Ibn Taymiyyah on the Fitrah, Intellect and Revelation
Date:
Channel: Yasir Qadhi
File Size: 47.07MB
Related
- Ahmed Deedat – Short Talks On Middle East Tv 3rd Series
- Muiz Bukhary – When The Earth Is Shaken!
- Yasir Qadhi – The Consequences of Sins
- Abdul Nasir Jangda – Seerah 080 – The House of Abu Ayyub Al Ansari
- Abdullah al Andalusi – The Rise of ISIS
- Omar Suleiman – Late Night Reflections 05
- Nouman Ali Khan – The Israelites Under Siege
AI Generated Transcript ©
Bismillahirrahmanirrahim Assalamualaikum Welcome to this week's academic access. I am actually very, very lucky to be very fortunate enough to have interview up to have Yes, yes as the on board for this week on the topic of science and scripture, she also welcome to academic access. As soon as I can love her for having me I just want to say from the get go, that is the first time I'm using this camera and mic setup. So if anything goes wrong, or I'm out of focus or my background, whatever, so I apologize, but I'm not a tech expert. So I'm just putting that disclaimer out from the beginning, but
I'm the lambda. So she says even though you need no introductions, I think I'm the lead everyone knows you. You have a huge following across the world. Mashallah. But just for the sake of getting, you know, a bit of a profile out there, can you tell us you know, just briefly you know, what are the different hats you worn your background, so that people understand what where you're coming from and how you reach the position you are today.
salado Santa Rosa, so basically, I'm currently the Dean of Islamic of the Islamic center of America, and also the resident scholar of the East Plano center, here in Dallas, Texas. hamdulillah Al Hamdulillah, thank Allah for all the blessings he's giving me in DME. In terms of my academic tracks, as most people are aware, I've had my, you know, before going to Islamic Studies, my engineering training, and I've benefited immensely from that, and I worked at corporate America, Dow Chemical for a while. And that, again, just gave me a teaser of what life is like in the corporate world. All respect, I'm happy, I'm not in the corporate world itself, I'll say
I'm happy I chose a different path. But we need the corporate world as well. And also going through engineering and stuff, obviously, your mind becomes very different when you go through four years of advanced partial differential equations along with it anyway. So that was a different phase in my life hamdulillah. After that, I want them to Medina, as most people are aware, spent 10 years there, and
it was very spicy of see, that was exactly what I saw something pop up there. It was a very interesting phase, I loved it, it was definitely a blessing from a lot to be surrounded by the hula, and in a very scholarly environment. And obviously, during that phase, I really identified with that strand of Islam and I absorbed its theology and culture and values very much and I have no regrets. So that was why was at the time hamdulillah. And it made me appreciate why people find comfort in a strand of Islam and why they do it because
it
leaves trans folk is a very important formative stage of my life. In years 1819 to 2005, I was at Islamic University of Medina. And then I returned post 911 world and obviously a very different world than the one I had left before going to America. And I spent the next five years in residence at Yale and other three years doing my dissertation, so still connected with people going back and forth. So eight years of a PhD at Yale University, and obviously, that forced me to think in a different manner. And I feel that I'm a better person for it. Obviously, my critics think that I've been corrupted and whatnot. And that's their prerogative to think which I believe in and I
understand Danny from the paradigm of Medina and from that paradigm of just one my way or the highway or just understanding 100 I understand that you know, you you're very uncomfortable thinking outside the box and you think that that's a VNC and I sympathize with that because I would have thought the same 20 years ago but I don't view it that way. I view myself as
having been exposed to more knowledge and with more knowledge comes
a sense of humility and a sense of like okay, the half with the capital half a bit of a joke capital half the half with a capital hat is a lot as urgent a lot is and how nobody else is and how it is a law that is and how, and most of us are all of us really are striving to achieve a sense of how, okay, a sense of truth and for some issues that might be crystal clear. Allah is one that is how no doubt about it right? For other issues. It might be 90% 10% and so we're with the 90%. You know, generally speaking student ism versus morphism ism. Okay.
pretty clear. But even in this case, the other strand, they have certain understandings, they have certain, you know, issues that, okay, we see where they're coming from. And even if we disagree, we're not going to say that they are outside the fold if you like, right. And so what a person realizes is that for a lot of issues, ultimate truth is something that only Allah knows. And then there's gradations of truth, right? For every issue, there's a gradation in our conversation today is going to discuss quite a lot about those gradations, right, who is certain about that interpretation versus other interpretations? So anyway, back to your question. So that kind of
forced me to rethink through issues and I don't view myself as being any less of a committed Muslim, we're all sinful people, but in terms of my emaan inshallah, tada, my rituals, my observation, my my yochanan, Allah azza wa jal in the Quran, in the Prophet systems of isata, Hamdulillah, that has never changed at all, and hamdulillah it's just a matter of understanding that, you know, our tradition really is very vast and rich, and people have struggled to find the truth to help in different ways. And, you know, the strand that I was with has has its attempt, and its historical roots and other strands as well. And the other interpretations out there the sincerity of the people
who say that might be just as much as the sincerity of others. And who is true and who isn't, it's a case by case basis. And so I am a person who wears multiple hats than that I used to teach at a non Muslim University, I resigned that position willingly, um, but I used to be a professor of Islamic Studies, majority of non Muslim students, so they gave me 10 years of teaching experience, which is very different than the masjid experience, I always think you've had a lot and the Rhodes College, that was called the Joe. I've met Memphis, Tennessee, I resigned there willingly, I could have stayed there, or I could have, but I, I just felt that university teaching wasn't the best usage of
my time. I liked it, I enjoyed it. But there are bigger projects that take up time that are more important for me, at a personal level. And so I decided to leave that world as well. So I also preach at the, you know, level of the madrasa, you know, sorry, at the level of the mixture, then the hood was in gurus. And I think that is an issue as well. And then there's a third niche, which is academic Islam. And unfortunately, one of the criticisms that people legitimately have is I sometimes wander between these areas, and so caused some issues, which I understand I'm learning as we go along. What is said in an academic setting, is not always the same as what is said, in the
masjid audience, you know, and I'm learning that as we go along. And the problem as well, as I mentioned in one of my previous interviews is YouTube, that
even with your conversation, right, I don't know how deep we should go in, and how superficial we should be. I really don't know. Is there a right answer? If I'm not deep enough? Or if I'm too superficial, people are gonna say, Oh, he was wrong, because he did you know, he didn't say this and that and if I go too deep, it is. So there is no right answer, really, you appease one audience, and you're going to displease another and it's just a matter of case by case basis of how deep we want to go into. So let's begin the conversation asking Allah azza wa jal for tofield in his eye and wisdom in and how things are phrased, inshallah, does that answer your question, by the way, I have
