YQ Gems #4 – Regarding the Book ‘Sharh al-Sunnah’ Attributed to al-Barbahari

Miss min Hill was

set up while I was in LA, he bought a car to welcome to another episode of IQ gems. Today I'm going to do something different, I don't know how this is going to be received or whether it's going to be useful or popular or beneficial or not. But I wanted to see an experiment around today's lecture is going to be a relatively academic one. It's actually original research. It's something that I've been passionate about for many, many years, which is basically early Islamic theology. And today's lecture will primarily be meant for those who have read the famous Book of Shadows sooner, well, Barbara Hardy, and who have some idea of the development of early Islamic theology. So this is not a

general lecture. It's meant for those who are interested in the sciences of VEDA of theology, and especially those that are interested in in early Islamic theology. And today's lecture will also have some original research that I have been doing in this topic. Unfortunately, none of it is published because my own personal life, it doesn't really give me the luxury of sitting down and writing papers. I'm just so busy and doing the various things that I do. And also there's no need for me to be honest, to write papers to professor's write papers to basically get to tenure track and tenure. And my circumstances are such that I really don't, I'm not under that pressure to do

that. And I just research for my own interest. I don't research to, to publish even though I know there's benefit in that nonetheless, just a disclaimer here that today's lecture is meant for those that are interested in the development of early Islamic theology, and have some basic background with that caveat.

Today's lecture is going to be some thoughts that I have about the bookshelf persona, which is attributed to the humbly shares of Abu Mohammed and has ended not nearly as Barbara Hardy, who died 329 after the hedgerow. Now, this book, it has played a pivotal role really, in the shaping of modern Salafism. It was first published in 1988, in Mecca, by the head of the department, Dr. catani. And then a second edition came out, edited by my teacher in Medina, Shahada, Daddy, and a series of other editions came out again, mostly in Saudi Arabia, some in Egypt by the Egyptian selfies, some in in Yemen as well. And this book has become a favorite of the modern Salafi

movement. It has been printed numerous times it has been explained by some of the leading scholars of the movement, shuffle fosun has a printed commentary on it, shuffleboard medical, he has a commentary on it as well, she has on her jewelry from from Yemen as well, it has become a favorite. In fact, in my own time, in Medina, I studied this book multiple times. In fact, one of them was with the head of the department cover to cover, I don't know if you can see this, this is my original copy. And if you can see my my notes here from dating back to 523 1418 as a panelist, so I have my I did this, this this book multiple times. And of course, as you're probably aware, though,

I'm speaking in English to an English audience, you're probably aware that an English translation was released by

many publications in Birmingham. And of course, it played a pivotal role. As I said, By the way, this book was also translated trying to find the year when it was actually published in 1995. Right, so it coincided with the rise of the Western Salafi movement. And it was also translated into French and, and Swedish and other European languages by practitioners of the Salafi movement of the 90s and early 2000s. And, of course, we are all aware of those that have studied the book of the impact that that it has had on our perception on the understanding of this movement. Now, in this brief lecture that I'm going to be giving this, this mini talk I'm going to be giving, I'm going to argue two

points, the both of them are independent from one another, and yet they are related, okay, they are independent in that you can agree with one and not the other, you can agree with the second, not the first, you can agree with both you can agree with neither. And both of these are opinions that I hold. And I'm going to defend them very briefly. But this is a summary of more research that I have done, but it is a summary of my own findings and my own opinions. And at the end of the day, it is research I mean, feel free to take it or reject it or or corrected it's just an opinion about a book written. So keep that in mind before you go to your keyboards and start doing your PDFs of the the

Zeitgeist of the 90s. In any case, first position that I have.

This book is a relatively obscure work

That was hardly ever studied or quoted or utilized until the modern selfie establishment discovered it, published it and then popularized it. The Shadow has Suna was never one of the popular Creed's of Islam, even amongst the humbly or the author at school, and his popularity only goes back to the last 30 years basically of our generation, and it gained popularity in our times, because it could be used to support a particular interpretation of Salafism that is clearly manifested in this book, and it justified certain trends. In other words, I am arguing that the message of this treaties, it is actually Firstly, not typical of even mainstream Methodism. And secondly, it proved useful to

popularize a certain interpretation that needed justification. In other words, if you want to be a little bit more, I mean, blunt here. It captured a particular Zeitgeist of the Salafi movement, it encapsulated it, and then it helped to perpetrate it as well across the Arab and in particular, the Western world for our for our purposes. So that's my first hypotheses are my first contention and I'll mention some points to back that up. The second which is independent, but it does play a role. The second is a conclusion that I'm not the only one to reach it is found but most people are totally unaware of this, but it is you will find this in you know, certain treatises in it and and

books out there, that this book is actually not written by Albert Bahati. It is simply not an

work by the famous humbler scholar Alberto Bahati. Bahati was a shaved head Abdullah he was the, the, the most senior Hammadi scholar of his timeframe, he died 329 higit. Okay, about a Bahati was a great scholar. He was definitely a very, you know, harsh person. We know this from a number of things in his life. He was very, you know, a steer. He was very harsh against the Morteza and whatnot. Nonetheless, this treaties does not belong to him. He did not author it rather, the person who authored it lived two generations before him, it actually predates Albert Buhari, and the person who authored it, his his, he's known by vuillaume Hillel. And while I'm here died 275 hijra 270 500.

