Shadee Elmasry – Podcast Snippet w Jonathan Brown

			This is very important. One thing
		

			is this notion of human nature is
a fixed
		

			phenomenon. So that human beings
did this, how Greco Roman view of
		

			history was cyclical, there is no
change in history, just the Wheel
		

			of Fortune goes round and round
and round, sometimes you will read
		

			some of the report, but humans are
always the same. And that becomes
		

			a very important way of thinking
about history that allows Western
		

			historians to go back and say, I
know what happened in the past,
		

			because people in the past were
just like people now, if people
		

			now are greedy bastards, who
always just want whatever they
		

			want, and trying to, you know,
maximize their gain and all this
		

			stuff like that. And they're
cynical and nasty. That's what
		

			people were in the past, that's
very different from the way that
		

			Christians thought about the time
of Jesus or Muslims think about
		

			the Companions, or the Prophet
lays outside, we don't think about
		

			the companions that like other
people. Yeah. So
		

			then the other thing discover, as
I said before, his notion of the
		

			of the historian as the detached
analyst, so someone like Tacitus,
		

			who's a historian, it dies around
130 of the common year or Polybius
		

			image, and Olivia says that the
job of historian is to be PSB,
		

			ready to criticize his friends and
praise his enemies. So you kind of
		

			historian as the detached analyst.
So this stuff is all discovered, a
		

			couple of things come out of the
Greco Roman tradition, one, the
		

			idea that you go back and you
discover these texts, and you
		

			start to realize how much language
has changed and how much texts
		

			have been doctored to notion of
historical distance, how we're
		

			really just different from the
past. Okay, three, the idea that
		

			there's a fixed Human Nature
doesn't change over time, and for
		

			the notion of historian writing as
a kind of detached, and sort of, I
		

			don't want to say supercilious,
but almost kind of haughty the
		

			historian is writing, you know,
you go and go into his history
		

			section of a bookstore and pick up
a book. It doesn't just talk about
		

			the past and and matter of fact,
it's always making these kinds of
		

			quips and jokes and things like
that. And this guy was so silly,
		

			he did this supercilious attitude
towards what you're saying that
		

			happened in Europe seems to be
it's almost like a divorced the
		

			children of a divorce right? Where
this massive break happens. And
		

			everyone remembers that year as
the year of the divorce,
		

			everything is now judged now, from
two years from the divorce three
		

			years from the doors, everything's
judged by that. And then whoever
		

			the villain is of the divorce,
usually, according to one SEC
		

			report that I read is that usually
each parent, each kid will assign
		

			one of the parents as the villain
and one as the victim, right?
		

			Usually, like younger kids will
make it black and white, that
		

			there's one villain, there's one
victim, then the villain.
		

			Everything about the villain
becomes mistrusted, if they see it
		

			in someone else, so let's say
someone villainized as the Mom,
		

			let's say, right, so the mom was
so bad ruin my dad. And now he's
		

			has everything about his mom,
let's say if she was into, like
		

			beauty, and she was into whatever
Pilates, pilates, it all those
		

			things,
		

			they actually start to mistrust
anyone who has those qualities,
		

			right. So what you're saying is
actually seems like a very, but
		

			this is at the at the
civilizational level. So that
		

			really starts in the you see this
very clearly in the 1700s. Someone
		

			like Voltaire died in 1778. This
guy's hatred for the Catholic
		

			Church was just epic. I mean, it
made him mad, funny, though. I
		

			mean, he would just like he would
praise Islam and praise Jews who
		

			hate groups. He didn't like Jews
at all, for example, but he would
		

			praise whoever, if it helped him
make the Catholic Church look bad,
		

			right. So he was just so for them,
a lot of his anti slavery
		

			discussions are not just because
he thought slavery was wrong
		

			inherently, it's because he wanted
the Catholic Church was supporting
		

			it. So that's definitely true. And
you see, I mean, there's like a
		

			lot of anti clericalism in the
emergence of a modern view of the
		

			world. Now you know, how we have
the Hadith that you're going to
		

			copy the people who go, who
preceded you, and you're going to
		

			copy them, even if they go down a
little meaning the smallest detail
		

			right? Now, what about the most
massive things which are your way
		

			of thinking, your way of viewing
the world, your way of viewing
		

			your Imams your way of viewing
your past? Right? So we are now in
		

			your notice in this in academia,
we now have a lot of Muslims who
		

			actually do their minds have
adopted this framework of mistrust
		

			of the past. Like we're in a
modern times we have an identity
		

			crisis, like we're not connected
to the past, right?
		

			They were just guys just like
we're guys hungry to succeed,
		

			whatever. Right? And so they've
taken this on and it's now as in
		

			the Arab world. Yeah, it's not
just in the West it's in the Arab
		

			world to Egyptians have this
right. You see writers who have
		

			this, who now view the prophets
generation, Alia salatu, salam,
		

			and this Harbin the next two in
the next three, three, first three
		

			generations
		

			In the same way that you have now
the Renaissance and Reformation
		

			and Protestant Reformation and all
these guys viewing and trying to
		

			tear down, like we need to tear it
down, right? That idea. You see
		

			this now in Muslim intellectual,
there's a book that came out in
		

			1958 called a DUA, Allison and
Muhammadiyah, by Mohammed Abu Raya
		

			died around 1970. And he was a
student of Rashid riddle. And that
		

			book is like the most
comprehensive and aggressive
		

			attack on Hadith tradition. It's
not irreverence, it's basically
		

			you can imagine kind of a Neo and
what hasn't lights? Yeah.
		

			But the point is, he's his
criticisms are very much the type
		

			of criticism of Western historian
you know, he says, The Companions
		

			are like any other people.
		

			You know, they were selfish and
sensor and you know, self involved
		

			and wanting to advance their own
interests and unreliable.
		

			But by the way, another thing I
forgot to mention is another
		

			element of the Greco Roman
heritage that is revived. There's
		

			two things is one is skepticism,
literally, a philosophic
		

			philosophy called skepticism,
which is they got from a scholar
		

			named sects Sextus empiricus, who
lived died around 200 ad. And a
		

			lot of the idea that human beings
cannot so skeptics where they
		

			believe that
		

			right and wrong absolute right and
wrong, absolute truth was simply
		

			unknowable, it was unknowable. In
fact, even sense perception was
		

			not really reliable. And they use
the example of a stick, you know,
		

			when you put in the water and you
look at the state appears to bend,
		

			which of course, it's not really
bad. So how how can we really even
		

			trust sense perception? So what
they said is, look
		

			right and wrong, can't really know
about so basically just behave
		

			according to the custom of the
city you live in. That's right and
		

			wrong. And that has a big impact
on your Western Europe after the
		

			1500s because this idea of
		

			let's not talk about God anymore.
Let's not talk about metaphysics
		

			anymore. Let's not talk about
reality. We'll let's just study
		

			the world around us. What's going
on?