no clue. Yeah. 100 I think you gave us a whole tour of your thoughts, which is very good. But before we actually get get to dicing up today's topic, you've published, you know, several books, and as far as I'm aware, you're working on a book recently as well on a three school, right? Could you just give us a snapshot of the material that you've done? Yeah. So I'm, I'm very close to finishing maybe in a few months, and shall we say very close means I've been working this for four years, three years now. So based on those pretty close to finishing a book on on Salafism, which is an academic book, it's not going to be it's not going to be like a PhD dissertation is not to that but it is
meant for educated
non Muslims. Basically, it's not meant just for the Muslim audience, those that are interested in this strand. And what I've done in this book is really I wanted to explain to those that are interested, those that have some type of Islamic background, what exactly set of Islam is, what is the history of Salafism? What are the various transit interpretations of Sufism and different so for example, you know, Chapter Two is the history of Salafism for example from Mr. Mohammed prima Maha Medina, all the way down to our times. Chapter Three is about Muhammad Abdul Wahab and his Dawa, you know, so each one, you know, chapter four is, you know, the, the, the the modern jihadist movements
that have come, for example, you know, are they even said if you, you know, is this term jihad, the Senate view, we discuss it academically because academics talk about jihadi centrism. So they say either an ISIS or jihadi selfies and I deconstruct that it's not that simplistic. I don't view them as being a selfie mainstream. They are they have a
strand, but they're not quite set up in the sense of sort of the set of Islam for example, you know, they have a little bit of here a little bit there. So the book is, inshallah I hope should be published I hope inshallah within this year that's the goal right now
you're saying what are the things that are some of the things that standards are for me, one of the things that
was very important in my own journey was the contextualization of the development of this lfu school. The notion that some people have is that the strand that they're attached to whether it's setup ism, whether it's the urban design, whether it's web Jamaat mainstream movements, somehow assume that how they are doing things is exactly how the tub everyone did it, let's say, okay, they have this a historical unrealistic perception. And therefore, if you disagree with them, the notion is you're you're a deviant, because you're disagreeing with how, you know has had a boss who used to practice system or maybe even how the Sahaba used to practice this stuff. So what I've done in one
of the things in chapter two is to really demonstrate with my own movement that I used to be a part of, you know, and every movement can do the same, by the way, the bundys can do the same every move is to demonstrate very historically very clearly, that there was never one specific interpretation of what Salafism was. Yes, there were certain paradigms that were common, agreed. But historically, the versions of ethnicity creed, even, you know, from
time to even Tamia, there were definitely different strands. It wasn't just one strand, it didn't Tamia resurrected, and then basically took over one strand of him but he thought he wasn't the only hamady, there were homies before and after even Tamia or 30s, that has slightly different interpretations right. Now, it's easy for the modern admirer of had been Tamia to come along and dismiss those other strands is not having been authentic, which is what we are taught. But that's a judgment call. And historically, other strands of humble ism, that we're not necessarily you know, and again, this is not the interview for that, but I can give some examples here. I mean, maybe I
shouldn't, because that's going to release a whole other issue. But historically, it is very clear that humble ism was a spectrum. Very clear, and I've proven this in my book, and anybody who knows this, you know, what they said was, even though Josie said for those who know represent two different strands, okay. What that said, and his theology is again, not exactly Tamia. Okay. You know, what the,
the the timimi brothers said as well, you have very many different differences within Methodism, yes, certain things are, are common between them. So when you understand that there has been a development, and then when Tamia comes along, and today we'll talk about some what events EMEA did to the setup fee to the SME movement, which is amazing. It's really very proud. And I think there's no dismissiveness, it's just a fact, he took I said ism setup ism. Basically he did, he didn't call it set of ism in that way. He took it. And he imbued it with a dynamism and an energy that it did not have before. And he gave it a level of respectability that it did not have before. Right. And
one of the ways he did this was he intellectualize the tradition. And again, before even taymiyah, hardly anybody in fact, I don't know of anybody who did it even to a fraction of the material. Some people did try to adapt me, for example, others they tried to, but even to me was a totally different level of intellectual thought, who, you know, for, you know, less cluttered, he affiliated with that school, had he not affiliate with that school history would have taken a very different term. And he wanted to defend his school. In order to defend his school, he had to reinvent the school in a way that it didn't exist before him. Right. So if you read humbly thought, pre urban
Tamia, if you read the books of creed, pre urban Tamia, there are market differences. And in today's talk, one of the questions wanted to ask me is actually, literally a segue into that topic. So maybe I should stop here and allow you to ask the first question, because that's literally segwaying into what we're going to talk about right now. Right? And just to kind of remind for the people who might be watching this later on. So what is the name of your book? And when is it coming up? And who is it coming out with?
It's called, well, the 10th. The title is still not fully confirmed, because again, we're with
Salafism in the path of the pious predecessors, and it is going to be released by one world publication was which is affiliated with Oxford. And so inshallah Allah that should be coming. I mean, they're waiting for me to submit to the manuscript. And as you probably aware, you're also an academic, I mean, once you have something you're not satisfied with, you go back with it, you keep on doing it. And this is a book that is not, you know, it's it's a different audience. So the majority of my audience, I'm expecting going to be non Muslim. So I need to really think about the terms I'm using, you know about the presumptions that they have. So it's a book that requires a
significant amount of thought, and I've done I would say, 80 90% of it. So it's that final two
20% and as usual time is the problem but inshallah inshallah My goal is to submit this year inshallah.
inshallah inshallah, right, so we're now I think ready to kind of get into the topic at hand, which is
the the title of the topic is science and scripture. And in my hand right here I actually I actually printed out your dissertation, which you did at Yale, I don't if you guys can see that. So this is Chicago. He's a PhD thesis, reconciling reason and revelation in the writings of Jamia. So this is it, and you can find it online. But I, one of my friends was, he was able to send me this. So she asked it to kind of, you know, start off this entire topic, right? As soon as we've touched upon inventory, and that's the focus of your thesis. What was your, you know, he's been Tamia does, you know, a lot of remarkable things in his work, and one of his most important elements is the formula.
