Intellectual Seerah Part 1 – The Existence of The Prophet Muhammad
Channel: Mohammed Hijab
File Size: 94.27MB
Bismillah Alhamdulillah wa salatu salam ala Muhammad and rather early he was so happy he was telling him to Sleeman Kathira welcome to this new series is going to be inshallah very informative series. And we're going to try and be as original as possible in this series, it's not a Sierra, which is going to be like a story setting storytelling style, it's going to be a zero, where we're going to be trying to critically assess each of the claims, implicit or explicit that are made by the Syrah writers, or by our tradition. So in other words, we're not going to come from a confectionery perspective, we're coming from a perspective of someone that is actually critical of the Syrah. And
that's why in the first lesson today, what we're going to go through is effectively the existence of the Prophet Muhammad wa sallam himself. Because if you think about it, right, a lot of the new atheist or even skeptical, historical revisionist Orientalist type of narrative has been
these religious stories. They're exactly just that religious stories, mythologies, fictions, they useful fictions. And we don't need to believe in these things at all. So what we're going to be going through is, number one, how can we prove that the Prophet Muhammad wa salam even existed? What are the claims being made on the other side, because we need to have an exposure of this and the utility of that for us for our purposes, it will Insha Allah, increase the opinion that we have the certainty that we have of Islam, in fact, you'll find going through the slides that we're going to be going through today in sha Allah, that there's such a rich, you know, plethora of evidences
relating to the historicity of the Prophet Muhammad, Salah Salem of Islam,
which would rival anything in the antiquity or middle middle ages,
anything at all, not just religious information, but any information at all. So,
before we get started, let's maybe just do a critical introduction here the first slide and talk about something which a group of historians have come out in the 1970s chief most among which was Patricia Crone. Crona, and Michael cook. And Crona, she wrote a book called Hagar ism in the 1970s. And in this book, in the first instance, she actually was making the claim that the Prophet Muhammad doesn't exist. What Why does she say this? I mean,
this is a very radical claim, even for Oriental the standards, by the way, like within the orientalists. This is not a normal claim. It's a very, very radical claim. She said, if you put like effectively, she was saying, if you put all of this kind of traditional narratives, the Hadith and the Sierra and all this kind of stuff, if you put it to one side, okay, what are we actually left with, we're left with manuscripts, we're left with coins, we're left with, you know, all these kinds of inscriptions. And it would seem to be that Islam was invented, at least, you know, 50 to 100 years afterwards, before the time that it was meant to be. So it's important in other timelines
here, the Prophet Muhammad Sallallahu Sallam died 11 Ah,
the Hijra is a calendar, which as we're going to cover, Inshallah, it started with the migration from Mecca to Medina. Okay, so that's when the calendar started. So the prophets are Salam died 11 years after the Hijra. And so that's why it's 11 H. And this is commensurate with 632
a Gregorian calendar. So just bear in mind these two dates, because they're going to be important when we're covering some of the slides today. So that's 11 H, which is the same as 632. What Patricia Crona and Michael cook. And some of the students came out and said, is that look, actually, Islam really was invented afterwards. And she had this very elaborate theory about there being some kind of an alliance between Jewish people and Muslim people. And that Islam was actually an alliance. The Muslims in Jewish Alliance tried to overtake Jerusalem. And in fact,
these narratives were invented, and so on and so forth.
Patricia Crona, actually, because of certain manuscripts that came up from my understanding, it was actually the son art manuscript that changed her whole mind about this. She actually retracted her position.
And so she does believe even she, the most radical skeptical mind
came to believe that actually, the Prophet SAW Salem does exist, and she retracted a lot of earlier theories. Very interesting. So we're talking about, you know, what the forerunner of you know, historical revisionism in the West. So, that's one thing.
I was looking at some of the argumentations that she was making in her book. And she makes some interesting arguments. But it's interesting for our purposes, because you'll see that actually, this feeds into some of the confectionery narratives. She says, Look, if you look at the Quran, you'll find it's not compatible with the historical context. So I remember from their perspective, the prophet Hasulam, he wasn't a prophet, from their perspective. From their perspective, he wasn't revealed it no information was resulting from God. In fact, from their perspective, he's making this thing up himself.
So she's saying, if you think about it, if you look at the Quran and Sunnah, for example, out of chapter seven, is talking about Sabbath breaking. It's and this is meant to be a makansutra. Why is it in a Meccan? Surah? Is it discussing things relating to Jewish people, there wasn't even a Jewish population there.
So she's saying like, it's not, it doesn't connect with the primary audience. And then she goes on to say, even agriculturally, and contextually, like you find that the references that are being made, yes, are of certain geographic features which are not, not available to or not applicable to the prophetic salams character or to his his condition or context. For example.
There's references which are more numerous and vivid, she says to the sea, by an Arabian is there's not this kind of see. She's saying like in the location is what why is there so many live reference in the Quran to see Moreover, what why is why is the Quran talk about olives so much?
Well, we know for a fact she says Arabian Peninsula doesn't have olives. And it cannot even produce olives and pomegranates. Why does the Quran talk about these fruits?
She it wouldn't make sense if the Quran was context specific to talk about these fruits, which the people the primary audience are not connecting with. But you can see how this can lend itself to an argument that we can make. Okay, from the confectionery side, so actually, you're making the argument for us?
Because it would indicate, I mean, obviously, one could argue from the confessional side, or from the faithful side would indicate that the the readership was not intended to only be the primary readership of the Quran
is true, why is it that it would agree with Patricia Zilla? It's true, you're right to say, why is it that the Quran is talking about these fruits, and these landscapes and these geographic locations, which are not really applicable to the primary audience, it would indicate that the author of the Quran was intending this information for other than the primary audience, which is the sahaba. So you see, it's a non goal really
is and you're gonna see a lot of these own goals being committed by the skeptical minds. And that's why I think actually looking at these orientalist, and looking at these revisionist is actually quite useful. Because isn't that an irony that the more you make an argument against Islam? Sometimes you find that these arguments themselves?
Are the arguments for Islam?
If you really think about what you're saying here, right? So this is one thing.
She says, look, for example, if you look at sort of chapter 18, verse 32, is talking about you know, the the man with gardens, I'm sure you've guys have read it and seen. So if gardens, there's no greenery in Arabia. At that time, there wasn't now there's more in I mean, if you and that's what prophecy, as maybe we'll cover
that the greening of the Arabian Peninsula, but at that time there was there really wasn't.
So why is the Quran speaking about God in so much?
And with good detail, as if the primary audience should connect with such information?
is true? Why is it because the Quran was intended? We would, we would argue right, so we continue.
So some of our conclusions were the following. There was no Calif called Abu Bakr.
Bear in mind this, you're going to find that this is a bit ludicrous.
And that the Prophet saw them lived after 632.
So he lived, he didn't die. As he says, he continued living up Gani after 632 that the Prophet and Jews had this hyper Alliance and attempted together to claim Jerusalem, as we've mentioned, and Mecca wasn't the center of Islamic civilization, but it was somewhere else maybe north north of the Arabian Peninsula. These are some of our conclusions.
However, having said that, there is a plethora of evidences that we can put use to our disposal and even if we use our approach, and that's why I'm saying, let's use Patricia's approach, let's go with it for the sake of argument. And it's not just Patricia has come to this conclusion it's very unusual conclusion of their being. Nope, Abu Bakr or whatever
is some of like some of our followers or some people
We are influenced by her.
But even if we use this approach that let's put aside the Hadees you guys Muslims believe in the Hadith, we're going to talk about the Hadith
where you guys believe in the Hadith, let's put aside the Hadith. We're only we're only concerned with manuscripts. And we're not even concerned with the histories of the Arabs, which, by the way, frankly, is quite a racist and colonial thing. Because why should it be that we'll have to have like a white man to tell us what history was? Effectively that you're telling us it's like, you know, we only accept histories from the Persians or not even them, let's be honest, let's, let's say the Romans. It's got to be from a Roman source. It's got to be another language. It cannot be the Arabic language.
If because if it's that language,
we know it's all you know, conspiracy you confectionary or whatever faithful.
And of course, if we did the same if we flip the switch on them and said, Okay, let's do the same thing with English. Henry, the fifth Oh, Henry, this eighth or whatever it is, we're not gonna accept any English sources. Let's just accept Gaelic sources or something like that. And let's see where we were ended up with your histories. Let's see what the white man's history can look like.
We don't accept your own language history. But anyway, for the sake of argument,
I'm going with it. We have the following sources to our disposal.
The first one is the fragments of the Arab conquest. Now this was actually written six days six Adi met. Now remember, we said that the first one was with Edwin 632. So when is this four years off the process is very, very, very, very recent, very close to the death of Mohamed Salah Salam, and in it, not only is it a primary source, but as a primary source, with the name Muhammad in it in a different language. And this is why it says actually was the Battle of Yarmouk, which funnily enough, was the battle that who was engaged in who was the Khalifa time Abubakar Siddiq, a working study.
Yes. So this shows you another issue here with
and the following was said yes. In January, that people have humps, too. This is actually the this is translated as translation.
It's been translated by what's his name Robert.
Holden. Well, I forget his surname now, but I'll come to in a second. Who was a who was a student of Patricia kroner, and he seems that the top guy now and he's written a book called early Islamic history or something like that is he translates these texts.
Hoyland. Yeah, that's right, Robert Holan. Yeah, so Robert halen is a student of Patricia Corona. And he's translated this I think, he says the following.
Well, the translation of ages one. In January, the people of Homs took the word for their lives. In many villages were ravaged by the killing of the Arabs of Muhammad, the Arabs of Muhammad Hassan was mentioned. Okay. And many people were slain and taken prisoner from Galilee as far as Beth.
On the 26th of May.