Basically, any almost 50 years we are to a generation and have two generations before a generation is around 30 something years, right? So around two generations a generation I have before Barbara Hardy, and this person who lamb Holly, I mean his title is William khaleel, obviously has a named Mohammed bin Mohammed Ebner ba whatever his name is, or his title, people know him by vuillaume khaleel. This person who lamb khaleel, was actually not a famous scholar, rather, he was a a preacher, you know, for the masses. He wasn't an academic, he wasn't an intellectual. He was not a scholar. He was a popular preacher, who had direct ties with the royal family with that buses with

the K lift, or we should say the Regent, his name was in Norfolk, the Regent of the buses. And the senior most Lady of the royal family, the mother of Norfolk, and the grand mother of the future. halifa, who was the wife of the previous or I should say, the concert of the previous halifa, who was his patron. So you know, in those days, the royal family would have, you know, various scholars that they would or you know, preachers or whatever that they would, you know, subsidize, I mean, to this day, that is the case, right. So William Holly was actually somebody who had direct ties with the herbicides and had contact with the royal family with ICBC that busted family and was a patron

he was patronized by patronize here, I mean, of course, the financial flow was coming from the the Office of the caliphate, or I should say, the mother or of the region. And so of course, This changes everything, because when I'm Holly was not a scholar compared to Alibaba, Heidi. And it really does make you think about well, the the contents that you're going to find here, as we will discuss now we're going to be making arguments for both of these points. And in the end of the date is just an opinion that I have and much of this is original research, some points here and there you will find in other writings, but what I'm presenting to you is something that I have on my own, you

know, it's again, it's up to you, you can take it or you can leave it now, first point, my first point I said was that this treaties was relatively obscure, it was never mainstream. How do we know this? How do you know if a book book is read or not? Well, many things First and foremost, how many times it was quoted, how often did other scholars reference this this work? I mean, look at our body. Can you write a book about Islam without referencing a hadith in Bahati, for example, right? So how often was this book quoted in Islamic history, throughout the treatises that are written by theology by Allah by even the humbly scholars

If you look at how often this book is quoted, you will find barely half a dozen quotations. And even that three or four of them basically are about one phrase that has to do with the intellect. And that is that there's a phrase in child history that that says that the intellect is basically, at birth, God decides it, Allah gives it to you at birth, that phrase was quoted a number of times even taymiyah, quotes it as well, a Buddha Allah, the famous humbly scholar of the fourth fifth century, he also quotes it, otherwise the treaties is hardly mentioned at all, it is barely quoted in any book. Now, contrast this with instantaneous quotations of a didomi have had been hoceima of a data

company, and had been Tamia would would advise his students to study the works of a daddy me, that's something that we find very, very common in the writings of even Tamia, you do not find the shadow has seen as a mainstream quotation, constantly quoted across the centuries, it is hardly referenced at all. Another way you can tell whether a book is is mainstream, whether it is read or not, is how many manuscripts exist of a book because again, I mean, look at sahadi, look at cereal, July, look at any of these famous books that have a number Dean, you will find 1000s 1000s of manuscripts across the globe, obviously, because then that indicates people are reading the book, people are

passing it down. So the quantity of manuscripts throughout any era gives you an indication about how popular the book was, okay? How many manuscripts exists of this bookshelf has so now a whopping grand total in the entire globe of one, there is one manuscript that is preserved in the famous ancient library marked with a variety of Damascus. And that is, the only it is the soul is called the unicam. It is the sole manuscript of this book, there are no other manuscripts this book was not widely read, widely publicized, it wasn't being written down by scholars and passed down from No, we find one manuscript written in the five hundreds of the hedgerow and it's just in a collection of

other you know, writings, and it's just found in the maktabah of Vahidi. Okay, so this shows us both of these points shows us that number one, it was rarely referenced, hardly anybody talks about it. And number two, it is not something that is commonly found physically as a manuscript. Now, all of this therefore shows us that this book was not well known, it was not something that was being studied, it was not something that was representative really of the 30 Creed, there are plenty of other books that are representative of the fit creed. So then why was this book chosen? Why? Why was this manuscript taken out and, and edited and then and then published in the 1980s, in 1988, was the

first time and then of course, after that it went, it went viral or global after that, why? Three points to be mentioned about short as soon as anybody who's read the book is well aware of this, okay, three points that really indicate why this book was chosen, and the impact that it had on the movement that it was chosen for, or I should say, the strand of the movement, because again, even as I've said, many times Methodism or Salafism any strategy, open ism, a shot ism, any movement, there are many sub movements, it's really ridiculous. And it's a typical, and it's not a typical, it is not very precise to mention that the the entire movement is always unanimous in one area, on the

contrary, movements are composed of human beings and human beings are different. And within any movement, you find various strands, various interpretations, politically, even theologically methodologically. So the Salafi movement is no different. It has multiple strands, and that particular strand of the modern Salafi movement became popular, especially in the 90s. And especially in the West, as we're all aware, but it wasn't just in the West, it was coming from the east. And my argument is shot has soon in caps you this book encapsulated that Zeitgeist, and then in fact, it perpetuated it right? It was both they wanted it, and then they used it. Now, what are

some of the things that are unique about this book that we really don't find in other mainstream theological books? Well, first and foremost, I think everybody is aware, the extreme harshness that is displayed in this book against anybody whom the author deems to be not of his version of Satanism, the big idea and this is, of course, humble ism was always you know, strict on the sun and harsh upon the editor. There's no question about that. But this book is at a different level altogether. And you have these famous quotations that again, this book popularized both in Arabic and in English. For example, if you see a person sitting with a deviant, then warn him and if it

continues to sit with that deviant then leave him because he himself is a person of innovation. For example, Alibaba, how he writes where he quotes that on the left

The robot body again, I'm gonna say this is not a better body, that if you see a Vadim foster father, literally he uses these adjectives, but from a listener, stick with him. And if you see a worship or you know, a pious person doing good and whatnot, but he's from there, then leave him. So panel again, imagine if you see a vaad in Farsi foger. Go ahead and associate with him if he's of your creed. And again, this is something that goes against the basic teachings of Islam really, right. You're gonna have your loyalty to a person based upon abstract ideas of theology. Now, again, you will find various quotations of some of the setup, but one very important point here we have to

mention very clearly in the end of the day, treatises written by odermatt remain treatises written by rula they do not become the Quran and Sunnah. No scholar has the right to Trump the Quran and the Sunnah. No scholar has the right to dictate something that contravenes Islamic principles. And the religion of Islam teaches us to have mercy between the believers the Koran teaches us that we should have one oma united the Sunnah of the Prophet system says there are six rights that every Muslim has upon another Muslim not every hardcore self he has upon every hardcore selfie. Every Muslim has rights upon other Muslims and of them is that you show compassion and mercy and you return the

