Mohammed Hijab – Extreme Scholar Veneration in Anomalous Opinions

Mohammed Hijab
AI: Summary © The speakers discuss the history and use of sharia as reference points for enemies of Islam. The use of sharia is a de realizing mistake and a reference point for against-shiping events. The "monkey's" use in women's clothing is a false statement and may not be true. The Northernity of the deen and the Hubble w converse are also discussed.
AI: Transcript ©
00:00:00 --> 00:00:45

salaam aleikum wa rahmatullah wa barakato. I just made just wanted to make this video really as a quick response. First of all, to give a slight justification for doing why I'm doing, the reason why it's important as Muslims to realize there's a difference between the Sharia and phip, Sharia washy, and fifth, which is an attempt to understand it, and not to equate not to equate the two, or the opinion of a scholar of Islam with the Sharia as a whole, because this would be an egregious equivalence and egregious equivalence is because this is one of the easiest model entry points for enemies of Islam, to attack Islam to take one isolated opinion of a scholar, whether they are

00:00:45 --> 00:01:32

classical or contemporary, and to try and generalize Islam. With that opinion. This is a very segmented and decontextualized way of dealing with Islam. And in fact, we found quite egregious and problematic, was in this supposed refutation video the linking of shelburn his opinion, with Ibn taymiyyah his opinion and even with all my heart and what means opinion, I shall dwell on her herself. As I'm going to explain now, there is no equivalence to the detail and presentation of shall Bernie in his fat sweat with any fetlar of Ibn taymiyyah a show County, let alone on what happened what meaning my mother of the believers, I shall de la Juana, which is exactly what these

00:01:32 --> 00:02:14

Shia, anti Islamic, Shia are doing and these anti Islamic apologists are doing. And you're arming them with this by telling them that actually what al Bernie is saying when he's saying sucking the * directly is what Aisha is saying, You are giving the shot exactly what they want to hear. Because you have tasks sub to your chef, you have a cleaning and an allegiance your share, which is extremely unhealthy. Number one, completely an Islamic and totally unjustifiable. You should first of all stay in your lane with all due respect, because this is not something which you need to get involved in. Frontline dowel work should be left to those who are on the frontlines. Point number

00:02:14 --> 00:02:15

one. Point number two is this.

00:02:17 --> 00:03:10

Let me ask you a question in the 14 minutes that you had talking about an advantage fatwah? Why did you conveniently Why did you conveniently circumnavigate? Why did you convene the MIT? Why did you conveniently completely avert the point? Well, Bernie himself he mentioned specifically about the * of the woman sucking directly from the * of the woman and saying Leanna who is not Moulton or mo Dasha, it's not a an object of desire, because it's so that Leanna who saw that, then so that politeama, this Tell me where this has ever been said before, even including even hasm, who have already agreed has a similar opinion to El vanny. By any body in Islamic history. Tell me one

00:03:10 --> 00:03:51

person, this is a challenge. Tell me I would like to know for my own growth, and please, honestly, tell me one person in Islamic history, who has said exactly what Bernie is saying, which is to say that the reason why you can suck from the teeth directly from the * directly is because it is gloomy. Yes, and black. Now here's why we'd like to ask another probing question. And please remember those questions and answer those questions. Do not run away from those questions, because you want it to defend the shear as if the shear has no mistakes, as if the shear is monsoon. Since you wanted to go down that route. I'm very happy to ask you these questions. The second question I

00:03:51 --> 00:04:25

would like to ask. The second question I would like to ask is, is this idea of Hackman? In other words, the fact that the breast or the * in particular is black or gloomy, dark Yanni? The fact that this is so and that the shock waves not they're coming out and as much as he said, as husbands No. Is it hokhmah? Or ala? It is, is it wisdom? Or is it causative reasoning? Now if it is wisdom, so if it is causal reasoning, if

00:04:26 --> 00:04:59

so, can it be murky, Sally? In other words, can you now expand that to the whole breast? Can the whole breast a black breast, or dark or gloomy or black breast? Is this now deplete of OSHA? Is it not molten Scheffler anymore? Because of the fact that it's that black? Because this is lambda? So that so I'm asking, do you understand that from the column of the ship and if so, is it Allah because if when you have Li n, there's only two things we cannot know as you're doing tally of some sorts, either Tallinn of the hekima or italianmoda, Allah lateralis Allahumma so

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

Have you taken by then Allah has inherently created something ugly or lack of shower and attractive doesn't have to do with ugly doesn't have shack Well, you doesn't cause a man to to have desires because of its blackness or darkness. Are you willing to defend the statement of shall Bernie and say this is not a first of all, it's a justifiable statement. And it was not a mistake. So my first question was for you to get any scholar in Islamic history, 4400 years, who has used the same tallien and the same justifications using the darkness or the blackness of the *, that's number one, your job at Kindle buy in at Alamo die? number one. Number two is what I come with name that

00:05:42 --> 00:06:00

you now tell me? Do you condone or condemn? Do you allow? do you justify? Or do you see that there's no justification? Do you consider a mistake or not? make it very clear for you people do consider it a mistake or not? that the reason why

00:06:02 --> 00:06:43

the * according to Bernie is not molten or molded shapleigh desire is because it is black or dark. Do you agree or disagree? Please, please, I'm not saying this brothers in order to attack you or do her job on you. But since you have opened the parent or the kind of ones, it's very, it's very befitting that we we end this properly. Now, if you say I agree, then Okay, we can have a conversation based on that. If you say, we disagree, we can have a conflict. But you must answer this question, since you have opened the Pandora's box and you have opened a can of worms, and really bravas will I add that I want to go into this? You know, I think this kind of back and forth

00:06:43 --> 00:07:27

is unnecessary. But the underlying important kleider to note is this. The important principle to know for the Muslims is this scholars make mistakes and the acquire of the Allah that should not and could not be defended for 1500 years, or even we don't need to represent 1400 years of what the * can of Islam have done? We can't really defend all of that in there. Now we defend the Quran and the Sunnah. And we do defend the self as an ismar. Or sometimes the Sahaba can make a mistake. So all of those things is our Deen. We have to be able to differentiate between the deen and the scholars of the Dean was Salam Alaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh

Sh Al-Albani Adult Breastfeeding Case Study

Share Page

Related Episodes