The such and such went from the vicinity of Homs and the Roman chase them on the 10th of August, the Romans fled from the vicinity of Damascus. And they were killed many people some 10,000. And at the turn of the year, the Romans came on the 12th of August in the year 947. They're gathered in Abuja besides Yarmouk, by the way a multitude of Romans and many people of the Romans were killed, some 50,000. This is very, very interesting for many more than one reason number one is actually commensurate with the Islamic report. Like, you know, the, the the the Battle of your morgue,
for as per our traditions is exactly like this. And someone will be tempted to say, well, these Arabs, for example, they're exaggerating the histories.
They're saying that they defeated the Romans and they did this and they did that. They're exaggerating the histories, but now you have a Roman source saying the same exact thing.
And the key and critical point here is the Arabs of Muhammad. So much so that some of these Orientalist have been trying to say, look, since I was Muhammad, that gives you more credence, but he was still alive at a time. But that's not necessarily so there's nothing to indicate in that phraseology that he was still alive, what they were ascribed to him in one way or another. This is a key manuscript information, which indicates without a shadow of a doubt, that there was a man called Muhammad, that there were there are people fighting on behalf of his course.
And that the histories of the battles of Yarmouk as per the Islamic tradition, or the same histories that you're finding in these traditions as well. This is written in the fragments of our Congress. Yeah, that's the one that's what's written here. Yeah. So what this is, is actually, the actual fragment was in the Gospel of Mark funnily enough, ironically enough, the Bible wasn't preserved but the Bible is being used to preserve the slang
interesting, the Gospel itself hasn't been preserved. But the the falsified or Unpreserved gospels are being used to
reserve Islam in another way, which is the gospel of Mark. And all of this stuff is weird because they used to have like these parchments and stuff like that, and it was written on there. So that's the first one. The second one, the chronicle of 640, by Thomas, the presbyter. states the following. Now 640, how many years are we talking here?
Eight years of the process of death. That's very, very, very close. And as we'll see, you don't find stuff like this in Christianity at all. You wish
to find something that was eight years after Jesus.
That's from another chance, and it's manuscript evidence. And it says the following, and the 945 indiction, seven.
On Friday, the fourth of February, at the ninth hour, there was a battle between the Romans and the tie of Muhammad not-i The Arabs of Muhammad
Hoyland he actually he does the translation for this. He's written in his book has been peer reviewed. Some, I don't think there's much discussion about the Syriac here to what it means. And
so here once again, in Palestine, 12 miles east of Gaza, the Romans fled, leaving behind patrician Bryden, whom the Arabs killed some 4000 poor villages of Palestine were killed dead Christians, Jews and Samaritans, the Arabs ravaged the whole region.
In the year 947, the Arabs invaded the whole Syria and went down to Persia and conquered it. The Arabs climbed the mountain of modern and killed many monks there in the monasteries of Qaeda and Nata, that died a blessing man, Simon doorkeeper, of Qaeda brother of Thomas, the priest.
So Mohammed has mentioned again in a very early source by Thomas the presbytery. So that's another primary. And by the way, there's lots of these, but I'm just giving you three
from non Islamic sources just so they can have them in your arsenal, because some of them could ask you what is the evidence? According to our method, I'm telling you, this is the evidence according to the method of today, we're not going Hadith. We're not going there. We're sticking with manuscripts, non Arabic written, we're giving you all your criteria. And yet, we're still coming to us. And by the way, these are housed in British Museum and the British Library. I mean, it's not like the manuscripts of these things are in some place in Baghdad or Cairo, where maybe there's some guy forged, they made it up. It's right there you can anyone can visit and go to the British Museum
and see it in public exhibition.
This one here is written 661, which is a bit later, but the amount of detail on this by CBS.
It's and he wrote a book called The history of miraculous Yeah, it's actually quite startling. So let me read somebody who said at the time, a certain man from among those same sons of Ishmael, whose name was Muhammad, Salah, a merchant, as if, by God's command appeared to them as a preacher, and the path of truth. He taught them to recognize the God of Abraham, especially because he was learned and informed in the history of Moses. Now, because the command was from on high, at a single order, they all came together in unity of religion, abandoning their vain cults, they turned to the living God, who had appeared to their father Abraham. So Muhammad legislated for them, not to eat
carrion, not to drink wine, not to speak falsely, and not to engage in fornication. He said, with an oath, God promised this land to Abraham and his seed after him forever. And he brought about, as he promised, during that time when he loved Israel, but now you are the sons of Abraham, and God is accomplishing His promise to Abraham and his seed for you.
Love sincerely, only the God of Abraham, and go and seize the land which God gave to your father Abraham, no one will be able to resist you in battle, because God is with you. This is amazing detail, isn't it?
This is not from an Arab source. This is CBS himself.
So these are some of the evidences that we've got here. And there are more the doctrine of Jai Kobe and so on. The reason why I brought these ones in particular, and there are so many more is because these ones actually mentioned the word Muhammad in them.
And they're very early. So all the Criterion are met. And but what more do we want? I mean, we have a whole list of different things that are mentioned here.
Now, in addition to this, you have a range of coins being minted. Now, of course, this cut like, for example, if you were to compare this with early Christianity, there is no coin with Jesus on it in the first 100 years of Jesus, because Jesus wasn't in political power. So they don't have the privilege of having any coins that they can use to corroborate it.
Even the existence of Jesus.
Whereas we do have coins. And really and truly the first coin with the word Muhammad on it was
actually at the time of Abdul Malik and more 166 Ah, some 50 years after possums death. However,
really and truly there were coins with other symbols on them and other phrases which are known to the Muslims, for example, the best manner Bismillahirrahmanirrahim or Bismillah, Allah Lilla for Allah. So these coins were that the first one with the word Muhammad on it, that I came across looking at the primary source evidence was one in 66. Ah, which is pretty early. Indeed. Now, there are some interesting things about coins. And one that I mentioned about that is that, really, what's interesting what people have discussed it.
And you'll find that some of the coins
it was an amalgamation, okay, of like, Persian symbol symbolism, sometimes Roman symbolism and Islamic symbolism. So you'll find that some of the early coins, you have like the high Sarani.
And then you also have Bismillahirrahmanirrahim, for example, or you will have some, in some cases even have a cross and so on. So how could an Islamic coin, have a cross on it? How could an Islamic coin have
the symbols of the Persians on it? How could it be? And the answer is this. It's simply that these were the symbols that the people of those nations when we're used to, if you found a piece of silver, which didn't have this did harm a Delhomme or a dinar, that didn't have this symbolism on it, it would not be recognized that coin, it would not be accepted or treated as a coin by those people. And hence, it would not fulfill this function of being a coin. And moreover, the machines that they were using to mint those coins, had those symbols on them, to create new machines all over the empire in the new empire was not practical. And this shows you by the way, that the Sahaba must
have therefore been very practical and pragmatic. You see, we have this notion, nostalgic and false notion about the Sahaba that they were extremely intolerant and incapable of any kind of, of pragmatism, but for them to have and this was historically on the record coins, which has some symbols of shook on them sometimes. But because it was data or because the situation became so difficult, that you couldn't even trade without those coins. You can see or sold in practice at the time it was a hobbit le generation, a double Oktibbeha method, that certainly things will of necessity, make what is halal haram? You will find that if someone tried this nowadays, they
wouldn't accept this
as if they are more pious than the pious predecessors
because they have a false notion and analogic false notion of what the price pious predecessors surely Yes, they were it's true, I'm working Sadiq was very staunch on certain issues. And we'll come to maybe some of that. And the pious predecessors were very staunch and non compromising on certain issues. But where it became where it came at the threat of the political supremacy of the Islamic civilization, they didn't actually did they engaged in pragmatic politics. And that's very clear, you have coins with symbols of Shere Khan.
But it was because it was so difficult to change it. Across the Empire, there was a free flowing stuff, they just used it and put as much Islamic things as he could. What Takala Mr. Tato Simple as that really. But the reason why I bring this to your attention is because someone will say, well, it doesn't make sense that the first coins that you have our coins with, for example.
Both of these things, it shows that Islam was still a developing religion.
It's still Yanik because remember, the orientalist wants to say Islam was maybe was actually crafted at the time of Abdullah medical model some of them have said this I've seen as we've got to cover his some of his works Stephen Shoemaker
Yes, isn't it but we'll cut we'll come to he kind of makes this kind of point and he he's got academic reasons and stuff will come to is very interesting guy to read.
Orient anti kind of Islamic narrative or Orientalist type of the Christian guy
that actually Islam was developed in the the time of Abdun Milliken and Marwan but as we've said, there's enough information from the first 10 years of the person's death 1015 2030 years that not only mentioned his name, but mentioned very specific things about his mission.
So that was before the Milliken moron
if we say of the Milliken Marwan was, for example, you know, I don't know 65 H or something like that as well. That's why it's important to know, the timeline. He's an MOV at the time of the omae. It's, but way before that we have primary source information from non Muslims that indicate the name of the Prophet and the mission of the Prophet.
Of course, in addition to and we're going to come to this the manuscripts we have the Quran and the
manuscripts we have and the Hadith manuscripts, and not just manuscripts, the Hadith itself and the Senate and all that kind of stuff, which we believe, but that's coming from a concessionary Islamic perspective. And we're granting for the sake of argument, all of the premises that the historical revisionist wants us to take. We're saying even if you grant all of that you're still wrong.
So we're going to the next next thing so coins are interesting thing, but you need to kind of know what's going on with them. And these are some pictures of the coins. I mean, I've put them there.
They're very very, you can buy them like you can buy a coin like this for about 100 pounds.
You know Adama Shido friend is Masha. Allah has got a very nice coin collection. And you can see if you want to if you want to see these coins, Yanni, if you want to touch them yourself and get some points and you can you can touch them.
You can touch them and feel them. Okay. Yes. inscriptions. Another thing is, which has become more as so many inscriptions. The like, there's there's actually a few very important inscriptions of the early days. One of them is the inscription of Zebedee. And another one is this inscription of Zumaia, of 24, ah, and this inscription, if we say 24, H, we're talking about the time of Amara.
