Mohammed Hijab – Intellectual Seerah #17 Battle of Khaybar
AI: Summary ©
The importance of managing one's excitement and fear in order to achieve success in life is discussed, along with the history of " Free Mixing" and the controversy surrounding " Free Mixing" and "naughty man" in the umber. The best actions are the most middle ones and the best actions are the most middle ones. The confusion surrounding the origin of the term "naughty man" and the use of the Hadith in the past, along with the actions of the Iranian president, are also discussed. The speaker argues that the best actions are the most middle ones and that the best actions are the most middle ones.
AI: Summary ©
How are you guys doing? And welcome to
this new session
of the intellectuals here. We're going to be
talking about Haibar, one of the key events.
Actually, very topical and political event because it's
been used in some of the protests
In, the pro Palestine protest,
actually been referred to as anti Semitic, interestingly
enough,
by the British, police interestingly.
The Metropolitan Police considered the sloganeering of
some of the guys as as an anti
Semitic slogan. So it's topical from that perspective.
Obviously, it's another,
you could say the final chapter of the
relationship between
the Jews, if you like, or a subsection
of the Jewish society and Muhammad and the
Muslim people in general.
And we'll be doing as we do usually,
employing the interdisciplinary
approach,
to try and understand some of the issues
at hand.
And we will be talking about some psychology,
a little bit of history, and opening up
the floor for some questions and answers and
discussions and facilitation
of all of that. So
actually before I, begin with that, there's, if
you see the slides,
there's a few incidents and issues which don't
fit neatly into any of the particular
topics. So for example, we spoke about, we
spoke about, we spoke about, but there are
some issues in the Sira which I came
across. A lot of the Sira people of
the English speaking type speaking about and using
it as a kind of istidlal, as a
kind of
evidence making.
And I thought it would be interesting to
mention them. One of them is the incident
of the praying of some Christians in the
mosque. Okay. So there is a waya. There
is a hadith
which says that there were some Christians that
came
and that they were allowed to pray
in the mosque of the prophet.
And I've seen many of the contemporary Sira
people embellish this and say, well, this shows
that Islam is a very tolerant religion and
this wouldn't be allowed today. And if someone
tried to do it today,
then, they would be shunned and so on.
But then I did a bit of research
myself on this incident and found
that, unfortunately,
there is no Sahih Hadith of such an
incident taking place. In fact, Ibrahim here mentions,
and I've mentioned I've copied and pasted exactly
what he says.
He says, well, I'm
and so on and so forth. He says
he he only found such and such of
this particular
person,
and it's not, effectively a strong hadith. So
to try and build a Jewish prudential case
that, okay, it's okay for polytheistic practices to
be
effectively. Because you're saying Christians and Jews or
maybe policies or Hindus can come and pray
their own prayer in the mosque, Then you're
you're effectively saying
that, you you know, policyism can be done
in the mosque. What what a
big claim to be making and using the
seerah and the weak sila to try and
make that claim was very unsubstantiated,
very unusual.
There are some prolific and,
you know, scholarly type or academic type,
people would make this case. But it seems
to be
part and parcel of the apologetic approach, the
capitulationist
approach, the accommodationist approach, that many of the
people would use
in order to try and say Islam is
a very tolerant religion,
and that we've got it all wrong. And
this is one side of the extreme.
And there's a very, very clear verse in
the Quran, Suraj.
The
the
for Allah. So do not call any other
than Allah,
in the Masjid.
So, I mean, to to bring a weak
hadith, to try and make a case that,
okay, some Christians can pray in the masjid
and do their own ritualistic, polytheistic practices.
I think this is more indicative of cultural
decay and weakening of the Muslim community in
the western world that the accommodationist approach
than anything else.
But having said this,
we go
and and once again, this is these are
some things that are not necessarily mentioned in
any of the
topics,
but I just thought I'd mention this.
Another
interesting thing is the story of Tholmeiman. Now
we don't have the
opportunity here because it would discove what we're
trying to do to discuss the story of
Tholmeiman. But I think at some point, we
should mention the story of Thamama. There was
also a very interesting discussion
of the daughter of the prophet Muhammad Sallallahu
Alaihi Salam, Zaynah Bint Mohammed.
And Abu As, okay, who was her husband,
and obviously he was a husband,
who was not Muslim.
And at one point she gave him a
man.
A man is the idea of giving security
to someone, who is not Muslim,
which is a very interesting concept.
But it shows a lot actually, because in
that particular con context,
you have a woman here, okay, which is
the daughter of the prophet Muhammad,
giving security and a man
to
a man is this idea of security. And
therefore, you have the idea from it which
comes which is almost step in. You have
3 categories of
disbelievers or or 3 categories of, ways in
which you would deal with disbelievers in a
Muslim state. One of them is the.
And the
and then the Mustapman or Mustapman. I've heard
them say we we pronounced, in both ways,
Mustapman, Mustapman. I don't know which one is
there. Maybe both are correct.
I don't know. Mustapman or mustapman. Should be
mustapman. Maybe mustapman. Given given it could
be.
Anyway,
these are 3 categories. One of them within
me is a person who has to pay
the tax,
which maybe we'll talk about one day, the
jizya tax and it's very they say it's
a discriminatory
tax. Well, I I don't know why it's
such a discriminatory tax. It's just a tax
that the people have to pay.
It's not as a because
it doesn't purify the wealth. We don't consider
anything
unless it's done for Allah's sake to be
purifying because the word zakat come from the
idea of purification.
It doesn't purify anyone's wealth, but it's a
kind of tax that they is levied in
exchange for protection.
But on the point, you have the dhimmi
who pays this tax and then is is
given security by the Muslims.
And then you have the or
the. You see the person who does that
or some kind of a treaty between which
you mentioned already. And then you have the
or
the or this idea
that,
this person is being given a man or
a security. You'll find in many of the
tribal cultures especially in Pashto cultures.
You can correct me if I'm wrong, you
guys are much more learned and and, aware
of this than me.
But, one of the issues of
Osama bin Laden and why he was given
security is because when these Pashtoos give their
word of security,
it's not gonna happen. No one's gonna go
against that. It'll be seen as completely dishonorable.
And so countries can go to war on
basis.
Basically, that, you know, this person's given security
by these other people.
And so the the tribal code, and this
continues, you know, until this day of giving
security,
the idea of giving security to someone
is a very important, thing.
And we'll be speaking about this maybe in
this context as well. But it's interesting that
Zaynab Bint Mohammed, who was the daughter of
the prophet who was married at the time
because the had been done
before Islam,
before, before the rulings had to come down,
to a disbeliever. She gave this man, protection
and so no one could harm him. You
see, this is a very interesting thing and
they got the idea from that. And we
also have some other rulings
of some contemporaries,
that some say, I mean, this is very
shared and aberrational opinion that if someone gets
into Islam
and that let's say for example, a woman,
a Christian woman, and a Muslim man are
married.
Yeah. And, sorry, a Christian woman and a
Christian man are married. Yeah.
And then the woman becomes Muslim.
So some This splinter group of scholars,
some of the contemporary scholars have said, this
shows you that it's still possible for the
niqah to be continued
even if, yes,
even if the man is Christian.
So they have this very I would call
it very aberrational view. But they use this
you should you should be aware. They use
this story
of Zainab
Bint Mohammed and Abu As as a way
to justify this. But even those people, they
don't say that you can do Ibtidan,
which you you can't they would never say
that a Muslim woman can marry
a Christian man from the beginning and the
account would not be valid. But she they're
talking about a very specialized context and they
use this story.
But it seems to me that this is
a very mardooled and rejected opinion,
and, it's extremely isolated, I mean. But you
should know the story about that.
But to give this as an, as a
as
a as a kind of Jewish prudential reasoning,
it's something you should be aware of. This
isn't a fit class, and I'm certainly not
going to go into details about that. I'm
just making you aware of certain things, but
I think it's still important for you to
be aware of certain things. But if this
was an acceptable opinion, then it would have
been shared among many different people across the
centuries of 1,400 years. It wouldn't be something
which only a few people here and there
would be talking about.
So these are just very some, very important.
The story of the Theban is important because
it shows you a man who became Muslim
due
to the behaviors of the prophet Muhammad salallahu
alayhi wasalam.
Like, he just observed the prophet Muhammad, and
he saw because of his,
his virtues, and his behavior,
his generosity, his forbearance, his magnanimity, all of
these things that positive things that we've spoken
about before, he observed that and then he
became Muslim on his own volition due to
observing that. Once again, that's something we may
cover at some time. These are some important
things in.
On the point,
today we're gonna be speaking about, and there's
a difference of opinion among the scholars of
when this took place. Is it the 6
is it 6 a h, or was it
7 a h? So maybe it's 1 or
the other. I don't I don't know, to
be honest with you. Some say this and
some say that, but either way, it's either
6 or 7.
And, of course, Haibar is a place in
present day Saudi Arabia.
And it's a big place in terms of
geographic land mass kind of proximity.
