When Politics Enters the Masjid

0:00this audio is brought to you by Muslim Central. We're going to finish off with the issue of sectarianism. When two entities are at war and the one is Sunni, the other is Shia scholars on both sides exacerbate the tensions. Sunni and Shia, they've been around for 1,350 years. You think you're going to solve it in Dallas, Texas? Any group that thinks it is permissible to beat or kill other people who disagree with them? We cannot tolerate them. Having the different opinion doesn't make you a gaffer. Politics plays a role in much of sectarianism. Nazam al-Mulk commissioned Ghazali to write a refutation of the Isna'ilis. Eman, spirituality will not be fortified by destroying the faith of other people. Bismillah al-Hammal allahu sallam wa sallam wa ala Rasulillah wa ala Alihi wa sallam bihi wa man wa l-ahamabadi. So inshaAllah, we're going to finish off with the issue of sectarianism. On a personal notice is one of the areas I personally love. We can speak very long about sectarianism but obviously time is limited and so we need to move on

1:03to our next session. And there's also going to be inshaAllah an exciting announcement at the end of our class. So we were talking about some practical words of advice about how to deal with the variety within the Ummah. And I'm going to continue from where I left off by teaching you some maximums and rules because my goal is to teach you knowledge that will benefit you for the rest of your life. I don't want to go over different groups, different theologies at this stage. It's not what we're here for. I want to teach you maximums and principles that every time a disagreement comes. Shallah, you've taken notes yesterday, last week, taken notes today or at least watch it and take notes from there so that no matter what situation arises, you will have a template to deal with the diversity of thought. So continuing from last week, I think it did four or five issues last week. So today inshaAllah, I want to continue from where we left off and I'm going to mention the next rule and that is know that sectarianism almost always has political or institutional

2:12fermentation behind it. Understand that you are generally speaking, being utilized in a battle far beyond you and the guy you're talking to about the various groups out there. What do I mean by this? There's two types of people who ferment hatred. Number one, political entities. And number two innocent, perhaps gullible people who get caught up in those political wars and battles. Generally speaking, intramuslim fights have people and I'm not being conspiratorial, I'm just being historical here. That want to exacerbate that fight not because of theology but because of politics. History shows us the most obvious example. Sunnisya, polemics, flares up when the Sunni world and the Shia world are having a political spat. This has always happened throughout all of

3:16history. That doesn't make Sunnisya or Shia's right or wrong. I'm just telling you when two entities are at war and the one is Sunni, the other is Shia. Surprise, surprise. Scholars on both sides exacerbate the tensions. Just I'm asking you to be aware of it. That said, does it mean it's right or wrong? Does it mean that the one side becomes innocent or not? I'm simply saying that history has shown us. For example, one of the most bitter situations to arise between Sunnisya and Shiaism took place when the Sephavid Empire and the Ottoman Empire were having a full out war with one another. This is 500 years ago. In fact, many historians say that the current Sunnisya hatred taking place has its roots in the Ottoman Sephavid battle of 500 years ago because that wasn't just one battle. It was a battle of many decades, multiple dynasties. It was like a four or five decade battle. Multiple generations were at it at each other's strokes and it was

4:18not coincidentally at that time frame. That many Sunnis scholars are the Ottoman lands and many Shia scholars in the Sephavid lands. They wrote tracks, treatises, books, refutations. That basically made Tukfidab each other. Now, question to you. Do you think politics played no role? Coincidentally, it just so happened that the Sunnis of the Ottoman lands discovered there's something called 12 or Shiaism. I'm not accusing them of being evil. I'm not accusing them of being paid ages. I'm simply saying, as I have kept on telling you, humans are products of their time in place, right? Humans cannot get out of the time. Just like right now, we're looking at xenophobia. We're looking at Islamophobia. Right now, all of us are concerned about gender issues. Our great grandmothers couldn't care less about gender issues because it wasn't on their social paradigm to discuss. We're born in a time in place where certain issues take center stage and that impacts how we look at the world. Okay, all I'm saying, sectarianism is no different. It's no different at all.

