YT YouTube2Text

YouTube2Text → Transcripts → The Salafilosophers | Mohamed Hijab 02 - Ibn Taymiyyah and Philosophy

The Salafilosophers | Mohamed Hijab 02 - Ibn Taymiyyah and Philosophy — Transcript

by قناة إقناع · 12,514 words · 2,018 segments · language en · Watch on YouTube

Open in transcriber Summarize with AI Download SRT/VTT

Full transcript

0:31before i proceed with my response to
0:32muhammad hijab i find it of utmost
0:35importance to thoroughly and clearly
0:37address the quotations upon which he and
0:39his fellows rely to convince muslims
0:42that ibn's
0:46because as far as i know this is all
0:48they have to offer in the propagation of
0:50their kalami innovation
0:53it is on this
0:55course of discussion that the proper
0:57definition of philosophy and kalaem
0:59shall be clarified on the late
1:01and the critical distinction between
1:03that tradition and the general practice
1:05of rational thought in islam will be
1:07drawn strictly
1:09so pay attention brothers and sisters
1:10because this is really
1:12a whole father that needs to be blocked
1:15with power and precision
1:18i will start by quoting the the comments
1:21of one brother who gathered some of
1:24these quotations under the video uh the
1:26previous video
1:28from the previous lecture arguing that
1:30they justify his belief that not only
1:32did ibn condone and promote what he
1:35would call philosophy and kalam as a
1:37method of argumentation for islam he
1:40even believed that the salaf and imam
1:41ahmad rahim allah also did the same
1:44now first of all and before i go through
1:46his comment it needs to be established
1:48brothers and sisters that when the salaf
1:50condemned
1:52al-qaeda did not condemn particular
1:55theories of quran while accepting the
1:57method itself that produced those
1:59theories
2:00they rejected the tradition itself the
2:02methods of kalam okay and of course the
2:05greek tradition that spawned it among
2:06muslims
2:08and while it is quite popular amongst
2:11salafis that quran is prohibited by the
2:13salaf
2:14it is in its very principle not just the
2:16particular false beliefs of this
2:18particular sector of muta kalimin or
2:20that it looks like most uh
2:22self-proclaimed salafis are prone to a
2:24misconception and misunderstanding what
2:27kalam really is and what qualifies as a
2:29practice of kalam following the
2:31tradition condemned by the salaf and
2:33what does not
2:34at least the followers of this man are
2:36at least
2:37this is why
2:39this is why such a claim
2:42by those preachers
2:43uh uh is starting to take traction
2:46amongst them because of the equivocation
2:48or ignell
2:50in both terms philosophy and kalam such
2:52ishmael that goes in some stances to as
2:55far as defining philosophy as the very
2:57practice of human reasoning in which
2:59case everybody would qualify as a
3:01philosopher and if he is a believer in
3:03the maker then he would be a muta kalim
3:06if he believes if he's a believer in the
3:08maker and he has certain conditions and
3:10that he forces upon his philosophization
3:13then he becomes someone to kill him now
3:15some would say that the issue of
3:16defining the terms philosophy and quran
3:19is
3:19inconsequential and that any difference
3:22therein
3:23would turn out to be semantic at best as
3:25long as we are all able to tell truth
3:28from fallacy and proper creed from
3:30buddha
3:31this however is not the case since as
3:33i've started to show in the previous
3:34lecture and the one before it and we'll
3:36proceed to elaborate inshallah ta'ala in
3:38this series
3:39the salaf used to think of kalam not
3:41just as a collection of beliefs that
3:43ought to be rejected but rather as a
3:45methods or approach to thinking about
3:47the world and what's beyond it uh that
3:49should not be indulged with
3:51so if you don't define kalam properly in
3:54mythological terms as it is to be
3:56understood from the legacy of the salaf
3:58and
3:59in its totality not just from those
4:01particular quotations by britain
4:03you could easily find yourself calling
4:05unto muslims to be become muta kalimin
4:07in exactly the same manner that the
4:09salah were opposed to while thinking
4:11that that it's okay as long as you think
4:14your method does not generate false
4:15beliefs
4:17so to cling to such quotations the way
4:19that hijab joseph and and their friends
4:22do in their dawah is by all means a
4:25crime against salafi
4:27the scholarly problem with those
4:28preachers brothers and sisters is again
4:31that they did not study
4:33akida on the hands of true salafi
4:35scholars the salafi tradition is to be
4:37delivered from one authority to the next
4:39quebec
4:46in order to truly acquire the proper
4:48salafi creed and proper understanding of
4:50that creed you need to be brought up and
4:52indoctrinated marinated so to speak in
4:55the exact same manner that scholars of
4:57that tradition have been one generation
4:59after another starting from the sahaba
5:01themselves
5:02okay
5:03the inherited textbooks
5:05we're not just inheriting books we're
5:06not just inheriting ideas but we're
5:08inheriting a method of bringing people
5:11up onto these ideas of raising him onto
5:13the understanding of how these ideas
5:15work together okay
5:18the inherited textbooks of akri that's
5:21not to be left for people to read them
5:22on their own and understand them away
5:25from the teachings of this lineage of
5:26scholars that these books belong to
5:30okay only when this happens do we get
5:31such freaks of menhaj who are now trying
5:34to understand the nitimia's texts in a
5:36way that is alien to true selfish
5:38scholars and to the entire creed
5:40the entirety to which he belonged the
5:42entire creed that to which he championed
5:45rahim allah
5:47ibn is of course an imam of the salafi
5:49tradition but he is not the only
5:51scholarly authority in the creed
5:53brothers and sisters
5:55and his thoughts and writings are only
5:58to be understood from within that creed
6:00okay
6:01uh uh if we are to do justice to the
6:04imam the way he deserves there is a
6:06reason why our contemporary scholars
6:08would insist that students of shariat
6:11should stick to the classes of those
6:12scholars
6:15and only learn those books on the hands
6:17of those scholars not others
6:23who were not themselves trained unto
6:24that tradition in that way
6:26and since those preachers obviously did
6:28not submit themselves to the proper
6:29process of learning in the salafi
6:31tradition as i pointed out many times
6:35they are systematically misrepresenting
6:37him here misquoting him
6:39misrepresenting his attitude to the
6:41method they are using in dawa in a way
6:43that one can rest assured that if he if
6:46the man himself and
6:48were resurrected in our times and
6:50witnessed what they're doing he would be
6:52the first to denounce it in no uncertain
6:55terms
6:57they were brought up
6:58these preachers to view reasoning and
7:00rationalization in their very principle
7:02in the same manner in the same light
7:04that the western philosopher would view
7:06it such manner that was itself
7:09the fruit of the same greek tradition
7:11that the salaf condemned and demitai mia
7:14did everything he could to warn against
7:16okay
7:17you see brothers and sisters the problem
7:20with this sect of mutasa
7:22is not just that they have picked up a
7:25few false beliefs from
7:27uh
7:29mix them up together the problem is that
7:31they are systematically creating a
7:33methodological rift between the legacy
7:35of islam allah and the legacy of the
7:37salaf okay claiming that he and the
7:40salaf before him viewed the kalam
7:41tradition in the same manner that they
7:43were trained to view it
7:45taking nothing to stand upon in such
7:47claims
7:48but their this deficient understanding
7:50of such quotations such as questions as
7:52the ones we will present to you now
7:55the innovation here is a mythological
7:57one bid
7:59that blurs the strict stealthy
8:01distinctions between the philosophical
8:02method of quran and the method of true
8:04scholars of sunnah in employing reason
8:06in dealing with belief and
8:09such blurring that only asha's preachers
8:12would benefit from as i pointed out in
8:14the previous lecture the phenomenon of
8:16misquoting and misrepresenting the
8:17legacy of the imam allah however is is
8:19is not in the least a novel one
8:21historically speaking and i mean i've
8:23seen people from almost all sides of
8:26quoting the man in service of their
8:28innovations even even suffering and
8:30kaburi would do that the scholar at the
8:33magnitude and the caliber of the shaykh
8:36allah who left behind him a legacy as
8:38vast and humongous as his legacy
8:42dealing with issues and and delicates
8:46and as delicate and sophisticated as he
8:49dealt with dealing with issues as
8:51delicate and sophisticated as he dealt
8:52with
8:54such a scar is bound to have people
8:56quoting him in all manners of false ways
8:58that's no there's no surprise there
9:01what those preachers probably don't know
9:04is that those very same quotes and the
9:05likes are used by some to argue that
9:07ibitimiya was in fact not in keeping
9:09with the ways of the salaf and the ways
9:11of the imam
9:13after all if the salaf were generally
9:15opposed to kalam
9:18and he thought that qaram was not all
9:20wrong when he was opposed to them right
9:23now it saddens me to to say that some
9:26such others understand what it means for
9:28someone to be a philosopher and to
9:30subscribe to philosophical thought
9:31better than those preachers do although
9:34they would also insist that ibm was
9:36accordingly a philosopher which he
9:37wasn't as i shall show in this lecture
9:39around the late isla
9:40in a paper by dr hakeem azhar he argues
9:44that
9:45despite being an imam of the hanbali
9:47tradition was in fact opposed to
9:49hanbaliya and to imam ahmad himself in
9:51their attitude to philosophy and kalam
9:53okay he writes
9:55if we agree that philosophy is a
9:57worldview built on abstract concepts
9:59interpreting the structure of the