salams and you visited when you're sick when you help them when they need to be helped. In other words, in manana and Eman is based upon taqwa and taqwa transcends a creed or what you actually you know, recite, and books like this, they helped popularize this notion that abstract theology is far more important than actual lived piety. And by the way, even if you quote me, so, Fianna thodi or whatever and they do have quotes like this, they are talking about the Jamia and modern selfies take these quotations and they apply them to the urban these they apply them to Jamaat Islam is to Tiberius and Subhanallah Yanni again this so again, what I'm arguing is that this book was chosen,

and then perpetuated this issue in the the famous quote here and against Senator Barbara hardy that I would rather eat with the yahudi or an Asana instead of an albida. Right. Again, this contradicts the basic notion of Muslim unity and of brotherhood between Islam. I would rather sit with a yahoodi or an Asana than with a person a bit at this extreme harshness that is displayed in this particular book. It is a typical and it contradicts basic Islamic tenants. And of course, this work helped justify, especially amongst converts and new Muslims were never practicing, they never lived in in a religious environment. It helped justify this cultish mentality that Sufism was famous for and still

is famous for. And by the way, another study has needs to be done and I've spoken about this and other times, why did that version of Salafism appeal to a particular demographics? I don't want to go too much deeper. But if you look at the people who were attracted to that version of Islam and still are To this day, they are of a certain you know, socio economic or certain demographics of society. And this this methodology of cultish, pneus, and harshness, it appeals to them again,

look at where in England even where the self is a verse England even versus America, where in America for example, as well, and which demographics as well. And the the notion of having a theology that empowers you above and beyond all of the mainstream oma, right? That's another study not related to this, but my point is that a barber has allegedly

shot her sooner. It helped perpetuate this myth that as long as you know your abstract theology, even if you're committing Zina and drinking alcohol and whatnot, you are better because you're upon the sun. And this person who might be pious and praying five times a day and praying 200 but he believes that you know, in a shady theology, for example, he's an evil person, that is an Islamic belief it is an Islamic it goes against the Quran and Sunnah. And books like this, there are not the only one but books like this they helped perpetuate that cultish mentality so there are three reasons I said that this book is chosen number one, the harshness of displays that is a typical even

of Methodism, I'll have to be honest here. Definitely early humble ism, displayed some harshness, but not to this level. And this level is simply not found in in mainstream treatises within the the the 30 trend. Secondly, this book has a very heightened and exaggerated sense of its own value, and the value of its author, and its adherence to the sooner. In other words, this book is literally saying it defines orthodoxy. And again, there are phrases in here that almost every editor has to excuse the author for he couldn't have meant that or this is a mistake or this is an exaggeration. And of course, this sense of me defining

Orthodoxy my teachers defining what is correct and incorrect and anybody who dares disagree is a deviant. Well, it is enshrined in this book. So in this book it says that

do not hide this book from anybody from the table because it is possible that Allah will guide a person of innovation through it fed up a lot how eloquent.

Were Who am I was off to look if you had to get up so I advise you to follow the earliest teachings which is summarized in this book. May Allah azza wa jal Have mercy on anybody who reads this book and spreads it and calls to it and use it as an evidence because this book is the deen of Allah and the Dean of His Messenger and whoever considers anything permissible that this book has not allowed it is not from the deen of Allah and it is going to be rejected in its entirety. He has made his teachings define orthodoxy, and he goes here from an karabi Matthew Hideki tardy, we're gonna be here with Takata who implement what am your sugarfree healthy men who what am eh had heard of a man

who, for who or saw tablespoon nothing with Gemma artin whoever believes in this book in its entirety and takes it as an Imam and doesn't doubt one word in this book, then he is the person of Sunnah. And he is the person of Gemma and whoever rejects even one word of this book, he becomes a pure person of deviation and how Subhanallah nobody has the right to say that nobody naughty mama might not even Tamia not anyone except for the prophets of Allah whitey he was sent him and this mainstreaming of this fanaticism it does not be fit any trend of Islam. It does not fit any scholar, much less the great scholar a mammal about a body and as I'm going to argue, but nobody could never

have written these words. He was too scholarly. He might have been harsh against Alibaba, okay, fine. But for him to say whoever disagrees with one word of my book is a calf at the bottom will dilemma in my book is the the correct and anybody who disagree? So paddler no scholar can say this. And again, what I'm calling was not a scholar. He was a mass preacher. Right? He was not an academic. He was not a person of knowledge. He was just a popular guy, you know, who had royal connections and whatnot, you would expect such you know, highfalutin Yani talk from an ignoramus or for somebody like that, and not from a moment above everybody, Bahati, as we're going to mention. So

the second reason why this book was chosen, is because it teaches very clearly it teaches that you and your scholars get to define orthodoxy. It's there in the book, that attitude of if you don't agree with me, you're an actual deviant. You find it in the book. The third thing, which is again, very clear why this is chosen, and especially now look at what is happening in the Muslim world. Look at what is happening in those countries. Look at what is happening with the scholars who were trained with that version of Sofia, what are they? They're totally incapable of responding to the political challenges because they were spoon fed for 3040 years aversion, a quietest politically it

you know, a incapacitated survival acquiescent version of Islam. I'm sorry to use the word bootlicking. But it really is. This is not Islam. And what really shocks me? How can anybody study the life of Ibn taymiyyah, that lion who would speak the truth and march into the palaces of the rulers and even disobeyed the rulers at times when he felt that his father was were better and the ruler said, don't preach it, he couldn't care less. And he still gave his feet for tours and teachings in contradistinction to what the rulers told him he did not obey the rulers in certain things that they explicitly said to him. Don't give this photo don't teach this, like yeah, whatever

is my opinion, and I think it is right. Now, My point being I went into my digression here, this book, it preaches a survival, obedience to the rulers that is just a typical, it's not even mainstream humble ism. True. Certain versions of Methodism, were politically quietest, yes, but this is survival. See, there's a difference between saying we obey the ruler, we don't want civil war that's fully mainstream Satanism, but this book takes it to a different level, whoever, from the book, whoever prays against the soul bond is a person of innovation. Whoever makes to offer the soul bond is a person of the sun. So your allegiance to a law is dictated by making to ask for this Hold

on. You can even not like this. Hold on. You can't even say me, like get rid of the soap on place and other soap on. There are lots of passages in this book. And again, there's entire sections dedicated, that demonstrate that this book has a different level when it comes to acquiescence to the ruler. And by the way, again, this is a different topic. Maybe in another lecture that I give this notion of there's unanimous consensus that one cannot revolt against the ruler. No, there has never been there never will be agreed and I'm not a political agitator, and I'm definitely not on the side of