It's it's got big land mass. It's probably
even bigger. The Medina really, if you think
about it. If you think about the
proximity, not now because now Medina has been
expanded,
has become a massive city. Yeah, Yani. If
you've been there, you you know what I'm
talking about. But at the time of the
prophet Muhammad,
it was probably going to be bigger. And
it, you know, was inhabited by these Jewish
tribes. Some even Bernu Nadir,
and Bernu Kenuka went there and spent some
time there as well. It was a place
which had a lot of date palm trees,
and therefore had a lot of produce, and
therefore had a lot of money being, generated.
Okay?
And you should be aware also that these
people of Haibar, the Jews of Haibar did
not have
a peace treaty with the Muslims.
It's very important. You know, when the Medina
Constitution took place, the meet it it included,
and,
I believe. But it did not it did
not include these, people at all, in Haibar.
The the Jews in Haibar, they did,
in fact, they were complicit
and, co collaborators,
in the Azab
war, which we spoke about. So they were
assisting. Obviously, they have a Jewish connection,
and they wanted to assist
the Jews of Benoit Baraydah. They wanted to
help them and so on and so forth.
And so they were complicit.
As a result of this hostile behavior
that we have now witnessed,
and that these the proximity between Medina and
Haibar, I don't know, maybe 90 kilometers,
maybe a 100 kilometers, something like that, which
means on a horse, maybe about 3 hours
or something to get there, maybe 4 hours.
It's not that far away actually.
2, 3 hours, I don't know, you know,
something like this, maybe 3, 4 hours
Or or a camel, maybe tooth. I don't
know how it works, but yeah, you can
see. And by car, maybe it'll take an
hour.
You know, something like that.
But the point is
that the decision was taken, that there would
be a strike,
a retaliatory strike
on the people of Haibar.
Okay? There'll be a strike. Now the way
Haibar was constructed
was it wasn't just like this one united
front and that you have, you know, the
army and so on. No. It was mini
fortresses.
So you had 1 fortress, 2nd fortress, 3rd
fortress, and all these people
were protected within their own fortress.
And you may have, like, dozens of people
in each fortress.
So the the war took place. It was
actually a series of war. Now very interesting
is
in Surah Al Fath, which we already covered,
Allah mentions
that you'll be given a lot of provisions.
You'll be given a lot of produce, little
provisions, and so on. And Allah will make
this quick for you. He'll expedite that for
you.
And the majority opinion among the professors, the
exegetes on this ayah, is that it's not
talking about Fat Hamakah, which we're going to
discuss
in the lesson after next. But it's talking,
in fact,
about Haibal itself.
That when
is saying that there will be a great
victory, a great victory which will give you
this,
a lot of produce and so on, is
talking about this thing that happened.
Now,
let's get controversial a little bit maybe because
we've spoken about
we've spoken about some of the the basic
facts.
Let's explain
because someone is going to be thinking, okay,
this is the 3rd time,
or in fact, maybe even the 4th time
we've spoken about
and you've spoken about
and you spoke about
and now you're speaking about the Jews of.
There are 4 clashes
in the
between Muslims and Jews
that we can see, that we can identify.
Now, there has been we now have to
start putting our interpretation hats
on, and start being honest with ourselves, and
saying why is this happening?
They're not There needs to be some kind
of explanation mechanism.
Because someone will say, look, this is a
Islam is a hostile religion clearly.
It's attacking the Jews at every opportunity it
finds.
Look at this. It cannot be a coincidence.
Well, let's look at it from another perspective.
Very interesting. There is a concept referred to
as the narcissism of small difference.
Others refer to it as the narcissism of
minor difference. Okay.
And this is a psychoanalytic
precept.
And the idea is when you have a
people that are more close to each other,
there are some differences,
there's more likely to be clash.
So if you find, for example, in early
Christianity,
you'll find that, you know, the Aryan controversy
or something, or Catholics and protestants. I mean,
Catholics and Protestants, if you know anything about
European history, they had some of the most
* wars
against each other, more so than wars with
other people.
Shias and Sunnis. I mean, not as much
as the Catholics and Protestants. Actually, no comparison
whatsoever.
But compared I mean, there are we wouldn't
consider them to be big difference compared to
the atheist, for example, or Christians. There's more
similarities that we have than do you know
what I mean?
And the same thing could be said with
Judaism and Islam. Of all the religions on
the face of the Earth, isn't it interesting
that the 2 probably most closely related religions
are Judaism and Islam?
Yet, you'll find most problems between these two
groups.
Now, why is that the case? It's because,
I mean, if you are looking at it
from a psychoanalytic perspective,
when you have people of a similar belief
system, but there are some clear differences.
Psych psychologists like Freud, by the way, and
I've gotten something here for you to read,
would refer to this as the,
the narcissism of small differences. The differences are
seen as big, even though they may be
small compared to
other things, other other for example, comparisons. Like,
compare Islam on Judaism on the one hand
and Islam policies, and which one has bigger
chasms and greater disparities? Obviously, the latter.
So
that can be a way of for example,
if you're a Jewish,
kind of, I don't know if you wanna
call it,
clergy or,
political leaders or even,
cultural leaders.
And you're seeing this new religion, you you
consider it to be new religion, which is
speaking about Moses, is speaking about Abraham, is
speaking about Noah, is speaking about all the
things that you know. It's even refer it's
it's referring to them specifically.
You know, there's no other religion that speaks
about Jews as much as Islam and refers
to Jews in as much in the same
way as Islam
in the in the primary text. Not even
Christianity does,
which is interesting because of continuation.
You see? So the point is is what
I'm trying to say
is, then you're seeing this other religion now
is acting as a competitor.
And just like somebody
is more likely
to be jealous of their own,
let's call it brother.
Sisters are more likely to be jealous of
each other.
Co wives are more likely to be jealous
of each other. Brothers,
Yusuf and the brothers, for example, could be.
People of the same race are more likely
to be jealous and angry with each other
cousins.
Why? Because it's like there's direct lines of
comparison.
So you are you're competing with me on
my ground.
You're competing with me for for example, the
love of my mother and father.
You're competing with me from the validation of
the community.
You'll see certain people, black on black crime,
for example.
Why? What's going on? It's because you're in
the same category.
It can you can feel jealous. Those go,
oh, the Arabs are killing each other. Why?
Maybe it's because they were Kuwait and Iraq.
I don't know this. Or has to be
as us. And it could be anything.
But sometimes when you're in the same category,
like dentists, if you're a dentist, okay, You're
more likely to be jealous with another dentist.
If you're if you're a doctor, you're more
likely to be if you're a alim, Islamic
alim, you're more likely to be jealous and
resentful and competitive with but if you're now
competing for religious market share,
then you're more likely
to be jealous and resentful
of people who are competing with new,
market share.
So it's you can employ
psychoanalytic
approaches
to the behaviors of some of the Jewish
Jewish tribes
and reactions to Islam.
And you could use this idea of the
narcissism of small difference
as an idea as to why were they
so hostile?
Why were they continually collaborating?
We wouldn't say, and this is where it
does. Someone could say, well, you're trying to
be anti Semitic again. So we're not saying
this because of their biology.
We're not saying any of that. We're just
saying this is a natural way that anybody
from any
background will respond. And this is, in fact,
backed by some kind of psychology.
So that's one way of doing it.
To get even more
controversial,
one could say another way of doing it
is because of Jewish supremacy theology. And we've
already spoken about this. And just to remind
you of this,
is
we've mentioned this man, rabbi Schneerson.
And just to remind you of what he
said, he said, all creation including the heavens
and the earth are vanity compared to the
Jews.
And you got rabbi Ovaida Yusuf. He says
the purpose of the Goy, which is the
Gentiles,
the purpose of the Goy
is to serve the Jews.
He asked the questions, why
are the Jew among Jews created? Because it's
it's a very bewildering him. He doesn't understand
the rabbi.
Why
non Jews were created? Why the black man
was created? Why the Chinese man was created?
The Arab man. The per the Persian man,
the Kurdish man, the whatever man, the Turkish
man. Why were these people even created? Because
he was one day thinking whether he was
eating his,
kosher food and drinking his dress, I think.
And he's probably thinking to himself,
why are these people even here?
Yeah. Ali, let's be honest. This is what
you're thinking.
And this is one of the big big
rabbis. I'm not saying, okay. Well, all rabbis
are like this or Jews, but this is
what he said.
Don't take it up with me. This is
one of your big big shots.
And when you say, why were these guys
created?
It couldn't be because they wanted to Allah
wanted to test them and to see if
they were gonna do good deeds or bad
deeds. Couldn't be the reason purpose of life
for this guy.
It couldn't be because they Yani, to to
make the best of of themselves and to
see how much of the potential
they could,
they could realize. Couldn't be with these reasons.
But in fact,
the reason why these were people were created
is that they plow and they will reap.
Honey? And we will sit like an effendi,
and we will eat. So I told you
this guy was eating something.
Say, oh, the food is here. It must
somebody must have made it for me.
And it's for those guys to make it.
For those servants to make my food, my
sandwich.