Right? So how does the fifth law tie into this discussion about reason revelation, and why is that so important? I mean, I would say characteristically, no other school of thought ever does that. So why what is so novel about it? So what I liked about even taymiyah what really it shows you, you know, his personality, is that he took a concept that was mentioned in you know, it's mentioned in the Quran and Sunnah. And he developed completely, an entirely new slightly remarkably consistent and well thought out. It's an epistemological and psychological tool that dovetails perfectly with Eben Tamia, his whole worldview of theology of rationality of the Scripture and the role that the
scripture has Visser v. this V, the intellect. And what I what I found remarkable is that in my research, I haven't come across anybody in Islamic history that spoke about the fifth or in such a level of detail. And with such an emphasis of trying to extract from the fifth or both epistemological, and psychological, dare I say, even ethical and moral notions, and even taymiyah taps into these verses and ahaadeeth, which have been glossed over pre eventide me and this shows another important point that even taymiyah didn't just say, okay, nobody spoke on the fifth row, who am I to speak about the fifth row? Nobody, nobody brought in the fifth row. When it came to Islamic
Africa, the way that I've been intimidated, nobody brought in the fifth row and came to psychology, even even even to me, I didn't call it psychology. But if you read my chapter three of the dissertation,
even taymiyah actually brings in psychological issues, and he links it to the fifth row morality, where does morality come from? Right? Why do we all have an ingrained sense of justice and injustice in our if an injustice happens, we feel a sense of rage, right? Where does that come from that notion of a knowing that there's a higher purpose in life even. So all of these things human morality, psychology, cognition, epistemology, even taymiyah comes along. He doesn't say, Okay, well, I have to follow the setup and stop where they stopped. No, that's the whole point. He recognizes that there's still uncharted territories out there. And he takes this notion, and he
links it directly with one of his most scathing criticisms of the multicolor moon and the philosopher, and that is their proofs for the existence of God. Right. And he brings in the notion of the fitrah. And he considers all of their proofs to be superfluous, which has a really unique tactic. It's literally as if he shaves off their proofs, he literally takes a bulldozer, and it goes, you don't need any of this because we have the federal right. Nobody had done that pre urban Tamia. Everybody's trying to deconstruct and he does that successfully as well. But nobody had represented, nobody had presented sorry, an alternative that was just as well thought out a
completely separate paradigm. And that's what it meant to me it does with the notion of the fifth or so what I liked about it as many things first and foremost is somebody who genuinely admires him and Tamia to this day. I admire him and Tamia immensely, and I consider him to be truly shareholder Islam. But even Tamia was no traditionalist, the way that the tradition has led to Branton. He thought outside the box plenty of times, right? That's what I liked about the guys that he's not just some some, you know, cut and paste because I don't want to be too dismissive, but most people who study tradition are simply copying and pasting. They're simply cut and paste and if you dare, if
you dare type something that they've never read before, right? If you dare try to have any originality instantaneously. You know, they, they, they're like, Oh my god, I was a bit empathetic, deviant coffee, whatever. The Eben Tamia is the best example of this where he develops an entire epistemological tool, and he brings it in to have some type of tripartite relationship of the fitrah and the outcome and revelation
Nobody before has ever done this. It's fascinating, right? He develops an entire system of human thought, and is based upon three pillars, the pillar of the fifth pillar, the pillar of the outcome, and the pillar of Revelation. And he brings in a symbiotic relationship. I challenge anybody to find even a fraction of that system proven Tamia find it in any of the classical aroma of the, you know, the tabular activity of your own, find it in the students Remember, you won't find it I mean, I, I've looked them and if somebody finds it, I'll be benefiting. I haven't found it. And I did my research of the fifth row. I read every single treaties ever written, not even treaties, nobody
wrote about the fifth one in a separate booklet, even if intimidated and do that. It's in his data to outer than other writings where he mentions it in a lot of detail, but not separate. Even bill Barr has a few sections, which are interesting, you know, other people have some small commentaries of the fifth law, but nobody has developed, as I said, the notion of the fifth row, the way that had been Tamia did to me, that is what really knowledge is about where you stop where the people before you stopped, and then you build, you don't just, you know, stay there immobile. And so that's what I liked. And of course, the notion of the fidra. To summarize for our audience, obviously, the Quran
mentions only once in the Koran fitrah, the light that he put on Asada, and the Prophet says, I mentioned there's like six or seven, a hadith about the fitrah, the most famous one being Kula mo luden eurodollar, for every child is born upon the fitrah. And then his parents make him into a hoodie or an assignee or a Medusa, and then the headache goes on and so forth. Tamia the fifth or is an innate, inherent, not even knowledge. It's just an understanding that is equally distributed to all of mankind, nobody has more physical versus less fitter. Unlike often, some people have more output versus less often. Okay, unlike, you know, other things people are born with different
privileges when they're born. The fifth law is equally given to every child, every single child is equally upon the fifth row. And the fifth row is a sense of, well call it psychology call it morality, call it ethics call it higher purpose, all of this is there, where the fifth that I gives you a notion of you are a being that exists for a higher reason. There is a God that needs to be worshipped, worshiping, that God brings about a sense of pleasure, even they may actually even says this, the fifth law allows a person to feel a spiritual ease when they connect with God. Right? So for example, why do Christians feel good when they go to church, even though we believe that their
theology is wrong? Okay? Why do Buddhists Why do Hindus when they meditate, they feel a sense of goodness, they're not right in their meditation. Even Timmy explains it from a psycho spiritual perspective, that feeding the fitrah makes you feel more human. Basically, of course, I'm paraphrasing, but that's the point. So any religion is better than no religion. And some rituals, no matter how they're done, are going to make you feel a sense of ease. The question therefore is which rituals and which theology will make you feel the most at ease. And this is where of course a bit Tamia comes in, he says, that the faithful and the prophetic teachings complement one another and
they fit perfectly together. And the apostle generally speaking, the intellect, generally speaking, should support all of these but the outcome is the easiest to corrupt. The intellect is the easiest to be in mistake, right? And of course, the reason he does this, this is really interesting. So his critique of the philosophers and over the moon to the moon is that they rationalized too much right there depending on their ankle too much. Okay, even Tamia tell us what should we do that don't we have to have brains to think of course we do have been Tamia says, aha, but the brains are the most finicky. The brains are the most socially corruptible, right? Your society your influence is very
easy. So there is another mechanism of checks and balances. That's where the tibia comes in. Right? There is another epistemological tool that is far more difficult to corrupt. Yes, it is corruptible in the end of the day, but it is far more difficult to corrupt. That is because this epistemological tool is not based upon factual knowledge is not based upon sense perception is not based upon input, it is divinely ingrained, it is implanted into the human psyche and soul. And therefore, the fifth or should tell you inherently something isn't right here. And by the way, we see this all the time in debates between atheists and our Muslim Brothers when they're the one they sometimes mentioned.