Those that are always you know, calling for never have a call for vitalising as to ruler, but the claim that we should be serval and acquiescent and especially in the face of what is going on here. So Pamela, I mean, all you need to do is look at the the works of earlier authors, many of the early henna fees of expository disease, even the Monique azima Malik, people should read how Mr. Malik viewers towards the buses, right, this claim that do you have to love the rulers and make dua for the rulers from the beginning of our history, you know, her saying that are the Illa, Juan, the grandson of the process of urbanism obey. I mean, how can you say, there's a Jima and you have given

as obey. And then you have a long list of a ruler map, the revolt, even a shot and whatnot. Now you can say you disagree, you can say that it was wrong, you can say they caused fitna but to call them deviance, that's my point here. I myself am very sympathetic to political quietism that's my overall philosophy, political quietism. And that, you know, if I were a citizen of those lands, most likely, I would just go about teaching my stuff and you know, whatever and you teaching the people what they need to know not not becoming a martyr and standing that's personally who I am. But somebody who wants to do that you're going to call him a deviant. Also, this does not mean that you bend over

backwards and you lick the boots of the rulers and you just justify everything that they're doing that is not Islam. And anybody who studies the the the the methodology of our greater Allah from a Noah we have been hijacked to Ibn taymiyyah to when there is in abdus salam these people they had to examine their own cells. Most of the the followers of this brand of Salafism look at how they're, you know, doing now when their own country is literally being sold to the worst forces on Earth. But I don't want to go down that tangent. That's a totally different tangent, but open your eyes, what's going to happen when this interpretation of Salafism which is against Ubuntu me and, frankly, it's

against they've been up there will have if he followed his own advice, then, you know, there would have not have been a suit with the lab. But my point being this book is a level of servitude that is simply a different, you know, different level altogether. It is, it is arguing that it is a part of our religion, to not just obey the rulers, but to submit to everything that they do. So these three points are my argument are some of the main reasons why this book was chosen. And they're all a typical, once again, number one extremely harsh with anybody who disagrees this, this notion of a little bit and be mean and nasty and cruel to them. And asuna is always better, even if their volume

fossick foger. Number two, a heightened exaggeration of one's own orthodoxy we define who is orthodox and unorthodox, and we see this and you know, the salary publications and the medallion award, that is exactly where this comes from. Number three, the strong emphasis of loyalty to the rulers, right. It's not something that is it been to me, and it's not something that is even mainstream habit ism. And it's not even Barbara Hardy, as we were going to mention. Okay, so that's my first point, by the way, that only half the lecture here, guys. And by the way, there are many problematic issues. I'm not even going there, this text is not full of free of errors. There are

theological problems, and that it makes many 50 issues into theology, for example, theologically, it has definitions of loom of Allah and justice, which are actually not even sad. They're, they're sad, the guy defines voting in a way that sad is and even taymiyah would later on refute, and the ludum have alone read this up. Also, he claims that for example, the profit system knows everything that will happen until the day of judgment that Allah told him everything that will happen is in his own to the Day of Judgment. I mean, the interviews are gonna love this. This is a humbling textbook. No, it's not. That's not mainstream, humble ism. The Prophet system was taught certain things, yes,

Allah did show him certain things, but to say that he knows everything that will happen until the day of judgment. It also has the notion that Risa will marry before he dies and whatnot. These are we don't know this, to make this into a theology. So anybody who denies this, according to him is a little bit odd, right? If I say Jesus is not going to marry, the book says I'm a deviant and badan will do it because I've rejected one word from the book. Also, by the way, the treaties has many 50 rulings as well that are not be fitting to put you For example,

Nika is only with woody I mean, the hanafis have their position, you're not going to consider them to be deviant. fortec bereiten Sonata janaza becomes an issue of theology here, praying in a panting should one should what becomes an aspect of theology here costs and traveling becomes an aspect of the ultra the HANA fees are not so nice, because they don't do considering traveling for example, triple Penelope says is a triple Bella. So according to this book, even Tamia would be born mobile because even Tamia didn't agree with a triple tala. In any case, my first point to conclude before I move on to the second point, this treaties is neither the most accurate nor anywhere near to being

representative or mainstream.

Thought ism or humble ism, it was never popular in the history of Islam pre modernity. Rather, this treatise was deliberately chosen in the late 80s, early 90s to reinforce a particular narrative, and it was then popularized and perpetrated to present a version of Salafism that all of us who were active in the 90s are very familiar with. Okay, that is my first argument, completely independent of the second one. But of course, if you believe that this book is not even by him and butter, Bahati automatically, it will help the first point, but you could believe it is by Bob Bahati and still agree with me, in the first point that this book served a purpose and Bahati even if it is his

amoment about a body does not get to define Islam. Only Allah and His Messenger have that right now. The second point that I'm going to bring in this is that

the book is actually not authored by my body, it is a mistake to attribute to him. The actual author of the book is somebody by the name of hulan khaleel, who died 275 already mentioned, he's a relatively minor person associated with knowledge. He is more a public preacher who had ties with the government. And, believe it or not, he has been accused by multiple scholars of being unknown fabricator, a Buddha Buddha cG stanny, the great Imam of the sinner, called him a fabricator and hack him the famous author of the mustard rock adata poultney called him a fabricated liar. Josie called him, somebody who fabricates whatnot. They all accused him of being a liar, even as they

admitted that his outward persona was that of piety. He felt that it is permissible to lie against the Prophet sallallahu wasallam to encourage people to be to be good. So he had this Machiavellian interpretation that you know, and maybe he was in his own weird way pious or ascetic or whatnot. But he felt that he could lie against the Prophet so I said, I'm in order to encourage the people and he has, without anything, he says 400 fabricated a hadith. And that'll put me in No, Josie mentions a number of them in his famous mold right. Now, this guy. As I said, he was a friend of Elmo, OFAC the Basque region. Now one more fact, by the way, was the brother of the Khalifa. The halifa was in