And the inscription says, The Omer top died on this, this time, whatever it like, at this time period, and this is in line with Islamic narrative. ISIL, who wrote this, at the time almost died in the year 24. Ah, and this is in line with our calendar, and our rendering of when our Lakota died.
So these are the kinds of inscriptions. Now that is true to say, when Abdul Malik of number one, for example, when he became empowered, the inscriptions exploded, especially in middle Aqsa, they started being inscriptions all over the walls and all those kinds of things. But inscriptions was not a practice, really, of the Arabs, that they would go and write stuff on rocks and stuff like that. It wasn't something they did. It wasn't their culture to go and write stuff. But even despite that, notwithstanding that being the fact, you still do have these inscriptions. So look, you have a triangulation of evidence the same as what I'm coming to. You've got coins, you've got inscriptions,
you've got early manuscripts from non Muslim sources. And it becomes so much that someone like Patricia Crona, who's meant to be like the most aberrational circle revisionist, that even about her, Freda Bonner, who's meant to be someone who's also Orientalist. He says that she asked all the right questions, but she had all the wrong answers.
That even he admits and she came back to her senses had to come back to her senses.
This you will never find and I keep telling, you can never ever find such levels of preservation from different sources in any other ancient world religion, which is dominant in the world, demographically, Hinduism, no chance, Judaism, absolutely. No chance whatsoever, we're going to come to that near the end of it.
And that's why I actually get enraged that you know, if you have a discussion with a Jew, and he tries to compare Jewish preservation with this, it's actually comical. It's comical. It's a lie.
And, obviously, Christianity as well.
This is the picture of the inscription.
Now, some people say, look, and you've heard this, you've probably heard this before. We said, look, the first Syrah Yes, was ignition. So a lot of people make this mistake, actually, it's not even the case that the first Sierra was even a sham. Or even it's hard.
Because it's hard has been preserved and even a sham. It's not the case that even is hacker has been presented. It's not that slave in the first manuscripts we have not true. That is not understanding even the manuscript evidence, because we've got zeros before even a sham. For example.
We have Musab Nakba, and he had some of the cooler than Maha Xia and that was 141. So that's even that Maluma that particular infant piece of info which is incorrect. We have manuscript ID, Sierra's that go to 1.1. Now, the Sierra doesn't mean, the older Hadith was not there. And then this guy made us all up. Of course, we've had the Hadith tradition, and we'll come to this have ascended of chains of narration from the time of the Prophet. Now, he just wrote a book, compiling that stuff, at 141. And that's the earliest manuscripts of an entire story of the prophet that we have. It doesn't mean that the Hadith were not there. The hadith were there. For even manuscript evidence of the Hadith
was there before, for example, the Sahaba, the Sahaba of Hammurabi.
And we have partial manuscripts of even
want to be
found near Swan and you'll find them actually Jani, some of them in Berlin, some of them in different places. Her mom, evident when a bee was
Actually the Student Oh
he was born 19 Ah, which is as you can probably add numbers now, nine years after eight years of process under death
eight years after a problem so sometimes we have manuscripts attribute to a person who is a student of Abu Huraira
this is even manuscripts but of course manuscripts are not the only thing I mean
we have absorption and incorporation so for example it's not the fact that okay, you don't have the manuscript that the thing is not preserved. We don't believe in that. So for example, Buhari there are things which are were manuscripts at the time Buhari put into his book, we don't have the original manuscript but we have Buhari and so why would not count does that make sense? Even on a manuscript level, we have things the same thing Timothy, we have same things in society we have different Summon, that the same thing apply. It's called absorption and incorporation.
So for example, this Haifa, a saw the Kurama glass is included as part of Muslim damnit.
Now, obviously, I haven't been humbled by 241 is very long, but at his time, he had access to that. He had that cipher in front of him. He had that particular manuscript in front of him, he wrote it down, we have it now. So he copied something which was physical paper. Because this there is a misconception that in Islam, everything was through oral transmission, that everything was Chinese whispers or oral transmission or this kind of things. It's false. There were entire manuscripts that were copied by writing from one Hadith scholar to another. And this is I'm giving you examples I this is by no means an exhaustive list. But I'm Oblast as you know, as hobby, decipher Valley, Nabi
Talib is included within Bukhari
and so on and so forth. Like the book of the cat written by a walker Siddiq is included in a Buhari and so on.
So we have that we have manuscripts, people, and there's so many of those that were written by the US hub, or the Sonance, and the Gemma's and the Hadith, and all these particular books of Hadith.
And we're still sticking with the script here. And we only for us, I should mention, we don't accept that this is the any, our method, as we'll come to see is much more rigorous, much harder than their method to find the manuscript somewhere, and you can actually be something to someone, you'll find that our method is actually much more, it's much more critical in this, the Hadith method is much more critical than this.
But we're sticking with this. Why? Because it's what modern historians are used to. So we're giving them this anyway.
And obviously, one thing that was a recent discovery in 2015, was the Birmingham manuscript is very significant for historian, for me, is not history. And for you. And for faithful believers, it shouldn't be very significant, because we don't base our faith on this, but we're making the argument. And we're saying, look, it's 95% is carbon dated to a degree of 95%. To within the life of the performance, Ursula
is carbon dated to the degree of 95%, within the life of the product, how solemn and
which is five, six eighths of 654 by the University of Oxford, and it's in the University of Birmingham. Once again, it's in a Western University. Now, that's a manuscript and it is two folios. It's two pages, but it's commensurate with what we have. Now we have other manuscripts, obviously, the most complete one is the Topkapi one. And that's people think it's off man's it's not off man's one, this is like once, one century after the prophets.
Death by has basically 99.9% or 9.5% of the Quran, and some manuscript, and it's in line with what we were reciting today.
And so you have a perfect match between the sources that are in the Birmingham manuscript with that, which is in the Topkapi manuscript, and there's a 99 point per all of the Quran is there, and then you have 95% radiocarbon dating to the town. What more do you want? I mean, to be honest with you, what more do you want?
For historian they're studying ancient if they found this for the Bible, imagine you find something attributes of Jesus in the first within his life to scrolls. T would be to Christians would have a good they would.
Unbelievable, there's no chance you're going to find anything like that in the first 100 years of Christianity, no chance at all any.
So SubhanAllah. Sometimes Allah uses the orientalist, the historical revisionists as a jhandi.
As a way to actually make Islam true as a way of preserving the religion. Well, I will I will do that I'll be kala who and no one knows the genome of Allah except for him. So Allah can do to us here of this believer to serve the religion of Assam. And so an Orientalist
serve the religion of Islam.
He tries to attack it. And actually he starts to realize there's more than this going on.
And this is a good example of that.
And this is an image of the manuscript here. Look how chunky it looks. It looks I actually love this image. I mean, it looks very crisp or beautiful writing. Imagine if they had a Bible look like that.
Imagine if they had it. I mean, imagine if you had something like the Old Testament, that they even their process of choosing what books go into the book, the Bible is arbitrary. As an atheist did it in the fourth century is not even counseled, did it? Let alone have a book like this full manuscript like that? I'm gonna be honest, man. I want to tell you something else. And this is almost a waste of time, but I need to mention it just because you need to be aware of the you need to be aware
of the kinds of discourses that Orientalist in the academy and outside of the Academy are putting forward there's a guy called Dan Gibson. And what he tried to say is that look, Mecca is an imaginary place.
It's an imaginary place, because if you look at the masjid and the earliest lamp, they will not actually pointed to Mecca at all. In fact, they will point to so they they will pointed to Petra.
So which means that the Qibla was actually not towards Mecca, but towards Petra itself. Okay, now he thought he was being you know, very, he wants to be the next Patricia Crona Of course, you know, he wants to say something ridiculous, but he was refuted by his own peers
David King, who's a historian of
some standing in I think is kings University. I can't remember if his kings or not, but he contributed to Britannica or the Encyclopedia of Islam.
And even Dan Gibson when he was trying to quote him, he caught him incorrectly. Yeah, he refuted that Gibson and I'm gonna read some of the things that he said.
He said Gibson published his book Quranic Geography in 2011. It he proved his own satisfaction that the Quran contains so few references to actual locations, including Mecca, that its origins must lie somewhere else, namely, Petra. Funnily enough, the authoritative Encyclopedia of Islam has no entry for Petra, for nothing of consequence in early Islamic history happened. So Gibson then briefly discussed Psalm 30 early mosques, which according to him festival was Petra and not towards Mecca. His argumentation was weak indeed, not least because he did not present any orientations. The bibliography did not include a single word on the kilesas now David King, responding to them Gibson,
Gibson's new book contains dazzling array of information and plans of Psalm 60. Early mosques, treated more or less in chronological order, but therefore, not by region, and is intended to show how the earliest MOSFETs Petra, then between Petra and Mecca, then the false Qibla towards Mecca with variations on theme
says Gibson wishes to ingratiate himself with Muslim readers by showing by means of a survey of early mosque orientations. These early mosques are correctly aligned, but the catch is that they are correctly aligned towards Petra, but they are not. The quoted passage asserts that the Qibla of the companions of the prophet who built the first mosque in Egypt was towards Winter Sunrise, not Petra, Gibson errs in thinking that the Qibla is towards the back Blackstone, rather the Kaaba is towards the cabinet itself. Gibson completely misunderstands my findings on the determination of the Qibla and mosques orientation. Essentially, I found that Muslims for the first few century use folk
astronomy, particularly a strong astronomical horizon phenomena, the cardinal directions and solar risings and settings, solid solid scissors, thereafter, they use cableless based on geographic coordinates and mathematical procedures, I claim the almost phase the qibla in ways of which we can now only understand I will also say the early most did not face directions we modern we modern think they should now Gibson sorry now
now Gibson to claim the face picture and accurately at that.
He continues, you know, you can read it maybe I should give us His book is not actually this is interesting. Gibson's book is not a scholarly work for his texts is of the kind one would expect from a first year college students.
