 فشرف بالشتغالي بالعلم ولا تبغي به ما عشت يا دادا دالا وياله من شراف عظيمي ثابت one is they debate they prohibited النهي عن المناظرات التي يبينها أصحابها على الشك they also won against debating people okay who's foundation is something you're not gonna agree with for example the innovators and even the atheists the Christians and their foundation is what for example recently but a while back I remember watching Richard Dawkins the discussion that he had with what's that and John Lennox when they had it in the sculpture the dinosaur so it's probably there or somewhere else but it was the two of them so he said something about that foundation in which he believes that things should be observed his worldview is skepticism without everything there's nothing really certain there's no problem with that foundation you can't debate with a person like that a person who believes everything should by default should be doubted and we need to move away from doubt towards certainty so the assas of everything it's a shock you both won't agree do you see that person they won't entertain that idea and debating that person like that bring about any benefit does that make sense because that person's argument is going to be is going to be will prove to me you're even here I've got the rights to doubt your existence right now does that make sense and the debate has to have a foundation where we can platform something we agree upon that's where we start off right common ground but there's no common ground there's nothing we can both agree on nothing there's zero there's no resistance right now you don't have it no more are you with me brothers so since that doesn't exist entertaining that idea of debating that person also the self-warning of that do you want to demand that person do your authorship write books on them do lessons on them write things like that about them articles journals what not but to bring them forward to the people it's not correct to debate them number four is debate which brings about more debates something that's argument and a debate that's going to bring about more it's going to bring out more more اختلاف that basically what you're opening is not going to stay there you're going to debate and this debate is going to turn out to be what something else is going to stem from it which then will become a debate and that something's going to give something else and that it's just going to go more more more more and that's really the previous one it's the same as the previous one are you there people who were ايتيس when they got debated and debate was open with them they're going to go home remember and they're going to work on their debate tactics so that they're going to have to see where it went wrong for them and what was causing them to basically get caught and was that they found out that they were holding onto the principle of certainty first صح so what they did was they removed that now so they come back now and the debate has become more disgusting are you with me so that's why a debate that's going to give birth to what's worse shouldn't be done number five debates that are based upon accepting some of the evidences and not really wanting to accept the others are you with me a debate that's based upon believing some of the textual evidences and not the rest they also want against a debate like that and that's common some people are pushing forward debaters who's عقيدة is actually not to take a cupboard ahead are you with me brothers this man doesn't take single narration in عقيدة and he's been put forward and he's been told to debate and he's going out and he's debating and guess what as he's debating or as he's talking he comes up with this غريب and so the people are looking at him as he's the one who's debating the كافر and the Muslims so they're looking at the Muslims as when they're relating to are you with me and so it's what brings about what do you call it it brings about that concept now creeps into the people are you with me brothers it's very dangerous with Alika many debaters that we see today I'm just على سميلة تمثيل just for you guys it won't be in the recording إن شاء الله تعالى is what's his name the debater شبير علي you know right he's got عقيدة issues very very dangerous very serious but he's a good debate with Christians amazing profound and like wow eloquent points but he doesn't take all the textual evidence does he yeah he does not take all the textual evidence so for him he's going to debate from a whole different perspective when he's debating are you there and within a debate it will dismiss points نصوص واحيين كتابة سنة are you with me so the debate like I self don't want against it are you there the self wow are you against it are you going to believe in some of the evidences are you going to reject the the other so they will say for example and I've seen people do that like for example one individual told me that he doesn't he was debating so he asked the so he asked the can you bring the evidences for the from the Quran سنة look how the debating an ignorance of himself has actually brought him to this problem so he goes I don't affirm when it comes to usul of the religion and the only thing I consider from the usul is basically what was found in the Quran because when I'm debating Allah if I say that Jal exists and he says to me where is it in the Quran let's say it's in the Sunnah he's going to say to him when the Imam is in my Sunnah as well let's take it look what happened to him are you with me so he's belittling his Sunnah because he's scared and worried that he's going to say I'm going to take my Kitab there is if Imam is here for me are you with me brothers but on the grounds that usul is not a story which are correct authentic yours does so you're