incapacity to the halifa was basically living in his palace doing nothing. And what was the de facto ruler and wafak was the real ruler, and Mr. Fox and what I'm hadeel had a direct contact relationship, and in what Fox mother was the one who was patronizing The one who is subsidizing O'Loughlin his activities and basically, you know, the sponsor of hulan khaleel. And what am Khalid is also known for another incident in history, which is very important for our book as well for our lecture, and that is that he was fanatically anti Sufi. In the year 264 hijra. He caused a mini mini mini Inquisition when he gave a long list of 70 people to the Royal Court to the caylus Royal Court

of Sue fees to be imprisoned or even executed. he famously remarked about a specific famous Sofia but has an annuity he literally said to the halifa execute him and his blood is on my shoulders, meaning I will defend on the day of jasmine go ahead and kill him execute him and his blood is on my shoulders. Now, the halifa den sent the order out. Many people were imprisoned. Nobody was executed as far as I know. Many people were imprisoned, many hid from the from the police and whatnot, and even had been Tamia writes about this incident. And he says that who now Holly was a worshipper who displays simplicity, but he had no knowledge and he was even taymiyah writing he had no knowledge or

very little knowledge, and he would fabricate Hadith for the masses, and had been Tamia himself says this episode that Willem khaleel did was really a boon that innocent people were harassed and intimidated for no valid reason. This is what what I'm Claudio is known for. Now, clearly, if what I'm calling authored this book, rather than Barbara Hardy, automatically, many of the arguments already go a notch down, even though as I said, even if this is all about our bodies in the end of the day, it is an opinion of one man, it doesn't make it the Quran and Sunnah. But now if you realize the person who authored it was basically a loyalist to the herbicides of fanatical preacher

with little knowledge. Basically, that's how he is described, maybe he might have had some worship or attitudes and whatnot, but he's not a person of knowledge. Well, I'm Holly is nobody compared to the great Imam of the henna Bella and Barbara Hardy. So automatically it changes everything now, how am I getting to this conclusion? That's what I'm calling is the author rather than about Buhari. So I'm going to mention 11 points very quickly. And again, this is a part of a much larger research that I've done for myself. I mean, this is just something I do this is this is you're seeing me now this is what I do when I'm bored and I need to do so this is what I do. I like to do research and

topics that interest me, and I don't have much need to publish or whatnot. But I thought let me

See how this works? And by the way, if you're still with me right now, and if you're actually enjoying this, write in the notes or whatnot, because I don't know, are people even going to be paying attention? Is this something that is a benefit? Is it something that is of use? I don't know. I mean, I have multiple audiences and whatnot. And I believe that's one of my biggest weaknesses and problems that I am not because of my different audiences. Anyway, that's a different thing. So I have 11 points. 11 points that and this is some of this is completely original, you're not this is my research, some of it, some of which we'll find other places. 11 points that I argued that this

book is not authored by me but Bobby number one, and this point is mentioned in every edition is well known. Number one, believe it or not the manuscript itself. As you can see, there's a copy of the manuscript one of the pages, the manuscript itself, I said, there's only one manuscript copy, right? It's in the media library. The manuscript literally says, with a direct is not from its author, that this is the shot her son of a Willem de Lille not available Bahari, the manuscript, the one manuscript has smack dab on the front, not the name of Burberry, but the name of hulan. How do the one manuscript so how did it get attributed to a better body we're going to get there. But it is

very important to note that this book, when it is discovered, in this manuscript form, it is the same handwriting from the beginning to the end, the same handwriting, the same author is doing it, the same text is there the same, you know, pages are there, and the first page of it has an isnaad from the, from the writer all the way to direct continuous is not all the way to Hola, Hello, this is I mean, this is right there definitive proof, but there is something that brings throws a spanner in there, which is why it is attributed to about a body nonetheless, that is a massive argument, when you find the treaties in the same handwriting from the beginning to the end, and it has the

name of somebody else, and the is not is there and it is authentic. In other words, Now, some people say that the person who took from Willem Julio was only 15 years old. So what 15 years old was an adult 15 is not a child. Yes, he was 15. But 15 is definitely a sensible age. This is like the 18 year old of today, 15 year old back then it there is no law, there's no breaking of the chain, and anybody who says so doesn't know the basics of it. A 15 year old is more than qualified to take from a teacher and pass the book down. But my point being D is not of the book and the book itself and the name on the cover is what it is, it is not about bodies. Okay, that's the first point. So then

how then did he get attributed about body the second point a little bit long here. The first person to attributed to Albert Bahati is the famous called the law of the humble is in the year 458 hegira. And then his son in a big law in the book pubblicato hana a bit of the famous double collateral Hana Villa, this is the, the source book of somebody, scholars, early scholars, in double quotes on HANA Villa, he is the one who then follows his father in this regard, by the way for the advanced students. We are the references Alibaba has it only once or twice and he mentioned Alibaba he says that the intellect again the issue of the intellect which is probably where even Tamia found it from

I'll call the FBI and they've been Tamia did not read the original book separated and Tamia is reading a call the other the other is quoting this book and of all the other says Alibaba Hari says and then he quotes this here, okay. And his son in Vienna, who wrote the bottle Hannah Bella. In the biography of Alibaba Buhari, he says that and of the writings of Alibaba, Alibaba, howdy, Shara Hakata, the son, I'm pretty sure you cannot see that here. But anyway, and then he has most of the treaties preserved within the double cultural Hana Villa This is a key point here, most of the treaties is preserved within this book in the biography of Albert Bahati, okay, how and why did this

happen? To be honest, we are not 100% certain, however, there is a bit of an indication and that is that in this book pubblicato hana Villa, even obeah Allah mentions with his his nod to somebody called hesson. Was he has an Was he an incident between Alberto Buhari and an SI D, the famous meeting, which is highly disputed, but it's only mentioned here. And right after this, he says, and of his treatise ease, and he mentioned this book here, now, and he was he was a friend of all the China and the isnaad goes through him. This was the person and he was he was a fanatical bigot who hated the Saudis and who wrote a treaties, the most famous treaties that disparaged about Hassan

allegedly by the way if you know the famous book to be incredible mystery, a bit of a circuit, he wrote it, to refute was okay so to be in cannabis study, which is the famous book written in defense of autism was written to defend a shady against

Was he who is this person was he was he?

