00:00:00 -->
00:00:42
Assalamu alaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh one of the most difficult questions I get asked by
students who are beginning to study the classical sciences, is the fact that they come across these
different theologies within even Sunni Islam. And each one of them is very passionate about what it
itself is preaching. And it might view the other versions or manifestations as being in error as
being theologically deviated. And you even have some very, if you like, strict people on all sides
of the equation, basically expelling the others from being authentic or pure Sunni Muslims. And the
fact of the matter is that this does really raise some eyebrows. The beginning student knowledge is
00:00:42 -->
00:01:18
confused what is to be done? This person might even be quoted various great scholars, whether
they're in my mother's alley, whether they're shiftless, I'm even Tamia. And they're being quoted
things that seems to suggest that the quote unquote other side isn't quite legit. It's not quite,
you know, correct in its understanding. And this raises problems because, on the one hand, these
quotes do exist. On the other hand, given the circumstances and the world that we're living in, one
wonders is this really our priority is to split hairs over finer details into we're already a
minority within a minority within a minority, and for us practicing Muslims to disagree over some of
00:01:18 -->
00:01:53
the more advanced theological topics. Does that make sense or not? So I've been asked this question,
I, myself have gone through a number of phases of my own life in this regard. And the fact of the
matter is that, as I keep on saying to my students, and I remind myself more knowledge always makes
you more humble. And the more that one studies and the more that one contextualize it, and the more
that one historicize is these developments, the more that one realize, you know, all of these
strands, they were attempting to defend what they viewed as orthodoxy for the time in the place that
we're in. Now, each one of them is shallow to either was sincere, perhaps some of them might have
00:01:53 -->
00:02:31
been, if you like more rational, trying to defend Islam, others are more textual and literalist
trying to defend Islam. But in the end of the day, I'm not doubting the sincerity of any of those
within the spectrum of wanting to defend the Sunnah of the Prophet salallahu idea he was setting
them. And if we look at the times that we're living in the political and social circumstances, in
fact, it is my certainty that if those great scholars that we are quoting on all sides were alive
today, they would be the first people to teach us tolerance. And to make us understand that we need
to contextualize our problems. No matter how passionate you might have a certain understanding of
00:02:31 -->
00:03:10
our last names and attributes of the specifics of other in the end of the day, all of the sides on
these intra Sunni equations and disputes all of them, their intent was to defend the purity of the
message of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa send them Additionally, the questions that these
interests only disputes raised, the fact of the matter is, these questions are simply not found in
the minds of our youth, the teenagers now, our young college men and women, they're not asking
questions about how do we interpret this divine attribute? What does it mean when Allah says, x and
the Koran about his attributes? No, they're asking questions that are of a totally different genre,
00:03:10 -->
00:03:53
Does God Exist? How do we understand the existence of evil? How do we know Islam is true? The entire
debates about theology have moved on from the debates of seventh century about that. So for us in
the 21st century, here in the Western world to take those debates as the end all and be all and I'm
not dismissing that tradition. I'm not saying that debate is totally irrelevant. What I am saying is
that compared to the debates that we're having today, they are not anywhere near as relevant nor
therefore anywhere near as important as the modern debates, contextualizing and understanding this,
we then can say that inshallah Tada, all of these historical strands of pseudoaneurysm, those that
00:03:53 -->
00:04:34
go back 1000 1200 years, perhaps even more than this, all of these historical strands, we need to
learn to not just cooperate together, we need to learn to genuinely respect and tolerate these
differences. And to understand that our dilemma of all of these spectrums actually wanted to defend
Islam from those who wanted to harm it from those who wanted to bring doubts. So we need to do what
they did 1000 years ago, their questions were different than ours. And we can come and unite
together on a common platform to defend the purity of our faith, to defend the orthodoxy of our
tradition, and to answer modern questions. So it to be very simplistic here therefore, much of the
00:04:34 -->
00:04:59
interest only dispute that we find in the third fourth fifth century simply does not need to be
regurgitated. It doesn't need to be repeated so many centuries later. These are controversies of a
bygone era and we can leave them controversies of a bygone era for the masses for the masses, all
strands of Orthodox humanism, traditionalist soon ism, all of them can come together and try to
offer solutions of questions.
00:05:00 -->
00:05:29
I have a modern nature. And therefore we need to get beyond this sectarian rhetoric and learn to
understand that each of these traditions has a magnificent glorious history and they shall
loudhailer benefit from the rich heritage. And we'll talk more about this, this whole issue of where
do we draw the line and what is important, what is not. We'll talk more about it in the class that
I'm currently teaching and that is no doubt Chuck will love it. This is your brother and Islam.
Yeah. So all the sudden I'm wondering what happens we're lucky we're about to catch up.