I'm sorry to mention vulgarities but is incest allowed or not? Is bestiality allowed or not? Okay? Apologize for the you know, the the time but this is the classic Ibn taymiyyah moment. Fifth are verses often because these scientists are these atheists are these philosophers. They have no intellectual basis right to deny the validity of incest, right? They they don't have any ground to stand
But they know deep down inside something isn't right. Where did they get that knowledge from? It comes from the fitrah. Right? So even Tamia brings in the fifth row here. And he says, Hey guys, you you philosophers, humans, on the moon, you need to come down on your your reliance on rationality, and make it secondary to the fitrah. Okay, and so the prophets are the most knowledgeable, they have the best knowledge. And the fitrah proves to us that the prophets are true. And the outcome then has to be in conformity with the other two. And if it is not in conformity, we need to correct the outcome based upon the fifth throw and the prophetic knowledge. So that's in a nutshell, you know,
what had been Timmy his notion of the fifth rise? And, again, like I said, morality as well, where does morality come from? How do we know lying is wrong in justice is wrong? Murder is wrong, you know, you can't rationally prove, if you truly believed in the survival of the fittest, why can't you just go and take the money of somebody else plunder a pill? Why can't you do that? Right? Why is in every single society, you know, morality, somewhat similar by morality here, I mean, right and wrong, justice and truth, right? Why? as well, the notion of a higher purpose, like even taymiyah mentions this, like, mankind is always searching for a higher purpose. And this is so true. Once you
get beyond your teenage years, and you've satisfied them with the non Muslims, you satisfy all your desires and whatnot, then you begin to feel an emptiness, like I want to do something with my life, right? Even billionaires are not satisfied with simply having billions and living that life of an animal, they want to do something, right. Why? Why do they want to do something? If it's me, it comes in with the fifth, that the fifth that AI tells us that's, there's a higher goal and purpose, and we're not just here to, to, to live the life of an animal. And then on and on. I mean, there's a lot of, you know, beautiful things here. So, two basic points before move to the next question. What
I like about this number one, the originality and the bravery of Tamia to just, he didn't care if nobody discussed this or not, he couldn't care less. Okay, let me go into it. And I think we need to also allow others to do the same thing, as long as their basis in their paradigm is true as a bit they came from. And then number two, a 700 years after the relation of the Koran, right, 700 years after somebody comes along and presents this really holistic model of human existence that nobody before ever did. This tripartite notion of this symbiotic relationship between your human psyche and soul, call it your fitrah versus your intellect versus the revelation from Allah subhana wa, that
shows you there's if 700 years went by, and nobody could verbalize it, well, then there must be other things as well that can be verbalized, can be, you know, thought about, and we're, that's exactly what we should be doing in our time as well.
Right? So just to kind of make it clear for our audience members, you in when it comes to the fifth floor, right? You're saying that this has been the only definition of the fipronil or have them have there been other accounts? Because I remember how many have seen he actually wrote the book on the fifth floor right? Where he discusses various different formulations. So what are your thoughts on that? Yeah, so Mohammed has seen has a nice article and I think a book later but when I wrote my PhD, he had an article out on the fifth row and he mentioned like four or five different interpretations so some people said the fifth is the religion of Islam. Right. And and this is where
we get the notion of revert you know, as people who know who listen to my lectures that technically that's not correct that a person who was born into a family of non Muslims and then chooses Islam, they have reverted to the fifth row but converted to Islam. Okay, they're converts to Islam they are not revert to Islam. The fifth row is not synonymous with Islam. Some of the early scholars said that the fifth Allah is Islam, and that they have their their views. Some of the earliest callers also said that FIFA is either the fifth or is predestination. Okay? So they interpreted it as predestination. Some of them did have rudimentary ideas that were pre event a million, but they
didn't develop it like even Samia did. So we do have that basis of the notion of FIFA that a behavior would come and develop but nobody as I said flushed it out and and and made an entire system of thought that based that's based on the fitrah because what have been Tamia did was that he he basically discarded the reliance that the philosopher's had on the African
Can you see me What happened there?
We can hear you your your camera just went blank. I think
we
got a new toy. So this is yes, I got a new toy.
It just okay. Now can you see me? Yeah, it's cool. It's cool. Okay. Sorry about that. So, what was I think so. Yeah, so it's been 10 years.
Basically brought in the notion of the fitrah. To explain to the those who relied on their aka too much that you guys have an alternative that you should have done nobody before even taymiyah did that right? to rely on the notion of the fifth or as being of primordial importance more than what you think his rationality, and he's not dismissing rationality, but he is saying in case of conflict, the fifth law has a higher epistemological value than which you think is is philosophically sound irrationally. Correct. And he mentioned this, of course, I mean, why rationality can be incorrect, you know, which is much more frequently, much easier than why the
fifth and the fifth that I can be corrupted, that's what his point is, right? The fifth or is corrupted, but much more. It's a longer time if you like to do that. Whereas the intellect can be mistaken very easily. And there's a difference the fifth, or is not mistaken, per se, but you can corrupt it, whereas the intellect can be mistaken. And it doesn't even know what's mistaken.