He is called by a mama that hubby. Sorry, he is called by multiple bills that he is called a known liar. And that was he. And remember that hubby in his in his biography of him in Sierra Nevada novella, go read it. He is very skeptical of this person's accomplishments. He goes, he might have done some good in here and there, he mentioned certain things, but he goes otherwise, something is wrong about what he is saying. And he calls him how to believe somebody who just picked things and described it human there. He is not precise. And he has some big question mark about his authenticity. And it seems to be and this is a theory that Hawaii has he was the one who found this

treaties of vuillaume hillels and wanted to ascribe it to somebody of the Hambali Kambou lamb curry is not associated with mainstream hamburgers, or lamb curry is not hardcore, you know, a mom of the hamburgers, it seems and Allah knows best. This is the theory that Allah was he was the one who ascribed this book to Alberto pahadi. And the Abuja family then got this notion. And once it is put in double cultural Hannibal under a liberal Buhari, then call us everybody is then regurgitating it. This is like the first domino, and then you find your mom and daddy. And they've been telling me and others, they're quoting from abeokuta. They're quoting from the author, Hannah villa. They are not

quoting a separate treaties, which is when I'm having those treaties, they're not finding the original document. They're simply looking at what you know, the famous scholar says, and it's that's fine, a mama their hubby in his car, and others. So remember that he is compiling earlier sources. And once the mistake has been made in this book, it's going to be perpetrated this book is again, you know, 500, something big, right? It's written down pretty early, but it's written down 200 years after about Bahati 300 years after William Holly, and a mistake occurred there. And it's then been perpetrated the few times in Islamic history that this book has ever referenced. It is not

referenced because of a manuscript copy, it is not referenced because of a separate book, it is referenced directly from this book, which made a mistake, it's either intentional by a huazi, which is a theory or a genuine mistake, by all the data and his son, it may be either either way, it is not from a barber Howdy. Okay. Now, this is the second point here that the isnaad goes through a huazi. And it is mentioned here and it became the perpetrator. And so anybody who mentions it now I know people are gonna respond back and you know, that's fine. That's what I can make researches Yanni. No problem, we go back and forth, but realize you can quote me the six or seven people that

are mentioned in the introduction here and other books here, realize they're all quoting from this book, it doesn't matter. Nobody is quoting from the original, nobody's going back and reading its own treaty. So the second point I want to mention is that the the the source of this confusion is, as in every Island, his love of art and his father before him, and most likely, the name of Hawaii is associated. And he is not an honest person, he was a fanatical bigot, who would it would fit the stereotype that he found this treaties and he wanted to claim it for his faction to be refuting against the other faction out there. The third note now, now that we've done this Now, another thing

we can do, and this is the rest of the points are going to do this is called source internal source criticism. We're going to look at this book, do a deep dive, and I've done this plenty of times, oh, by the way, I've studied this book in Medina, three times with the scholars and then multiple times on my own back in the day when I actually thought that it was about bodies. And so this is something that I've been doing research on for a while over 20 years just thinking about this. And obviously, these are things that this is this my area of expertise, I love the development of early Islamic theology. Now,

I was saying what we need to know what we need to do now is called source criticism. We look at the book itself and see, are there any hints within the book? Is it better bodies? Or is there hold on? We know tidbits about both of these authors. We also know they live in a two different timeframes. Okay, but but how do you die 329? Remember that what I'm calling dies 270 274 275. Okay, so there's around, you know, 50 years, more than 50 years between the two of them. So now we're going to look at internally can we find some differences and can we can we choose one over the other? And we realized that in fact, there are plenty of evidence has plenty. That to me, is definitive, that the

book belongs to an earlier era and belongs to Holland, and it does not belong to a later era to the scholar, the famous scholar Albert Buhari. Okay, so point number three now of why this book is about Biharis is the harshness, the high praise the actual

successive, you know, this book is upon the happen anybody who has bought it. This is not scholarly language, it is not befitting of an Imam like a barber hottie and that's why every single editor who's who's editing this book has to put a footnote, even shahzada headphones on

rogering when they comment on this book or you listen to the commentary, they'll say when they get to this phrase, May Allah forgive the author, this wasn't befitting of the author. You know what, it's not from the author, but he was too scholarly. He might have been strict as I keep on saying but he was an add him it was a shame for him to say anybody who disagrees with one word of my book is a golfer or ball and we'll determine this wording cannot come from an item an item has humility, an item knows his worth. And therefore this is coming from a popular preacher when I'm clear, it is not coming from from and also this harshness, as I said, a typical, a typical this harshness of I'll

sit with a Vadim fossick foger evil person if he's upon my belief, and I'm going to hate somebody you know, so you get my point here, it's not befitting barbati point number four here. One of the things that about about a body is well known for read this and double hearted Hannibal read this in any early book of humbling theology, Albert Buhari followed a strand of sad, humble ism. And again, the notion that all selfies had the same IP that this is, this is something you're taught is not true. I mean, go read. You know, a Buddha had a belief and if an athlete had a belief in a religious belief, and potamia had a belief in Tamia comes along and he takes one strand of herbalism and it

becomes the dominant it's not the only strand proven Tamia, there's clearly and in my book, my book which is going to be published inshallah, soon I go into this a little bit of detail and much more detail is beyond the scope of even that book. My point being

that Albert Buhari followed a strand of amberlite Islam of pre classical Methodism, let's say, that was obsessed with some issues and of them was the issue of the Prophet salallahu alayhi wa sallam allegedly sitting on the throne of Allah on the Day of Judgment. Albert Buhari is one of the most famous scholars who would constantly argue that Ahmed Mahmoud is the profitsystem sitting on the kursi now this is not the time to go into all of this and where he gets it from and whatnot, had been Tamia basically saved humble ism by rejecting that strand and that went into history and Oblivion, but for 200 years, 150 years, that was predominant Humbert ism that the Prophet system is

going to sit next to a law on the throne and humble ism did have elements of it, you know, extreme, you know, that scene, which is again, even even tame images is not just me now, even beyond dimensions, and this is one known, Albert Buhari. In fact, let me see if I can find it here that he mentions here that Albert Bahati would never have a gathering.