College students Yeah, well, my works are quoted and misquoted. It is unclear who is the author Gibson is not competent to write on early Islamic history and often misinterpret the very few serious sources he does consult. I counter Gibson's agnostic to logical tour de force with somebody with the simple argument that the earliest Muslims could not have a lie
In mosques accurately, it was Petra, or for that matter towards Mackay that it is even easier to demolish Gibson's necessary backup thesis, which is that the first generations of Muslims had all necessary technical equipment, trigonometry, geometry, geographic coordinates, astronomical instrument, instrumentation to derive the direction of petrol accurately for any locality from Angeles to China. He's basically saying, how could they know if they're so far from the Kaaba, where the camera is, where the kibble is, how do they know the direction of the Qibla because you know, the astrolabes and these kinds of things were invented much after.
I mean, directly the things that would help orientate someone to know whether it's a blacklist. So he said that, obviously, we're looking at he's looking at Google Maps and always looking at and Gibson, and he say, Oh, look, it's not actually towards her. It's not actually,
it's more like that. So you must say it must be
as if these guys they had the same ability, like they had like a compass on their phones, and they were out. And they said, they must be bringing that way.
Gibson for you. And this is what they have to say. Now even the old guy that says not even a college student, with a first year college student, with them make a comment like this. So the point is, these are the kinds of embarrassing things that they're they're led to, because they want to mention something new. But the truth of the matter?
Is that Mecca, you ask, what's the evidence of Mecca, then tell me the evidence of Mecca. I had this conversation with one of them if you don't expose them one by one very famous historian in a setting.
Yeah, in a particular in the University of saying, I'm not going to expose him, because this is what he wrote books on this and that he wrote a book on it. Potamia, and he's from Jewish background.
It's not daunting, anyways, because he's very famous about someone else. And he said, like, Mike has not even mentioned the Quran. I said, Yes, it is actually.
He said, Well,
he said, It's not my case, book acid is mentioned, Becca, as also mentioned, Nick, actually, as well, hold on. He said, what I said we bought an iMac is, as
is mentioned, and he looked at it and I was like, Is this the end of the argument? Is this it? Is this how easy is it you have to know one area? Because it's not mentioned before? And I told him that. But I'll give you one better. I mean, the Quran obviously, they'll say it's invented by Abdul Malik and moron. And maybe the hijab uses that coffee. And they came in with the Quran, which makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, by the way, because a lot of the Quran is, you know, is talking about the future and certain ways talking about the president certain way, it doesn't even make sense to posit this.
But let's say for the sake of argument,
interestingly, you'll find that there's evidence of Mecca
in Christian literature. And this is very powerful. So I'm gonna give you some interesting points. This is Clark's commentary on the Bible.
And this is the blessing, where with Moses, the man of God blessed the children of Israel, before his death, the Lord came from Sinai, and rose up from saya onto them. And he shined from Mount Paran.
And he came with 10,000 of saints from his right hand, and went a fiery law for them. So what is this person? You ask the biblical scholar?
They've got two opinions on wet partners. Maybe there's two params? Actually, there's actually it seems to me that there's two brands like sometimes you have one city, more than one city was one name like Alexandria, where I'm from, there's many Alexandria, I was robbed on something when I was in Egypt. So how do I get from Alexandria to so they'll give me these things in America and Alexandria in America. Sometimes you have a city like London, there's a London somewhere in Canada. You know, sometimes I see more than one name for a city. Purana is one of those kinds of cities. But look at what the biblical scholars are saying.
He dwelt in the wilderness of peran. This is generally allowed to have been a part of the desert belonging to Arabian
patria, in the vicinity of Mount Sinai. So let's see some of the references of that.
The strong biblical Bible Dictionary also tells peran Is the desert of Arabia.
CBS, a seventh century Armenian Bishop and historian when describing the outcome. He said,
When we covered CBS already, by the way,
he said they assembled and came up Iran. So it's as if you understood that was the front of the Bible. He understood they assembled and came out of peran Yeah.
The Bible tells us the Parana is a very place where Ishmael dealt, dwelt. While he Ishmael was living in the desert peran His mother got a wife, for him from Egypt, the Talmud, look, this is the time that the Palestinian Thomas says
The following 8000 apprentice priests fled to the army.
I've always had a problem for answering this King's name. Yeah. Which is
you guys say hey say, Nebuchadnezzar, Nebuchadnezzar, yeah. And they went to the Israelites, they said to them give us something to drink we are firstly, they brought them salty things and skins, bottles that were blown up with that they went to them eat and drink, when one of them open the skin and put it in his mouth. The air was in, burst forth and choke them and Israel in the Oracle concerning Arabia. Can you see? So this this term Arabia has been used and this is the Talmud, this is a Jewish source.
Babylonian Talmud, here you have again, the one who sees Ishmael in a dream, his prayer will be heard. And only Ishmael the son of Abraham, but an Arab in general, no, the one who sees a Campbell in the dream death has been decreed upon him
from heaven, and he has been saved. So basically is connecting Ishmael to where, to the Arabian Peninsula. Okay, so it's not Islam that came and connected Ismail or Ishmael with the Arabian Peninsula.
And in particular peran, the Arabian Peninsula, this seems to be continued from at least some level of biblical and Jewish
information that there was there.
You see, so there's more than a book of Jubilees. And each one his sons,
the sons of Keturah, and their sons went together and vote from from Paragon to the entering in Babylon in all lands, which is towards the east facing the desert.
So it's telling you where it is now. It's towards the east, facing the desert.
And these mingled with each other and the name was called Arabs and the Israelites.
Now, very, very interesting.
You're seeing here
we're seeing that they're asking what's the evidence, Mecca and all this kind of thing? And it's usually Christian sometimes asking this question, your evidence is your own books. The evidence is in the in the Jewish books. Now, we'll come to this maybe near the end, but there are two schools of historical like historical or historians when it comes to the Bible.
There's what you call the minimalists, and we call the maximalists. Okay? Now, the minimalists are those who when they're looking at the early histories of especially Old Testament prophets, really, and truly anything but Moses after before Moses is scanty, if not in any evidence of any profit, that's outside the biblical, or let's say religious books. You've got Moses, you've got David, you've got Solomon, you've got some other prophets, you've got the people of Israel, there's evidence of that, and we'll come to that outside of the Bible. Okay. So a minimalist is the one who, when he wants to, when he wants to understand the early histories of these people, they will not
consult the Bible that much, they will consult it minimally.
The maximalists will consult it more. So what I'm saying is that this standard of evidence where we're looking at the Talmud, or we're looking at the Bible, it would satisfy a more maximally orientated historian
from the school of thought perspective, like, but it's still something you can't say, oh, this is not evidence of Mecca, is being attached to its male and the Arabs and so on. There is clearly evidence and, and this is just some I can give you more. But for brevity and conciseness, I want to give you some information. So when Dan Gibson says, oh, there's nothing connected to
Mecca? Well, actually this thing's connected to make a way before
it's mine is connected to Mica. Why is it coincidence? How could it be a coincidence that this narrative in the Quran, the narrative of the Quran, which which locates Abraham, and locates his mind in particular, and Hagar Hotjar it locates these people in the Arabian Peninsula. There's ample evidence in Jewish sources and biblical sources that connect them in the same area.
If Muhammad wa Salam is meant to have no relevance, if this is if this is not actually a continuation, because the story of Islam is that Muhammad Allah Allah Salam was a continuity from previous prophets.
And that he was from the sons of Ismail as we're going to cover, but if this story was
vacuous, and it was completely, it made no sense, bereft of any historical quality. If this story was such, then how could you find any evidence that corroborates it in their books?
If this was some kind of made up story?
This doesn't make any sense. Why would you put that
Why would you want to put the Arabs in their, in his in his Talmud of all places, one of his most sacred place, the place was smiles in Arabic.
So to say, we're not buying here, no one's gonna buy this, then Gibson and talking about look at Petra.
Let's be honest about the situation.
And I was reading something interesting. And what I found is extremely interesting in it, because
it's become fashionable in the orientalist world, with some of the anti Islamic apologists. And that's what they are. They oppose academics, but really the apologists for Christianity or the anti Islam apologist, for example, Stephen Shoemaker, and he wrote a book, I'm not going to advertise his book, but I'm going to mention some of the things he wrote in that because I find it really interesting.
You know, in the Quran, for example, we will see the story of Jesus, okay. And you will know that the story of Jesus in the Quran is different from the ones in the gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, especially that, you know, Mary, in chapter 19, you know, and sort Maryam, she went to the palm trees, and then the, you know, the dates came on her, and she shook the power Huzi. And she's hooked up the palm trees, and you know, the story.
This story, by the way,
is not in the,
in the gospels, you will not find it in the Matthew, Mark, Luke, you'll not find it in the, in the Gospels of the Christians, but you will find it somewhere else.
A close match to this story, we'll find it in the Gospel of James. Now gospel of James, not the book of James, the Gospel, who is James just for the sake of argument, or just for the on the set, James actually is meant to be, according to them, not according to us, but it's meant to be the brother of Jesus Christ. They say, they say, Joseph, the carpenter had a brother, who had a son, and that son was James.
Anyways, there was this, the gospel of James.
This particular book was not being read, and according to Stephen Shoemaker, and I haven't done as much research on this matter, as he as he is trying to locate this once again, on goals and shooting themselves in the foot. And we saw in the beginning, when Patricia Crona was talking about the landscape and the geography, we're going to see even more here, we're going to see even more of this, that really, he's trying to locate Islam or the formation or development of Islam in the early, let's say, time, like 50 years at a time of Abdul Malik and Marwan.
And he said, Look, there's there's a church is a church in Jerusalem is called the charisma church, this particular church in Jerusalem.
This particular church in Jerusalem has very specific notions about marry.
In fact, that you know, the tree in the Quran has mentioned that shake the tree and this will come down, they consider that tree to be even holy tree, they consider that tree to be a holy tree. And you know, it's located think about it, it's meant to be where the historical Jesus's, like near Bethlehem or Jerusalem or whatever it may be. So it's actually meant to be if you're being a historian about it.