You're telling me
that this,
idea
was not present
in the past?
Nani, let's be honest with each other for
a second, Yani. This is a strand of
Jewish opinion.
This is an interpretation
of Judaism.
This is Jewish theology
supremacy.
Now let's be honest with you. We know
that it's I didn't bring bring to you
the quotes of the Old Testament and the
quotes from the Talmud. I could do that,
and it will be an entire session on
justice.
I could bring all the quotes of this.
I didn't bring I brought to you the
quotes of the rabbis
so that you can't say, well, you're misinterpreting
it. It's not my interpretation. It's the interpretation
of your top dogs.
Your top dogs.
Your big ones.
This is their interpretation.
They are saying this.
So are you telling me in the past,
they didn't have this belief?
Okay. Let's think about it. You had the
enlightenment period. You have the renaissance. You have
the enlightenment. You had all this. You have
liberalism proliferating throughout the world.
You have all of this.
Did things
do you think now are things diluted
or are things
not diluted? Do you think liberalism?
Now we know that the dominant world order
is liberalism. Would that dilute some of this
propaganda or some of these talking points? Would
it not? I think it would dilute it.
It's wrong
for you to say this. Racism is seen
as wrong now after in the west and
and
and everywhere, most in the world. Most of
parts of the world, racism is seen as
wrong. So to say stuff like that, which
is clearly racist.
Of course, you're gonna hide this, which is
why you'll find mostly the sources that these
things I found them from are Hebrew sources,
which I've translated
for your convenience.
Because what said in Hebrew is not usually
what said in English, because there's 2 kinds
of discussions, 2 kinds of discourses. What you'll
see in Hebrew is much more flagrant, much
more wild. They can say what he wants,
and they all laugh in the room. Not
all the Jews, I believe this, of course.
But I'm saying the ones in the room
who followed these rabbis, they're laughing. Yes. We
agree. Of course. A slave. You think that
I'm meant to be like this Arab?
In present day, Israel is the most racist
country in the world, but at least it's
a contender for it.
Present day Israel.
Do you think here's a question.
Does this kind of discourse from the top
leading rabbis in the world today,
does it feed into that racism or does
it not feed into that racism?
This is a question for the people.
How so?
This is a question for the people.
Do you think that if this is thing
are things people are saying now?
And we have all these Talmudic quotes, which
are we we spoken about at another time,
and we can speak about it.
But that wouldn't feed into
why someone would feel hostile towards other people.
Of course.
Look at the depiction, for example, of Ishmael
in the old testament.
As a homework,
in your own time,
he's referred to as wild.
I think it's a wild donkey even.
Dehumanized.
Why? Because he's the father of whom?
The Arabs.
You can't have a prophet
that comes from another
race.
It has to be from our people.
And this is what the Jewish supremacy theologians
and proponents would say.
This is why there was such hostility. In
fact, we have primary source
information.
Sophia bintahoye, and we'll cover this. Her ex
husband,
when Sophia had the dream that the prophet,
she
had a dream the moon would come to
her lap or something in her husband.
He interpreted that as there'll be a king
of the Arabs, who you're going to be
with. He couldn't accept it, and he started
attacking her physically,
because he understood.
How could it be that it comes from
these people?
Cannot prophethood cannot come outside of our confines.
They have it has to be us. It
has to be our tribe.
Are you telling me that this, which is
clearly evidence in the Talmud, in the Old
Testament, in the words of the rabbis, are
you telling me we should forget about this
because we're scared to be labeled on Semites?
That this should not be a part and
parcel
of the analysis of why
and and by,
and
acted the ways they acted. Are you telling
me we should completely disband that and not
speak about that?
If you are telling me that, I think
that would be unfair.
I think you I think you're unfair to
say this.
I think we should reject such a thing.
So when people ask, oh, well, why is
the prophet,
acting like this with these people,
With these Jewish supremacy theologians.
Zionism
was a If you're saying a Zionism, then
a Zionism was in 18, 1900. I'm not
saying it's only Zionism. I'm saying it's also
Jewish supremacy theology,
which predates Zionism by 1000 of years.
And Zionism incorporates parts of that, even though
some some Zionists
might not even be religious.
They may be
secularists. They may be atheists. But for some
reason, they've still incorporated this idea that the
special and the chosen, and everyone else is
going and gentile and servant.
And, of course, if you think that,
even the studies that are done on narcissism,
one of the studies that I looked at
was I read, don't ask me why, but
I've read multiple books on narcissism.
I've read multiple books
on it.
The study say that when you're always told
that you're right, that you don't have any
corrective parents,
your parents think about this.
Studies show that if you don't have parents
that tell you're wrong from time to time,
you're wrong. That you're always mollycoddling them this
and that, you're more likely to have what
they call narcissistic traits.
Now
I don't like just as a caveat and
as a tangent, I don't like the way
modern people talk about narcissism.
It's almost become it's too subjective.
And especially in the context of relationships, I
think sometimes it's too loosely used. That is
something we'll speak about in different time.
But this point, I think still holds, which
is that
imagine now, not only do you have a
parent that's telling you always right, your God
is telling you you're always right. No matter
what you are because of who you are,
not because of your actions.
It removes you of individual responsibility.
Any action
that removes you of individual responsibility
is an action that it will
grant you or will,
entrench and embed within you this idea of
entitlement.
And what is entitlement?
Most definitions I've ever come across in psychology
of the word entitlement
is that where you believe that you deserve
special treatment without cause or reason.
And that is exactly Jewish Theology
Supremacism.
Jewish supremacy theology.
That is it. That you are right on
the basis not of what you do, but
on the basis of who you are.
Now some will object to say, well, that's
not what we believe. We're Jews. We don't
believe in this. I say, I'm not generalizing.
I'm not saying all Jews believe in that.
I'm not saying even all Jews believe in
Judaism.
We know that some Jews are atheists.
They're ethnic Jews only.
We know all of that.
But I am saying that this must be
considered.
And this, of course, you're going to object.
But I don't care about you object. You
can
object. You can object. You can object. You
can interrogate. You can say, this is there.
This is something we have to speak about
here.
We have to mention this.
Anyway, we'll continue.
Also, don't forget that there was, you know,
the Jewish tribes
had a political
kind of,
they had a political placement
in the Arabian world. Now you have a
different it's a political struggle as well. Even
then, it's a political struggle.
So the the religious I items and I
ideas were intertwined with the political ones. So
that's another way of,
of looking at it. This is images of
Haibar
excavated. I actually wanted you to
see what it would look like.
Now, let's have a break and have a
discussion. The question open the thing is, what
do you think the reason?
Now we've covered all of the interactions between
the Muslims and the some of the Jewish
tribes.
In your opinion
in your opinion, and this is gonna be
easy, and I'll let you speak to the
person next to you for 5 minutes.
What do you think the reasons may be
Considering all the factors we've mentioned
of some of these clashes between some of
the Jews and some of the Muslims.
We'll come back in 5 minutes.
Okay. So let's have a feedback,
session.
The question, just to remind everybody was, we've
seen all these clashes between some of the
Jewish groups
and some of the and the Muslims.
Of all the different explanations
that we have spoken about, which one for
you is most convincing and why?
So let's start
with,
with Yeah. Go ahead. Yes. Yeah. What do
you think?
I would definitely say the,
they had a lot in common as you
said. So they were both monotheistic
faiths.
But there was a difference where the Muslims
were evangelizing people. And I think,
to some of them they were scared that
they would lose Jewish followers. So I think
that's an excellent point actually. Yeah. That's And
they did lose some Jewish followers. Does anyone
know some of the names of some prominent
Jewish people that
became Muslim?
Married.
Okay. So that's an excellent one. We're gonna
speak about Sofia.
Right? Okay. So she's definitely one of them,
but, who else?
Abdul.
Who? Yeah. Yeah. Beautiful. Yeah. Good example. Who
else?
The guy who
converted and then died on the same day,
this Khaybar. And what what was his name?
Was he Jewish? Yeah. He converted. Oh, yes.
Yes. He was Jewish, his name. Yeah. Can
you find his name? I forget. Yeah.
Yes. Who else?
In fact, I mean, this is mentioned in
Quran multiple times. May maybe 2 2 or
3 times. I cannot remember how many times,
but
it says
That
this is a chronic question that,
say,
Imagine the Surah Al Aqaf chapter 46 that
say, imagine if this was from Allah, and
then you've disbelieved in it.
And someone, one of the witnesses from Benny
Israel,
has
said of his truth this this truth.
And for Amana, he believed was stuck part
of him, and you became haughty and arrogant
about the situation.
And the same sort
says, they
were is very interesting way of thinking about
it. It shows
the entitlement psychology of some of the Jewish
supremacists, ideal ideologies, and propagandists.
Quran is showing you this.
That if it was good, there is no
way these people would have known about it
before we.
Can you see what Allah is telling you
here in the Quran?
He's saying, if they're they're saying,
yeah, if there was if this is a
good thing, there's no way these people
would have come to it before you.
Some of that entitlement thinking.