of a hottie would never have a gathering. Let me just find this here. Except that, yes, here it is. What's another limb eukanuba Albert Buhari is do some measures and Illa we're the guru fee and aloha xojo. You query the Mohammedan Ma, who I'll allow she This is straight from the book in my volume, three page 76th edition. Okay. And this is one more look at a book. Albert Buhari was obsessed with this issue that the Prophet system is going to sit next to a lot on the Day of Judgment. And he would always begin his his teaching and his knowledge sessions with sending select upon the one whom Allah would sit next to. So who would sit next to Allah and even a B Allah says he would never have

a gathering, except that he would mention this point in it. Now, this book does not mention the one point that Buhari is famous for how is that possible? Because it's not coming from our body. The one thing that the body is obsessed with is not mentioned in the book that's ascribed to him that that notion is not here. That's another point point number three. And by the way, there are other attributes here. You know, the the sorry, point number four, there is the luck coming down the two fingers of a law the placing of his foot on gender, the standard 30 stuff here, but that issue of the process of sitting which is associated with better body it is not in this book. So point number

four this book doesn't seem to be better bodies. It seems to be another person's point number five, what was what I'm highly well known for? His anti dissolve Okay, he was a fanatical anti Sufi berbahasa he was not anti Sufi, by the way, another advanced point here, the relationship of Sufism with humble ism. Again, it needs a deeper research the will have Ibn Abdul Wahab came along there was a slip I don't like saying well hobbyist and HDS Ibn Abdul Wahab came along and made humble ism anti Sufi, otherwise humble ism is not entitled to have some of the greatest random Abdulkadir Gilani. Look

His books and who he is and he's one of the famous humbler Rama and Humbert ism has always been There's even an academic article by Christopher multitude about humbly Sufism and whatnot debnath Iam is an example of this now.

Baba Hadi was friends with and a student of an a companion of one of the most famous Sophie's of his time. And that is to study herbicides to study and volum hollywell was fanatically anti Sufi is that point clear, but Buhari is not anti Sufi. In fact, some of his teachers whose colleagues is the famous famous a to study who's the soul wolf is well known his opinions are well known his writings are well known. Lamb Holly is anti Sufi, okay, what does this got to do with the book? Okay, open up this book. In fact, let me open up the English book here and find that section for you in the English book here, page 79 here, okay, point 118. In this translation, he basically says, beware of

those who talk about choke and muhabba because these are pathways to deviation. And the way to worship a lot is through fear not through love show and muhabba beware of them. Now, this is another definitive evidence that this book is not authored by Barbara Heidi it is authored by vuillaume Julio because hola Maria was the one who literally accused a naughty of being a cafe because he used the word show because of this word. This word is what obsessed him there is a larger widget and it goes anywhere. He of course means passion. And it's not in the Quran and Sunnah but earlier to so have used it to describe their relationship with Allah lamb khaleel went berserk and he said anybody

who uses this is balling will delight should be executed and he wanted a naughty to be executed because of this word and that word is found in short has seen that the whoever says this beware of him and Barbara hardy is friends with to study and to study uses this word all the time in fact I did in my quick research I did in his study actually says that's a lot better i mean i mean II to rugby Hill Cobra, that Allah that the process of saw the major signs of Allah and he says this woman has added a llama hub button will show unwelcome what okay he uses the word that Baba Hari allegedly says whoever uses it is lot and will do. I hope you guys understand this point. polam hadeel is an

anti bigot when it comes to his he hates the soul Wolf, and he hates the words that are issued and shokan muhabba and it's mentioned in the book this book shot has Santa Barbara hardy is not antitussive one of his best friends and teachers is to study in fact they have he says we're kind of realizing what you saw he will always be with us that he loves to study and to study he uses the word Chopin muhabba so this book cannot be from Barbara Hardy. This book is from Ghulam hodja. Is that point clear? that's point number five Okay, point number six here there's only one honey for mentioned by name and praise highly buttered. Okay, one halifa is mentioned by name Okay in this

entire book, Guess who? Al mutawa whose motto what kill the husband of the woman who's paying his fees will do okay and motor what kill is the father of a more and more facts mother is the one paying what I'm calling his salary comes from this lady. And the one person who is mentioned by name and praised as the one who who you know open the sooner and and do and destroy data and alarms or just say the religion like lavish praise placed on one Khalifa by name. And that just so happens by quick Why would a better Buhari be praising somebody? No doubt and what they did certain good things and the men and whatnot, but the amount of praise and to mention by name and to say the one who

revived the sooner It seems this is more hula Mahalia, who needs to praise His patrons family, not Barbara Hardy, who there's no need to praise somebody 100 years ago. Okay, that's point number six. Point number seven. You read the book, and you come across the list of names of people to follow. And he mentioned with the Sahaba and Abu hurayrah. And tab your own he mentioned the great scholars Edmund was there you mentioned Marty cabanillas Mademoiselle, and he keeps us sane from the next generation next generation and then he goes down. Okay, where does he stop? Because here's the point. If he stops at 290 300 310 320 hedra, it cannot be when I'm clear. It has to be a bit of a

hurry. Where does this book stop? It stops at Hajji when men had died to 17 Vanessa died to 31 and a hammer the hammer died 240 and he says whoever respects these people this following this Santa Barbara Heidi is two and a half generations after a mama within the ambit, where his body and Buddhahood and the great imams of the Sunnah if butter Buhari had been writing this book, he is missing two generations. Not just

One if William Hill is writing this book, he is mentioning the generation right before him is when I'm clearly not barbati Point Number eight, the evil people that are mentioned. Okay, who is he refuting? Who is mentioned by name? He mentioned only four names if anybody praises them they're evil people. Bishop elementary cdai to 18, a B, A B D, di 240 abulhool, a a di 235 and a shamble faulty di 227. That's it. Alberta Buhari has well known enemies from the mortiser, who harmed him whom he refuted, who was their their antagonist. These have no mention in shall Hudson, who is mentioned to generations before by Bihari people that would not be now William Hulu would definitely

have known some of these people and their students. He's that generation and he's saying beware of that group of people. butterball, how do you Why would he be mentioning people that lived 100 years ago, Lam Julio is mentioning the students whose teachers are these evil people, quote unquote, right. So again, both who he mentions to be with and who he mentions to not be with they stop at Olam hereos generation not to generation later which is by body to me, by the way, these are almost definitive that to me, this is an open shut case. When you look at this now, there's still more to come. Point number nine there's 11 points point number nine.