Right, right. Okay. So just to kind of make it easier for people to understand. So when it comes to the role of reason, right, there's a difference between using reason to interpret and using reason to prove the veracity of Scripture does even taymiyah say that the fifth law is is is more fundamental than both in both stages, or only in the first stage? No, so the fifth law is not used to interpret the Scripture, right? It's not an independent cognitive faculty know, right. The fifth law is an intuition that explains certain things that maybe even you can't put into words, right. And that's why again, this notion of so again, to give you a simple example, fit throw versus
intellect
someone as great as you my mother does, I do love her more anyway, allies, would you have any Have mercy on him? Great. Your mom projected Islam definitely a great Adam. He has this notion, which is pre Descartes, right Descartes to notion of having to consider the validity of Islam. Right? That is that he writes in his his famous book, semi autobiography that I realized I'm a Muslim because I was born a Muslim. And if I had been more than other household and so I had to first thing I had to do was Chuck was to doubt right and of course, that is, generally speaking, more resilient and ashati thought generally speaking, it begins with the premise that you need to doubt and then you need to
prove Okay, and this goes back to of course, Pyro and others of the ancient Greek tradition as you're aware, this is well known, well discussed in the books here. And of course, it's very logical and rational Descartes is the first one who verbalized it in English or in you know, Latin or whatever. That How do I know what I know? How do I know everything is true? I have to doubt everything. Okay, I have to doubt even my existence. If you only rely on the intellect, you do have this because allien paradox or Descartes tea and paradox, Cartesian paradox. If you only have the intellect, then somebody can come and say, why are you a Muslim? You've never experienced other
faith traditions, you have never even studied them. The average Muslim who's never studied any religion is his Islam is balton according to this day, Cartesian notion or Cartesian notion, because he hasn't proven his Islam. And that is why some of the famous scholars of the past most famously had been for Locke and others. They actually said that the amount of the mortality is not valid. They said this theologically, they said the amount of the quality is not valid. So even Tamia has to come along and extrapolate from the text. How are you going to prove that the Islam of the villager the Islam of the average Muslim, the Islam of the guy who just born and raised as a Muslim, never
once thinking about Zoroastrianism and paganism, and no he's just an average Muslim? How is that Islam valid? If untamed, it brings the notion of the fifth row, his fifth row intuitively knows that a lot is true, the Koran is true, the prophet ism is true. His fitrah His instinct is in harmony with the revelation of Allah subhana wa Tada, he doesn't need to step outside of Islam before re entering it, because his fifth row was already within the paradigm. And what I say in English is that it is an internal compass, you know where true north is facing even if you don't, if you don't have by truenorth I mean the truth right here, you know, the true north, you know, the truth without
having a physical compass, okay? Now sometimes you need that physical compass, sometimes your ankle has to come in to check and that happens when a person is struggling have another faith a Christian or a Zoroastrian or whatnot they're struggling is my faith, true or not? Right? And they're Fitzroy is a bit torn. They have to bring in the African and African has to analyze monotheism versus polytheism. Okay, three Gods versus one God, Jesus Christ, what is and that's where the acrylic comes in. That's not that's not necessarily the ruler of the fifth row. But the fifth row will tell you monotheism over polytheism the fifth row will tell you, why should I worship a human being that
used to eat and drink Jesus Christ? Why should I do the fifth row is going to tell you those basic things without you having to verbalize them. So this is where again,
epidemia comes with this beautiful system of checks and balances, right? But the Quran and Sunnah is not balanced, it is merely affirmed. That's what Tamia says the fedora and the apple, they affirm the validity of the Quran and Sunnah. Right? And
once it is affirmed okay then the role of the intellect so the filter affirms it. The role of the intellect then comes to understand the intent of the Quran and Sunnah and not to challenge the veracity of the Quran and Sunnah.
Right? So, you know, when you said that, it comes to affirm, just to kind of make that clear, it is the fifth little like than a mirror of the Quran and Sunnah or is it something that just merely receives it without any friction? No, it's not a mirror. It is a receptacle, it is a psychological embedded intuition. That right fit for our when it hears about monotheism, about Allah subhana wa tada about the Prophet system, it automatically is inclined towards accepting it as true. Okay, so when the Quran is recited the fifth, or is that comfort and ease that it knows it to be true? When the facts of Islam the theological facts of Islam are mentioned, the fitrah intuitively knows that
this is the truth, right? So it's not a mirror. It is a psychological receptacle, that when it receives it, it validates. Whereas, whereas when the fifth or were to receive polytheism, when the fifth or to receive and that's why so many people have pure fedoras reject the faith that they're on without even having heard of Islam? How many Christian hundreds have you met? Right? And I've met many that have said, Yeah, even when I never heard of Islam, I never believed Jesus to be God. Why? I mean, think about it. Where would that notion come from? Where which knowledge would they have when they've never heard of Islam? They've never heard of the Islamic paradigm that Jesus is a
prophet and not actual claiming divinity. Yet how many people intuitively they're like, yeah, it never really, it never really stuck with me, right? They'll say phrases that will betray their throne. I never felt comfortable with it. What did that mean? They never felt comfortable, and they mean the fitrah. That's exactly what the throws over here. Right, right. Okay. So now that we have an understanding and insight of, you know, his notion of the football and how it kind of understands revelation in general. Now, the next question is, she asked what is exactly revelation? So what what what defines revelation? What is the purpose of revelation?
So for events A me and for mainstream Sudanese as well, the revelation is the Quran and the Sunnah, they're both revelations, obviously, Morteza lights, and others are gonna have different you know, they're gonna see the Koran only and whatnot. But for mainstream Satanism, and this is, of course, very much a part of, especially out of all of the Sunni strands, the 30s in the 70s are the most in this regard. And I don't mean this, dismissively. I'm just saying, the way they view the sooner is essentially as equal to the haoran whereas most other strands would say, the sooner is, is subsidiary to the forearm. And this is a classic debate any you know, is the God of the Sunnah,
lesser than the Quran or equal to the Quran and as mainstream selfies and even Tamia, generally speaking, I would say would sympathize with this as well, that he would view them as being co equal in terms of their legislative weight in terms of their their so that is the revelation of the Quran as soon as the revelation was the other part of your question. So and then what is its purpose? What is the purpose of exactly so the purpose of Revelation is hidden in us is to guide mankind about the bigger questions of life, why they're here? Why are they here? What's going to happen to them after death, how they should live their lives and how they should worship Allah subhana wa tada as Allah
says, In the Quran, makuta driven Kitab wanted a man this is addressed to the prophet SAW sent him You didn't use to know what was this revelation, nor did you know he man. Now this is interesting here because the Profit System was always a monotheist. He always believed in a higher power, you look even named Allah and his culture in society, even the name of our Lord was alive wasn't like coming from a different civilization. Yet Allah says you didn't know what eemaan was, which allows you the cobalt and then further, we found you not upon guidance ball here should be translated as not upon guidance. And we gave you guidance, despite the fact that the process of never worshipped
idols, yet still the the adjective ball was was there, which indicates that there was shortcomings, there wasn't enough. And that's what a lesson we gave you. That why lemma command them to contain them again, we taught you what you did not know. And this is also proven in the hadith of psycho Hadith that the Prophet says when the Sahaba were engaged in an expedition, and they were waiting outside the village for a settlement to see whether they're Muslim or not. And so somebody gave the budget event that's classical law that you wait and you see whether they
There was no idea that and so when the man said, Allahu Akbar, Allahu Akbar, the Prophet says and said Island's fitrah then when the man said he had a la ilaha illAllah, right, then the verdict of Islam was pronounced on the person. Now notice here, Allahu Akbar is the fitrah. A shadow Allah, Allah, Allah, Allah is Islam. This is a very technical interesting point. To say that Allah is the Greatest doesn't necessarily make you a Muslim.