10:00universe we find that mutaemia exhibits
10:03such an interpretation as shall be
10:04discussed here he believed unlike other
10:07hanbalits and pay attention to that
10:09brothers and sisters unlike other
10:11hanbalits that the religion of islam
10:13specifically the sunni
10:15doctrine should be grounded on
10:17philosophy grounded on philosophy allah
10:20stand islam in the midtimia's thought
10:23must be displayed or defended not only
10:26by the quran and sunnah
10:28but with reasoning as well this was a
10:31main thesis
10:33that religion and reason accord each
10:35other
10:36there is hardly a single religion
10:38uh religious issue that cannot be
10:41conceptualized rationally
10:43by rationalizing religion religious
10:45issues he attempted to explain islam in
10:47philosophical terms
10:50covering aspects such as the creation of
10:51the universe god's attributes the nature
10:54of things
10:55the place of man and the interpretation
10:57of the quran to name but a few like el
10:59gazelli ibritai media two aspired to
11:02construct a philosophical world view
11:04leading one to believe that his
11:06philosophical thought was more coherent
11:08than that of al-ghazali more coherent
11:14remained perplexed between the asharit
11:16doctrine uh
11:18mysticism and the messiness philosophy
11:20and then resorted to
11:22eclecticism in order to combine elements
11:24from all these fields
11:27meanwhile shows a different direction in
11:29maintaining the reason and religion
11:31quran and sunnah on one side and sound
11:33reason do not contradict each other
11:37writings implement his writings never
11:39implied a blind commitment to any muslim
11:41theologian
11:42even the works of
11:46were not adopted by him in every single
11:47aspect rather imnitaimia was a free
11:50thinker in building his own worldview in
11:52a manner far from being eclectic he
11:55adopted concepts from other leading
11:57thinkers but in the end created his own
11:59individual system unquote
12:02now if i were to omit the part of this
12:03quotation where the elder declares that
12:05i was opposed to all hanbali in his
12:07notion of how philosophy relates to
12:09islam
12:10then
12:11they would most probably take the rest
12:13of it with open arms okay hijab and his
12:16followers they probably wouldn't even
12:18take issue with his contention that
12:19philosophy is a worldview built on
12:21abstract concepts interpreting the
12:23structure of the universe because after
12:25all this is what they do really okay
12:27they start from abstract theories about
12:29all that exists metaphysical theories
12:31that characterize the components of this
12:33world what is necessary uh of of
12:36anything that exists rule and what
12:38categorize and what categories thereof
12:40can be conceived in light of whatever
12:42analogy the theory proposes for this end
12:45all the work of mr kalameen of the past
12:47stemmed from and built upon theories
12:49like substance and essence alzheimer's
12:57that characterize the nature of every
13:00existing thing that can fall under the
13:03general meanings of attributes that are
13:05exhibited by things that exist within
13:07our worldly experience that's that's
13:09that's what the tradition is about
13:10that's what the tradition of
13:12metaphysical theory does
13:14if it exists anything at all and it can
13:16be attributed to temporal becoming or
13:18exist for existence
13:21then the nature of that attribute in it
13:23must be so and so according to the
13:24theory if it exists and it can be
13:27attributed to existing in some place
13:29relative to uh to another existing thing
13:31to other existing things then the
13:33explanation of this very attribute of it
13:36the reason it can be described as such
13:38must be so and so as this theory goes
13:41all right now a quick look in the books
13:43of scholars of kalam from the past
13:45centuries
13:47uh we'll reveal to you that they adopted
13:49this notion of theory to the fullest
13:52al ghazali and his
13:54before him stated in no uncertain terms
13:57in their books that kalam is the science
13:59of studying existence and its essence
14:01okay what tells the difference uh the
14:04different categories of things uh that
14:06can exist in reality tells them apart
14:08okay it tells them from one another so
14:10in order to qualify as a muta kalim you
14:12have to embrace some theory of existence
14:14navarre
14:16as such on what qualifies things to
14:18exist at all
14:20what explains their existence as they
14:22are this in reality is what the greek
14:24tradition teaches as the job of a
14:26philosopher
14:28right to provide lay people with the
14:30means to know if something can exist at
14:32all and if indeed it does to tell them
14:34whether or not it can be described with
14:36this or that meaning or can be
14:37attributed to this or that meaning at
14:39all
14:40to deliver the light to the blind as
14:42famously depicted in the allegory of the
14:43cave by plato in his book the republic
14:47all humans to a philosopher are blind
14:50until they acquire such a theory an
14:52exposition of all that exists insofar as
14:55it can exist at all all right this is
14:57why we argued in more place than one
15:00uh
15:04is in reality a philosopher every bit a
15:07philosopher trained in the greek
15:09tradition of metaphysical theory only
15:11with the additional condition of working
15:12to manipulate this or that theory in
15:14such a way as to place some abstract
15:16notion of a maker sonia within its
15:19framework
15:21okay he would start with where a
15:23philosophy where the philosopher
15:24normally ends at least before he
15:27proceeds to address the divine
15:29and proceed to establish the knowledge
15:30that the world was indeed created and
15:32thereafter
15:34established that it had a creator
15:36then he would proceed to determine under
15:39the very same principle of metaphysical
15:40theorization and the definitions
15:43uh that his commitment to the theory
15:45force upon him by entailment what
15:47attributes and actions should be given
15:49to that abstract maker if at all and
15:51what should not all the while playing
15:54playing uh arbitrarily in what notions
15:56are to qualify as rational necessities
15:58and what should not following the
16:00ongoing debate okay which also follows
16:03the rules of the same tradition
16:04altogether
16:06whatever it leads him so fact of the
16:08matter is that
16:10is nothing more than a philosopher under
16:11the greek tradition who seeks to build
16:13his religion upon his metaphysical
16:15theory whatever it happens to be
16:18had it not been for the apparent
16:20attempts of
16:21and metroid to avoid in the outcome of
16:24their theoretical construction of
16:25theology divine philosophy
16:27every belief that the the that imams of
16:30al-sunnah
16:32and the
16:33uh they have uh uh
16:36in viewing what they came up with from
16:38all that as the actual creative muhammad
16:40they would have deserved the exact same
16:42ruling of tak fear as extreme
16:44brother persistently pay attention
16:46because there's a strong
16:48manhattan reason a strong methodological
16:50reason why we don't uh judge
16:54in in in in in their in
16:57virtuality as a sect
16:58overall
17:00after all the epistemic source the
17:02tradition of reasoning and theory and
17:04the founding principle of theology is
17:06the same okay but they only differ in
17:08this aspect that i just mentioned the
17:10only difference that sets the many sects
17:11of the calamine apart in terms of the
17:13rulings in the eyes of arason those of
17:16them who still stick to ancient
17:17metaphysical theories and those who have
17:19migrated to modern metaphysics instead
17:21is how deeply they have fallen in the
17:23pit of zandaka there are those who ended
17:25up declaring that they don't see it
17:27possible rationally that their maker
17:29should have any of those attributes
17:31described to him by the prophet
17:32salallahu in any real sense thereby
17:35hitting rock bottom so to speak in
17:36zandakaya
17:38and there are those who would accept
17:40some some and reject some claiming that
17:42only those attributes they rejected
17:43would necessitate according to pretty
17:45much the same theory his existence to be
17:48explainable by the exact same theory
17:50that tells us how worldly things do
17:52exist
17:54thereby exhibiting
17:56that would keep them out of that fear
17:58and there are those uh who have embraced
18:02metaphysical theories built arguments
18:04for an abstract maker unto them and yet
18:06they are too shallow and uneducated in
18:08the ways of kalam to actually see what
18:10entail entailments come with the
18:13arguments that they embraced and their
18:15premises let alone to embrace those
18:17entailments themselves
18:18like the first group did or tried to get
18:20out of them like the second group did
18:22this sad state of affairs for this third
18:24group is what most of the these seller
18:27philosophers have ended up putting
18:28themselves into while trying to drag
18:30sheikh islam allah down to do it with
18:33them
18:35if they understood properly what kalem
18:37really is and thereby the tradition of
18:39philosophy that spawned it they would
18:41realize that they are neither here nor
18:43there in terms of doing the homework and
18:45that that mota kalimian before them did
18:48that all the motokine of all did
18:51and that if they did it if they did that
18:52homework they would only fall deeper in
18:55the pit given the methodological
18:56commitments they have already chosen to
18:58embrace
18:59all right
19:02i will elaborate further on this later
19:04on inshallah
19:05the point i'm making here
19:08is that in order to really quick qualify
19:11as a muted you have to pass the test as
19:13a philosopher first okay and to do that
19:16you must have your own worldview
19:19built on on abstract concepts
19:21interpreting the structure of the
19:22universe okay to use the words of hakim
19:24azhar quoted above you must do that
19:26homework yourself
19:28we're not talking about someone who