We are the ones who are the heads
of civilization. We are the ones with the
book. We are the ones with Moses. We
are the ones with compendiums
of talmudic
inscriptions and,
encyclopedias
and so on and so forth.
We are those. How could these people,
backwards
people,
ever have something of that
value and worth before us? If it was
that good, do you think our community would
not
know of it before
those people?
This is in the Quran.
Yeah.
So, yeah. That's basically,
like for someone, like, for example, if we
would say,
a polytheist to become Muslim,
there's actually a lot they would have to
change slightly.
Like they would have to take out all
the statues out of their houses. They would
need to do changes in their life. Whereas
if a Jew becomes Muslim, there's very little
they have to change.
Other than maybe
pray 5 times a day, you know, like,
there's just a small differences but ideologically
there are very little differences.
And so That's a good thought experiment. If
an if an orthodox Jew became Muslim Yeah.
He would have to learn how to recite
the Quran and,
yeah, I need the fat. He'd be praying
5 times a day rather than 3 in
different times. Yeah. Okay? He's already used to
this.
He's already not eating pork. He's already not
eating most of the things. He already understands
some of the etiquettes. He's already understands, like,
gender relations and stuff and marriage.
Know? In fact, he's gonna be more lenient
now. Yeah. Because now he doesn't the woman
is gonna find it easier to get a
divorce.
Yeah. A kosher food is much more,
meticulously prepared than halal food.
The only difficulty is that they're not gonna
drink Yeah. I mean, because they're allowed to
drink. I'm not sure if you know this,
but you can have wine as a as
a Jew.
You're gonna have more vivid understanding of the
day of judgment. You have a stronger ideology
now as a Muslim than you did as
a Jew of of true belief in God
before you had the belief of, God that
rest and all that. Now you don't have
to have any of those beliefs.
You're gonna see the black man as a
equal to you. Maybe you didn't think that
as a Jewish supremacist. If you you're a
Jew, maybe you did believe that. It depends
on what you believed.
Maybe you'll become a little bit more outgoing,
and maybe, maybe less. I don't know. Depends
on what kind of temperament you have or
what kind of Jew you are. But in
terms of if you're an Orthodox Jew, right,
you already know a lot about
religion and you already know there's a lot
there that you're doing that you'd be doing
as a conservative Muslim. Yeah. It's true. There's
not the only thing they would also have
to change is their view of aisa.
They would be able to adjust. Only the
belief type thing Yeah. And day to day
Yeah. Practical. But it's just because it's such
an easy transition then for a Jew that
they will maybe they were concerned. Like, they
would have preferred if they became polytheists because
no Jews gonna become or can convert to
that, but they would become Muslim. That is
And you don't have to, you know, abstain
from electricity on Saturday. Yeah. For example, that's
something we'd be giving. But maybe we all
do need need to switch off electricity on
that. At least one day, we can I
know it's a bad idea, actually?
No. Honestly, because there's too much screen time,
too much just I think think maybe 2
days a week, you you stay up the
same. No problem. But the the point is
is that there's gonna be things which are
gonna be easier in some aspects, but maybe
I think more more things will be easier
for you. I I don't know. It depends
on how strict you are as an Orthodox
Jew. But now you've got much more, sorry
to say about this, if you're getting married,
you've got many races to choose from.
No? Is this the truth? Yes. If you're
a seeker or a Jew, you have less
races to choose from if you wanna stay
within your religion. As a Muslim, you have
60 Muslim majority countries. You have all this
you can choose whatever you like.
If you're into the black woman, if you're
into the, you know, this one, you're into
that one.
You're black man, if you're a woman, you
can choose. You can enjoy.
You know what? It's true. And but by
the you can go to this country, you
can go to that country, Muslim majority. Oh,
Moscow, Moscow. That was fantastic.
Yeah. So so there will be, I think,
perks, you know, and then we have to
be honest about this. Let's be real. Yeah.
Dunia perks as well as Dunia and of
of course, the.
I mean, you won't be in *. I
mean, that's,
that's the main thing.
Yeah.
It's the first sign. You know,
so there's lots of things. I mean, not
all Jews we believe are going to *
anyway. I mean, of course,
we don't know what what exposure they've had
to Islam and all that kind of thing.
But you see,
that's a really good point. What else,
Sean, what do you wanna say about this?
Well,
I think another point that applies here
well,
it would also be the
entitlement.
Yes.
That's another factor.
If you're,
if you feel like
you should never compromise anything
or everything
has to go your way,
the reality is nothing
Like, there there would be no possible
outcome
in any situation but
conflict and confrontation.
And I think it's certain people,
like, you know, the people say Karens.
It's almost like they're the Karens of the,
of, like, that sort of situation.
Yes.
Yes.
Just to
think about it another way. Why were the
Jewish tribes even there in the first place?
They're waiting for their own prophet to come.
So you can say it's almost,
hatred that it didn't come from them. It
came from the Arabs, and they were expecting
the whole time. So imagine the whole adrenal
pump like our prophets coming. When he comes,
we're going to get all of you. Then
from the prophet comes from the people you
were looking down upon. Yes. So expectations were
fully removed. Then that that maybe built the
hatred. It's that you built up such a
high expectations Mhmm. And then it came from
the people you hated the most. And that
was the ultimate test, isn't it? Because at
the end of the day, he true humility
is to accept the truth wherever it comes
from. Mhmm. I mean, like Azaleh, he mentions
humility. He says the worst kind of
is what the prophet
mentioned. He says,
which
is to
which is to,
not acknowledge the truth, reject the truth,
and
to belittle the people.
Okay. So you have two aspects of what
is because we've we spoke about narcissism.
By the way, this
I read multiple books, and the way they
describe narcissism is is a range.
Now you gotta be careful of this usage
because
especially leftists, they,
leftist, they use this term
in order to attack certain groups in a
certain manner. Be careful of it. Leftists
have used some psychological terms
in a way which is,
it seems academic, which is not.
Like it's not in the it's not in
the
literature.
So beware of it. Like for example, if
a woman's going over a divorce or something
like that, she say my my husband was
a narcissist.
Because it's so easy.
I mean, I've even seen some definitions of
narcissism
as a disagreeable extrovert.
That's that is the minimum that is a
minimum requirement of what it means to be
a narcissist, then we're all finished. I mean,
I'm finished doubly, doubly.
You know?
But I'm saying
that
really the Islamic notion
is not this. The Islamic notion is number
1, it's idea of arrogance,
which is that you reject the truth and
you believe other people. These are the 2
main pillars.
How most psychologists
refer to entitlement, which is a people believing
that they have special
they believe they they require special treatment without
cause or reason, that's the main definition.
That one is not against us. We are
we are for that definition, because they usually
say narcissism requires 4
pillars or 3 pillars.
Grandiosity.
Yes. Which unfortunately,
what if I say this?
Grandiosity,
entitlement, and, lack of empathy.
For example, there's a book I read called,
should I stay or should I go? It's
like a relationship book by Romasi.
And another book, do you know who I
am? I read to I don't know why
I was reading this book. And I wrote
another book I read is called
the narcissist test by doctor Malcolm.
Yeah? I read these books on narcissism, and
it seems to me they're all in agreement
on these three points.
Entitlement,
grandiosity,
and lack
of empathy.
Now, if you think about it, we agreed
lack of empathy is problematic.
But there's also a book by Paul Bloom,
which I find very interesting.
It's called Against Empathy.
I I I agree with his conclusion that
it's not always right to moralize on the
basis of empathy.
Because, for example, and he uses many examples.
He said, for example, let's use the Madeline
McCann. Madeline McCann was a girl that got
lost in New England. Yeah?
Kidnapped, lost, or when she went to Spain
or I don't know what country she went
to, she got lost. White girl. Portugal. Portugal.
Yes.
Now, if the whole country was very sad
about this situation.
Yeah.
Now, I'm giving my own example, but this
is the thing that Paul Bloom mentions, which
is that, when you empathize and you moralize
on the base of your empathy,
then you can, over exaggerate
based on emotional response.
So, for example, Madeline McCann was a big
issue, but black girls and Asian girls and
many girls are kidnapped on a daily basis
all around the world. Why do we have
a disproportionate
pain when it comes to Madeleine McCann? Because
it's all over the news media, which is
controlled by the elites.
So they've manipulated us to be empathetic towards
this one girl. Empathy, therefore, is not a
good way to always moralize. And Paul Bloom
has this book called against empathy, which I
think he makes a point that sometimes
emotionalizing on this place is not. So why
I'm why I mentioned this to you is
because narcissism has 3 pillars according to these
guys.
Lack of empathy,
selfish,
selfishness, lack of empathy, grandiosity, and entitlement. Entitlement
seems to me okay, it's reasonable. But lack
of empathy, we can discuss. And grandiosity, what
do you mean by that?
Because what it seemed to be grandiose by
one person might not seem to be grandiose
by another.
And, like, for example, I was reading some
of these books, and some of them say
that a man thinking he does he deserves
special treatment because he is a man is
narcissism,
because they should be equality.