Even pagans would say, God is great. Christians say God is great, doesn't make them Muslim. Okay, so the fitrah told you, there is a God, there's God is one, and that God is all perfect, all powerful, that Allahu Akbar, and the person said, Allah,
but you need revelation to tell you La ilaha illa Allah, and that you cannot worship any other entity, even a fraction. Because if you don't have revelation, you might have this notion of hierarchies. You might have an association of one God and whatnot. Right? So revelation comes and teaches you the details of theology. revelation comes and teaches you the details of worship, revelation comes and teaches you the details of morality of ethics of law, how does one live? This goes back to the famous incident of Jaffa pasado de la one. Sorry, Jaffa w one. And he has assaulted Jacqueline every time when he was speaking to the joshy. That ninja she is asking him what is your
faith? And notice, if you look at that paragraph, this is what revelation is about. We were a group that didn't know how to live our lives. This is what revelation did right? We would prey upon the weak, we would steal from the poor, we would be harsh to the orphan. We would eat carry on. He mentioned eating maita as something disgusting now, right? revelation came and what did it do? It taught us compassionate and unkind. It taught us to treat our relatives with dignity. It taught us to give food to the poor, it taught us to not eat carry on right do not eat the the Mater. So Revelation the purpose of Revelation is to provide for us that which the fifth are cannot provide in
and of itself. And that is the details of a man because you will never know from the fifth row that angels exist. You will never know from the fifth or in and of itself that there is heaven and hell the fifth row will not automatically tell you that right? The fitrah will not tell you of life after death. The fifth row won't tell you the right revelation has to come and teach you number one the details and that's what a listening Mark wanted to do Makita politeama number two it will teach you about how to live your life which is the idea right the equivalent Jana Malcolm should I say woman Haha, every nation we have given a differentiator and a different way of life. These are the two
main purposes of Revelation. Right? Okay, right. So now that we've established what revelation is right, so, you have the individual and then you have the revelation, and between these two, there has to be some kind of interpretive methodology. Can you give us an overview of what are the methodological principles in interpreting revelation? And are these things fixed or open to change? Yeah, so that question is definitely a very, very deep one, much can be said about this. And in fact, Much has been said and it really depends as well on you know, which interpretive strand of Islam you're going to follow. Mainstream student ism what separates them from all the others trans
is very straightforward, and that is for them. There are two sources of theology and law the Quran and the Sunnah obviously, the sheer the Morteza other strands they have other you know, sources but for mainstream so nice. This is what they view and with a lot of legitimacy now of course, they have to prove it within their own tradition, why they're restricted.
When it comes to theology, generally speaking, those are the only sources when it comes to law. You have other sources as well which differ from other hebdomad Have you have the eg medically asked is the s&s this law. All of these different methodological tools comes in when it comes to hermeneutics. Good Shepherd, just just for the sake of our viewers, can you just use the Arabic words what is theology and what is what is law? What are the Arabic equivalent theologies or thida and long as *tier Okay, when it comes to either there is really no PS in our pita. Okay.
Some say that there's a priori, some types of the astrolabe and, okay, I wanted to get an ology. And All right, so some say there's absolutely us and some say very small areas, you might be able to have PS and NLP which is our priori plasmin. By Viola like it should be more so nonetheless, generally speaking, the sources of theology are straight text to us. And the reason for this is very straightforward. theology or a fee that is in the middle of a complete knowledge of the unseen theology is something we don't understand. It's not something or
We can rationalize it is something that needs to be informed. We do not know of the existence of angels through our minds. The Quran has to come and tell us there are angels, they're made out of this, they have this many wings is their function, how is our mind going to understand that it has to be informed, okay? Unlike law, that Allah has allowed law to be interpreted, Allah has allowed law to be extracted. And that's why the Sahaba themselves had, you know, differences between law much more than that about theology. So the hermeneutics of theology is different than the hermeneutics of law, theology, you extract the meanings, and you don't really bring in other sources
of interpretation. Now, that's mainstream Satanism. Sometimes some segments, even within Satanism, didn't quite live up to that. And so they would bring in and this is obtained me as criticism, now I have to betray my roots or my biases here. I'm still, you know, sympathetic to Methodism, I'm still overall sad in my creed. And so when it comes to the attributes when it comes to other when it comes to the issues like this, generally speaking, even I'm not 100% Yanni, you know anymore, but still, overall, I'm definitely sad to this day, and the reasons are to me, it is but I'm still there. My point being given to me as criticism here applies. He said, non fit Sudanese have taken sources of
hermeneutics outside of the Quran and Sunnah. Okay. And especially for him, it was the notion of what is called the Kalam cosmological argument and how they perceived of proving the existence of God, which led them to then it forced their hand on how they interpret the attributes of God. Okay, now, to be clear, if you're a part of those other strands of Satanism, they would not view the sources of these of these notions to be Hellenistic and Greek. They would say, this is from the whole on, and they'll say, fly on Luna and it ADK the Hadith but don't look at that camel and how it was created. Don't look at the creation around them. And they're gonna say their Kalam cosmological
argument can be derived from the Quran and Sunnah. Right? But even taymiyah said, No, it's not derived from monsoon. And this leads, I know, we have other questions here. But this is a beautiful segue to that segment here. And that is as follows. Okay, let me see if I can explain what I'm trying to think that sometimes.
Even taymiyah accused these other groups
of corrupting the pristine nature of the Islamic sources. Right? And he said, You're wrong. But he didn't accuse them of Kufa.
Why? Because from their paradigm, their understanding is that they're deriving it from the Quran and Sunnah. Right? Right. And as long as a person feels that they're deriving it from the Quran and Sunnah, even if they're wrong, they're not outside the fold of Islam.
Okay, and let me just jump here because I know, time is a bit limited was already by the look at the time, it's already been 15 minutes of Mandala, right.
I mean, like, if you have to go, that's fine inshallah, but yeah, it's otherwise from my side. It's okay. Okay, yeah, um, we can do a part two as well, I don't mind because we didn't even get to some of the bigger questions that you had.
Like that. But I want to, so I want to I want to definitely mention this point here.
The more Tesla, and the Chinese and the majority's. All three of them have a certain philosophy about the names and attributes of a law. Okay, they viewed the language associated with the names and attributes of law as being, generally speaking metaphorical, okay, to different levels, as you know, the Chinese have different than the mortiser. But still the paradigm is the same, and all of them are basing it on the Kalam cosmological argument and the notion of accidents and bodies those who No no, I mean, this is something now, even taymiyah did not accuse any of these trends of
yet he did accuse the philosophers of Kufa as delivers it.
And the philosophers did a similar thing, not just with the names and attributes, but with the heaven and hell. The philosophers said Heaven and Hell is symbolic. We're not going to accept heaven and hell. The philosopher said this is flowery language that is not meant to be taken literally. Because of this isn't a me and Sally and all of the Muslim scholars said these people are outside the fold of Islam. However, the same hermeneutical tool when it was done by the mortiser with the attributes was not considered COVID Raven Tamia, do you understand what I'm trying to say here? Right. Why? Why this is the key point and if we understand this point, inshallah we can understand
as well, why certain views might be problematic but not covered, and why certain views are crucial when it comes to the forum.