19:29learns philosophy and claim with the
19:31sole purpose of exposing the fundamental
19:33error in the way that those people think
19:35and see things as we believe allah did
19:38we're talking about someone who commits
19:40himself to that tradition itself
19:42starting from building up a theory of
19:43existence in this sense or at least
19:45following the mainstream theory and that
19:47at his time whatever it may be in
19:48philosophical academia
19:50and then proceeds to construct all his
19:52knowledge upon that theory divine and
19:54otherwise okay this is by no means what
19:56the imam did in any of his works despite
19:58what many people like himself here are
20:01in the business of trying to show that
20:02he that he has
20:04he never committed himself to any
20:05metaphysical theory like substance and
20:07essence or the world view that followers
20:09of such theories would be bound to adopt
20:12okay on the absolute contrary he was
20:14critical of these theories he took pains
20:15in showing the linguistic and rational
20:17fallacies that such series dragged the
20:19philosophers and the
20:20consequently into and showed that all
20:23their innovations in belief and in
20:26the real quran do in fact go back to
20:29those fallacies
20:30originally
20:32he wrote elaborately about the
20:33fundamental error in assuming that
20:35people need metaphysical definitions and
20:37logical rules okay like the kind that
20:39the the greeks came up with in order to
20:41be able to make proper sense of the
20:43world around them
20:44so to identify him as a philosopher
20:46claiming that he did produce the exact
20:49same sort of theory he spent his life
20:51fighting against in in his very
20:53principle is to turn his entire legacy
20:55upside down brother the sisters it
20:57really is something that almost amounts
21:00to a criminal offence against the imam
21:02to simply state that he was a free
21:04thinker in building his own worldview in
21:06a manner far from being eclectic he
21:08adopted concepts from other leading
21:10thinkers but in the end created his own
21:12individual system
21:13okay that's a crime
21:15one is compelled and is bound really to
21:18ask at this point what system what do
21:20you mean by his own system his
21:21individual system by philosophical
21:23system philosophers refer to theories of
21:25the type i explained earlier theories
21:27that reduce all of reality to one or
21:29more types of of natures or compositions
21:32as obtained from experience
21:34so when when or where did he ever do
21:37that or endeavor to systematize his
21:39entire knowledge by such a theory okay
21:42the the owner would proceed to force his
21:44own interpretation onto certain general
21:46statements that the imam had made in the
21:48context of rebutting and refuting the
21:51claims of philosophers and
21:53usually by countering some metaphysical
21:55claim within an opposing necessary
21:57principle that it contradicts
21:59to establish his appealing allegation
22:00about the method that ibritemia used in
22:03his works and the general category that
22:05it places him under as a scholar of
22:06islam
22:08he must have made up a system of his own
22:10ibitamiya one way or another and it's
22:12it's our job now to try to figure that
22:14system out literally milking his text in
22:16attempt to do that why
22:18because the greek tradition makes it
22:20unthinkable that anyone should do as
22:21much as the imam did in refuting
22:23philosophers without actually being one
22:25himself a philosopher
22:26okay he must have had his own system of
22:29philosophy constructed in the exact same
22:31manner as philosophers would otherwise
22:34what would he be calling unto people to
22:35found their knowledge of reality and
22:37existence
22:38and their entire cognitive device upon
22:41okay he must have had that system
22:43internalized in his thought process one
22:46way or another and we are now required
22:48to hunt it
22:49from from uh to hunt for it in his texts
22:52to finally bring him forth as the
22:54philosopher none of of of his poor
22:56gullible hanbali students knew how to
22:58view him as okay if indeed it is true
23:02that his main thesis were uh was that uh
23:07the religion and reason accord with each
23:09other and that there is hardly a single
23:11religious issue that cannot be
23:13conceptualized rationally then he must
23:15have had his own theoretical world view
23:18that he constructed for himself in
23:19exactly the same way that philosophers
23:21do otherwise how would he even begin to
23:23call any claim or belief rational at all
23:26okay and how do do we know that he did
23:29that by picking up some positive general
23:31uh statements he made in his literature
23:34to counter the claims of philosophers
23:35with
23:37stitching them up with a system of our
23:39making and calling it his own as
23:41attempted by by this order here
23:45it's the same esoteric allegation that
23:47asha'ira made about the sahaba
23:49themselves when they were confronted
23:51with the fact that they never had
23:52anything to do with philosophy they
23:54never exhibited any signs of even
23:55attempting to acquire theory about
23:57existence as such
23:58they never heard about substances in the
24:00essences and they never even showed any
24:03form of of propositional argumentation
24:05to prove that the maker did exist
24:07okay if this is the case then how can
24:10they even begin to defend them against
24:12the charge of ignorance and blind
24:13following such charge that philosophers
24:15would level against them every chance
24:17they got okay they need to defend them
24:19of course because the quran teaches that
24:21those are the best people in iman after
24:23the prophets
24:26okay
24:27so the only the the the the only resort
24:30they thought of the only way out was to
24:32claim that they must have done something
24:34the sahaba in the way of argumentation
24:36in this sense one way or another even if
24:38they didn't express it openly debate
24:40over it or rely and relay it to the
24:42students afterwards okay they must have
24:44philosophized one way or another to the
24:46best of their abilities in a way that
24:48would leave them justified in believing
24:50that they were created at all under the
24:52tradition of the greeks okay under the
24:54commitment that this tradition brings
24:56they must have done that because
24:58otherwise the tradition necessitates
25:00that they be charged with the lead man
25:03so how could it even be conceived that
25:05someone like abnetimia as prolific a
25:07critic he was would engage so deeply and
25:10coherently with all those theories and
25:12doctrines of philosophy and kalam the
25:13way that he did without having come up
25:16with his very own system individual
25:19system of metaphysics beforehand the way
25:21that every philosopher does okay to
25:23someone like the author of this paper it
25:24wouldn't be conceivable at all
25:27anyway the point that we reach from this
25:29discussion brothers and sisters is that
25:30someone who has been trained on that
25:33tradition
25:34could only see someone like
25:37allah as a philosopher because according
25:39to the tradition he wouldn't begin to
25:40qualify as a rationally coherent critic
25:42of what philosophers do any otherwise
25:45okay so let's keep that in mind now
25:47we also arrive at what we claim to be
25:49the only proper definition of for
25:51philosophy to define it as a distinct
25:53form of systematic practice of reasoning
25:55and theorization okay it's it's a
25:57distinct form of practice uh of
25:59reasoning and theorization that has
26:01certain commitments to it okay such
26:03definition should draw the necessary
26:05distinction between those who
26:06philosophize and those who just reason
26:08properly because it is utterly
26:10unacceptable even by philosophers
26:12themselves that the two should be
26:13treated as one and the same
26:15it should be clear enough to anyone with
26:18sufficient background knowledge that
26:19philosophy is indeed a special mode of
26:22thinking
26:23not all reasoning that would be
26:24identified by a philosopher as sound or
26:26rationally valid should qualify in his
26:28view as philosophy and not all reasoning
26:31that would be identified by a
26:32philosopher's mainstream philosophy or
26:34plausible philosophical inquiry or
26:36argumentation should be classified
26:38objectively speaking
26:39as proper reasoning either
26:42okay
26:43so while the two might intersect they're
26:44not the same
26:46they're not the same thing
26:48much of what philosophers would spend
26:50their time debating and theorizing about
26:52is in fact sheer sophistry assault on
26:55fitra innate knowledge tanator or at
26:57best a waste of time on futile
27:00unfruitful questions like the famous
27:02physioship okay a thought experiment for
27:05example in metaphysics a philosopher
27:07like plutarch decides to overlook the
27:10way that all normal healthy humans would
27:12understand and deal with the issue of
27:14identity believing them all to be poor
27:16blind followers of their parents on that
27:18as on everything else of course and
27:20endeavors to reveal with a metaphysical
27:23theory of his own what identity really
27:25is and how we know that something
27:28remains essentially the same thing
27:29despite changes that that could occur to
27:31it with time
27:33okay they tell him he's a sophist
27:35because nobody actually needs to learn
27:37how to call something by its name or to
27:39identify the tool following his theory
27:41whatever it teaches
27:43so another philosopher thomas hobbes
27:45comes later and challenges people to a
27:47question on whether or not they would
27:49still
27:50uh
27:51call something with this original name
27:53even after all of its parts have been
27:55replaced with other parts if they answer
27:57saying no then it follows that the
27:59identity of anything is to be defined by
28:02the attachment of its parts i myself i i
28:06am myself only for as long as every part
28:08of me remains in place or at least some