See, that's why they bring leftist agendas into
psychological expressions.
And you can see that although they're talking
in a psychological way, they have a feminist
idea and they're trying to impose it. And
in fact, Romasi herself, she mentions in the
book,
should I stay or should I go? She
says many people in the Middle East, and
I'm paraphrasing,
and the east
are conditioned towards Nazism
because they believe that they
are owed rights that other people shouldn't be
owed
due to their gender.
Well, that that condemns entire traditionalist discourse
to narcissism.
So what I'm trying to say is that
you have to be careful
of the usage of the word narcissism,
because sometimes the ones who are using it,
they synthesize their own ideological
ideas with it. We have to remember, the
word narcissism is an English word. It has
been Arabized, for example. They use it in.
They use this term.
But it has
connotations, which we, as Muslims, have to be
careful of. Our
words, which is dig is not colonialized word,
is that
we use. And our tariff of is
That's the promise he mentioned what that is.
And there is why I brought this to
your attention
is because I use the word narcissism a
few times in this session.
Narcissism of small difference, etcetera, etcetera,
narcissistic.
So I'm saying that take what I say
when I use the word narcissism with a
pinch of salt,
because this word some has been exploited by
the leftist to fulfill their own,
egalitarian agendas.
It has.
There's a lot of terms that have been
exploited by the leftist to fulfill their own,
agendas, and it comes in the in the
in the facade of psychology, pop psychology.
And it even seeps into the Muslim community.
You see?
Anyway, the point, I was making before was
so it's Kibber. When you know Al Khazali
mentions in his book, he has a book
where he's talking about Kibber and arrogance and
so on. He mentions that what the worst
kind of arrogance
he has a book on arrogance.
He has and he says the worst kind
of arrogance, the worst of all of it,
is when you reject the truth, when you
know it's true.
When you reject the truth, when you know
it's true. If the truth comes from a
source that you don't accept,
that you don't like, or strange to you,
but you reject it because of the source
rather than
because of its content, then this is an
expression of arrogance.
If for example, I'm speaking to someone who
says 2 plus 2 plus 5,
as I actually did.
And, honestly, I'm sorry to say you arrogant.
And,
subhanallah, the has come. The revelation has come
to and distinguishment,
discernment
between those people
who are sincere and those people who are
arrogant.
So when the truth comes and you reject
it because of its where it's come from,
that arrogance that you had, which is a
Luciferian arrogance,
the same arrogance that Shaitan had Lucifer himself,
which is also mentioned in the old testament.
And a Cairo meant I'm better than him.
You created me from
fire, and you created him from clay.
And it's even a false argument because why
is fire even better than clay? It's not.
It's not. 1 is destructive. 1 is constructive.
His one's worse.
He's got a false argument, but he's arguing
against God.
He's arguing he decides to argue against God.
You can't tell me you're gonna win an
argument against God. You you know he's the
all knowing, but
what do you mean?
So it shows you're a bad person.
And and and because it shows you a
bad person, where do you deserve to go?
*.
So the is a test to see who
goes to * and who is a good
person,
who is the and who is the
and who is the arrogant one. The is
it is is for Khan.
Anyway So Yes, father. In the bible, when
it mentions Lucifer, they usually portray him as
a a preferred angel or he was, you
know, he had professional treatment. Is that consistent
like, is that similar in Islam? What do
you think? No. I mean, we believe I
mean, the majority of
that he was jinn.
You know. And so we have a different
idea. Okay. But some scholars do say that.
The reason I would say that sort of
consistent is because maybe his test would be,
okay I created you from fire you felt
special.
Now I'm gonna give you a command to
do this.
And then I'm gonna test you or you're
gonna listen to me or you're gonna stick
to
you because I was created from fire therefore
I must be better.
So if you take like so the Jewish
people have had like for over a millennia
you know the prophets came from them they
sort of had this you know you know
and they were monotheists. Yes. It's an excellent
it's an excellent power
It's a it's a similar power. And of
course, some of them accepted the religion of
Islam. Yeah. And another thing that's very interesting
is because when Iblis said I am better
than him, the moment he said that he
showed that he's not better than him.
Do you get it? And that's the same
with the the the.
The moment you say you're better than them,
you're not following the command of Allah. You
just showed you are not better than them
instantaneously because if he was better than them,
you will, take the Of course. You did
some of, the supremacy. Yeah. Exactly. Of them.
Of course. Yeah. You just show that you're
not better than me. It's true though. It's
it's interesting, isn't it? It's an excellent point.
Guys, you pray my grandma come back. Yeah?
Okay. We're gonna pray my grandma and come
back and finish the session. Inshallah.
Alright. So let's have a little bit more
contributions on the questions that we asked before
we continue. Did you wanna say something, Yosaf?
Yes, brother. Yeah. So,
I was thinking about the fact that
after the advent of Islam,
Islam in some way became an intellectual threat.
Because
if you look at at Jews, they don't
have this tendency of or urge to to
expand or give dua. Right?
And, yeah, there is a quote actually. Funny
enough, I was reading this book, Abraham Fulfilled.
No. That's the book. And then the first
chapter, it actually deals with some of the
points you've mentioned today.
It focuses on this
Ishmael Ishag controversy.
Yeah? And there was a citation of, professor
of,
religious studies. Can I cite it? Is that
okay?
Professor of religious studies, Rabbi Nancy Fuchs Kreimer.
Sounds German.
So she says here, through the ages, Jewish
interpretations
of Ishmael have largely depended on the social
context of the authors.
In early centuries,
rabbis portrayed Ishmael in a variety of ways,
negative, positive, and neutral.
After the rise of Islam, the author's anxieties
and fears were reflected in their consistently
negative portrayal of Ishmael.
So it shows that, you know, before the
advent of Islam, they were nuanced about this
topic. Mhmm. But but after that, they became,
you know, very negative about it.
And, I also think that Dawah plays an
aspect, as I mentioned at the beginning.
Because we have this, you know,
expansion mentality, you know, giving Dawah, but they
don't have that. So I think Islam is
also in some way an intellectual threat.
Yes. Yeah. That was so No. I think
that was really excellent citation and a really
good point. I'm very glad you made it.
And the fact that you've got a reference
there from a Jewish rabbi
only adds,
strength to the argument.
If we see,
let's say, ideological
sort of shift where they became more negative
to Ishmael because of Islam, one could assume
they also had a political shift against
the Muslims.
And why would that be, you know, surprising?
Yeah. It's not surprising at all. Yeah. I
think,
it's very clear, actually. And there's there's a
clear motive, political and otherwise,
to do what they did. And it's not
all Jews, of course. It's those,
political elites and supremacists.
I came across this Hadith,
which is very interesting because
maybe I should preamble this by saying part
of the intellectual is
discussing how the prophet Mohammed salasalam
deals with the natural range of emotions that
human beings go through.
So we've spoken about, if you think about
it, throughout
the 18 or so sessions, 17 or so
sessions that we've done,
we've spoken about love.
And we've defined it and we've spoken about
how the prophet was in love and how
he conceived of love and how he reacted
to love and how
we've spoken about grief,
and the year of grief.
We've spoken about fear, and fear management. How
do you one of the well, the things
we said was that one of the great
things which shows the truthfulness of the prophet
Muhammad Sallallahu Alaihi Salam is that he was
able to manage his fear at an astounding
level
as a political general, especially on the battlefield.
In a way that was even beyond some
of the guys who had more experience than
him in the battlefield.
And there's another excitement,
sorry, another
emotion which we haven't spoken about, and it's
excitement.
And that's why I was reading this Hadith
and I wanted to discuss excitement because excitement
is one of the interesting emotions. Let me
read the Hadith
and
then we can speak about. This Hadith is
actually in Al Bukhari. Right?
While we were with Allah's Messenger in a
holy battle,
we never went up a hill or reached
a peak or went down a valley, but
raised our voices with Takbeer. Takbeer is to
say Allahu Akbar very loudly.
Allah's Messenger
came close to us and said, oh, people,
don't exert yourself,
for you do not call a deaf or,
you don't do not call upon a deaf
or an absent one, but you call the
all listener the all seer.
The prophet said,
Abdullah,
Qais, shall I teach you a sentence,
which is from the treasure of paradise?
It is
There is no might or power except with
Allah.
Now what I found quite interesting is that
imagine this. I mean, we have to kind
of draw the picture a little bit. You
had Hudaybiyah.
Hudaybiyah was a great disappointed was appointment for
the Muslim people because they thought that they
were going to do the pilgrimage, and this
was gonna be a great symbol of success
and so on. And then for a lot
of Muslims, and in fact all of them,
there's companions,
their hopes were dashed when they couldn't do
the pilgrimage.
So there was this feeling of sadness and
this feeling of disappointment. Now imagine, it's like
watching your team lose in a way,
playing a sporting event or something like that.
There's a certain feeling that you probably imagine.
Now
the Quran is predicting first of all that
there's gonna be a great Fatha, great conquest,
and you're going to get a lot of
money out of this and so on. So
all of these companions
are getting overexcited.