If a person believes that
intent of a law was x. And that's not the intent clearly, but he made a wrong hermeneutical extrapolation, generally speaking, that person is not to cuff it, because they believe they're extrapolating the intent of a law. What did Allah intend with this? However, if a person believes that, well, in the case of some of the philosophers, there was no divine communication,
or if a person believes that the divine communication was x, but x is contrary to reality, and Allah said it, so that the masses can be deceived into believing x, this is also Cooper.
Right? So the philosopher's Al farabi, for example, very clear, Al farabi. I'm paraphrasing, but I'm simplifying is basically saying there is no heaven and hell, we all know that that's what he's saying. There is no agenda enough. But you see, these masses, you have to keep them in check. You have to, to, to to have sticks and carrots, you know, you have to give them incentives, or else all of society will go haywire. And so the philosopher slash profit because of Robbie doesn't believe in a God that communicates to mankind remember this right? And farabi does not believe in the communicator of God, the philosopher slash Prophet, being the wise person that he is has to invent a
fantasy
and that fantasy is a fable that is taught like will tell you no, not us as Muslims, maybe others are gonna say it to our three year old son four year old son don't exit the bedroom or else the monster is gonna come and eat you after you know, we give them these weird tales, right? And farabi is basically saying the Prophet slash philosopher, is that parent telling that child ridiculous tales to keep the child in check? Okay, right now, the end result hermeneutically is similar. And that's what have been teammate kept on saying, The Morteza you didn't take the attributes literally. The Philosopher's you didn't take heaven in hell literally. But the the ways that they got there
were radically different. And that literally saved one group from Eamon and Cofer and caused one group to fall into Monaco. Sorry, say one group from Cofer and cause the other group to fall into Cofer, the more intensity that did not accuse a lot of lying over the villa. The more it says that it did not say that Allah is intentionally deceiving. The more it says it is saying this, these are the limits of human language. And they have a perception of bringeth forth that when Allah says he is severe, what he means is that he is aware of all voices, it doesn't mean that he hears the way we hear. Okay, right. Well, the law says it went up so they brought in all of these interpretations,
which
we might disagree with as soon as I just heard there's a Sunday but though they're approaching it from a methodology that still respects the Quran as being from God, and respects the Quran is having wanted to convey guidance to us. And that's why the within Islam, whereas the philosophers dismissed either Allah azza wa jal himself, or the efficiency of the Koran. And because of this, they're non Muslims. Now, your some of your questions are about science. Before we even get there, this is setting up the paradigm. Right here, we're setting up the paradigm. If a person for whatever reason, wishes to interpret the Quran or sooner, in a manner that mainstream Muslims don't do, but they
believe their tools are within the tradition and they believe they're deriving at the correct interpretation as intended by a law.
Generally speaking, without giving too many examples, generally speaking, we will say they're within the fold of Islam, because they're not rejecting the authority of a law or the authority of the messenger or the authority of the Quran. Okay. However, if they dismiss the authorities of you know, the, the, the wire itself, or they accuse a lot of intentionally deceiving, that, well, Allah gave these fake fairy tales of Adam and Eve so that we believe in them already people right, this now reaches the level of Kufa because the accusation is against a laws, truth or with a bit law or against the Qurans truth, or against the Prophet systems knowledge and truth. And that we cannot
have two opinions about and that's where you've crossed the Red Line. And you've left the fold of, of even acceptable interpretation and entered into the domain of basically rejecting a London's measure. This is tech leap. This is a rejection, right? And that's what the essence of COVID is not the only type of code but the essence of Cofer is to reject a lot, or the authority of Allah, it believes did not reject a lot, at least reject the authority of Allah, at least did not reject the existence of Allah, at least rejected the authority of Allah.
So if a person rejects the authority of Allah, so just says, yep, or accuses a lot of division, below the will of even saying this, but to get the point across of intentionally lying, now you have crossed into the realm of disbelief, and you have left the realm of submission to Allah as a creator in the Lord.
Right. So she said, I was going to suggest perhaps we cut her off here, because I think we've set up the stage for maybe the part two, because we've got some very interesting questions from from people. I was wondering if we could just entertain those for the next few minutes, and then maybe hop on to part two later on, but that'd be okay with you. Perfect. Perfect. Right. Okay. So we have Dr. Nassif who's a assistant associate associate professor at the University in Turkey. He says how detailed is the vision of the FIFA according to Tamia. And he goes on to say, if he considers monotheism is preferred to Trinity in terms of football, what would he say the choice between
ascribing causality to nature and occasion can be made by the football. So how detailed is event A me his notion of the fifth law? That's a very good question. Um, I would say I do not know of any other field origin of any strand of Islam that has spoken about and developed the notion of the fifth or more that have been Tamia. Frankly, I don't know of anybody that has come close to heaven. Tamia, like I said, the the, the, the way that had been Tamia, extracts from this notion, so many different issues. And I mentioned some of them, some of them have to do with theology, some of that had to do with psychology, some of had to do with morality and ethics, the way that he's extracted
it, I don't know, anybody that's even close, in the entire, you know, the 14 centuries of our tradition, and if anybody knows of someone, then please inform me, and I'm going to be very eager to read, even after the bottle, did a good job before even taymiyah. Nobody spoke up at about a third more than even after the book. But his interpretation was totally different. And he took a different tangent to it. But he did spend quite a lot of time doing this as for this notion of occasional ism.
You know, I don't know if you've been to me it ever linked directly to the fifth row? I don't think he did. To be honest, I don't think he linked occasional ism to the fifth row. But dare I say that he would view the fifth row as telling you intuitively, that causality is real.
You know, okay. Because causal I mean, if it's me from causality, obviously, right? I mean, unlike the Yeah, I just wanted to know whether it was embedded in the Fitbit or not that that was because so there are certain. So he does mention that.
I want to see if I find it here, he does mention that a child instinctively knows
something being unfair, something like that, right. So that causes like, if you if you smack a child, the child is not that you should smack a child, your child's gonna turn towards the direction of that, that entity, right, that's causality right there. You get my point here, okay. If you snap your fingers in one direction, the child is going to look in that direction. Without having been taught causality, the child understands that cause and effect are somehow linked together. Right, the noise coming from an area that means is from that area, okay, hitting from the backward tapping from the back, there's going to be seeing what's going on over there. So I would assume, but I don't
think he expressly mentioned this, that he would be sympathetic to the notion that causality is derived from the fitrah. But there is a point here, which I think nobody can say not even human or any of us.