going to dismiss your one because you're worried about that you see what happens here so this is very common in people who are not grounded who don't have Islamic knowledge and who want to believe in some of the textual evidences they actually give up because they know that in the debate this is going to happen so they don't want to get caught so they actually dismiss evidences are you with me number 6 is the set of the prohibited refuting innovation with innovation which is also what we just clearly mentioned before you're basically is called you're basically refuting innovation with another innovation so you're initiating something like something what I think it was Imam Ahmad عبد الرحمن he was told him and he said بالكتابه السنة he said and so he said that what he has done is I could be right if you wish to no problem you can even be my brother if you want to does that make sense if you refute بالتن with another بالتن I'm against a بالتن not who said it are you with me just because you said بالتن this is good and he says بالتن because I don't like him does that make sense بالتن is بالتن whoever says it doesn't matter so you're not allowed to refute بالتن with بالتن and this is a problem comes another problem comes which is people will see a person who they're with refuting a misguided person refuting what a misguided person and so they will be silent about him pay attention it's problematic now so you're with me I go and I debate with somebody they bring an innovation I initiate I create an innovation to respond to this to get rid of his innovation my group know that what I've just done is innovation they're going to be silent about it and they're not going to respond to me about it they're not going to correct me on that are you with me so what I don't know the problem is that I did remove his innovation but I brought another innovation in place so have I brought any good I've not brought any good so that you as an individual should be upset why we came here is to get rid of an innovation we came here to get rid of a misguidance and you've just created and initiated another one does that make sense so we've not left with victory did we we ain't left with that that's important so those are the points brothers and many more but those are the most prominent things why the set of prohibited from debating and debating it not being something that they want to get in their books now they spoke against it the characteristics of the one who's debating one of the characteristics that a person was debating the people of misguidance needs to come with the first characteristics is that each and every one of them no sorry these are the characteristics sorry because we previously mentioned the characteristics of their distinct characteristics in now we're going to speak about the innovators and the people of misguidance are you with me brothers how they are when it comes to debating so you're going to see a lot of these characteristics prominent today in many people the first one is each of those so each of those deviated people whether it's disbelievers or not they're they're towards their what to their group and their people they're very fanatic towards them you find a very prominent in them number 2 is that through their debates it gives birth to disunity and even more debates like for example if you look at the deviated groups they break up into even more even more they become yesterday they were together now so they're debating people of misguidance it breaks them up even more does that make sense it does because they're only on one path which is they don't differ they agree they oppose one another these ones yesterday they were together today they do you and they do of each other all because of what all because of debates and discussions that will bring you this about so this is what you find with them number 3 when you look at هلوبات and their debates and their discussions you find their speech is what they speak too much but really what they just said was it couldn't be said in 3 words or 4 words and they'll speak for half an hour it's really not it has a lot of substance in it so a lot of words fancy words you know he's speaking for 45 minutes I can summarize that whole into 3 to 4 minutes of what he just said that's what he said nothing other than that which he said that's how they are you'll find that very prominent and now it's even more because it's politics like that that's the whole point of politics they give you a 45 minutes slot you talk and you have to relieve that pulpit and you have to not hurt anybody is that possible but they'll do that in a sense where their speech is so ambiguous and it's too much and they'll say something and they'll nullify it again and they'll go back on it again and they'll say it and you don't know who are you with are you for or against what are you on are you with me brothers that's why the people say leave stop this political speech stop being a politician the reason is because they can't get a point across easily they won't they'll talk for an hour or so and is he going to do it for us or is he not who is the initial question in the beginning okay the fourth is they they enter into the evidence but they place introductions for it those introductions that they place for the evidences okay it does not bring the results which they are looking for and all of this Insha'Allah will take many examples also the fifth one which is it's very powerful it's very common it's very common they take exceptions and they want to make the exception generally so every قاعدة and every principle you're always going to find what you're going to find exceptions that's an exception of the principle that does not remove the the قاعدة which is the principle in this issue are you