They're shouting takbir, Allah Akbar,
And how the prophet Muhammad SAW Salam is
reacting to this is to tell them calm
down. Managing their emotions. Yeah. So he this
is very interesting because
it shows you that the prophet Muhammad not
only managed
his own fear and other people's fear in
a fact in a very phenomenal way, but
he was also able to do that with
excitement itself.
Which shows you
the stoic nature, the temperate nature of the
prophet Muhammad SAWSALI. Now, in the in the
west, you have
whole books written about stoicism.
In fact, there's one by Pigliucci
called how to be a stoic.
This guy, Ryan Holiday
writes multiple
books on the topic. One of them I
read, recently actually called The Obstacle is the
Way.
Oh, it's not I mean, I I wouldn't
give a 5 star rating if if you're
honest with me.
So to say, over here is a popularizer
of stoicism, and people in the west now
are thirsty for stoicism
because of the overstimulated
environment.
Because there's so many things that they because
of mental health crisis and so on and
so forth.
The best book I've read on socialism,
by the way,
and I think one of the best books
that a white man has ever written.
That's a big statement but it's probably true
is
Marcus Aurelius's meditations. I'm not sure if you've
ever read this. Now, of course, when when
he's writing this book as a primary source,
and he's writing a book,
by the way, and invoking polytheistic gods. So
obviously we have to
any,
discount that part or reject that part.
But this book is extremely powerful book.
It's not that long. I would highly recommend,
you know, reading this book.
I I personally, if this this book was
in
the Islamic spiritual tradition. It would be one
of the top books in the Islamic spiritual
spiritual tradition.
Marcus Aurelius' The Meditations. Another one, which is
very interesting,
is,
a book written
called The Consolation of Philosophy.
This, I prefer personally the primary source books,
the old school ones,
than the secondary source ones written by modern
day authors. Because I think the
the primary source ones,
the the people are going through something. For
example, this book, The Consolation of Philosophy.
The guy had like a week to live
and he was writing a book before he
was being going gonna be executed.
And he wrote this probably one of the
best books
written because he's he's putting everything in perspective.
If you've got a week to live, he's
bringing the the most wisdoms out of it
and so on. Now there are 2 books
called the consolation of philosophy. There's one by
Adam d bottom, you know, a contemporary
guy that's you probably know him from the
School of Life, YouTube channel. He's he's the
voice that speaks over it. He's written that
book. I'm not talking about that by the
way, I'm talking about the original. But I'm
just saying, the reason why stoicism has become
very popular in the west today
is because as Schopenhauer mentions, it was a
pessimist philosopher.
He said that humanity
oscillates
between extreme boredom and extreme fear.
Like we as humankind, we oscillate between extreme
boredom and extreme fear.
When there isn't war and so on, we
become very bored.
And boredom is the opposite of what? Excitement.
And what is excitement? Excitement really is
stimulation.
And you can have different kinds of excitement.
For example, sexual excitement.
We can talk about that. I've got many
things to say about that and many books
I've read on that as well, but I'm
not gonna cite any right now.
But that's one form of excitement.
And excitement, by the way, has its limits.
For example, if you've ever seen mentally ill
people,
someone with OCD,
someone with,
you know, schizophrenia,
someone with bipolar disorder,
someone with PTSD,
The you can have manic episodes. You can
have overexcitement, overstimulation,
or to autism, by the way, someone who's
autistic.
They are they have a lower threshold for
excitability.
They have a lower threshold. This is very
interesting, very to know.
But the point is is that because we
are living in a world
where we always require
stimulation, excitement, and so on,
To know how to moderate your excitement
is an extremely important part of the human
experience. And what the prophet is teaching us
here is don't get too excited.
Don't get too excited even if
you're approaching something which is going to be
a great thing for you.
Manage your excitement just as you manage your
fear.
There's 2 things if the human being
is able to manage and become successful.
His fear and his desires.
If you're able to manage your fear and
your desires, you become successful. If you're not,
you don't. In fact, in psychology, they refer
to someone who's disciplined in this way as
straight conscientious.
Someone who's able to discipline themselves,
routine eyes and whatever. Despite
the emotions, you still have
a routine that you're doing, for example, or
discipline that you're doing. So So the prophet
as salam, you can see the sheer stoicism
in the prophet's character by
calming down the companions.
This is incredible leadership. This itself is a
it is an argument for the truthfulness of
the prophet Muhammad salasalam.
On the issue of excitement, it's very interesting
as well in the learning context.
Yeah. I've got a definition here. What is
this excitement? Excitement is according to the American
Psychological Association, an emotional state marked by enthusiasm,
eagerness, or anticipation, and general arousal.
Obviously, you can get, you know, I mentioned
a sensory overload, this idea. And an issue
with excitement, especially if you're in a warrior
context, if you're gonna fight somebody,
being overly excite excited is not good because
you can get something called adrenaline dump.
And you can see this in a lot
of the, the fights if you watch UFC
or boxing as a person so excited in
the 1st round, the 2nd or 3rd round,
they they finish
because they have a adrenaline dump.
So you have to manage those, emotions.
You can also have burnout.
And in fact, there are many,
this is called Dodson's Law. When you're learning,
as you can see here, like, if you're
in a state of
learning, any learning you do,
it has to
Stress
and stimulation has to be there, but to
a certain level. If it's too much, then
you become overly stressed. But if it's too
little, you become overly bored.
So Dodson's curve is that, when you're in
a state of,
productivity,
some people call it the flowchart, that's very
similar to this chart,
is when you're being stimulated to a certain
level, but you're not bought by the activity.
And by the way,
sometimes you can be bored. It's not it's
not a problem to be bored.
Boredom is good sometimes. It's no problem. Just
embrace the border.
But the prophet basically is teaching us not
to get over excited.
Now,
first of
all, there is a Hadith of Omar and
Isma'il.
But before I told you about this Hadith,
because it's very interesting, it talks about gender
relations. We were talking about gender relations and
so on before the session.
And how the companions used to discuss with
each other.
Because a lot of the crypto and others,
they will make it as if there was
no gender relations
between men and women. There was, like, this
gender separation.
This is Hadith alongside so many others. I
mean, I can cite so many, but this
is interesting Hadith. In this context of Haibar
is one where Amr Al Khattab is having
a discussion open,
and they're both getting emotional with Asmaq Bintu
Umas,
where he was saying, we are
we have more right to the prophet than
you because we were there and this and
that, and she said no. She was arguing
with Amun, and so much so to the
extent where she went to the prophet Muhammad
SAW Salam.
And then she asked the prophet, is he
right? And she's he said, no. She's wrong,
actually.
Which also dismisses this idea that Amun was
heavy handed and he was, you know, throwing
his way around. And we said this before.
One of
the of the, disbelievers and the opponents of
Islam is that Omar kept interjecting
and changing the religion of Islam. When the
prophets when Omar had the idea that woman
should be covered,
somehow
a an air came, yeah, to confirm Amal's
opinion, for example. When Amal, for example, decided
that the prisoners of war should be punished
and Abu Bakr,
didn't,
and he was right, then this shows you
that Ahmad's opinion because he was a heavy
handed
person and so on. And the prophet and
the community was so scared of him, they
had to adjust things in his image. But
here you have an here you have an
example. Last week, we were speaking about the
example before
about when Abu Bakr was putting him in
his place, but you can say that was
Abu Bakr, a Siddiq.
You know, he has a certain placement.
Here you have a, you have a clear
Hadith
of a smart been to a mess. He's
not even married to her. You have a
woman
here
who she's arguing with Amr
in public,
going to the prophet,
and the prophet didn't say to him, Omar,
what are you doing speaking to this woman?
This is and free mixing. What's wrong with
you?
And how can you be? And he didn't
say this.
He's in my mind. I'm just saying a
lot of people would consider this to be
free mixing. A man and a woman let's
be honest. If you saw a man, Muslim
man, and a Muslim woman speaking in a
public place who's not married to each other,
some people will go too fast. So what
are you doing? Speaking anyway to him or
her. Anyway, they're having conversation.
And there's even more Hadith, by the way,
with Esmeralda, who
happened to be married to 3 of those
companions.
Well, I think 4 of them.
She was married to
Jafar?
And who I don't know who the 4th
one was. Maybe Omar himself. I I I
can't remember.
And, she was married to another companion.
And she and she was asked in public,
who was your favorite husband?
And he she said among the elders,
it was Abu Bakr, and among the youngest
it was Jafar.
And then,
Ali said, what about me?
So so, what? You having a joke, having
a laugh with the ladies?
Having a joke and there's a is there
talking about her experiences with her husband.
You say, no. This is how can you
speak about your marriage like that?
How could it be that these friends had
the same wife anyway?
How what's going on here?
Sorry to say, your idea, your cultural ideas
are not related to the religion of Islam.
It might be a great shock for you
to know this.
But your crypto
ideas
of what constitutes proper gender relations
is incommensurate,
incongruent
with the reality of the seerah.