28:11parts of me remain in place okay
28:12unchanged uh for as long as i as i exist
28:16in which case you are not to be called
28:17by the name you have had seven years ago
28:20or ten years ago because your body has
28:22had different cells back then altogether
28:25different cells okay the veintab
28:28body cells are are said to change to
28:31change entirely and completely within
28:33seven to ten years okay
28:35and and if they answer in the
28:37affirmative then he would suggest that
28:40uh if in theory we reassembled all uh
28:44the replaced parts from the old you to
28:46build a new one then we would have to
28:48use okay who go by the same name the one
28:51that has all your parts and the other
28:54that has all new identical parts which
28:56is a contradiction since something
28:58cannot be one thing and two things
28:59simultaneously now to anyone trained
29:02under that softest tradition this will
29:04constitute a really huge problem
29:06what they call the problem of identity
29:08okay if i'm not the same person i was
29:11seven or ten years ago because all the
29:12parts from my body have changed now then
29:15who am i okay and would it be fair to
29:17judge me for the crimes that the older
29:20version of me committed ten years ago
29:21before all the cells from that virgin
29:23were replaced by the cells that i have
29:25now some philosophers like leibniz
29:27responded by formulating a law of
29:29identity illogical law brothers and
29:31sisters one that was then challenged by
29:33other philosophers who found it
29:34inadequate in response to hobbes to the
29:37challenge that hobbes brought or the
29:38paradox now for someone who is not
29:41trained as such the entire question is
29:43softest and unacceptable to the core
29:46the question itself is pure sophistry
29:48and the only proper way to respond to
29:50softest questions is to dismiss it
29:52altogether obviously the term identity
29:55and identical in that discourse are
29:57ambiguous fume ishmael brothers and
29:59sisters and this is precisely what the
30:01entire trick plays out i am of course
30:04the same person i was 10 years ago and
30:06the same person i remember to have been
30:0830 years ago but in my body but is my
30:12body the same is my physical structure
30:14the same obviously not
30:17the reassembled ship in the thesis
30:19paradox
30:20is the same as the dismantled if by the
30:23same here you mean the exact same
30:25components the name and exact same
30:27design
30:29the exact same function okay
30:32the name should change since by
30:34convinced convention people may have
30:35chosen to keep it attached to their own
30:37vessel even after having replaced every
30:39single part of it it's continuing to do
30:42that job for them this is the same job
30:44that the old ship did to fill the exact
30:46same space and the exact same
30:49character to them in keeping with the
30:50same design makes it the same ship in
30:52that sense all right it follows then
30:55that the resembled uh the reassembled
30:57parts would not be the same ship in this
31:00meaning but rather in the meaning that
31:02it has the same parts that the original
31:04used to have and is rebuilt following
31:06the same design and is still the same
31:07ship and in this sense
31:09what i'm trying to point out here is of
31:11course not the proper way out of the
31:12proclaimed paradox but the miserable
31:15fact that it does exist at all in the
31:17literature and that it it did consume
31:20the time and effort of so many brilliant
31:22people throughout the ages to the effect
31:24that it to this day philosophers are
31:26still debating its many different
31:27solutions
31:29it is precisely this sad state of
31:31affairs that characterizes philosophy as
31:33a greek tradition of thought and sets it
31:35apart from all other practices of human
31:38reasoning brothers and sisters the
31:40systematic propensity for sophistry
31:42imposing questions from in the first
31:44place and for making up universal
31:46metaphysical analogies in response to
31:48such questions covering all that can
31:50exist and all that can be known
31:54all right
31:56so a proper definition that would really
31:58characterize the philosophical practice
31:59as it should be characterized in a way
32:01that is comprehensive
32:03and exclusive mania should by all means
32:06pointed that
32:08at this principle of metaphysical
32:09sophistry that the greeks invented it
32:12must have it in in the center of it at
32:13the very core
32:15the principle that makes it the job of a
32:17philosopher to reveal from his armchair
32:21the underlying truths of all things that
32:23can exist to acquire such system or
32:25worldview that this author is claiming
32:27him italian to have created for himself
32:29okay
32:30the principle that allows the
32:31philosopher to put himself in the seat
32:33of authority over the very way that all
32:35humans should think about everything
32:37that exists in reality and the very way
32:39they allow themselves to learn anything
32:41at all about reality
32:43obviously to define a philosopher just
32:45as someone who thinks would be to define
32:47him as someone who has eyes or ears or a
32:50tongue
32:51it does nothing to exclude those who are
32:52not to be called philosophers okay a
32:55similar issue arises with the term
32:56thinker
32:58what is a thinker okay is the thinker
33:00someone who just thinks a lot this is
33:02obviously useless as far as definitions
33:04would go there must be a distinction in
33:06at least the subject matter or the
33:08quality of the thinking that he does to
33:10to merit the title all right similarly
33:13that that's where the term philosopher
33:15came from everybody loves wisdom we all
33:17want to do it right or to do what is
33:19right a philosopher thus is someone who
33:22supposedly excels at loving wisdom okay
33:25it's what sets him apart from the rest
33:27of of of those who love wisdom he goes
33:30farther in seeking it than other people
33:33okay now seeking it where exactly in his
33:35own head you wish to learn all about the
33:38world without leaving your own room
33:40think hard come up with some good
33:42looking analogy to tell the world that
33:44everything that exists must be made of
33:46so and so it must be such and such teach
33:48them
33:49what the theory implies in terms of what
33:51life is about
33:52why they are here in this world and what
33:54will happen to them when they die when
33:55they leave it and you become more than
33:57just a lover of wisdom you become a
33:59giver of wisdom a revealer of wisdom
34:02it's a revelation now okay you give them
34:04revelation like a prophet would okay
34:06only it's a revelation by reason okay or
34:09in other words philosophy isn't this
34:11what it was all about after all for
34:13those teachers of the greek school uh
34:15scholastic tradition to set themselves
34:17up as actual prophets of wisdom amongst
34:19their people yeah that's what that's
34:21what it was all about to them
34:23if indeed philosophy is a revelation of
34:24wisdom all wisdom as the fathers of the
34:27greek school had intended and would have
34:29you believe then it can only be defined
34:31as the practice of all thought and
34:32reasoning under some metaphysical theory
34:35about all of reality or all that exists
34:37systematizing all knowledge accordingly
34:40okay this is what the fourth system
34:41comes from
34:42a rational construct of all that should
34:45be believed about existence starting
34:47from some speculative theory about how
34:49things acquire the attributes that they
34:51acquire and why they exist in the way
34:53that they do rather than otherwise or
34:55whether they exist why they exist at all
34:57rather than otherwise
34:59as such which was which by the way is a
35:01very is a very central question
35:03metaphysics why does something exist
35:04rather than nothing brothers and sisters
35:06this is where it comes from this is
35:07where the question itself comes from
35:09as such no follower of the prophets of
35:11allah subhanahu ta'ala should even try
35:13to become a philosopher because to do
35:15that
35:16it you you would because to do that
35:18would be to embrace the principle of
35:20sophistry in question and allow for all
35:22articles of faith to be treated as
35:24though they were little more than
35:25theoretical suggestions which in turn
35:28would result uh uh which in turn would
35:31result in internalizing the source of
35:33ultimate wisdom and revelation rather
35:35than pointing it up to the heavens where
35:36it actually is
35:38okay you take wisdom from within you
35:40from inside your mind not from outside
35:42this is the reason why some philosophers
35:44who originally claimed to be muslim
35:46decided to become prophets themselves
35:48actual prophets why not okay if if what
35:50is becoming a prophet anyway they had to
35:52define it okay which they only achieved
35:54by theorizing in the exact same manner
35:56about what it means to actually be a
35:58prophet
35:59what it means to actually be a prophet
36:01what is prophecy what is a prophet
36:04you work hard enough on your reason and
36:06your theories al-farabi for example is
36:08one one famous example of someone who
36:09claimed to be a prophet and better than
36:11a prophet
36:12your work you work hard enough on on
36:15your reason and your theories get
36:17yourself immersed in your thoughts and
36:19ideas deep enough and eventually you
36:21would see what prophets claim to see and
36:23even manipulate matter itself the way
36:25the prophets did according to the theory
36:27and as the theory would go
36:28whenever a physical miracle is exhibited
36:30on their hands i mean that's it folks
36:33you want to be a prophet be a good
36:34philosopher
36:36excel at it and you would
36:38you would become someone who actually
36:40does what prophets do
36:42okay you want for something to be the
36:44truth think hard enough to come up with
36:46it proper theory to describe and explain
36:48it by analogy and that's all you need to
36:50do that's it
36:52this is why it is only natural that