What exactly is purely from the fifth or, and what exactly is from experience and intellect.
Certain things are very clear, this and that. But there is a middle area.
And perhaps causality occasionally was kind of sorted in this middle area, where we're not, you can make an argument either way. But however, dare I say, though, and again, I betray my sad sympathies here as well. Nobody is an occasional list until they're taught it. Everybody believes in causality, this is the way the world works. Occasional ism has to be explained to you and taught to you and you have to absorb it intellectually. That in and of itself would indicate to me that, generally speaking, the fitrah is intuitively pro causality. Hello, learners, right. Right. Just to kind of top onto that point again. So I interviewed dr. john Hoover earlier on, and we had the conversation
about occasion isn't evidence a meme? And he said that imitate me it wasn't occasions but not of the same sorts as the machete and the matter. Yeah.
All right. Yeah.
So I think I know what's going on.
I think it looks better. Yeah, it shuts off after a while.
So I need to like, redo it every so often. So I need
inshallah for part two inshallah. Yes.
So, would you agree with that statement? Or would you think that he would subscribe to the exact same thing? No. What what? So john Hoover is definitely somebody who is one of the world's experts have been Tamia. I've met him many times, I've read all of his articles and books. And generally speaking, I have no disagreements with anything of his analysis. And I think I know where he's coming from, without having spoken about this particular issue. What he means is that
what every Muslim means, and that is that Eliza has the right to stop causality. Whereas the philosophers wouldn't go that way. Right there philosophers would say that causality is supreme, and nothing can come between, you know, a cause and its effect and effect and his cause. Right? Where is it been Tamia would basically say that Allah has created so unlike the shadow, the shadow don't believe in inherent causality, right? The Shadow believe that Allah subhana wa tada creates the illusion of causality. Okay, so everything is directly and in some ways of obviously, the OSHA decreed in some ways is actually giving more kudos to Allah right more power to Allah indirectly,
whereas the authorities would say, Allah created inherent causalities within substances. So a rock is inherently capable of breaking glass. Allah created the rock that way that it has certain properties that can inherently break glass when you throw it through glass, whereas the shadows would say that the rock has no properties whatsoever, and that wounding when it hits the glass will the law created the cracking of the glass. So the illusion of causality is given. So even taymiyah would argue that obviously causalities are subservient to the other quarter of Allah subhana wa Tada. And so if Allah wanted to intervene, that he could intervene, and of course, the Chinese would
say that is the definition of a miracle. And even Tamia says, No, that is one type of miracle, not the only type of miracle. Okay, so for the Saudis, their definition of miracle is the breaking of the causality or harmful either, right? That's a whole different topic altogether, which you didn't even ask about. But anyway, that's me and my infamous tangents. Right? Okay. So we here we have a PhD candidate from Cardiff University. He's actually doing it under documents rally. He's asking this question Salaam chiffchaffs. Are jockeying for for the first part. It has been a fascinating discussion, I just want to ask a side question. Earlier you mentioned that revelation is the is only
the Quran Sunnah. I wanted to ask, Is there an onus on us to defend or look into previous scripture? When issues arise with science and scripture? by previous scripture? You mean? The old the New Testament? I'm assuming? No, I'm assuming so I use if you can just let us know. But I'm assuming it's previous scripture, not at all. Because Firstly, we have an explicit Hadith of the Prophet SAW Selim, that the famous incident of hon hapa when he came with the Old Testament, and he was searching for some guidance or whatever. And the Prophet system said, basically, there is no need to do this. Yeah. Are you in doubt if Moosa were alive today who would have to follow me, okay? And the
famous Hadith about it as well, that whenever you narrate from the children of Israel, don't affirm and don't deny, which shows us that we are not obliged to definitively believe in the previous scriptures. The previous scriptures are supporting evidence internally, or for debates amongst Christians who might so be persuaded me personally, I'm not a big fan of the pure the Dotty and style of relying on the old the New Testament. That's my personal preference. Nothing wrong with that, right. But there are Christians that would appreciate that style, but it has its pros and cons, because once you open that Pandora's box, then you have to go with the flow and and take the
verses you don't like as well. If you're going to pick and choose how do you explain to the Christian your methodology picking and choosing, you can explain to your fellow Muslims which we should note no problem doing what we say we'll pick and choose based upon our scripture, and that's explicit in the Quran. Allah says that this Kitab is more Haman and LA and more Haman means it supersedes and eclipses the previous scriptures. So the word mo Haman considered a filter. The Quran is the filter, the previous scriptures, you're allowed to put them through that filter, anything that passes we may take but anything that the Quran and Sunnah stops, we cannot take that's the word
Mohammed is very clear. So we are under no obligation whatsoever to look at the previous scriptures and me personally, that's one of the reasons I've never been interested at all. Beyond the basic the doctrine and whatnot. I've never been interested to immerse myself in biblical studies. It's not even I'm remotely interested in because for me, it's a non entity. It's not something that I'm very concerned about because it doesn't give us knowledge.
knowledge that is beneficial. with anything we need to know it's in our tradition.
Again, I'm not dismissing those who do do that. I'm simply saying I don't have that passion and, and personally on my own personal level, I think it is a methodological mistake. That's my personal opinion. To quote the Bible as a download tool separate from the Quran, the sooner, we should only use it as supporting evidence. And we should be clear when we use it, that we're only using it as supporting evidence. That's my personal philosophy.
Right, right. Okay, right. So, guys, I think we'll cut it off there because I know that she also has to head off in Sharla. So we'll hopefully see you guys for a part two. Thank you very much for tuning in. She also, thank you so much for your time. I know you've got a ton of things like your book to finish, I'm literally gonna forget off this call before I go somewhere else. I'm gonna be doing that.
Good luck with that inshallah we'll arrange for part two and hopefully actually get to the main discussion, which is the actual science and scripture. I hope this was a good setup for it because we did discuss in my opinion, so my issue comes with though before we finish off shame is that those who watch it or two, I would want to have them to have watched part one so make sure that somehow arranged as well. Because
Yeah, so what we'll do is we'll actually put like, if you want we can we can even have as two distinct links or one big file and we can merge them all up if you wish. We'll discuss it okay. choccolocco for hunting hope that was of some benefits and use inshallah and inshallah until next time, I show that now figure out what's visible Guys, guys, if you don't have a Canon m 50. I'm not a techie guy. So in the comments or whatever, help me out here. What do I do? How do I you know, it's just not shut out in the middle of the interview in shallow okay.
salaam aleikum wa