And if you applied your gender notions
on the companions of the prophet, they would
fail your test. Many of you, the extremist
ones. I'm not saying, of course,
the moderates and the
and the right ones and the correct salafis.
These are the ones we like, and we
are them.
No problem.
But the scripto ones,
no. No. No. No. Don't come with this
because we come with this.
Now on the other hand, you have the
feminist
and other imams
who say a famous story about Amal Khattab,
and I want to dismiss the story.
They say,
Omar Khattab,
one time
a man I'm I'm sure you've heard this
hadith. Yes. A man, he he has some
issues with his wife.
And then he went to who? He went
to Amanullah.
So he can ask him how to solve
his issues of his wife because his wife
kept answering
back. He stood there to see,
and he saw
his wife was shouting at him and he
was just saying,
yeah, I need something like, you know, yes,
yes. And then he went and asked,
why is it that you accepted this from
this woman?
And according to this hadith,
Amr, he turned around and said, well, she
bore my children. She does everything in the
house. I have to accept a few
humiliations here and there.
Yani, not humiliations. I I accept it. No
problem. Something's
just a vague. I want to break the
news.
This Hadith is weak, and it might even
be fabricated. And it's an insult to Omar.
And not only is it an insult to
Omar,
it goes against Hadith,
which are in Bukhari,
which are clearly showing
the opposite of this gender relation.
What had this he's talking about? The Hadith,
the famous one of
where it starts with
which is that we of the people of
Quraysh were people that we used to dominate.
Omar is saying this, Omar.
We used to dominate
our wives.
This is I'm sorry.
I'm sorry. It's me.
Hey, Rama. Is the one that you are
saying who's standing there and his wife was
shouting him in public and the people couldn't
hear
because you're it's that you have to find
the weak at least to explain your humiliation.
He said no.
He said, we were a people
that we used to dominate our wives. We
went to Medina, we saw, and this might
be con controversial.
Say, we saw that the women there, they
used to dominate their husbands.
So the feminist now is getting excited again.
So called Muslim feminist, failure, Muslim feminist,
abject failure.
Abject failure.
She's getting excited and say, okay. Well, I
wanna be like those women who are, dominating
their husband. Put an asterisk next to dominating
of the husband, and let's continue the Hadith.
And if not Behar said, well, actually,
the wives of the prophet were like this
as well. And they obviously, one of the
wives of the prophet who, Hafsa, his own
daughter, Omar's daughter. He went now,
Omar Khattab, to the house to ask his
wife if it's true.
The moment he asked her, she's she had
some response, and it wasn't
no. At some point, it wasn't a rude
risk that they're rude.
First question, and this is Buhari.
The one that you made into some kind
of, sorry to say,
humiliated individual and his wife.
He said,
are you responding back to me?
This is the real
Umar.
This is the real Umar with his wife.
This is the well, it's not it's not
this one. This is and what happened?
He he then
and so on. He went to see his
daughter, and he started getting angry with his
daughter because of her behavior.
But what I'm saying is that the Shahid
here is imagine his wife, and that's why
I said put on the line
because we're gonna go back.
He considered a woman answering back to her
husband
as too much.
So imagine now why he conceives that those
men of the Ansar are being dominated by
his wife because his threshold for respect is
too high.
His threshold, that's not high. This is true.
It's the way you're talking about.
He's not no. He's not gonna accept the
what you and me expect
except.
He's not gonna accept this.
If he was transported
and he saw the state
of what was going on in the Umma,
in the Muslim majority countries,
in Egypt.
I can only speak about my own countries,
and no one can say I'm being a
racist.
And the loud woman in the balcony.
Have you seen this? The loud woman in
the back, he said,
and shouting at her husband and pulling him
like this in the marketplaces.
You think this is Islam?
You think Omar would have accepted this? You
think any Sahabi, any man,
even the Jews of Haibar would not accept
that one?
No one would accept it.
So don't make Amad into some kind of
weak man so that you can justify on
insolence
and lack of control on your wife.
But the reason why I mentioned this is
because there's extremes.
There's the feminist extreme and the crypto Salafist
extreme and the other extreme. It's not just
Salafist, some others groups. Some Sufis are like
this. Some Shias are like this. They're too
staunch when it comes to gender relations.
And he said to me one of them,
and he said to me one of them,
from one place in the world, he said,
I'm so proud. I said, why? He said,
because I've never seen a woman in public
in my life.
And I said to him, but your in
your province, is there a is there an
issue
when it comes to homosexuality?
He said, yes. I said, maybe this is
the reason.
It's just so happens that homosexuality
is exacerbated where you remove women from the
equation altogether.
Isn't that an interesting trend?
Don't go too far actually when it comes
to gender relations. Don't go.
Why do you think homosexuality is exacerbated in
prisons?
Do you think these men were like that?
Many straight men, they end up liking the
guy.
They end up being gay.
No. It's true.
But because of the environment,
if you have too much of a male
environment and you remove the woman completely, you
can't speak to him, you don't even know
what woman looks like,
then you are putting a person in a
position where maybe they will become more
homoshexually,
inclined.
So what I'm trying to say to you
is, there is no extremes in the Ummah.
And and so we can't use, but still
the the meaning is true, which is that
the best
of
actions are the the most middle ones. Don't
be too like this or like that.
Be a little bit you know, you have
to realize, you know, when when it comes
to gender relations and and mixing with the
genders, that it's not gonna be,
segregation.
Anyway, we've mentioned already
that there were multiple
small battles.
And let's look at this one. Mahmoud ibn
Maslam Al Ansari, he died in this battle,
Muslim. And do you know how he died?
One of those probably Jewish supremacists.
Instead of face to face confrontation,
he grabbed the big rock from the top
of his fortress, and he threw it on
him.
And this is exactly the IDF method. He
doesn't want to engage in physical face to
face confrontation unless he has major military advantage,
102,000, 300,000 people, and big tanks, and this
one and that one. Instead, you're getting humiliated
by this one now. So you have to
go on top of a building and throw
a rock. So there's no risk upon you,
and there's only risk upon the enemy.
It seems to me this whole idea of
fortifying and stuff like that, it's not a
new thing, by the way. And that's why
Quran says,
end of the eye. But the point is
is that you don't know.
You,
they won't fight you altogether. These particular Jews,
not all of the Jews. These particular they
won't fight you altogether
unless
mentions they're in a fortified place
behind the tank.
An airplane
has to be
10 to 1 advantage, 5 to 1 advantage,
massive technical advantage.
Hide the walls, and because they don't wanna
get hurt.
Throw the rock, you know, this and that.
You think they're all together? They're not all
together. And and this showed you that they're
not all together. All of them were focused
on the Oliu
Fortress.
Our problem is we think Israeli society is
unified.
If you look at the Knesset, you realize
that Israeli society is not unified. There are
so many different opinions. Jews are not one
monolithic thing that they're all, like, unified than
one thing. We've seen that there are many
pro Palestinian Jews. We've seen that there are
secular Jews. We have seen that there are
religious orthodox Jews. We have seen that there
are reformed Jews. We have seen politically that
they're against each other.
We we we we when we're when we're
stereotyping the Jews, a lot of the time
when we're doing it, we make them into
this impenetrable. We actually help
the Zionists
and making them into some superhuman
that we can undefeated. Look at what they've
done with the economy, and look, they own
everything and this and and that and
no. It's not that deep.
It's not that deep. The reason why Israel
is in the state that it's in is
only and because of the west. You eliminate
the west, you eliminate Israel.
Where was they before the west?
Scattered around the world.
Don't pretend that this they're the the invincible
enemy and the the Frankenstein and the monster.
Because the moment you start to think that
this this narrative of aura of invincibility,
we
we make this narrative on, on ourselves.
They had a losing record.
The Jewish supremacists of the old
had a losing record, 4 to 0.
They didn't even engage. They have no chance
against the Muslim army.
So much so that we had to the
Muslim
had to keep them in and protect them,
and we respect them, and give them their
synagogue, and and they had their golden age
in Islam.
They had a 44 to 0 losing record.
No one victory, not one.
But we we prop them up in, this
Israel and this and that. The Jewish supremacists
and the Israelis and the Zionist.
As if they're the perfect and they cannot
be beat.
Famous battle. Do you wanna tell us about
that one? Not sure. The first can read
the the poem. Is it a famous poem
of,
Anna Levy.
Hi, Dara. Hi, Dara. And then what's the
second one?
She has to do. Yeah? Can we hear?
One is what?
So I'm a very fierce looking Lion. Lion
kind of thing. Yeah. Yeah. But it sounds
so much better in Arabic,
doesn't it? Yeah. We destroyed it. You keep
repeating the word lion. Yes. Yes. In Arabic,
you have many words for lion. Yes. So
and every time he uses a different variation.
Absolutely. But can you see when it comes
to this is, maybe the narcissist,
book will say, this is grandiosity on behalf
of.