If you want to know what Jesus said, Let's go to geographical location. This is closest where he lived, and listen to what he said. I'm going to read exactly what he says. He says, this version,
this version of how Jesus was born, and marry, it's so specific that Muhammad couldn't have known about
it. It's not at that time, you know, and that you'll see I'm gonna read it couldn't have known about it. And even you know, yeah, Dr. Harun is mentioned Quran. Oh, sister of Aaron. And the some of the Orientals, they say, that shows you that there was confusion with Aaron and stuff. He says, the sister of Aaron is mentioned in that church.
Look what they're doing rough, they're making our job easier. So okay, maybe she had a sister, or your brother God errand. I will now we have information of that.
I'm going to read it to you now, Stephen Shoemaker. And he thinks by saying this, he's making a case against Islam, trying to show the development of Islam. And what he's actually showing is that it's impossible for the last alum to have had information that was connected in Jerusalem in a very specific church.
And I saw an interview with him
with another professor of electrical Reynolds, or whatever they got for this first name, Gerald Reynolds or something like that. And he's saying there's no chat. He's a storyteller. I've told him, so there's no storyteller that can go into that much detail.
But you know, he went to Syria when he was younger and he doesn't this is no chance. This is very specific church in a very specific place. And this information came, so I'm gonna read out what he says.
Because, as I say, they shoot themselves in the foot without realizing, says the case of the Cathedral Church and the Quranic nativity tradition in line 2228 submarine submarine, which I have discussed elsewhere in some detail leaves little
question that we must approach the Quranic text as a corpus of traditions
to absorb Jewish and Muslim traditions or Jewish and Christian traditions in the decades after the believers conquered and occupied the Near East. In these seven verses, the Quran gives highly compressed account of the birth of Jesus, that depends on distinctive combination of Christian nativity traditions, that is uniquely found outside the Quran. Only in the liturgical practices of a particular Marian shrine, just outside of Jerusalem, that can FISMA church, in the vast in the vast world of late ancient Christianity, it's only at this church that we find the world of late ancient Christianity. It is only at this church that we find the combined two
early Christian traditions that appear in the current account of Nativity, Christ, Christ birth in a remote location, rather than in Bethlehem, and Mary's refreshment by a miraculous palm tree and spring. For good measure, one must add the liturgical traditions of this same strain.
Also explicitly named Mary as the sister of Aaron.
See what he's saying? He thinks he's making a case against Islam say, look, he must have borrowed it. He must have been around after he must have borrowed it from these guys. There's no way they wouldn't know about that. She's very specific charges, very specific liturgy.
Can you see how he's digging a grave for him? So you're making the case for me, my friend, he couldn't have known that information. You're right. And that information is most likely closest to the historical tradition of Jesus. Why? Because geographically is closest to him, where he probably lived. He didn't live in Rome, Roman Empire. Jesus, there is good evidence. He also stories even atheist acknowledges his sources tomorrow.
But if he is this recipe is true, then most historians will say go to his geographical location go close to where he lived. And when you do that, you find the story closest to what the Quran and according to this guy who's anti Muslim or insolence, he's saying, There's no way that Paul could have known that. Let's see what let's see what he says.
At last, providing a clear solution to this well known puzzle of the Quran, the correspondence between the Quranic passage, and we continue, and the tradition and liturgical practice of the Catholic Church is simply too close
to be a coincidence. Clearly the Quran knows and expects its audience to know, this particular configuration of Christian nativity tradition. Not really. Not really. But that's what he wants to say. It's like he's trying to locate it outside of Arabian Peninsula. No way. It's meant it must be. It's like the same argument that Corona was saying, Why is he mentioning olives? Why is he mentioning pomegranates? Why is he mentioning seeds? Why is he mentioned the Sabbath is meant to be a makansutra. He's mentioned it because the primary audience is not the only audience.
Why is he mentioned these details of that particular church? He's mentioning it because he couldn't have known that information, and he got it from a different source.
So listen to it continues. Nevertheless, there is no evidence that this particular fusion of traditions, was known even among Christians. Listen to what he's saying. This particular fusion is no evidence that even Christians could not have known that who lived outside of Jerusalem and Bethlehem is therefore Hard to believe, if not entirely unthinkable, the court saying he thinks he's making a case against Islam. He's making a very strong case. He's he is bad apologist, Islamic apologist, and I've heard
Subhanallah is trying to harm Islam is really aiding it seems unthinkable. He's saying no, he's a story is looking. We trust this guy. So he's, he has no connection to Islam. When he's doing his, his interview with Reynolds, whatever, he's got Christian pictures in the back and crosses. He's you can see his real anger towards Islam. He's angry towards anyone who has a confessional narrative and it is what he's saying. While I listen to what you're saying.
It is therefore Hard to believe, if not entirely unthinkable, that the kisses kisses mama would somehow have been widely known among Muhammad's non literate followers and the central hijas so that they could have had any chance of understanding the compressed and elliptic reference to them in Quran 1922. Indeed, it boggles the mind to imagine that somehow this this, distinctively Jerusalemite combination of Nativity traditions, could have been widely known or understood by the hundreds or so literal early Meccan. Surah is particularly when we find no evidence of any knowledge of this particular configuration of traditions anywhere else in late age, ancient Christianity other
than the charisma, the suggestion that somehow this distinctive mixture of traditions could have reached Muhammad and the sisters of Mecca and them alone in the Baron Hamlet strains. Credibility, strains credibility in the extreme
because he wants to show that the Quran was not authored by Muhammad
was authored by a conglomerate of authors. And they came together and there was development and other than this, instead, what he's showing is, in fact,
he couldn't have written this because that information couldn't have come to him.
And that is a Quranic argument for the for the veracity of Islam.
There's so it's such a strong argument, it's mentioned the Quran.
Yes. Except the gospel of James. They don't know. So then can they not say we really we just,
we don't care what they accept? Because thing is? So here's a good question. So look, the Christian believes in a certain amount of books in the New Testament. Because in the fourth century is the guy called Athanasius. Who decided this is what's going to be in the book, and this is what's not going to be in the book. This was going to be the New Testament and what's not going to be in the New Testament. Now, we will say, even from your perspective, oh, Christian, how do you give this man such authority to include what's in the book? And it's not? He can't turn around and say Athanasius, it was a it was a council because it's the same as the council like the Council of Nicaea, the
Council of Constantinople, you can see is somewhat plausible, okay, the church has been given authority. This is a single individual. So my single question is what gives us an atheist that power? So for me, as a non Christian, I don't need to throw everything away from Christianity. Just like historians have been using texts of the Bible in a minimally and maximum way. I have the right as a historian to look at it and say, well, actually, I'm going to look at it as a historian. Yes, at the sources which are closest to the geographic location which Jesus Christ is meant to be, I don't care about what Athanasius decided to be authoritative or not authoritative, I'm gonna look at
what's closest to Jesus. And when I do so, I find this actually, the descriptions of Jesus's birth is more in line with the Quran than your descriptions.
He's gonna say no, but we don't accept those of us who don't care. What you accept, we're talking is a historical discussion. It's not a religious one. We've already put aside our religious biases. We're not talking from a confectionery perspective, faithful perspective. Well, as an atheist, said, what Martin Luther said, what John Calvin said, Who will Augustus we don't care about these people. These are theologians. This is a historical exercise, not a theological one. That's what I would say to them.
I say when we look at the historical data here, if we are to believe that Jesus Christ actually existed, and we do believe that, then we have to look at what what the evidence is of his existence, well, what kind of different narratives and this is one of them. So that was the gospel of James, what date are we looking at?
I think so. Yes. I think I think we said a century
after Christ. Yeah, there's nothing before that. There's nothing the first century so thing is the second, I think it's the second stage of I don't know exactly the date. So that's the look that I just mentioned something I was gonna say, because as we know, we believe that Islam came from, you know, Adam, and Eve all the way till now. And I think when people say there's similarities between other religions and Islam, therefore, Islam copied them. I think that actually plays in our favor, because because we are we've been there from day one, if they will, if there were no similarities, they will say, Well, you say you are here from day one. But nothing you say can be found in other
religions? Sure. So it's a good point, what you'll see, you can look at it two ways, the borrowing narrative, or the continuity, the theological continuity narrative. What I'm saying is that when you look at it, from our perspective, we're gonna say, look, there's similarities because Allah says not for under, he has sent these books before. So of course, we expect there to be scenarios, no problem. But what I'm saying is that when you have information like we're just presented, it adds a layer of argument
to the case here, a layer of historical argument, can you see what's going on? It's not just like my my word versus yours, and I'm faithful in one direction, you're faithful another. I'm saying, Look, you're saying what's the sister of Erina. But I'm saying there's no historical information by sister Erin.
You're saying why is this not what I'm saying? That's in other places where Jesus is meant to close to where he's lived. Now we're having a historical discussion. It boggles the mind of Shoemaker
there's also I don't know if you see there's also the you know, the replacement theory is is an Ambien. You know, there is some early Christians I don't know if the Unitarians Have you looked into this where they actually believe that this actually happened. Yeah, of course, there's there's, they're not Unitarians. I mean, like a lot of it comes from the Gnostic Bible and stuff like Yeah, so it's interesting that from these different Bibles that kind of prove a point and doesn't really say what happened. Yep. But once I've seen is that exactly as a substitution theory is there in in in this first set first century Christianity? Yeah. And I think we're talking here about this. I
cannot remember the name of the Gnostic writer was obviously they consider Gnostics to be to be heretics. So they'll say we don't, that's always the excuse for them. We say we don't care what you consider to be Orthodox and heterodox. We are looking at things from a historical perspective. You're saying okay, Jesus was crucified we're saying, Okay, let's take a look at it.
Look at these different substitution theory here. What a Thomas said he was stoned. Why is it different results? Results? Why is it different reports? Yeah. So just from a historical perspective, the reason why we're inclined to this as a historian is just because geographically speaking, it makes more sense. So we're looking at from a geographical. Why No, okay? Because the thing is, for us, the councils and stuff mean nothing. They mean nothing at all.