The the the relationship of the rulers in this book is something very bizarre. And it fits the profile of William Hill to the tee, and it does not fit the profile of a liberal body. This, this this obsequious to the rulers this this this, this complete survival attitude that this book displays towards the rulers which explains why it is adopted by a certain strand of modern Salafism and Barbara hardy did not exemplify it as Barbara Hardy was not bending over backwards to please the rulers and Buhari was not obeying every command of the rulers who allow Lille, his family friends with the ruler, when I'm Julio is a personal of the personal entourage of Norfolk and being paid by

the but by the mother of and morpha. So, Albert Buhari twice in his lifetime, twice in his lifetime, political issues happen his rivals sued him in court complaint against him and the halifa called him to be put in jail twice in his lifetimes. Now, the person who authored this book is saying you have to obey the rulers and they are this and they are that surely, if Albert Buhari wrote this, and the rule and the ruler says you should be arrested, he should walk in the streets and say Yes, dear ruler, I will listen to everything you say because my leader says whatever you say, Sahib as soon as to obey the rule, what would be so anyway, that's their version of Abdullah? Brothers be wise. This

is a version of Islam that suits specific royal families and rulers and so they propagated This is not the religion of Allah azza wa jal. It is not even the methodology of Jamia much less even Abdul Wahab How can the people who claim to fall in Tamia and the will have have such a skewed understanding of obedience to the ruler This is called brainwashing but that's besides the point right now we're doing an academic discussion now. And again, political quietism is not the same as being surveilled. I am an advocate of political quietism. I'm an advocate of not rocking the boat and not unsheathing the sword. But that's not the same as giving hobas just in the habit of

justifying let's not go over there. Oh the beloved's God, Allah will deal with them. Um, my point is that

if the barber Howdy, if Albert Buhari, authored this book, his lifestyle contradicts what he is saying, because both times the arrest warrants came, what does he do? He goes into hiding. He dies with a warrant on his head in hiding. He is at the house of a sister of his own. The student of his was a powerful minister. His sister had a house somewhere he is in hiding in hiding, and he dies. Private janaza has done his parade in the living room. And he's just buried over there because he was a persona non grata before this point in time the Royal Court issued a decree but a body I'm talking about well known look this up, and he is called to be arrested. What does he do? Does he

obey his own book and obey the ruler he goes into hiding, even as some of his students are captured and persecuted? The chef doesn't come I don't blame him by the way fully allowed in Islam. You don't need to be tortured the cleophas ruler then this is the point. Mainstream humble ism is politically quietest. It is not acquiescent. It is not survival. There is a difference between the two and Buhari when the arrest warrant came in, he knows his boom, he doesn't obey the ruler, he goes into hiding, that does not square up with what is written in this book. So either you say but Buhari was a hypocrite and I don't think he was or you say the author is real and not by Bahati, which is what

I'm saying. that's point number nine, point number 10. And there's only one more point No, we're done. 1011 We're done. Point number 10. There was a very interesting phrase in this book that very few people have picked up on a comment

To them, very few people, and it really shows us it's coming from a different era and a different audience and a different interaction. Okay? There is a phrase in this book that he said will come down, and he shall pray behind a law a moment, Ali Mohammed, or mo min Ali Mohammed, meaning the MADI shaqab rises and falls and what he comments on this book, he says, This is the Maggie and his name is such as it goes into the Sunni doctrine. Now, nobody seems to catch on this peculiar phrase, I'll call a moment, Ali Mohammed, this is not mainstream Sunni Islam or Methodism or anything. This is a phrase that is now associated with Shia Islam. But when the buses came to power, their buses

and the proto Shia were united against the omega three, this is history and the term called Eman Allah Mohammed was invoke, and it was invoked in order to basically show that this is now the, because there was this notion of that bus as being the mighty there are buses they had and they and they purposely did this notion of the black flags and quarters and their buses utilize this right? And so the argument at Mohammed is a Basset motif, and one would expect it earlier on not 330 hijra, but 201 would expect it in the circles of the courts of the Ibis, it's this phrase, Allah, Allah Mohammed is not found in Sunni literature. It's not it's not from Satanism. It is from proto Shia

Islam, and it is from our buses. And one would expect it from Willem Julio who had a relationship and is in the courts of the buses. One would not expect it from Alberto Buhari, who is a hardcore sad hambly. So this was an interesting phrase alignment, Mohammed point number 10. And then point number 11. final point here. This book has a number of ahaadeeth that are fabricated very weak why Hyndman Carmo door and this is one loan the editors point this out here. And hold on Holly was known to be somebody who dabbled in all of this he had no clue about how these Barbra Hardy was in Harlem and a chef and we expected he had enough knowledge to know a fabricated had it again but Buhari is

two generations after Bahati the books have been written down for him to quote a fabricated Hadith. And he is the shareholder Hannah Bella doesn't quite make sense here asked for a column called fabricated, edited, it fits the store stereotype and mold perfectly. So these are 11 points I mentioned one after the other go listen to my lecture, listen to all 11 of them, which to me makes a very strong case I would literally say 99.9% in my own estimation, that this book belongs to Holland khaleel. And not to show her soon, even if you believe it was still the first point is there, which is that it was never a mainstream book. It was never a book that was studied. It was never a book

that was popularized up until modernity. So to conclude, and I hope if you're still here with me, tell me was this beneficial? Did you want more of these types of lectures? Or I'll stick with other stuff no problem again any I have multiple audiences and issues is that not a problem? And this is I do this for myself. I have more even that I'm not able to say but to conclude neither is this book representative of mainstream Methodism or humble ism. nor even is it authored by the shape of Hannibal of his time the great Imam died in the the person who was known as the scholar of his time, at about a body rather, it was written by a non scholar but a popular preacher who had very little

knowledge who had strong political ties with the buses, and everything about the book fits his stereotype, and not that of the great Island, Mr. Bahari, in the end Allah subhanho wa Taala knows best Chuck Mullah hit and until next time, said I'm heading back to LA he will catch you

soon