36:54philosophy and sophistry would become
36:55synonymous in the eyes of many people if
36:58by sufficient by sophistry we mean
37:00employing reason the wrong way for the
37:02wrong end that that's exactly what a
37:04philosopher does
37:05in order to qualify as a philosopher
37:07okay the fact that philosophers in the
37:09west academy have always been the ones
37:11obtaining actual knowledge in many
37:13fields that would qualify today as
37:15proper science
37:17is
37:18inconsequential with regards to this
37:20definition i'm flashing and fleshing out
37:22here brothers and sisters because it
37:23doesn't imply that the philosopher would
37:25not produce any valuable knowledge at
37:26all whatsoever no that's that's not an
37:29implication of what i'm saying
37:30which is why it is unacceptable
37:32preposterous even to dismiss everything
37:34that philosophers have ever said just
37:36because it goes under the tag of
37:37philosophy okay and we'll further
37:39elaborate that later
37:41i'm involved with teaching philosophy
37:42science i myself am involved with
37:44teaching philosophy of science to my
37:45students at the university for example
37:47i'm even teaching much of it to in my
37:49lectures
37:52does this make me a preacher of
37:53philosophy in the same sense
37:55like the guys from
37:57sapiens institute are
37:59no
38:00that's not that's not the case why
38:02because i make sure
38:04to filter out the useful bits proving
38:06providing through throughout
38:09uh thorough criticism
38:11uh to this theory or that as needed the
38:13way that i believe someone like ibm
38:15allah would have done had he lived in
38:17our times i don't criticize a theory in
38:19philosophy following the exact same
38:21tradition that spawned that theory in
38:23the first place the way some
38:25contemporaries would seek to establish a
38:27salafi metaphysics and a solid theory of
38:28knowledge and the likes to counter what
38:30philosophers have in in those areas
38:33okay there is no such thing as a theory
38:35as a salafi theory of existence or a
38:37salafi theory of knowledge brothers and
38:40sisters because it is not in keeping
38:42with the salafi tradition to engage with
38:44such discourse of theory and reasoning
38:46in the first place that's the greek
38:48tradition and the kalam tradition
38:50consequently not the salafi tradition we
38:52don't start with building up such
38:54systems the way philosophers and
38:56al-kalem do rather we find that endeavor
38:58to be the epitome of where philosophy as
39:01a systematic practice of reasoning went
39:02wrong
39:04now
39:05having thus defined philosophy as a
39:06particular tradition of inquiry and and
39:08theorization it can easily be shown in
39:11response to the quotations
39:13most proposed in these guys attempts to
39:15ascribe their method to the imam allah
39:18that he couldn't possibly have been
39:19associated with that tradition in
39:21founding knowledge and belief if such is
39:23how philosophy is to be defined then by
39:26no means was he a philosopher okay
39:29for for that matter all right
39:33the commenter who prom prompted me to
39:35address this issue here and the issue
39:37with me of ibm
39:39and take on philosophy now in this
39:41series and at this stage of it before i
39:44proceed with responding to her job i
39:45mean brings forth some of these
39:47quotations that i mentioned earlier and
39:48he starts by saying abnetimia doesn't
39:50find using philosophical rhetoric as a
39:52tool to refute mota mean muslim
39:54philosophers who oppose quran and sunnah
39:57and also as a
39:59means of
40:00problematic he doesn't find it
40:01problematic
40:03okay and i can only respond to this by
40:06pointing out the fatal ambiguity in the
40:08term using philosophical rhetoric here
40:11brother
40:12when you deal with such delicate issues
40:14you have to be as precise and cogently
40:16elaborate and articulate as humanly
40:18possible it is by no means a scholarly
40:21practice to use such a term in this
40:23context without bothering with a
40:24definition for it a strict and clear
40:26definition okay if by using
40:28philosophical rhetoric you mean
40:30philosophical terminology and some
40:32arguments in the way of refuting the
40:33opponents if the opponent's claims
40:35pointing out the false and entailments
40:37and the force grounds upon which they
40:39built it and the types of errors they
40:40suffer from both in method and in theory
40:43then yes of course he did that
40:45i do that too all the time however it
40:47does not make him a philosopher in the
40:49sense that hijab and other like-minded
40:51preachers would have him
40:53depicted okay the commenter goes on to
40:56say in fact he encourages meaning
40:59people to indulge in these sciences
41:01because he finds this as a beneficial
41:02mental exercise like mathematics
41:05and to that i say of course people are
41:07encouraged to indulge in beneficial
41:08exercises of the mind and to benefit
41:10from that okay there's no denying that
41:13that benefit or or the demand for it in
41:16general however to claim that the imam
41:18means by that to follow the kalam method
41:20in arguing for the existence of allah
41:23and thereby engage in the kinds of
41:24debates that the mean have have engaged
41:27with with the philosophers on the
41:29premises of such arguments and their
41:30entailments following the tradition they
41:32generally observe in this respect they
41:34claim that this is what he encourages is
41:35to destroy his entire salafi stands with
41:38respect to kalem and
41:40and the man he committed himself to
41:42in this respect following one or two
41:44quotations that you insist on taking out
41:46of context in what is nowhere near the
41:49intellectual honesty the students of
41:51sharia are bound to exhibit
41:53okay
41:55he adds in fact in his book reason
42:02reason and revelation
42:04he engages in what we call philosophy
42:07he's no he's addressing he says he
42:09engages in what you call philosophy to
42:11refute
42:13and defend the sunnah the
42:17and i say no he doesn't to that i say no
42:19brother he doesn't he engages in
42:21rational argumentation of course lots of
42:24it rational refutations the doctrine of
42:26the doctrine you mentioned and and many
42:28others and he does an impeccable job
42:31with it
42:33does it qualify though as philosophy
42:36just because
42:37he addressed philosophical theories and
42:39doctrines with rational criticism does
42:41what he did qualify as philosophy no of
42:44course not not every critic of a
42:45philosophical theory or method would
42:47have to be a philosopher himself in
42:49order to be able to do that or what
42:51would be doing it through the
42:52philosophical method or under the
42:53philosophical tradition that i that i
42:55just highlighted in the previous part of
42:57the lecture you really need to
42:58reconsider what it is that you mean by
43:00engaging in philosophy when you
43:02attribute it to an imam of okay this is
43:05so critical because it stands on the
43:07edge of what distinguishes allah from
43:10this is not to be taken lightly
43:12not to be taken lightly okay
43:15he goes on to say it's very important to
43:17distinguish between
43:19which involves greek philosophy into the
43:21artery and between between philosophy
43:23philosophy in in those times also
43:26included natural sciences like maths
43:29medicine geography astronomy etcetera
43:31with addition to logic and theology
43:33is just an an an another
43:36battle branch of philosophy saying
43:37philosophy is haram is like saying
43:39biology is haram because of illusion is
43:41goof
43:42and to that i say nobody needs to
43:44establish the proper distinction here
43:46that more than you brother nobody needs
43:48that more than you
43:50okay
43:53uh and those who would find hijab and
43:54his friends justified under this under
43:57that distinction okay like i said
43:59brothers and sisters kalam is not just a
44:01collection of false beliefs that were
44:02founded upon philosophical fallacies
44:04kalam is a fallacious methodology that
44:07was founded upon the greek tradition of
44:09metaphysical theorization
44:11so you really need to learn what it is
44:13exactly that we mean by kalam and the
44:15kalem method and the greek tradition
44:17which has been the central subject for
44:19all of the imam's criticism and
44:20refutation in all of his books
44:23i never said that everything that goes
44:25in academy in academia under the tag of
44:28philosophy is by necessity
44:30of the name alone haram no of course
44:32like i said i myself engaged with
44:34teaching many fields that would qualify
44:35in mainstream academias philosophy even
44:38this position i'm promoting here
44:40in this very lecture would only qualify
44:42in mainstream academia as philosophy
44:44okay so when we say philosophy is haram
44:47we mean a particular trend of theory
44:49making and argumentation not all the
44:51academic content that falls under the
44:53title philosophy in fact not even all
44:56that claims that not even all the claims
44:58that have ever been made by philosophers
45:00in those issues that we would deem unfit
45:02for philosophical deliberation and
45:03discourse are to be rejected just
45:06because they emerge from that tradition
45:09no sane reasonable person would take
45:11such a blind stance with respect to
45:13whatever people call philosophy no we're
45:15not doing that okay and i don't know
45:17anything who does that
45:18if you understood what i stated in the
45:20first part of this lecture you would
45:22realize that i'm presenting a clear
45:24unambiguous definition of philosophy and
45:26distinction of that from other modes of
45:28thinking one that obviously does not
45:30accord with the mainstream tradition of
45:31the academy in defining it okay or hence
45:35in identifying a subject
45:37uh matter as a philosophical issue or or
45:39a particular theory as a theory
45:41philosophy i've been stating this
45:42general meaning in every lecture i have
45:45i ever gave on the subject so i'm i'm in
45:47no position to suffer from such uh a