So when we're looking at it, we're looking at just what we're historians here, we're not looking at theologians, the Christian is always going to return a theological manner. We're saying, look, we've already decided to park the theological bus in order to perform this exercise. And we're doing it. And what you're seeing repeatedly is that when the historical critical method is applied to Islam, it comes with favorable results when it's applied to Christianity, it comes with unfavorable results. That's really what's going on here. So let's, let's continue, because there's a few things I wanted to continue with you guys.
So that's one thing, okay, you can continue reading these in your own time.
But I just want to say something quickly about Hadith, because it's very important that we talk about this at least briefly, we spoke about historical critical method, we spoke about the revision and so on.
But we have a method
okay, we have a method and the method is in many ways, very simple, but very, very many other ways many very complex and the method for this to be so here
for it to be authentic, then it has to fulfill five conditions, three of them is our pathway with called positive. And to have them we call negative, like, so the Hadith has to be more docile, Santa for example, has to be connected.
So such a person, so such a person, so such a person, such a person heard from such a person heard from such a person, the information, the people in that chain, have to be adult, they have to have good reputation, which, and that goes into great detail, we're not gonna be able to cover today. And they also have to be doped, they have to have doped, or they have to have precision or accuracy. Now that is divided into two, either when they write what they're writing is legible and understandable.
Because at the time when they're writing stuff, you can't write something in
a legible manner. Because then people will be like me, verbally writing, I would not qualify for someone, unfortunately, or, and or their memory has to be very good. So if they're known for bad memory, they will not be accepted and Hadith. So these are the things.
Three things, which are pretty easy to do, like, say, a student of knowledge can probably do that. Fight, okay, this guy, look at the biographies of men, cuz How do you know? You know, because these people's lives were effectively recorded in the early days of Islam, first two, 300 years. And we have books of recording the squat and water gel of biographies of these people. Okay, so this person lived in this place, and this person was in that place, and here, and you'll find this embarrassing things that happen when people claim that hadith is narrated.
And there's geographic inconsistency. I narrated the Hadees from this person, but where he lives in Syria and you live in Baghdad, how had that happen? Do you ever go that everyone looks up honey, for example.
So there's that, but there's also two things which is a schueth. So aberration, and that can be with the Senate. It cannot and I'll explain what those what I love, which is a defect. Now, the thing is the most difficult thing so difficult, because what is the effect of how do you even classify what a defect of a hadith is, it can actually be a nasty defect. You can have a defect of the Hadith in text. Only the Hadith can be so here in terms of narration, but it goes against something established in the Quran. For example, I'll give you a famous example of this hadith thrown up, which is mentioned Muslim. And if you look at the hadith is narrated by kava bar. It says that, for
example, Allah created such and such, Adam from dust and Adam was created on Friday. Yeah, it's a long Hadith says something like that. And there's also Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, that kind of thing. So even though this hadith is a Muslim, which is one of the most authoritative books of Hadith, and Buhari himself rejected, and adequately, who's seen as one of the great scholars of LLN. So if he rejects the Hadith, why he says it goes against the narrative and the Quran. And it sounds like Genesis. Now he doesn't say this. But Cavalia above was a Jew before. So okay, you got a guy who was a Jew, he converted to Islam. He's narrating a hadith it sounds like Genesis, even though
it's not the content is not the same. And it goes against the Quran Buhari says even though it's in Muslim, I mean, he doesn't say this, but he rejects the Hadith itself. That totally rejects the Hadith itself. Why? Because it has Allah has a defect within it. So this example is a very difficult thing to do. Because you can have a lot in the NUS you can have either in the the content of the ad, because I have a lower defect in the Senate. You can have a something shoved in the NUS and then the sun is like you can have it in the chain of narration and you can also have it in the actual
content as well. Now this is the hardest thing to do because this
is a falsification exercise. It goes negative words, to prove that the hadith is more docile is easy. Okay that we look at the biographies. These guys are not liars, they're not whatever, they're not moved to that whatever. And even the Muqtada has some rulings attached to him by the way, he can read it so long as he's not calling his brother in law. So we move to that is how original Buhari for example. So it's interesting situation never. So there's very specific, logical historical methods that are used it. Suffice it for me to say there's no equivalent in Christianity, you will never find a single chain of narration that connects Jesus with anybody that's writing anything
down. The religion of Christianity has not been preserved therefore.
And by the way, you someone will say, well, that's not critical enough. If you imagine that I have a double humble mentioned, for example, who died 241 He wrote, obviously, he compiled the Hadith, Muslim Muhammad and so on, that he memorized a million Hadith.
What does it mean to memorize a million Hadith he didn't memorize million different wordings of the Prophet. He memorize, let's say 10,000 Hadith with 100,000. Senate's so what he's really memorizing is the change of narration is not memorizing a million
together, it's just memorizing names and orders. He had these guys have good memory.
These guys, I mean, they had incredible and it's not hard to believe this, people are doing that. Now. Stephen Shoemaker has a whole chapter, trying to tell us how the Quran could not be memorized.
He said it's impossible for the whole Quran to be memorized.
Except in the literature in a society where there's and he tries to bring scientific proofs.
So what you're talking about, and even I saw him in an interview, and the guy was saying, but you get some ceremonies of some young nine year old neuros. No Quran.
He said, Yeah, but that's only because they read it from paper.
I'll say okay, I was I won't say look, but I know some guys that told me they were blind.
Like we had had a shift where like he was blind share in Finsbury Park mosque, yeah, everyone knows him. And he was put on every year. You know,
his memory is spot on. Now. He doesn't make any mistakes, very rarely makes mistakes for crime. And he's blind. You can't tell me this guy. He learned from people. Anyway, so he's trying to say that you don't want to rubbish the idea of human memory. Because we live in an age of distraction. They think that people in the desert, there was distracted as we were, they were looking at stars and memorizing poetry memorizing, that's all they had to do. Okay, talking about comparing this and that, and even now you have people that memorizing this stuff.
So anyway, the point is, is that
the point I'm making is that they they knew, but more Hadith are rejected than they are accepted. Him as you got million Hadith, how many scientists do you reckon we have? And now we said about 10,000, by the way, like if you most of the 95% of the Hadith, that are in the six books of Hadith constitute what is what is authentic? What is authentic? So, we, we've been so critical with the Hadith, that we've rejected that 5% of them.
Were the biggest Hadith rejected on the planet.
We are about we're not
throwing the baby with the bathwater. You know, there is some, there is some caution that we must exercise. But we're saying that there's more rejection going on. That's how critical is it? This is a lead. This is Chef, this is not it's not corroborating, they're rejecting more than they're accepting. They're not happy to take because it's true and oriented society, people have political ambitions.
The Americans may have had political ambitions that our best has may have had the political, we accept, we accept. You're absolutely right. That's why we look at we have a method or criterion. Now compare this with the following. Okay?
The HCM method now, especially vis a vie, the biblical discourse, I'm going to give you something that according to Britannica, they circle critical historical criticism is a study of biblical literature method of criticism of the Hebrew Old Testament and the New Testament that emphasizes the interpretation of biblical documents in the light of contemporary environment. It draws upon not only exegesis, and hermeneutics but also the fields of history, archaeology, classical scholarship. So this is what we're doing here. Yeah, we're not just going for, I'm giving you a kind of a definition right? Now, look, they've got principles. And, by the way, these principles were just
developed recently, like maybe the last 100 years, 200 years, whatever.
And by the way, it's so interesting that even according to those principles, Islam would be preserved next year now, one of the principles is called the criterion of embarrassment.
The criterion of embarrassment for some reasons of victimhood keep talking about is that if something is embarrassing to the person, who is less likely that they would record it about themselves.
Now, let me give an example. One of the things they mentioned Satanic Verses. So okay, so if we were in the business of throwing
Nora way Hadith Vitalik vs. So they bring satanic was attacking Islam. I say it's just as italic VS is is an evidence preservation of Islam
they bring in had been to Josh now this is a very interesting story I'm not going to go into we're gonna go into into more detail on a different story, but basically, you know Zaytoven Hadassah who used to be the adopted son of the former Hasulam and then he wasn't really he has there's no blood connection between them anyway. Okay, that he divorced a woman called Zetas ain a bit to Josh. And then the prophets of Salaam, was told really by Allah subhanaw taala, according to the Hadith, according to the Hadith,
and as governors will have to believe in FCM Allahumma De Soto has a chapter three verse days, which says that and you concealed in yourself what Allah had exposed to you, that Allah exposed to him that you're going to get matches in a bit Jash but he didn't tell the people Allah reprimands him for that in the Quran. What's action Nasrallah contracture and you fear the people? Allah Allah saying this to Muhammad, Salah Salah and you fear the people and Allah is more befitting that you fear him.
The Hustle and bustle he said that if there was anything that was going to be concealed from the Quran, it would be this verse. It's very embarrassing. The prophets of Salaam is about to marry someone who is the wife of in the society at that time they consider it to be a big deal. Okay, he was the adoptive son, how could you marry his ex wife how even now it seems a bit weird, but it's not as weird as then because it's no biological relationship. At that time of adoption was a big thing. So they they consider that to be at the time it was a big deal. So much of the currencies will be different apps that come along with it, that you can sell within yourself what Allah is
going to expose, Allah say, I'm going to expose it.
And hustle bustle is saying that actually, if there's anything that he was going to conceal of himself, it would be this verse, tell me if this is not the criterion of embarrassment. So they use it to attack the browser Salam is not realizing that they're actually positively making a case for the preservation of Islam according to their methods.
visa vie, the principle of embarrassment.
So this is an interesting thing, but when you apply it to Jesus, and so on, what's what's really there to be embarrassed about?
When you you could say, Okay, well, the principle of embarrassment they need that stuff. We don't we don't need this. We don't need this for the preservation of Islam. We have biographies of men, this person where he was where he lived, where he ate, well, he doesn't.