with me for example he prohibited the eating of dead animals but there is a necessity of course necessity can't override the ruling of prohibition that's an exception nobody can come to me if I say you now can't come to me what about necessity what a necessity is an exception an exception cannot overrun that's an excluded narrow down specific situation the general ruling that we hold by is that that it's what now what they would do is they will say pay attention dead animals are sorry حلال يسأل أخي التقل so he's made it now into a what حكم عام you with me or what he will do is he will take an opinion which is strange opinion and he will make that strange opinion the حكم which is عام you with me that's common in their debates and their arguments with you so you need to know and say this is this is an exception why are you trying to make it a general ruling the sixth one is the second one is they have foundations that are battle their foundation is so weak and so ridiculous which with because of that they are not able to debate they really can't they can't they can't if they can't actually studies that he's actually able to go into the roots of their problem and destroy them that's the truth مبتدع don't have the ability to debate with the مشركين give you an example a Jew man was called to come to Islam and مبتدع wanted to call a Jew into Islam so the Yahudi man said الله لم يريد إسلامي الله doesn't want me to become a Muslim in other words if he did he wouldn't have brought me to Islam so he doesn't want me to become a Muslim he said so he said to him no Allah wants you to come to Islam but it's a shaitan doesn't want you to come to Islam it's a shaitan that doesn't want you for you to surrender and then this is the قاعدة and he responded and he said this is a shaitan stronger than Allah this is a shaitan this is a shaitan this is a shaitan this is a shaitan this is a shaitan this is a shaitan this is a shaitan stronger than God he went through and Allah didn't so this is just an example of أصحاب الفرق الباطلة للمشركين it's just a prime example of مشرك and مبتدع tried to debate a mushرك because Al-Sula would have said that Allah is irade two types irade كونية and irade شرعية universally he did it on YouTube and Allah wants you to come into it they don't believe that that's not their belief they can't say that because if they do then they will leave the whole belief of their قادري concept and come into it so the part that they took allows the mushرك to be there because their foundation is very bad and it's none of it are you with me brothers so with those reasons أهل البدع holding on to now إن شاء الله يتعالى we're going to speak about the books that are written and the authorships that have come in place regarding regarding مقلفات في علم الجدل the books that have been written in علم الجدل many books have been written here whether it be fiqh whether it be أصول الفق whether it be in تفسين of the Quran whether they even be in books of عقائد you find debates and everything is in there but the early discovered the early documented books in جدل debates was the جدل الفق على طريقة الفقهاء المتقدمين the early documented books were the books that were written are called into the فقهة the jurists the early generation of فقهة the books that they wrote in fiqh they authored fiqh in a way of debate an argument discussions, dialogue for example if you look at Imam Al-Shafi'u in his Kitab al-Risala sorry his Umm Imam Al-Shafi'u if you look at his Kitab al-Umm with the the story of Rami'a Rami'a Rami'a he's a student Imam Al-Shafi'u رحمه الله if you look at it you find very strong tough powerful dialogue taking place between Muhammad Ibn Idlisa Al-Shafi'u and Muhammad Ibn Hassan Al-Shaydani so when you read Kitab al-Umm by Imam Al-Shafi'u the way they're going at each other and the way it's taking place it's profound, it's amazing you become very grounded in fiqh you won't just learn what's your evidences but you will learn how to argue for your evidences and how to counter-react and respond to the evidences that the opponent has brought forward if you read the books written by Ibn al-Mudir رحمه الله again Ibn al-Mudir's Kitab is also جدل الفقي على طريقة الفقهاء المتقدمين Ibn al-Mudir رحمه الله his books are very powerful in that regard and you benefit from that also if you read the books of Ibn al-Hazzam رحمه الله and his Kitab al-Muhalla Kitab al-Muhalla is a powerful book in this way where Ibn al-Hazzam tackles and argues his points and debates with the people who are against him so Ibn al-Hazzam is very powerful in this regard very strong and very tough to prove his point that if you read his book seriously you would not believe that there's anything right out there in what he said the way he can argue his points the way he can argue his points they're very profound so these are the early works that are written in his regard rather the scholars they used to call their books Kitab al-Khilafiyat it's called Khilafiyat it's just recently that they started to call it فق المقارن in universities they call it now فق المقارن comparative Fiq فق المقارن is what comparative Fiq but they didn't know that as before before it wasn't called Fiq المقارن it was used to be called it was referred to as خلافيات خلافيات means differences disagreements that's what it's called and the شافعية were the early ones who authored it and I'm not saying that because I'm a شافعي myself but it is and the early one who wrote it his name is أبو حمد الطبري رحمه الله أبو حمد الطبري they claimed they wanted to write it but they discovered this 100 years after the شافعية they discovered this 100 years after the شافعية went into it one of the scholars that wrote it for them is the Kitab al-Tajirid written by أبو حسين القدوري رحمه الله تعالى he has