He's talking about himself like the lion and
this and that. What do you mean? When
it comes when it comes down to it,
no. And it's we're gonna fight now. Marhab
came up. Might have this guy walking around
and say I'm gonna fight and who who
who? And he even killed one of those
hobbies. I forget who he is. He killed
one of the habits And because he has
such a a fantastic
record and
no, this is, not true to think all
Jews are cowards, by the way.
Not true. Some of some of the Jews
are very brave. Madhab is a good example
of it.
It's not true to think all the Jews
are cowards or something. No. No. No. Marhaba
was a is a great warrior. You have
to give him everyone was giving him his
props and his respect, and he even beat
a Muslim. But he was no match for
who gave him the one blow and finished
decisive liquidated him. He was completely liquidated.
Neutralized, terminated, liquidated, finished.
I have never thought it. This is why
you stepped to Ali ibn with Talib. I
was surprised he even got to the ring.
Nowadays, sorry to say that Israeli, this guy,
he
I was training for him and then the
IDF soldier, he ran away.
I don't know what happened. And I'm not
I can tell you that for right.
So what's going on?
Anyway,
but this passive aggressive attack
because now, subhanallah, how did the battle end?
They kept taking over the fortresses until it
there's difference of opinion among the scholars. Was
it a surrender?
Did they surrender?
Or was it that they agree on a,
in a particular kind of set of, terms?
And it seems to me it was probably
a surrender. They probably surrendered. They said forget
this. Don't wanna fight these guys.
It could be that they agreed to a
certain particular terms. I don't know for a
fact.
But there's a discussion about was it surrender
or not?
It seemed like they surrendered after all of
this. And so
very dishonorably as they, these, supremacists,
they they bought food and so on. And
this woman, she put poison all over the
food.
Of the prophet Muhammad SAWSALAM.
The meat told him, don't eat me because
I have poison inside of me.
In whatever way that happened, I don't know
what happened.
But it was too late for, Bishar, who
was one of the companions who who ate
this.
And
he died, actually.
So what happened was in the first instance
of discussion, did the prophet
did he forgive
this Jewish
woman for trying to poison and kill him?
Because he asked her, and she confessed. She
said, yes. I tried to kill you because
you did this and you did that. Resentment
and bitterment and hate. And this passive aggressive
attacks is a hallmark of the supremacist.
No. Didn't didn't she say? She didn't she
as far as I'm she didn't say it
because of that. She said that I wanted
to see if you're a true prophet. If
he was a true prophet, you would have
known that the meat would have told you.
Is is that not what happened? That happened
as well. That both of that. She she
said you killed my brother, you killed my
father, you killed my whatever. That's why I've
done it. But it's then then she also
mentioned that if you were a true prophet,
well, it shouldn't have affected you anyway.
Well, she
didn't.
Yeah. Well, she didn't. She didn't understand.
So now if you wanted to see if
she was a true prophet or not Yeah.
Here he is still alive. So why didn't
you, accept him?
Yeah. Wasn't it wasn't he gonna,
forgive her, accept that it was because
he killed the companion. So that's what mentions.
I came across
this statement of said that how do we
harmonize between the fact that the prophet, it
seems in some way as in narrations that
he forgave her
for trying to kill him.
And in other narrations, it seemed like she
was actually given the death penalty.
So he tries to harmonize it by saying
that in the beginning, he forgave her. But
when
Bishop died,
that because this was now a matter of,
she killed a man. Now she has to
be killed. It was a life for a
life.
And then she was killed on the basis
of when he died, because the poison didn't
infect, kill him straight away. It took a
couple of maybe a day or 2 to
kill him fully. He was in a bad
state, and then Bishop eventually
died.
So they weren't expelled.
The Jews were not expelled, but rather they
were demilitarized.
All their weapons were taken. It became a
d became a demilitarized
zone. The gold and silver was taken away
from them. And in fact, the process have
given them extremely favorable terms.
They can even continue making money on their
produce
so long as that the money is split
5050 between the Muslim armies and themselves.
And that's a very favorable thing for people
that were so hostile, and it shows you
the magnanimous nature of the prophet Muhammad and
also shows you he had different ways of
different, of dealing with different Jewish tribes. This
is clear evidence.
It's not to do with their Jewishness.
He didn't deal with
in the same way as he dealt with
the people of Haibah.
The the same way he's built with is
the
punishment is is, is commensurate with the crime.
So so there was no killing of babies
or donkeys or cows. Right? No. That's only
to be reserved for the book of numbers
and, first Samuel
chapter 15 verse 3. Good.
Now this the last thing I wanna mention
is about Safiyyah Bint Hayer.
Because
I mean, for example, remember when you had
discussion with Tommy Robinson, he kept mentioning
Safia
Bintahoye.
So it seems to me that the right
wing and all these individuals,
they bring up the issue of Sophia.
And what Tommy Robinson, if you remember, I
remember this discussion. This was probably,
Yani, one of the areas
where Tommy Robinson was making the biggest lies
and fumbles.
And he needs to and and this is
a great way to correct him.
Where Tommy Robinson, thinking that he knows what
he's talking about, and, of course, he doesn't
know anything,
stated that, you know, the prophet, Muhammad,
sorry to say, but he
forced
into sexual *,
because he and this was his argument, and
this is the argument of people like Robert
Spencer and David Wood, which he took it
from them, just to be clear. Because there's
a genesis of ideas. Tommy Robinson is not
a free thinker. He doesn't know how to
access sources. He doesn't have time to go
into these things. So he'll rely upon people
like David. And you can see him liking
their posts and stuff like that.
The argument was that he forced himself upon
her because she didn't have any administration or
whatever it may be, and he just took
her as a slave and he forced her
and there was. Because how could it be?
He would incredulity,
incredulously
ask, how could it be
that
a woman who has just been in a
war,
and her father has been killed,
would now marry
the leader of the opposing war.
This is so the only
legitimate
way that we can think of this is
that if he have forced himself upon her.
This is the argument.
So there's ways to answer this.
And the ways to answer this is number
1,
it's very clear
that in the Hadith, if you wanna take
the Hadith, because if you're using the Hadith
to justify the position, then you have to
use all the Hadith.
Stated in the Hadith, your father remained the
staunchest Jewish enemy to me until Allah the
almighty killed him. Oh, Sophia, if you choose
Islam, I will keep you as my wife.
If you choose Judaism, I may release you
and you join your people.
So clearly, if he's forcing himself upon her,
why is he giving her a choice?
Sadis is
saying you can choose this or you can
choose this. And he's not saying if you
choose Judaism, you'll remain as a slave here
in a prisoner of war. In fact, he's
going further than that. And remember, her people
are free. Her people are not in, expelled
or something. They're in.
Says you can go back, If you don't
wanna be with me, you can you don't
have to be.
And then she stated in the hadith very
clearly,
oh, messenger of Allah, the almighty says,
well, I tell you why is there a
that no one should bear the soul of
what another person does.
I appreciate Islam, and I have believed in
you even even before I ended up in
your custody. Moreover, I am in no need
of Judaism, nor do I have a father
or brother under it. Since you have given
me an option to choose between Islam and
this belief, I do prefer Allah and the
message.
Now someone will say, maybe this hadith is
weak, maybe it's this, maybe that, maybe the
other. No problem.
Even if someone does say that,
we have the ayat in the Quran,
which is the
ayat in
which is that if you owe wives of
the prophet,
if you
want to
prefer the life of the adornment of this
life, I will let you go. And all
scholars of Islam say this was efficacious on
all the wives, including.
Meaning, a choice was explicitly given. If you
want to accept it from the Hadith,
then this is in the Hadith. If you
don't want to accept it from the Hadith,
then the choice was explicitly given to all
wives as per the a and the Quran.
Someone says, I don't accept the Quran or
the Hadith. We'll say, well, then you don't
even have a right to believe that a
man called Mohammed married a woman called Sophia,
let alone to to to claim such and
such about it because you're getting this from
the hadith. There's only one source, which is
the Islamic narrative.
So this is a clear
response to those who believe what the, the
argument.
And look, it shows you that the prophet
not only had this relationship, he was very
protective and I've put a hadith there, where
was where the prophet was very sick in
his last days.
Sophia said, you know, if it was up
to me, I would take this sickness from
you.
And some of the wives were rolling their
eyes and acting in a very bad
manner or saying some things under their breath.
And the prophet protected her against the wives.
And we know
that the prophet Muhammad protected Sophia against
the wives when they
were attacking her because she was Jewish. And
he said, well, you come from the holy
lineage. And this by far is one of
the best arguments against those who say Islam
is an inherently anti Semitic religion,
whereby they where whereby they define anti Semitism
as attacking Jews because they are Jews. Because
Islam, if it was an anti Semitic religion,
why is the prophet, number 1, marrying an
ethnic Jew. He married an ethnic Jew.
Number 2,
responding
to the other wives
and giving her, you know,
words to say and arguments to make against
the other wives on the basis of her
noble lineage,
which it happens to be a Jewish lineage.
This is decisive,
evidence.
And with that,
we will conclude. I hope you have found
this as
interesting as I have. It's been, a fantastic
session and Insha'Allah,
we'll conclude this whole series very soon.