that killed them? Yeah, the Hadith is there. And if it's not

00:09:13--> 00:09:24

luck, because if it says luck, and then whoever comes Muslims could be killed as well. So clearly, you have to understand the Hadith. there because if it was General, then whoever whoever changes his religion, meaning a Christian become Muslim, I'm gonna kill him.

00:09:25--> 00:09:59

Clearly this context behind that, and that's why you have to understand these are these are the these things. In the end, when we're given answers, we have to be measured. Listen, we have to be measured, because these people are looking for some wild answer that make us look backward and make Islam look at impossible religion for the 21st century, which isn't because we have all sorts of fit, we have parameters we have collide, and so on and so forth. And so with that, I leave the evidences and I put it also something of imagelist Kalani where he mentioned that the the treaty that you can put in place is Lucha de la is

00:10:00--> 00:10:34

huddle, which means it can be up until whatever you like. It's not just like or someone can say it's time bound. It's not time bound. Imagine himself says, it can continue for forever. So I've done that in 10 minutes, check the tweets out if you understand if you don't, but I've pulled the sources there. And clearly, we're not. So we're not trying to reinvent something. We're not trying to reinvent something. This is all within the dean or within the framework. And that's what we want to understand. And in fact, one more thing I want to leave with you a shout, Toby mentioned that when you have collide, yeah, it's actually more heavy than Hades, because collide is made up of many

00:10:34--> 00:10:52

different countries. So when I say I've done a lot to be home a lot, that the admission times of necessity, yeah, allows that which is hella Haram, make it happen. That's, that's deeper and more of an evidence, then you bring in single Hadees because it's made up of many different

00:10:53--> 00:11:14

evidences, that's how you have to think now, you can't just think oh, he's had he's had this you have to think Hawaii principles, principles, principles. And then the head is the head is makeup all them make up the principle rather than the opposite. And so the principles are, in many according to shot to be even even more powerful than the Hadees because they're made up of many of them, which is often psychoanalytic again.