We're going to accept his Hadith based on this. Basically, he's got a criminal record. A DBS check has been done on all the biographies of men.
And you're telling me about the principle of embarrassment.
That's how you're going to tell me that the Bible is preserved. You're telling me about that principle there. That even if you employ that you're going to exonerate the program's Arsalan? Not that but you're going to make a case for the preservation of historical and your methods. Everything has a hikma. You say, Why did Allah allow such a thing? Why did Allah allow the prophet to marry such a woman?
What's the heck out of it? Maybe this is one of the second that so it can be a bolstered argument for the preservation of Islam according to their methods.
They have other criterions, which is quite similar as one called the criterion of dissimilarity originality, or irreducibility.
So it's quite similar these the baptism of Jesus and stuff like that as Okay, well, because according to their theology, the one who's baptizing who in this case was John the Baptist is better than the one being baptized as they look, how could it be that Jesus has been baptized within the case inferiority, but still the story is told which indicates dissimilarity here
you see what I mean. But anyway, that is pretty weak in terms of historical just be honest about this. And then we know this as well.
The principle of multiple attestation comes from different sources and we of course have al Hadith, Aziz al Hadith and mature al Hadith. Al mutawa, as everyone knows, most Hadith are not actually heard. People think that I had Hadith, which is a Hadith supposedly narrated by one
chain of narration, one chain of the ratio is only rated by one person, that's not true. And I had had it not had but I had Hadith, who is divided into three. Al Habib, as he's as mature. And very, very, has two or more people narrating the Hadith.
The Shah attacked Abu Huraira and its look is why is he making all these Hadith? He's the most narrated person of Hadith. How could you generate someone else? It's so interesting, because if you use the principle of attestation, or multiple whatever, was it? Well, they call it the principle of multiple attestation. Yeah, if you use the principle of multiple attestation, even by the historical critical method standard, did you know that more than 95% of the Hadith and there's some studies I can cite on this that when the rates by Abu Huraira when the roof by somebody else?
So must have been some grand conspiracy? Because most of the things that have been arrested at least one of them
doesn't say the same thing. Why is it?
Because the other the false assumption is that he's saying this help himself, but actually our estaba con two guys hurry, it's not very best as he is, is as he's mature, two or three or more MotoActv. So we're talking about multiple attestation. Now you apply this to the Bible, there's nothing in the first 100 years. So what they're compelled to do is talk about Q Source and l source and M source and that source, and all these sorts in the second century. So they say, okay, these are independent from each other. But how can you be sure that they're independent of each other in the first place, because there's no chain of narration? When we talk about independence, we're
talking about guys that live completely different place, different human beings, different biographies.
And they have different, you cannot even employ their historical critical method, we have absorbed all of it.
So tell me, which is more critical. We're saying the Hadith method is more critical than their method, their principles of multiple attestation and principles and embarrassment and principles, whatever the similarity we are ones are stronger.
So why do you think you'll be more skeptical than we are? We're skeptical of the skepticism. And moreover,
not only are we skeptical of asking of your skepticism, we employ all your methods of skepticism to reach even more staunch and stern conclusions about the veracity of Hadith or lack thereof.
And looking at the historical historicity of Jesus Christ, EP Saunders he wrote a book called The historical figure of Jesus and he said that if you remove the Bible you've you've got a figure of Jesus Christ as a very like I'm paraphrasing any but he's he's basically an obscure figure in Bethlehem
Steel figure, you've only got by the way, you've got two people that are off to repeat it oft quoted,
as figures that are outside the outside the Christian corpus for the historical character of Jesus Christ. But we won't go into that we can go into that movies all the time. And one of them anyway is interpolation in his works, and the Christians tried to put the baptism and the crucifixion and their and stuff and then it was recently Yanni seem to be a forgery, and even that they put in forgeries in there. And even though even the non Christian sources the Christians have, they don't not only have their own books, but the books of other people that have no business with Trayvon
the corpses though it's like I'm crossing your my own Bible. Now I'm going to the bathroom to get across town as well. Why curse as he was books.
Because you're a force a theological narrative
interpolation into anything to do with Christianity, I always hear the word interpolation and corruption.
Nothing is preserved of their religion.
bits and bobs here and there.
But look at the historicity of Moses. Now many people will know that Yannick
if we go back to the idea of
looking outside the Bible, there is a slight delay. This rock and this one's actually in the museum, the Egyptian Museum Their look is we have something in our in our museum.
That's a very important artifact that is dated 1213 to 1203 BCE.
And in that steely rampart on the 13th line, it says the people of Israel and new expelled them around Fatah was the son of whom ranches a second. Okay, so this is what scanty evidence, quite frankly, scanty evidence, and there are about four Steelers with the woods, children of Israel. But that does show you it's not a myth. Because you can't tell me Gilgamesh and this one on that one now myth, because now we're locating it in a time and place. So let's just say, Don't Tommy Smith, how's that myth? who forged the sealer? The sun will come in there and put hieroglyphics and for that one. But if it's not forged, and Wallahi, and this could be a I think we're searching by itself. Wallahi.
If you look read, for example, the guy called Israel Finkelstein is more he represents not Norman Finkelstein, though when I spoke to you about Palestine, he's you know, there's another guy called Israel Finkelstein, who represents the minimalist school in the historical thing.
And they look at the Steelers and stuff like that. And there's another steely because we know that David, he came after Moses, David Solomon, and there's a stellar called the Tel Dan steely a very, very, very interesting seelen. It says in the house of David, because before that the minimalists were saying and this is shows you the arguments for silence can actually backfire in your face in a bad bad manner. People like Israel Finkelstein and others from the minimalist School of historical investigation. They were saying, look, there's no evidence of David. There's no evidence of him outside the Bible, there's nothing. Then the steel they came up to life called the Tel Dan steely,
which is a rock on Hebrew language and said the house of David. They translated that he had to come back a bit and retract. There is evidence now actually for that. So there's evidence for Moses, there's evidence for David.
Yes, there is.
But if you look at the minimalistic
And the reasons why and this could be a thing by itself. Well, light is so unbelievable. The reasons why they reject the biblical narrative is because they say, for example, how could this many people from Israel go to Egypt, that would be an event that will be codified in other places. But the Quran says that Pharaoh, for example, says that he should have known that there were a small number of people. So if you look at the Quranic narrative and compare it with the minimalists accounts, you'll find that the criticisms that the minimalist use against the maximalist and the biblical narrative don't actually apply to the Quranic narrative, which is a whole layer of historical evidence for the
veracity of Islam, which we can't go into now. But what I'm saying is that when you realize that these prophets were not myths, that's a very, very significant thing. You're talking outside of the purview of the Bible. This is extra biblical information. So we know now Moses existed we know okay, there's the children of Israel, there still is saying it's talking about David to talk about Solomon.
But we also know that the accounts of the biblical discourse have faulty
but then when you compare you're talking to us about the historicity of Muhammad and these some Christians apologist actually make the historicity of Muhammad compare the historicity of Muhammad wa salam with any of the prophets that existed before Him. Jesus, Moses, Abraham, nobody.
There's too much evidence.
And so with that,
I think we've covered most if not all of the of this, yes, we have covered everything.
We have covered all of how many houses that have
yet, as I said, it will
now open up the questions in Sharla. Yeah.
Without one of the headaches that they accept the supernatural, while the historical critical method does not accept it, so they're more probabilistic than the Hadith.
And both scientific or science in history, they believe in something or they they employ something called methodological naturalism. Yeah. So that way, you cannot verify an actual supernatural event. There is a Gani is historicals job historians job is not to say this happen or does not happen is historical historians job is to tell you what people said happened. That's his job. How does he know what happened or what happened? Think about it logically. If I wrote I saw such and such I saw man levitate, I went this place. I saw my liberty. Now. I wrote that journal. I wrote it, I put it down. I go to my psychologist, he said, Look, were you taking a hallucinogen? I say, No, I wasn't taking
hallucinogen I saw them and liberty was the man on strings was he a magician was this was that you can have whatever theory you like. But if I claim that a man levitated, you must accept that this is a testimony. So when you have a range of different things, you can have whatever theory of one about it. But the testimony is what we're looking for, and not necessarily the interpretation of the testimony.
So yes, this discussion there, but it's not the historians job to talk about the possibility of a historical event, or a natural or supernatural event, his job is just to narrate what the what was said, that happened, not what the interpretation of that might have might have been.
I just want to say,
the exodus in the Bible is 600,000 people that left me exactly, yeah, which is a mind blowing number. And a lot of historians said that that figure is completely wrong. Exactly. Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, exactly. So this is especially the middle of school, it will say so how is it that 600,000 people cross the sea Gani, Moses split the sea and 600,000 shot of what happened. And you're telling me that no one wrote this. And there was only one line the sealer of man butter, but the Quran says should have no clue.
There were a small band of people, which makes much more sense. It was the criticism that is levied at that particular kind of thing is not cannot be levied at that the Quranic account
I may have missed in your talk, but I was gonna say about the coins that you were talking about.
You said that they had like Allah His name written on it. But but didn't look correct Quraysh already believe in Allah before the Prophet SAW Salem. So couldn't it be the that like, the thing is they believe that Allah but they didn't have the formulations labs Mala like the best ml and stuff like these are unique to Islam, or ramen and stuff, but other than Rama wasn't any of the coins I have to look at manifest. For sure, but that's one thing. But another thing is the following is that they have no other gods. So why is the only we don't find a letter any of them will find the coin with Alazani
and moneta says local why no matter why not in the coin with them electronic jamming so that's actually a very good point. Because not only what we find is what we don't find like we don't find coins with my knife on it, for example.