worked in that بيها قصوة as Kitab al-Khilafiyat which I think now has been finished and he released I think a volume or two from it but now alhamdulillah they've published even more I don't know if they've finished all of it but I know they've published it again you read it he leaves you amazed with him and there's also the أحماف أبو زيد الدبوسي رحمه الله he's Kitab تأسيس النظر which when this book first came out the شافعية believed that ألب الجدل was for them this was their طريقة especially جدل الفقهي على طريقة المتقدمين so the شافعية believed that they were the ones that carried the banner of this and so what they did was they really wanted to respond to this book they really wanted to they wanted to respond to him and to give him an answer of what he wrote because he was right in it according to the حلفي and again if it is Kitab which is جدل based on the debate he's going to prove his arguments against them so he was refuting their points so it really hurt the شافعية this book stayed around for a very long time until الله سبحانه وتعالى he brought أبو مضفر السمعاني he used to be for 30 years he was a Hanafi and 20 years he became a شافعية for 30 years he was he was upon their مدهب and he knew them inside out so he came out and he wrote his book قواته على دلة and he became a book in the شافعية that they said if there could be a book to wade a book that could be wade a goat it would be this book for them it was it was a thorn in their neck it was a Kitab تأسيس النظر written by أبو زيد الدبوسي أبو مضفر came and he wrote that book and it's a book when you both read أبو زيد الدبوسي's Kitab تأسيس النظر you find that he brings so much textual evidences and دلة النقلية a lot authentic and he brings a lot of rationality and some of the benefit and أبو مضفر السمعاني it's Kitab قواته على دلة there is no Kitab like it it's not presidented especially his Kitab is far from علمه الكلاب and علمه الفلسفة is دليل and دلة in أصول الفقن قوات الفقية from the scholars you actually wrote in this field and brought our books is the Kitab written by أبو الحسن إبن علي إبن عمر إبن أحمد البغدادي والمالكي whose name is known as إبن قصار رحمه الله he wrote a book called أبو صحاق الشيرازي he stood over it and he saw this book and a method in the way it was written and he was قب سمعت بايت أبو صحاق الشيرازي دي قوطرنا اللمع أن الكتاب that Imam Muslim explains which is المجموع is الشرحة بالمهدب بايت أبو صحاق الشيرازي always explaining أبو صحاق الشيرازي أصحابون الشافعية أبو صحاق الشيرازي أصحاق الشافعية this book written by إبن قصار لم يؤلفوا مثله they never authored anything like it and then Tanjuddin al-Subki came and he this is to show you the تعصم of the madhab when Tanjuddin al-Subki came and he saw that أبو صحاق الشيرازي had said that especially Ahnaf and even the Malikiyah what happened was أبو صحاق الشيرازي when he said that Tanjuddin al-Subki came and he blasted Abou صحاق الشيرازي even though Abou صحاق الشيرازي is from the same madhab and he said what is he talking about yeah أبو صحاق الشيرازي nothing and so he belittled that because this is a group this is Taasub that was the first one which is called this is called that one was called في طريقة الفقهاء المتقدمين there's another type of جدل which we find which is جدل الأصوليين which are very amazing it's good to read خاصة when it comes to Babu Qiyas the chapter of Qiyas and the analogy when you look at that chapter that's when it comes out when they're talking about the علّة and the reasonings so debates and arguments نعم العمام الغزالي ورحمه الله in his مصطصفة before back in the days أصول الفق علّم الجدل used to be emerged together because that's how it started off until أحمد الغزالي came when أحمد الغزالي came he got rid of علّم الجدل from within أصول الفق they all used to bring me in there أحمد الغزالي came and he wrote his كتاب المصطصفة مصطصفة is the كتاب ابن قدامه summerized and took out also something which is روضة النظر وجنة المناظر ابن قدامه كتاب روضة النظر وجنة المناظر is a summary and work taken from مصطصفة أحمد الغزالي he took out some things and he also got rid of what he's not in agreement with مصطصفة أحمد was the first one who got علّم الجدل from babel qias and took it out and he left it for أحمد الغزالي he left it for his كتاب المنتقل في الجدلي he left it for that book also from the scholars that wrote in this field of علّم الجدل جدل الأصولي is كتاب الكافية في الجدلي لأن بمعاري الجوهنة بحمد الله لأن الجدل الأصولي أصول الفق إنه جدلي معنا also بسحاق الشي رازي كتاب المعونة في الجدلي بسحاق الشي رازي والشافعي يوصو هذا ملخص of في الجدلي I forgot to mention that إن جدل فقهاء على طريقة المتقدمين ابن عقيل الحمري يكون الجدل على طريقة فقهاء which is published مطبوع إنه متداول he has it he is the author of the كتاب الواضح إنه مقدمة he really talks about جدل الأصولي and advises the students of knowledge if you can go to that كتاب الواضح which he wrote he profoundly speaks about it from the books that are written in this field as well is أبهري الكتاب القواتح الجدلية المقترح بأي بروي الطوفي الكتاب الجدل وفي فن الجدل إضاح لقواني اللي نصطلاح ريت باي أبو محمد من الجوزي which is the son of Imlujouzi and many other scholars have written it books have come out regarding it so the طالب علم the student of knowledge is to give some form of attention to it read those works and those authorships that have been put together إن شاء الله تعالى when I have a 45 minute break إن شاء الله تعالى we'll come back we'll speak about for another 45 minutes إن شاء الله تعالى the most common terms that are used in أل مل جدل just defining each term that they use and what they mean by it and we will conclude there and leave it for إن شاء الله تعالى the book we'll leave it for إن شاء الله Saturday so now إن شاء الله you'll try to all be back by 11 o'clock إن شاء الله تعالى if you can be back by 11