 wa la'natullah ala ad-da'a, wa munkari fava'ilahim wa manakibahim. Minal an ila qayyama yawm ad-din. The respective viewers, thank you once more for joining us on this, your live broadcast from the holy city of Karbala, every night with the exception of Fridays, that is to say, back to the basics, in which we, inshallah ta'ala, will be going back to the basics of theological discussions and those discussions which pertain to our differences with people who believe in our ideologies and other religions. It is my pleasure to be joining you once more from the holy city of Karbala. Of course, in the background, we have the blessed maqam of Abul-Fadl al-Abbas, alayhi salatu wa salam. And I pray, inshallah ta'ala, that we can continue with a fruitful discussion in regards to how we can continue to engage in a more suitable and objective manner with those discussions pertaining to our theological doubts or indeed doubts about any other aspect of our religion. In the previous few nights, I do not like to continue summarizing, recounting, and continuing to describe what I have previously spoken of, but it is nonetheless important in order for the message and the general thought to be drilled into your minds, inshallah ta'ala. We've been discussing the concept of religion as a distinct worldview, as opposed to just a distinct set of beliefs on par with any other political ideology or any other belief set that we happen to carry, we have stated that no, religions and theological views, the theological school which you align yourself in within a religion be that, so in our example, that is Islam and in our example, that's the original Islam of Ali Muhammad, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon them all, or Tashayo as it's known as, Shia Islam. When it comes to looking at such a thing, we would describe it as a worldview. Now worldview has been previously described by myself as being the following, an interconnected set of beliefs that affects and dominates how we view ourselves in relation to the universe, and of course, would dominate our behavior as a result of that. I've stated several times that our primary objective in this show, in laying out the beginnings of our discussion, and of course before moving on to some of the more minor aspects of our discussion, is to convey to everyone that we are to view our religion as a worldview, and in doing so, we are able to go back to the very basics of our dialogue, the very basics which mandate and dictate to us, that we are to view our religion as a giant package of beliefs which answers certain big and major questions, as opposed to merely a bunch of floating abstract, small, tiny, minor beliefs which can be taken apart and deconstructed by anybody. So I've argued that by focusing on the major questions, questions such as who are we, what is our relationship with God, what is the nature of God, what is our future, and such questions, if we have those questions with suitable answers, then the smaller issues will of course fall under that greater package and would be part of that greater package, allowing us not to have to worry about the doubts on those smaller issues. But in order to look at a worldview and in order for us to proceed with this discussion, we need to once more reassess and reanalyze what we said were the key questions in looking and identifying a successful worldview and a dominant and complete worldview as opposed to a deficient, incomplete, and worthless worldview. We've stated that the tools of interrogation, just for me to recount them once more very quickly, is it consistent? I've stated that the Quran gives us a golden principle. It states that if this book were to have come from anyone other than Allah, we would have found in it much inconsistency, inconsistency internally or externally, inconsistency with the true realities of the world. If we would find such things, then we would know that this is not the truth because truth is not inconsistent with other troops. How much explanatory scope does this worldview have? And other decent qualities such as how it explains away our experiences and our knowledge. And we stated that the first thing we wanted to look at in any worldview is how it places the human intellect. Of course, tonight is a very blessed night because it happens to correspond and fall under the birth anniversary of the holy prophet Sallallahu alaihi wa ala and Imam al-Sadiq, which occurred in this blessed period of time. We've already stated that Imam al-Sadiq has many beautiful narrations about the priority and importance of the intellect. One of those narrations Imam al-Sadiq states, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, that the intellect is that by which the Rahman, the old merciful is worshiped and that by which the heavens are attained or the gardens of Jannah are attained. So when Imam al-Sadiq states this and when the other Imams, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon them all, also confer that the intellect has this great status. That is to say that we can trust our minds. Our minds, the very thing which we use to analyze and interpret all data in front of us is to be used and is key. The next thing I stated, which would be part of any discussion pertaining to a worldview, is human language. We're all communicating in a language of some way, shape, or form. We might be speaking in different languages depending on which countries you may be based in. But we all share the phenomenon of language. It's the way which we communicate with anyone. And in order for us to understand human language, we need to use that reason and intellect. So we stated that in order to understand the resources of revelation, if a worldview believes in a scripture which is revealed, it uses the intellect in order to understand the language which is given within the boundaries and frameworks of that language. The past two nights, we've spoken quite heavily about how certain schools of Islamic theology undermined the very ability to use reason by their inappropriate dealing with the language of revelation. And so I want to continue with that thing tonight. Just to remind the dear viewers, I'm going to quickly quote, but I'm not going to comment, inshallah, to Allah, on something which, I remember, stood out for me like a sore thumb when analyzing the other sects of Islam and particularly certain sects which give no primacy to the intellect and of anything what I called and what I referred to as playing Russian roulette with all six bullets loaded. It's essentially beheading one's ability to use reason. This dominant poster, this dominant online user who happens to be a scholarly individual, someone that's based heavily in the theological debates and discussions of the modern world and as a Salafi, he says the following, you can't call Allah a mere concept for he has an actual self which speaks to us. Concepts don't have centers of self-consciousness but Allah does. Christian philosophers and I'm assuming Ashari philosophers will argue back that Allah is like an unembodied mind. He goes on to say, just because Allah does not have a body, that does not necessitate that he does not have a form. Even Casper, a friendly ghost in the cartoons has a form yet no body. So if our limited mind can imagine this for the creation, then what about the creator? Why would such an individual assume that Allah must have a form? I quote, if Allah does not have a form, then what are we going to look at on the day of judgment? The prophet, peace be upon him, sallallahu alayhi wa aleh, said we will see Allah as clearly as the moon on a cloudless night. How on earth does that happen if Allah has nothing of himself for us to see? So we see the real problem here. Is not that the intellect did not guide such an individual, rather he knows his intellect has real issues with accepting that Allah has a form. And that's why he had to come with this pathetic analogy of Casper of a friendly ghost, a fictional cartoon character. But the real issue is in the next few words he said. But the reason he had to do this was because he read in the traditions, he read in the narrations that we will see Allah as a wajal. And he asks, how could you see something without that thing having a form? The real question, therefore, for such individuals is when they approach a text and they understand that text within the constructs of the language involved, someone like myself will see a text, the texts will say something along the lines of, the people stretch out their hands and Allah's hand is over their hands. I will understand that Allah as a wajal who is the ultimately powerful being who has no beginning and no end, who is not compounded and composed of different body parts, can't possibly have a physical hand and therefore for word hand here must be referring to something which is not on the apparent meaning of a word. In the same way we have such metaphors in the English language and I could say, for example, if someone asks me for my assistance, I could say I'm really sorry, brother, but my hands are tied at the moment. I don't literally mean that someone's taken some rope and placed that rope around my hands. Rather, I'm referring to my incapability, my inability to assist such a person at that time. It's referring to my, it's referring to my frustration and inability to help as opposed to referring to my physical hands. Now, if I would interpret language like that in my day-to-day English usage, then how is it possible that I would approach the language of revelation and utilize such an approach which undermines human reason and therefore undermines revelation itself to convey this as a true message for humanity? There are several examples which we want to come to where this is done. For those of you who are unaware of the basic Salafi or Athari position on the attributes of Allah Azawajal, when we describe Allah Azawajal as having certain parts or components or the revelation uses language such as the eyes of Allah or the hands of Allah or the feet of Allah Azawajal, these are what are known as as Sifat Al-Khabariya, Sifat which tell us or describe something about Allah Azawajal. The Salafi position on the Sifat Al-Khabariya is that they are to be affirmed and we do not question how and that is why on that same internet forum which I've been posting over the past few nights we see that one of the scholars, a Salafi scholar who posts on it, he writes, the position of the Salaf is simply that our great Lord Allah Subhanahu Wa Ta'ala has a form that is suitable to His majesty. So they won't discuss what this form actually is, they'll just say that we affirm that He has a form, we affirm that He has a hand, we affirm that He has two eyes and what have you but one that is suitable for His majesty. But the problem with this is in doing so you've actually given it a meaning so you haven't actually suspended judgment because you've affirmed that He has a form nonetheless, you've affirmed that He does literally have a hand nonetheless and to suspend meaning would be to say I don't know what that even means. I'm quoting from the website, binbaas.org.sa. The question comes as such, al-mas'ala fi sifat fi hadith al-sab'a al-laveena yufallahum Allah fi villi yawm la villi illa villi Fahal yosuf Allah Az-Zawajal bi anlahu vela al-jawab So the question asks, in the hadith number seven of those who will be shaded by Allah Az-Zawajal in His shadow on the day that there is no shadow, save His shadow, is this attributing Allah the exalted with a shadow? So the question is that there's a narration which mentions that Allah has a shadow. Is it true and is it accurate to attribute a shadow to Allah Az-Zawajal? Dear viewers just for suspense I'm gonna go for a break quickly and we'll respond to that question when we get back, insha'Allah salamu alaykum. Thank you dear viewers for waiting patiently. I just wanted to leave a tiny bit of suspense in responding to that question. Bin Baz's website's response says the following, naam kema jaaf il hadith wa fi ba'v ar-ruwayat fi vil'a arshihi Yes, as it has come in venerations but in some of those narrations fi vil'a arshihi in the shadow or in the shade of His throne walakin as sahihain However the two sahis, Bukhari and Muslim sahih they mention fi vil'a hi that is to say in His shadow or in His shade. Fahuwa lahu vil'a yaliq bihi subhanahu la na'lam kayfiyatahu mif al-sa'ir al-sifat al ba'b wahid in the ahl al sunnah wal jama'a wa Allah wali at-tawfiq Subin Baz states yes as is reported in the hadith and in some narrations in the shadow of His throne but in the sahihain it says in His shadow for He has a shadow that is befitting for Him the glorious and we do not know of its modality its kayfiyah or how it is just like the rest of His attributes. So the question is now, what is a shadow? A shadow is an area where direct light from a source of light cannot reach due to the obstruction of the physical objects. Can anyone answer me? What would be a shadow therefore befitting of Allah's majesty? If a shadow is merely something which is obstructed from being affected by light in a direct area of light what would we even mean by Allah Azawajal having a shadow? And why would we take this narration to mean that yes Allah Azawajal therefore must have a shadow? It is this approach, this approach of saying that no we're not fine, the intellect tells you that Allah wouldn't have a shadow but we don't care because the narration says He does. This approach of dismissing the intellect, dismissing the very faculty which Allah has given us to judge revelation, to understand revelation, to derive benefits from revelation, we turn it off, we switch off visibility to do this when Allah Azawajal holds us accountable on the day of judgment. All those young brothers and sisters, all those elder brothers and sisters who went against the grain of society, those who perhaps were Christian, perhaps were Jews, perhaps were atheists or Hindus and they heard about Islam on the streets. They heard about Islam via television. They heard about Islam via their reading. These young men and women who through their efforts went against the grain often suffering persecution from their families in order to embrace truth. Doing so why? Because they are convicted and compelled by the intellectual weight that bore upon their necks and convinced them that this was the only path that could be followed. This intellectual conviction which taught them that you know what, this is truth and I don't care what my society says because I'm gonna follow truth and following truth is a noble thing to do. They were convinced of the false sort of their previous religions. They would ask questions like how is it possible that a man would die on the cross and I would be guaranteed salvation by such an act. That's not justice, that makes no rational sense. And we as Muslims would cheer from on and say mashallah brother, do a book about it, write your story down. Write your story down so we can spread this around the world and teach everyone about how intellectually deficient ex-religion is and yet now the people that follow this particular theological school would have you say that no, that's fine for false religions but when it comes to the religion of the Salaf, no, don't use your intellect anymore. So switch off your intellect, switch off your intellect just for this issue of Allah's attributes because you know we can't understand it, you can't trust your intellect, your intellect's deficient. Why wasn't his intellect deficient when he was looking into the previous falsehood of his previous religion? This little caveat, this attempt to switch off the God given ability which Allah Azawajal has endowed within every sane rational human being is something that will save us on the day of judgment and yet if we take this approach given by certain theological schools we see that there is no way around it. We see that the very evidence we have come forward with is the same evidence that will condemn us. In the previous nights we discussed the genius arguments posed by the Christian philosopher C.S. Lewis, a former atheist. Who stated that atheism's downfall by atheism he meant a particular form of naturalistic, scientific materialism is that it argues on the basis of its worldview that our mind is merely matter and therefore all the decisions we make are merely the random effects of matter moving in motion and therefore if it were true that I have intellectually reached a conclusion of atheism as a rational choice then there's no rationality behind that choice because if atheism is true there is no rationality and it's just the material in my mind creating these beliefs. He was essentially pointing out that atheism went taken seriously beheads itself. So when we see that another belief system does the same thing when we see that another belief system comes forward and says, look, use your intellect. Use your intellect to believe in Tauheed brothers. Brothers Tauheed is very rational. And then when you come forward and you ask, okay, can I ask this about Tauheed? No, brother, the position of the self is we don't discuss this. What kind of religion is this? What kind of worldview is this? A worldview that makes you undermine the very thought processes which occur in your mind. That's why we find Yasser Qabi, Dr. Yasser Qabi who I mentioned in yesterday's episodes, the theologian graduate from Princeton University. In his article for theological implications of the story of Ibrahim and the stars, he argues that whilst the argument put forward by many Motakel-Lameen and theologians is a great argument, it must be taken and put to the side because it's not the argumentation of the self and we must argue in the way that the self argued in. It is this form of reasoning that heavily undermines any ability for us as a community to trust our minds. Why must we restrict the scope of the intellect? Did Allah Azumajal not give it to all of us? And so that is the starting point of any discussion on worldview. Ask yourself, does a worldview trust intellect or does it not? And if it doesn't trust the intellect, and rationality, then know that such a worldview is deficient. Insha'Allah, dear viewers, we're about to round off, but we'll continue this discussion in the next episode, insha'Allah. Wassalamu alaikum wa rahmatullah wa barakatuh.