45:49proclaimed entailment brother
45:52okay that polemic is not mine and i'm
45:55not doing that
45:56like i said many would feel tempted to
45:58lump me up with calvinists and preachers
46:01of reformed epistemology in the modern
46:03tradition of protestant philosophy just
46:05because i may agree with them on some of
46:07their central contentions did they end
46:09up making true statements of course they
46:11did
46:12okay
46:13i would say that even though i wouldn't
46:15encourage muslims to read their works or
46:17to look at the arguments and debates
46:19that they've had with their opponents
46:20because the method itself does fall
46:22squarely under the tradition i'm warning
46:24against
46:26so when you go to bethamia
46:55that to say the salaf did not deem the
46:56essence of
46:58blameworthy for every human being
47:00ultimately practices it when you do that
47:02you are committing a profound
47:04mistranslation of the text that renders
47:06the imam as asharit at best what he
47:09means by jin silk
47:10in this particular passage rather is the
47:12general practice of speech and
47:14reasonable discourse not kalam as in
47:17of course the salaf deemed kalam blame
47:19worthy okay and so did he
47:22following them so if we understand such
47:24a passage to mean that the salaf only
47:26condemned the false theories of what ali
47:28mean but not the method of qalam itself
47:31or the practice of qalam itself then you
47:33don't know the salaf and you don't know
47:35allah he then quotes the imam on
47:37declaring that the that imam ahmad allah
47:39did in fact employ
47:41rational argumentation in response to
47:43jamaica and we say of course he did of
47:46course he did but when did ahmed ever
47:48employ a kalami argument to prove the
47:50existence of the maker starting with any
47:52premises with the physical or otherwise
47:54in this particular practice at the
47:56particular manner that what the calamine
47:57would do in his practice of dawah
48:00and more importantly where does it
48:02ever make such a claim at all he then
48:04goes on to bring forth the single most
48:06quoted passage in
48:09by those preachers in defense of the
48:10position where the imam says
49:26um
49:41um
49:59now he translates this thread
50:03he translates this to reads however many
50:06epistemic methods are not needed by the
50:07masses and only those who know no other
50:10means or have rejected all other means
50:12are in need of them for some people the
50:14most subtle precise thorough and
50:17prefaced of methodologies are the most
50:20beneficial
50:21since those people are accustomed to
50:24prolonged research about fine details
50:28if a matter required little preliminary
50:30knowledge or the required preliminary
50:31knowledge was basic
50:33they would find no joy in researching
50:34this matter philosophical rhetoric and
50:36dislike would be most appropriate for
50:38this type of person due to his nature
50:40not because this is necessary uh
50:43is necessarily the only way one may
50:45attain knowledge about the matter of at
50:46hand for some people if they have
50:48knowledge that is available to the
50:49masses and the
50:50the lady or knowledge that may be
50:53attained by other
50:55than the intellectual class they find
50:57they have not set themselves apart and
50:58become distinct they therefore seek out
51:00the most subtle endic and and delicate
51:03of knowledge that which requires the
51:05most preliminary understanding the
51:07aforementioned prehistoric may be
51:08applied with such a person end of quote
51:11now of course he ended it at that point
51:13he didn't carry it on like i did in the
51:15arabic quotation
51:16now uh it is really staggering how many
51:19people would pick this particular
51:20passage though it is the only source
51:22from which we should acquire the
51:23manhattan of the imam allah can't you
51:26see him say in no uncertain terms and so
51:28the argument would go yani that it is
51:30okay to use the arguments of kalam with
51:32some people if they only accept the most
51:35sophisticated and most rigorous types of
51:36arguments if they're disposed to such uh
51:39argumentation can't you see him phrasing
51:43the cognitive benefits
51:48that come from engaging with the with
51:50the most sophisticated arguments the
51:52more complex the better then it follows
51:54that the sheikh was indeed a muta kalim
51:56who really had no problem at all with
51:58any argument that philosophers uh
52:01have put forth to prove the existence of
52:03god as long as uh
52:06the one you address
52:08with with it uh likes it
52:12okay his only problem
52:13uh uh his only problem would be
52:16uh or was with those who would insist
52:20that this or that argument is the only
52:22way to know that allah exists
52:24so is this as thusly stated rather the
52:27sisters the actual creed or the actual
52:29man
52:30with respect to the kalami method and
52:32the arguments of
52:33absolutely not absolutely not and i say
52:37it again absolutely not
52:39and if you were careful enough as you
52:41read this very book from whence you took
52:44this uh
52:45took out this passage brother you would
52:47realize that the very purpose of writing
52:49it is to show that the entire endeavor
52:51of metaphysical theory and aristotelian
52:53logic is softest it is very core and
52:56fundamentally helpful to human knowledge
52:58in general and to religion in particular
53:00so by what sense of reason are we
53:03required to overlook the rest of the
53:04imam's book the release of imam's books
53:07okay his entire legacy even the rest of
53:09this very particular book in your hand
53:11in establishing his manhesh and his
53:12religious standing with respect to kalam
53:14and the karami method in general in
53:16favor of one particular passage passage
53:18which is admittedly rather problematic a
53:20little bit okay all things considered it
53:23might be it might seem to be rather
53:24problematic at first glance i mean a
53:28true selfie scholar who appreciates uh
53:30the imam's strict position with respect
53:32to the greek tradition of metaphysical
53:34theory and argumentation and who knows
53:36that he was indeed the most staunch
53:38defender of the salafi attitude of imam
53:40ahmad's position
53:43would have only one of two routes or
53:45routes to take with this passage a
53:47amendment
53:49to show that it is not in any real
53:51conflict with the salafi attitude that
53:53the imam himself established and
53:54exhibited in his legacy as a whole all
53:57be overlooking at the jails to neglect
53:59this particular passage and overlook it
54:00all together tagging it as uh a
54:03problematic passage
54:05okay and proceed to benefit from the
54:07rest of the book as though it is not
54:08even there neglecting that part
54:10altogether the salafi tradition brothers
54:12and sisters is older than amitai all
54:14right and the salafi attitude towards
54:16philosophy as previously defined and
54:18kalam is not the innovation of epithelia
54:20such that we find ourselves in such
54:21trouble or inconsistency if we fail to
54:24comprehend this or that passage in one
54:26of his books in a way that fits what we
54:28know with absolute certainty to be the
54:30manager of the salaf and of the imam
54:32himself okay we're not
54:34we're not the followers of a philosopher
54:36who's who we depend upon understanding
54:38his text entirely in order to know what
54:40our manager is no emitter to us is not
54:42that person
54:44okay what i'm trying to say here is that
54:46i'm under no religious commitment or
54:47epistemic pressure to follow the first
54:49approach a or which is trying to amend
54:52this particular passage with the rest of
54:53the men's legacy i know for a fact what
54:56he and the seller before him teach with
54:58respect to the method of kalam and i'm
54:59in and
55:01in no necessity no necessity i'm not a
55:03necessity to acquire
55:06that knowledge from this particular
55:08passage okay
55:10and yet i can try to follow the a
55:12approach and say that in the first part
55:14he means that it's okay to use with some
55:17people such arguments used by
55:19philosophers and mutual mean that do not
55:21take any metaphysical theories as
55:22premises as in burhan hadood for example
55:25okay and pay attention here and do not
55:27compact with false entailments with
55:29respect to the the attributes of allah
55:32in which case he should only be talking
55:33about arguments from the false
55:35entailments of shirk arguing from the
55:38false entailments of shirk and of
55:39naturalism and the theories thereof like
55:42he himself practiced like he himself did
55:44in most of his books okay as he
55:45elaborated in the passage
56:12um
56:36foreign
57:13what this means we'll translate it now
57:15what we mean here is that the correspond
57:18the considerable truth in every proof or
57:20the in the world is entailment whoever
57:23knows that a entails b would take a to
57:26prove b even of the word entails
57:30uh
57:31even if the word entails was never
57:33mentioned by him i mean okay
57:35uh
57:36and even if he never even considered in
57:38his mind the very meaning of the word
57:39entailment itself anyone who already
57:41knows that a entails b or that if a then
57:44b and the likes then he already knows
57:46the entailment like one would know that
57:48everything in existence is a sign of for
57:50allah as it obviously needs him and
57:54relies upon him uh
57:56so its very existence entails his
57:57existence
57:59and like one would know that the
58:02more death okay that which begins to
58:04exist must have a more additive someone
58:06who chooses to begin it okay as in the
58:09in the first translation and translate
58:11it here or were they made by no maker or
58:13were they the ones who made themselves
58:15and in the two books of sahih sahin
58:18jeber namatam uh
58:20uh narrates that when he heard the
58:23prophet salallahu ah
58:25recite this verse in salat al-madr
58:28he felt his heart come off
58:31okay
58:32this is a complete congrega
58:34categorization of possibilities he says
58:37where they were they made without a
58:39maker which is impossible by necessity
58:41or did they make themselves which is
58:42even more impossible which only leaves
58:44the obvious entailment that they had a
58:46maker which is allah he mentioned that
58:49in the form of a reprimanding question
58:51to show that this issue issue he argued
58:53with uh is innately and uh
58:57undeniably true since nobody can in
58:59proper fitra claim that something can be
59:01created without a creator or that he
59:03created himself unquote
59:05so the imam was actually in the context
59:08of refuting the logician's claim that
59:10the argument
59:11needs to take a certain for any argument
59:13needs to take a particular form and a
59:15particular arrangement in order for it
59:17to qualify as dalil and do what it is
59:19required to do to convey knowledge
59:22okay he countered by saying no it
59:24doesn't if the mind captures the
59:26entailment in which in whichever form of
59:27phrasing it goes then the argument will
59:29have done its purpose and that's it
59:31that's that he gives the example of a
59:33sahabi having his heart moved out from
59:36listening to the verse he mentioned
59:38precisely for this end okay it did what
59:40it was supposed to do even there were no
59:42the word entailment wasn't even there
59:44okay the area does not follow any
59:46synergistic order in argumentation and
59:48it is not even directed to people who
59:50don't believe that they were not created
59:52at all azimuth
59:53would claim it to only be uh a form of
59:57no that's not the case the ai addresses
59:59someone who already knows by fitra that
1:00:02he was indeed created to remind him of
1:00:04the implicit entailment that if you do
1:00:06know that you have a creator then what
1:00:08business do you have not embracing the
1:00:10religion of his prophet once it reaches
1:00:12you okay why are not doing that why are
1:00:14you not doing that okay by what reason
1:00:16would you not hurl yourself out of shirk
1:00:17and into the as soon as you learn that
1:00:19the messenger is here
1:00:21the messenger is here okay this is how
1:00:23the argument works all right it is
1:00:25indeed an argument and it allele in this
1:00:27sense but it is nothing like what the
1:00:29philosophers and the muta khali mean
1:00:30would insist that true knowledge in the
1:00:32subject matter can only come from
1:00:34in this book
1:00:38the imam is essentially defeating the
1:00:40formalism and methodological commitments
1:00:42of the logicians so he endeavors to show
1:00:44that knowledge does happen in many other
1:00:46ways and through many other routes many
1:00:48other routes
1:00:50none of which are bound to take the
1:00:52australian format okay so if this is the
1:00:55case then one is free to address people
1:00:57with whatever they view to be more
1:00:59conducive to the desired outcome okay as
1:01:02long as it is not in itself bound to
1:01:04false methodological and doctrinal
1:01:05entailments without having a com to
1:01:08commit oneself to the recitalian method
1:01:10in doing so okay so he goes on in the
1:01:12second part to declare that some people
1:01:14are more fond of sophisticated arguments
1:01:16so perhaps it might be better to address
1:01:18them with such okay however considering
1:01:21what we know to be his hedge what do you
1:01:23think he would mean by that obviously
1:01:26and definitely not the sort of arguments
1:01:28and the means of argumentation that he
1:01:30himself spent most of his life warning
1:01:32against brothers and sisters okay he
1:01:34would probably be thinking of the sort
1:01:35of exposing the appealing uh and at the
1:01:39appalling entailments of whatever else
1:01:41the mushriks and the atheists would
1:01:43believe in place or believe in place of
1:01:45the creator not setting up a positive
1:01:47fund the foundational uh argument
1:01:49propositional argument that establishes
1:01:51the iman of of of whoever in uh it
1:01:55it is he addresses upon metaphysical
1:01:57premises about the world and the
1:01:59categories of things that exist and that
1:02:00and the like we definitely wouldn't be
1:02:02doing that or promoting that this is by
1:02:05all means contrary to his method and the
1:02:07method of the self before him which is
1:02:09why we said argue all you want and be as
1:02:12sophisticated as need be in your
1:02:14arguments but only in refutation of
1:02:17false doctrines not in the establishment
1:02:19of our own doctrine in the way of trying
1:02:22to get people to embrace it we are not
1:02:24preaching yet another philosophical
1:02:25theory that needs to be established upon
1:02:27mainstream metaphysical thoughts or else
1:02:29it would stand epistemically unjustified
1:02:31as the philosophers would insist okay
1:02:34pay attention here brothers and sisters
1:02:35we should go to as much length as we
1:02:37need in refuting this greek theory of
1:02:39knowledge itself
1:02:41in which case we would be providing the
1:02:43kinds of sophisticated arguments the
1:02:45imam
1:02:46proposes here that some people can only
1:02:48accept the truth if they are given them
1:02:50if it comes to them in this form though
1:02:52that's that's what we do that's what
1:02:54i've been doing in many of my lectures
1:02:56probably most of my lectures actually
1:02:58okay
1:02:59now although of course you have to
1:03:00presuppose first that there can be
1:03:03people who only like the most
1:03:05sophisticated arguments when it comes to
1:03:06the existence of allah and yet qualify
1:03:08as free from
1:03:10and thereby it would be okay to give
1:03:12them that kind of arguments they demand
1:03:14which is something i presume he only had
1:03:16to hypothesize in this text for the sake
1:03:19of this of his overall argument against
1:03:21aristotelian commitments okay
1:03:24it would be wrong to assume that someone
1:03:26who has spent his entire life drawing in
1:03:29drowning this kind of arguments for the
1:03:31existence of the maker going back and
1:03:33forth in the philosophical debates
1:03:35thereon would be willing to accept
1:03:36anything short of a metaphysically uh
1:03:38satisfactory argument according to the
1:03:40greek tradition and the kalam tradition
1:03:42that he condemns that the imam condemns
1:03:44of the very type that the imam himself
1:03:45wages his war against
1:03:47okay so to build your understanding of
1:03:50the manage of the imam allah and of the
1:03:52salaf at large with respect to that
1:03:54tradition on this passage is to do the
1:03:56imam a great injustice brothers and
1:03:58sisters even when he proceeds afterwards
1:04:01uh in what can only be viewed as an ista
1:04:03trod to favor the more sophisticated
1:04:06arts of thinking and argumentation he
1:04:07gives examples other other than the
1:04:09method you guys are trying to hold him
1:04:11to from his from this passage alone all
1:04:14his examples obviously included what the
1:04:16self would what what
1:04:19would favor in order to get people to to
1:04:22to to to to run their minds
1:04:25and and to train their minds and to get
1:04:26the reality thing that you that that
1:04:29this is supposed to be achieved okay
1:04:31it's not supposed to be achieved through
1:04:32falsehood no he's not this is not what
1:04:35he's teaching you to do
1:04:37yes of course if we do math or engage
1:04:39with
1:04:40and the likes this would be a
1:04:42praiseworthy way to get your mind
1:04:44sharpened
1:04:45and your cognitive faculties enhanced
1:04:47however no salafi who knows the creed of
1:04:50the salaf regarding the method of quran
1:04:52and the debates of the
1:04:53would advise anybody anybody at all to
1:04:56engage with kalam in order to benefit
1:04:58their minds in this way no
1:05:00absolutely not it's only conceivable
1:05:02that he meant the kinds of mental
1:05:04activities he himself engaged with in
1:05:06refuting false doctrines and
1:05:07philosophies in his books thereby
1:05:09arguing in favor of islam okay
1:05:12yes of course someone who is
1:05:13as qualified for such a task as need be
1:05:16would benefit from it in this respect to
1:05:18a great extent it would run his mind in
1:05:19ways that would benefit the mind itself
1:05:21of course but surely we can't expect the
1:05:23sheikh to be inviting us to do so or to
1:05:26do what he knows and even declares on
1:05:29multiple occasions that the salaf
1:05:31condemned and lamented and warned
1:05:33against of course not
1:05:34okay brothers it is a fundamentally
1:05:36misguided approach to dealing with the
1:05:39legacy of such an imam allah uh to even
1:05:42assume that such quotations would
1:05:44suffice to determine his manhatta
1:05:47with respect to kalem and
1:05:49there's a couple more of of such
1:05:50quotations that i might address in in
1:05:52later lectures inshallah in the course
1:05:55of this series i've already addressed
1:05:56them in arabic in length for those of
1:05:58you who know arabic in a series of
1:06:00lectures that i titled
1:06:09the point here is not some philosopher
1:06:12whose theses is of his own making and
1:06:15thus
1:06:16no reference can be accepted for
1:06:17understanding the method and the
1:06:19principles he established in his books
1:06:21by his own but his own texts no that's
1:06:23not true okay he's not he didn't invent
1:06:25his own method he didn't invent his own
1:06:27creed no we're not in the business of
1:06:29discovering or unlocking the
1:06:30philosophical system and methodological
1:06:32commitments of kantor higgler which
1:06:34wittgenstein when we deal with his texts
1:06:36brothers and sisters this is an imam of
1:06:39alison again this is an imam of arizona
1:06:43the creed in his books is that of alison
1:06:46that teachings and basic tenets and
1:06:48commitments of the method are of those
1:06:50of him
1:06:51he strictly and explicitly followed
1:06:53allah the books of whom he must have
1:06:54told to his students okay
1:06:56it is not his own innovation it is not
1:06:59his own concoction
1:07:01we are not tiny tiny eats or taimiyah we
1:07:04are not followers of a doctrine invented
1:07:06by abu taimei or any other scholar for
1:07:08that matter we are followers of the way
1:07:09of the salaf and so was amitaimaya
1:07:12himself before us so if you fall upon a
1:07:14text in the imam's books that makes it
1:07:16seem as though he promotes kaleem and
1:07:18philosophy in the meaning i explained
1:07:20here then you should take reference in
1:07:22the menu to which he ascribed himself
1:07:24and in the many writings where he states
1:07:26those commitments clearly and
1:07:28unequivocally this is the same imam who
1:07:30states clearly and in no uncertain terms
1:07:33commenting on
1:07:35the cosmological argument this
1:07:37one that that happens to be the central
1:07:39piece for the tao of hijab
1:08:06the point here is that many theorists
1:08:08would now take this innovative method in
1:08:10the sharara which disagrees with reason
1:08:13and the salaf and have con con conceded
1:08:16on disdaining it and those who use it
1:08:18for mandatory argumentation theorization
1:08:20and consider it the foundation of
1:08:22religion
1:08:51mortezali method the method of essences
1:08:54motion and rest which embraces the
1:08:57proposition that all bodies
1:08:59are
1:09:00more because they are not free of hawaii
1:09:03and the impossibility of hawaiith with
1:09:05no beginning
1:09:06this is an innovative method in shara in
1:09:08the consensus of scholars of sunnah a
1:09:11frightful method in reason and even
1:09:12lamentable to a multitude of sects the
1:09:15method referred to here brothers and
1:09:16sisters is that of using metaphysical
1:09:18theories as premises to argue for the
1:09:20existence of the maker including of
1:09:22course the theory of substances and
1:09:23essences and by the way including the
1:09:24science of cosmology as we or the the
1:09:27the the discipline of cosmology as we
1:09:29shall elaborate later on in these
1:09:30lectures and shout out to isla
1:09:33uh such a theory and whatever
1:09:35definitions and rules it entails in
1:09:37different sects of the kalimignani any
1:09:39argument that takes the statement the
1:09:41world began to exist as a premise should
1:09:43ultimately leave him with
1:09:45need to acquire metaphysical grounds
1:09:47upon which to found his beliefs that the
1:09:49would his belief that the world did in
1:09:50fact begin to exist because if it is
1:09:52okay that the existence of the maker
1:09:54should be considered an issue that calls
1:09:56for deductive argumentation to prove it
1:09:58then the same is true of the premise the
1:09:59world began to exist obviously in fact
1:10:02one would think that the existence of
1:10:03the creator sustainer of this world is
1:10:05far more obvious than the fact that the
1:10:07world in its totality began to exist
1:10:10they are both articles of fitra of
1:10:12course and they both entail each other
1:10:13like we said earlier but it might make
1:10:15more sense to use the existence of the
1:10:17creator as a premise to argue against
1:10:19any claim of eternality for the world
1:10:21than otherwise which is in fact which is
1:10:24the fact that
1:10:25exposed in many occasions in his
1:10:27critique of of
1:11:12and if knowledge of allah and belief in
1:11:14him was dependent on it then it should
1:11:16follow that they did not know allah or
1:11:18properly believe in him and that's the
1:11:20greatest boss for me as agreed upon by
1:11:21by all muslims prophets and messengers
1:11:24did not command their followers to take
1:11:25this path so if such knowledge depended
1:11:28on it then it would have to be mandatory
1:11:30and if the knowledge itself was
1:11:31preferable then the method would be
1:11:33deemed preferable and if it is
1:11:35if it were either
1:11:38then the messenger of allah would have
1:11:40made it so and then the sahaba would
1:11:42have relayed that to us but that didn't
1:11:44happen
1:11:45this is obviously a statement of
1:11:46rejection of the very concept of
1:11:48employing philosophy in building
1:11:50knowledge about allah as a proposition
1:11:52okay one that muta khali mean would only
1:11:54get around by claiming that the salaf
1:11:56actually did practice another one way or
1:11:59another as i pointed out earlier they
1:12:01would do that because again it is
1:12:04inconceivable in their tradition that
1:12:05someone would be justified in the belief
1:12:07that the maker exists without the use of
1:12:10some stance of metaphysical
1:12:11argumentation where would he fit within
1:12:14within such theories anyway if they
1:12:15didn't show that okay so the imam stands
1:12:19in firm rejection of the very allegation
1:12:21that we need this method at all to learn
1:12:23that we were indeed created and that our
1:12:25creator deserves to be worshipped alone
1:12:28and no other he says
1:12:34is
1:12:48the foundation of knowledge of the
1:12:49existence of the maker does not depend
1:12:51on nother and argumentation rather it
1:12:53exists in the mind out of necessity
1:12:55which is why all nations would concede
1:12:57that the maker exists despite the major
1:13:00shirk and blasphemy they suffer from and
1:13:02they don't use any of these famed
1:13:03methods of nother philosophy
1:13:05philosophers and technique like arguing
1:13:07for them
1:13:08from hadoop or for the worship from in
1:13:10can he says
1:13:31as it happens is there in the quran and
1:13:33the salaf and
1:13:35are in agreement on it but only in
1:13:37keeping with necessity and observation
1:13:39without the need to construct arguments
1:13:41that certain things like the world
1:13:43itself did begin to exist rather those
1:13:45things that we see beginning to exist do
1:13:48tell us that the uh maker exists so you
1:13:51can see a strict mythological
1:13:53distinction here
1:13:55drawn by the iman between the way the
1:13:56quran and the way of the salaf and the
1:13:58way the quran the with the salaf on one
1:14:00hand and the way
1:14:02of
1:14:03the other okay
1:14:05the quran acknowledges the previous
1:14:07knowledge of the existence of the maker
1:14:08as a necessary component in every
1:14:10healthy mind and further points people
1:14:13to view all things that happen in the
1:14:14world around them as signs not only of
1:14:16his existence but of his wisdom of his
1:14:19graciousness of his grandeur subhanallah
1:14:21and the vastness of his power
1:14:24so observation of
1:14:26events works in the minds of healthy
1:14:28human beings as dalil only in this sense
1:14:30not in the sense that we need to
1:14:31construct a philosophical argument uh so
1:14:34logistic argument where we prove first
1:14:36that the entirety of the world did have
1:14:38a beginning to conclude then that it
1:14:40must have had a maker
1:14:43as in the metaphysical tradition of the
1:14:44greeks so when you say philosophical
1:14:46rhetoric brother what exactly are we
1:14:48referring to here such arguments that
1:14:50the order of the
1:14:52poem that hijab is explaining in his
1:14:54lectures would acknowledge as proper
1:14:56proofs for the existence of the maker
1:14:58what is it then that you've learned at
1:15:00all from ebitda's responses and
1:15:02reputations of what
1:15:03if that's what you end up
1:15:05promoting subhanallah so in conclusion
1:15:08brothers and sisters what we have here
1:15:11is an imam who acknowledges the
1:15:12consensus of the salaf on rejecting this
1:15:14type of argument this innovative method
1:15:18in arguing for islam the exact same
1:15:20method that hijab and his follow and his
1:15:22followers are now
1:15:25uh uh uh
1:15:27using some quotations from the imam's
1:15:29books to argue that he doesn't find
1:15:32problematic all right so which of the
1:15:34two parties is more honest in presenting
1:15:36the imam's legacy which party should we
1:15:39believe regarding where to place of
1:15:40mitaimiya those who know what the true
1:15:43manhattan of the imam was and how deeply
1:15:45and profoundly opposed he was to the
1:15:46method of qlam
1:15:47and critical of the greek tradition upon
1:15:49which it stands and thereby understand
1:15:52all his works in that light doing him
1:15:54the justice he deserves uh or those who
1:15:56would resort to such an intellectually
1:15:58criminal way of picking and choosing
1:16:00passages from his books to invite
1:16:02alisson to engage with kalam despite
1:16:04knowing that he had actually spent the
1:16:05majority of his days at the imam allah
1:16:07in intellectual wars against those that
1:16:10method and the innovations it caused in
1:16:12the umm
1:16:13those who would quote him in a way that
1:16:15serves his actual cause thereby doing
1:16:17justice to his legacy in fighting kalam
1:16:18kilimanjaro or those who would quote him
1:16:21on claims that would smash that entire
1:16:23legacy bring it down from the bottom up
1:16:25okay every sensible muslim who
1:16:28understands what we've elaborated in
1:16:29this lecture with a heart clear from
1:16:32ahue and his b biases should be able to
1:16:34give the only proper answer to this
1:16:36question
1:16:39there

About this transcript

This page contains the full transcript of The Salafilosophers | Mohamed Hijab 02 - Ibn Taymiyyah and Philosophy by قناة إقناع, generated from the public captions YouTube serves with the video. The transcript has 12,514 words across 2,018 segments, with the original timestamps preserved so you can click any line to jump to that moment in the embedded player.

What you can do with it

Use the transcript to take notes, quote the speaker, build a study guide, generate a summary with ChatGPT or Claude via the YouTube Summary tool, or export it as a timed subtitle file with YouTube to SRT. You can also re-open it in the transcriber to choose a caption track available on the video.

Free YouTube transcript tool

YouTube2Text is a free YouTube transcript generator — no signup, no daily limit. Paste any YouTube link and get the full transcript instantly, with timestamps, click-to-jump, caption language selection, AI prompts for ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, and exports to TXT, SRT, VTT, or Markdown.