So today is basically just looking at the historical
relevance as in like, proving the profit exists
Historically, yes, and not the question of whether these historical accounts are true or not just showing to historians these narratives that exist outside of
Quranic texture or Hadith texture, essentially, yeah, exactly we're taking remember, this intellectual spirit is an attempt to look at each and everything that someone can say, taking it seriously. So that if someone comes to you and says to you, like how do you prove paranhos exist, you can easily just rattle them off the, the fragments of the Arab conquest, six days, six, Thomas the presbyter, 640, CBS 660s Do whatever it may be, you know, the inscription of Ohio 24. You can just say stuff like that, and just what they're gonna say, well, they're gonna say, if they deny these historical premises, then then you'd have to counter by saying what historical premises do you
believe in? It's like a philosophical argument, but from a historical lens is that is a good thing is if they start denying this, yeah, then we will just say, let's apply your methodology to all of history, let's actually,
let's see what happens like and then I can even be audacious about and start mentioning genocides and stuff, just to get them in trouble.
Now, honestly, because if you're going to start denying this stuff, like the existence of one person, or a group of people that believed in certain thing is just a very, very easy thing to substantiate right? Compared to the actions of people against other people, and how many people and just kind of details?
So I would, I think it's an easier case to make, even though there's a historical gap. I have a question regarding the Jews in Medina, Yathrib. Do we have any work from them any things they've written anything they've produced? No.
To be honest, all we had is like Talmud and the oral tradition. But the oral tradition, the Talmud, and stuff like that, that were codified much after, like much after Jesus, I don't think anything was written at the time or for myself, so I'm in his vicinity from them that survives with us. I don't think there is anything, I have to look again at that.
But having said that, if you look at the Jewish Encyclopedia, it's a secondary source. They they're happy mentioning, people like Abdullah bin Saba, and other other figures like that and say, Hey, I'm done. I'm sorry, existed, and this one existed, and that one existed. So scholars of Judaism, okay, and who rely on you know, these kinds of methods, they affirm this stuff happened. But in terms of primary sources that we can go back to I haven't seen anything. You know, what I mean, that's, that's there, like, or Old Testament or something that existed at the time? I don't think that I don't think we have one. We don't there isn't that one. Actually, it actually is not one, there is
not a Bible at the time of the promisor son that has been excavated, or that's even been mentioned by anybody. I'm not making an argument from Silence, therefore, doesn't guess what I'm saying. Till this time, we haven't found there has not been mentioned.
And also just wanted to say, I think the Christians would be scared if we find anything from the time of Jesus, because it would be very monotheistic, like, it wouldn't have any reference to the Trinity. So I don't think they would wish for us to discover any manuscripts.
Maybe a lie. It's not it's not of all the interpolation has taken place in history, I don't see it. And remember that there are lots of Christian apologists in power, the Republican Party, this one that one is the Vatican, whatever, they can easily hide this stuff. And burn it. If they saw something that said, like is in line with Islamic narratives, they might burn it? Yes. There's there was
one time I was reading a historian or he said, like, perhaps some, maybe it was five languages. And he knows all of this stuff. I saw for them just to believe at that point, when they say he knows all five languages. He knows all the key materials of things from Egypt from Oslo. And that's what you're saying there is a Quranic argument, because when he said it was the
lady dona la, he asked me and we had the listener be immobile. You know that they said that he was taking knowledge from this person, the person who spoke a completely different language. And this is an Arabic text. So the language skill thing is a big thing, bro. Because it's not like the Jews are making it easier. It's not like they have a proselytizing religion. They want to make it easier for the Arabs to know what they're about. They're not interested interested in converting people to Judaism? They've never been interested in that, actually. And so why would the it's not the only whatever is going to be in their language is going to most likely, especially at the technical
level, stay in their language. So for you to say it's not gonna it's going to be in a different language, you'd have to say that he knew technical people, and theological he. That's why people like shoe makers are telling you this impossible, they couldn't have as much detail for the storyteller or something other than that.
Just got a question about the manuscripts part of your speech. So you know, you said how they carbon date back to the to the Prophet so there's actually one or two of them, that club, they're carbon dated, before the Prophet was born. How would you answer that question? Well, look, the carbon dating works in a particular way where you don't know exactly what time period is. So this
Same 5686, Whatever 665 Whatever it was right? We said that was a solemn die 62. So it's within the time, but there's going to be an area that we don't know. And then it's a question of with carbon dating, because there's a particular car, but how they do it is, is carbon called carbon 19. And they look at how it disintegrates and how other how exactly scientifically it works. But they look at this carbon 19 and how it functions and whatever.
But you can either carbon date, the parchment, or you can carbon date the ink. So in this case, I think the carbon dating for example, the welding of manuscripts was of the of the parchment, not the ink. So some of them have said that, for example, on the Birmingham parchment, they say why you put why you carbon dating the parchment and not the ink. Because and even some Islamic scholars have said look, actually the ink will the style of the writing doesn't indicate the Hijazi style, which you would expect from the time of the Prophet Hamza Arsalan, for example. And even be that as it may, it doesn't matter to me, because what I'm saying is that if there's a manuscript that falls
within that time period, and it's a piece of it's a leather strap, or whatever, parchment, whatever, whatever material it was, then that's significant, from your perspective, is significant. Now was carbonate, this was a couple days, a couple of days, but it falls within that time period. It falls within that time of the person's life. I think what you're saying is basically, you know, the skin, yeah, let's say the skin the day was killed 20 years ago. And then the Quran was revealed. 25 years later, they come and date this kid. Oh, it was before the prophet, but it's I know, that's where they may have been killed. But the skin was used 25 years later. So that's what they say all of this
goes back to the Prophet was before he was born.
He says before this the range and
J Smith will come to the pocket. This club, actually this is related for the processor, they say. So they, they say oh, there's somebody else.
You're both right, you're both right, because it could be arranged. And it could be that the skin was there for 20 years. And then someone wrote on it.
They preserved those kinds of skins and stuff like that. You can no you can write on them. So it's it's all possible possibilities. But if you look at the orientalist narrative, they're saying that the die not actually said to you that after some of them says he died after there was no worker, the process lived at the time of Jerusalem conquest, for example. So I'm saying that Yanni, how would you explain this now? It becomes problematic, and I'm saying that even Patricia kroner, I think, from what I read, and I have to double check this, the reason why she actually ended up changing her mind was not even the Birmingham manuscripts, which is more voraciously. It was actually the Sonata
manuscript, the palimpsests assessed, it wasn't even that one. So the point is, it was enough to get her who was definitely and in the fall on it and making this skeptical theory to reverse her theory.
Do you know the applicant was the letter the prophet sent to Constantine the Roman emperor? Is that part of the historical Heraclius? Iraqi letters, I need to look at the authenticity of them and the manuscript evidence of them? Because I don't know if, obviously, we have any narration from our perspective, but from their perspective, we're looking at it from a manuscript perspective, I don't know.
It could be bad to have to look after the gutter. Absolutely.
Well, we have the letters, I mean, we have the letters that obviously isn't a hadith and so we believe in them and all that kind of stuff. But I'm saying Yanni, the manuscript of it, I want to see how old those manuscripts are.
Part of that when you read it, they said the tire,
apparently, that's our tribe. It's called PI. And it's very popular, and I'm actually from that tribe that they're referring to, but it's a very popular tribe in the Levant. So that's why they said instead of using Arab, they use the name of that tribe. Really? Yeah. I mean, once again, and that language, I have no clue.
Yeah, that's Arabic, Syriac, so I wouldn't know like that particular. I wouldn't want to make a comment on that. Because, you know, online is very staunch place. So you don't want to make a mistake on these kind of things. I know there is some level of controversy, but what was it oh, sorry, is it Orlando's sentiment?
Is Orland? Yeah, he translated it as the Arabs Mohammed or he translated in that way. And his in his very much reviewed is a very heavily reviewed work so I would expect people I'm not Syriac expert, someone who's right. Why would they let him slide on that? Do you know what I mean? Like so?
do you feel how do you feel after the first session you feel like is your arm now with information which is pretty strong. Would you guys think of the the FISMA church in that was
was really good.
Yeah, that was like bang on. I think the only criticism I have is like, I don't believe in the historical, like my historical perspective is I don't agree that should be geographical or I don't believe this brand of this strand of Christianity, but then it's, you know, it's the question is like Adelphia beside the point. Yeah, emoji here we're talking about exactly. You have to remember, remind them that this is a historical exercise, not a theological one.
Screenshot look very
distorted. Yeah, man. Can you see? The red one is reading from about the ark. Okay. Can you send the actual PowerPoint up? Yeah. Did I
clear a shot at that
point as well, that was quite an interesting scene that the prophets name written and that was, everywhere you combine
is passing? is 670. You said that about 50 years, actually, two years? Yeah. So 65? Ah, I think is the first name. So if you don't live in age was 54 years. Yeah.
The best thing for me was the sister of her I don't
usually attack that point around, they say, Are you mistakes with the Hodel analysis? Exactly. Yes, it was actually proves this. Interesting. Interesting, isn't it? But so with all that, having said, The next kind of sessions, we're going to do talk about the versions of the program, so Arsalan and what we're going to do, I'm going to be when we're going through the life, this is not a typical thing, like storytelling style. I'm going to be using a particular book of Sierra, there was a genre of Sierra books called the authentic series, basically. And there's one that I like, is called as one by Ibrahim Ali.
Yeah. And it's very difficult. It's about 600 pages long.
It's very, very difficult to go through all the Sierra without going through weak Hadith because the Sierra is filled with weak Hadith. I'm not sure if you're aware, but the Sierra is filled with weak Hadith. And so when someone narrates the Sierra, they're going to generate it with a lot of weak Hadith. Now, I'm not going to do that, not because it's not a legitimate way of knowing the Sierra, that is the way to do it this year. But because we're not in a typical spirit class or an intellectual center, so we're going to be telling stories, but we're going to be limiting it effectively to the authentic it is not because they're weak Hadith or the weaker Hadith and
authentic it says, They have no place in Sierra telling and history and work as of just because
we have objectives in this particular class, which is to kind of get the strongest things so that we can tell the strongest story as effectively what it is.
Until next time, Salaam Alaikum Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh