Mohammed Hijab – Russel Brand Was Right For Doing This

			Have you are you wasting your time on social media again? Your brothers and sisters in Islam net
from Norway are establishing a masjid a Dawa center. Establishing a masjid to convey the message of
Islam is one of the best deeds a Muslim can do. There's a huge need for an annoying, do you know
this and I know this, so that makes even greater, so give generously and Allah azza wa jal give you
even
		

			a Salam aleikum wa rahmatullah wa barakato. How are you guys doing? Many of you will know that
Russell Brand now has made the news, people are accusing him of some very serious crimes. And
whereas I don't really want to speak about those allegations, or get into that, to be honest with
you. I do want to make a point, which I think is applicable and relevant, and poignant, and
pertinent for the modern day, which is the following is that in Islam, we have a concept called
Nikka. Okay, which is an Islamic marriage, it is the contract of Islamic marriage, this will become
relevant in a second, or the reason why I'm telling you this will become relevant in a second. Now,
		

			this concept of Nica for all intents and purposes, actually, it solves a lot of the problems which
are happening nowadays, relating to sexual assault allegations, and so on. But at least to a great
extent, it facilitates some kind of, I would say, alleviation of the problem. Why? Because when
Annika actually takes place in Islam, it's a very simple process, by the way, where the man or the
woman get married. And there are two witnesses. And then consent is given and taken in that context,
and it's documented. Now, this process, although it could take, technically speaking, technically
takes about three to five minutes. And it can be done in three to five minutes, it actually serves
		

			the purpose, not just a spiritual purpose of making the matter holy in front of God, but it actually
serves a practical functionality, which is that it would at least on paper, it should, at least on
paper, alleviate some of these issues. Because if consent is given, and it's known that in this
Nikka, Arthur's * that both become halal for one another, or both become legitimately or
* becomes a legitimate cause of action, then I would say, if someone were to say that this
was unwanted sexual attention in certain contexts, then I will say, legally, it probably makes sense
in most countries laws, that the defense would be stronger, if the person has consent being given in
		

			front of two people. That's one thing I want to bring to the table, because Islam is a solution. For
a lot of these issues. You see, it's not just a spiritual solution, but we will say it's a practical
solution. So although I want to speak about the specific case of Russell Brand, visa vie, what's
going on with him, you know, these allegations and so on, I don't want to speak about that, because
I'm not really fully aware of what's going on. But what I do want to say is that if someone conducts
their business, in the manner that Islam prescribed, then the matter becomes much more professional,
and less problems are attached to such things. What I want to react to today, in fact, is something
		

			completely different, which is one of the only interviews I've seen Russell Brand, speak about Islam
and about Muslim people. And there are two kinds of timestamps in particular, which I looked at in
his discussion with Sam Harris, which I think are pertinent. So let's look at the first one and
react to it together, right, like, and suicide bombing to just aesthetics. Really, it was not
suicide bombing looks bad, a drone bombing, it's not just this is not just aesthetics because not
because suicidal people are undetectable. So, jihadists are undetectable, if part if the best thing
that can happen in an operation is that you die while conducting it. You are the perfect weapon.
		

			That's good. That's good. I just have to hammer I have to hammer this home, when you're talking
about the possibility of something like nuclear terrorism, or biological terrorism that you know,
when someone tries to weaponize smallpox and kill 100 million pigs just mentioned that the nuclear
terrorism is not hypothetical. It already happened 50 years ago, no underwritten, I won't buy
secularism. I won't call that nuclear terrorism. Nuclear. I didn't know there was certainly a first
case here in Nagasaki, that base semantics wouldn't be your primary concern, nor do we call that
thing but how mighty it's reasonable to ask well how the jab so this is very, very interesting here
		

			you see, I think this was a was actually a priceless interaction, the back and forth. And in my
view, Russell Brand definitely had the upper hand. Now first and foremost, we could talk about
suicide bombing. We'll talk about the the numbers of people Muslim people actually believe it is
legitimacy. We can talk about that on a mass level or on a even on a scholarly level. How many
people have given that legitimacy? In fact, this is not the rule but the exception within the
Islamic paradigm. Both doctrine
		

			Finally, we can say theologically, Jewish prudentially, as well as sociologically, in terms of what
Muslim people will believe is legitimate or not legitimate action. That's one thing anyway, that's a
conversation we can have another day. But the point being made here by Russell Brand is actually
very powerful point. And notice the reluctance of Sam Harris, to take ownership of the fact that I
mean Hiroshima, Nagasaki, the two most devastating and we're talking about two of the most
devastating detonations that have taken place probably in human history. Okay. And that was
detonated by a country who, as you mentioned, is got a secular ethic. It's it's constitutions, or
		

			the constitution of America and the founding documents, all of them are secular documents,
underwritten by liberalism, social contract, Arianism, and so on and so forth. It's a liberal
democracy, for all intents and purposes, yet they were the ones responsible for this kind of thing.
Notice his reluctance to refer to that as terrorism. Why not? And this shows you the double standard
here, it shows you the double standard, it shows you the weakness of the argument. So I commend
actually Russell Brand on this incident, for making this point and saying what he said here, it was,
and he's right to point out in the beginning, in fact, that this is just aesthetics, especially
		

			considering what he mentions in the moral landscape. Sam Harris has written a book called The Moral
landscape. Obviously, he talks about consequentialism, he believes in a kind of moral philosophy
called consequentialism. Which, by the way, there's no way on an atheistic or naturalistic paradigm
to actually prove that consequentialism is true. And on objective level, that's one thing anyway, so
then it does become about aesthetics and comes about what is and he mentioned, this himself is
fetishized in the imagination of the Western person, the average Western person. So that's one
thing. The other thing I want to respond to, or react to is another aspect of this podcast. So let's
		

			hear that bit and then come back and respond in kind. I think that these kind of sort of theoretical
tableaus are used to create a false hierarchy and a moral superiority by a dominant culture that
subsequently uses thinking of this and of this nature to underwrite the modern day colonization and
subjugation of these people on a massive scale. And as barbaric and disgusting as 911 was a daily
911. Since then, so that a state system can perpetuate yourself using rationalism, using comfortable
means of executions, but glide slyly by all white in the sky is no better, or that than the 911.
		

			Two it is it is better so that we can talk. So you're invoking many things here, which we should
treat systematically, things like collateral damage. So you, you drop that language. You know, it's
a euphemism, but that's the word we use to talk about unintended people getting killed by bombs. But
why is that like when 87% of drone strikes are as a result in
		

			the data here are hard to get our hands around as well, but it's politicized. Yes, you see, whatever
the the argument is being made against the objective fact of secular violence, state violence, which
has taken place in the 20th and 21st century on a scale that human history hasn't even seen. Before
that human history, forget about religious states, or whatever theocratic states are what human
history has never seen before. You notice that he wants to complicate the situation. Notice that Sam
Harris is trying his best to try and muddy the waters. And I have to respect and give
		

			props to Russell Brand actually, for making these distinctions. And it seems like throughout the
interview, he was very careful not to fall into what would be seen as an Orientalist discourse. You
have to give him credit for that. I think he did go to the School of Oriental and African Studies
and done some kind of postgraduate there. One of the key readings that they would read is like, you
know, Edward sites Orientalism or something like that, where the power structures are being
discussed, and it is relevant. And it's actually very useful because then he's not, he's not easily
he's not gullible and naive to these kinds of discourses which are intended to preach to the
		

			converted or to preach to the choir, in one way or another. The thing is, Sam Harris himself cannot
substantiate why morals should be one way or not, not another on naturalism or atheism in the first
instance. And in fact, on his deterministic worldview, he shouldn't even be holding those
perpetrators responsible for anything, because a suicide bomber is no different from any kind of
bomber. According to his worldview, he's written a book on free will and determinism, and he
believes that there is no such thing as a libertarian free will or a compatibilist ik free will. So
in other words, people are not in charge of their emotions. Free will is for all intensive purposes
		

			in illusion. So if you look at the package of Sam Harris's ethics and morality, you'll find that
		

			The way he puts the case really is, is a very weak way. And it's self contradictory when you compare
all of the different things that he believes in. But having said all of this, Sam Harris would never
discuss Islam with Muslim people. Have you ever seen Sam Harris discuss Islam with Muslim people? In
fact, I've challenged him many times. I'm not even going to waste my breath, challenging him again,
he's become quite irrelevant, actually. And a weak opponent he would probably be, and he tried to
block me on Twitter some time ago, when I challenged him, he me and him had a back and forth and he
ran away. He scurried along and put his tail between his legs. But I have to commend Russell Brand
		

			on this interaction, and I hope it was useful to you guys, and beneficial as well, was Salam Alaikum
Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh the Prophet Muhammad sallallahu alayhi wa sallam told us to who ever
built a mosque for Allah, Allah were built in a similar the house in Jannah. And we know the great
reward that will not only be gained but rather will feel your grave after your death. Whenever
someone prays that whenever someone gives shahada in the masjid whenever someone learns something in
the masjid, yes, that will be something that you will have on your scale.