5:20And generally speaking, when two entities of different sects, different groups have problems of a political nature, surprise, surprise, their scholars exacerbate their tensions. Innocent people, you and me get swept up because we look up to those scholars. Right? And I'm not saying those scholars are evil. I'm not saying all of them are purchased and bought for it or no. I'm not saying that. I'm saying there's a political element. That's all. Right? So be aware of this. And we can go more and more. I mean, the very first time where the Isma'ili's became a big deal was when Nizam al-Mulk basically, you know, the Isma'ili's were becoming political agitators. They were becoming a fifth column. They were sending out assassins. The famous story of the Hashashiyu and the assassins. You can look it up. And so Nizam al-Mulk basically commissioned Razali to write a refutation of the Isma'ili's. This was the first time that official Takfir was made. Again,

6:20I'm not agreeing or disagreeing. I'm being historical. I'm just being historical here. Don't read in as many of my critics do. I'm teaching you facts. These are indubitable facts. That when the Isma'ili's became a political threat and they did become a political threat, they became a fifth column. They wanted to assassinate the Khalifa and they wanted to have their own mini dynasty and empire. Right? The Nizadids had their own empire and the Karamita also before them. That was when Nizam al-Mulk literally asked Imam al-Kazali, hey, I need your help. Can you explain who these people are and write a refutation of them? And I'm not doubting Razali at all. Razali researched them and Razali wrote the refutation of the Barthani Firka. If one of your famous books you can read it. It's translated into English. Refutation of the Barthonites. Right? Who are the Barthonites? What we now call the predecessors of the Agachani's or the Bohra, they're the Barthonites. And he made clear the Kutakfeer of them. I'm not doubting he was sincere. Not at all. Don't misquote me.

7:21But politics played a role. And you can't help but be a part of the zeitgeist that you're living in. The time of face you're living in. My PhD dissertation, you can read it. A PDF is available online and I've given library chats about this. The Sufi Salafi Divide. It goes back to the Ashadi Humbali Divide of the fourth century in Baghdad when the Saljuks who were Ashadi entered Baghdad that was Humbali and there was a clash between the Khilafa that was Humbali and the Saljuks viziers that were Ashadi. And that clash was manifested in a Ashadi Atheri fight which became the Sunni Salafi Divide to this day. When did it begin? Politics. When the Saljuks empire was a threat to the Baghdadian institution and there was sectarian divides, sectarianism was fermented. It became bigger than it was before and it never died after that. So what is my point in telling you this? Don't be naive and one-dimensional. Don't be simplistic

8:27when somebody comes and says, those guys, those guys, those guys, that person might be sincere. Nine times out of ten there are people above him. Nine times out of ten. This is not conspiratorial. There are people that have, I'm not even saying wrong, Nia, vested interests. Yes, vested interest in increasing the tension. That's all I'm asking you to do. So be aware that politics plays a role in much of sectarianism and it's not even just politics to be even more sad here. It's also about domain. It's also about power. It's also about wealth. It's also about control of the masses. Right? You've got two Madras says, one block from each other and there are different Filqas, two messengers, one block from each other and there are different Filqas. Listen guys, messengers are also businesses. Messengers need people to come. Messengers need donations. So in order to get donations they have to diss the competitors. You can't even think about your

9:30own Nia when you are a cleric on that pulpit and the other group is different than you. Perhaps even you don't even know you're hidden Nia when you make them a bigger deal than they really are. Because they're encroaching on your territory. They might potentially take your people away from you. Right? The the neighborhood is divided and instead of coming to your Halaqa, they're going to the other Halaqa. You don't even perhaps understand your own Nia where if you weren't in that neighborhood, it wouldn't be that big of a deal. But now it becomes even bigger. Must you politics plays a role here? Right? So all I'm saying be a little bit more deeper and don't be surface level. That is the next point. I don't even know what point we're on. So you get, you know, just so you can write it down here. Shall I love Dada? Okay. Moving on, point number two for today. Let's just do today's number. Point number two for today. Now I need you to pay attention. This is a little bit complicated. I wish I had a diagram. This requires a diagram, but it's it's quite simple conceptually speaking. Anytime you disagree with somebody, I repeat anytime you disagree with somebody on any matter.

10:36I need you to pay attention. You automatically categorize that disagreement in a particular spectrum. A place on a box. The box is on a spectrum. Listen to me now. Some differences, you respect them. You will somebody has an opinion that is maybe quote-unconstricted and yours, you're like, oh, Masha Allah. Okay. You respect that difference of opinion. That's one box. Another difference, move on one level left to that box. You neutral. You don't care. Okay. Food differences. You like hamburgers. They like Bariani. I mean, okay, no big deal. It's a difference of opinion. Sometimes even in Fikhe theological issues, no big deal. Okay, this and that. Another difference. You move a little bit more. You tolerate. You don't like it, but it's no big deal. Okay. That's another difference of opinion. You don't necessarily like it, but okay, I'll bear with it. We're friends and it's not a big deal to me. Hala, that's your way, my way. Okay. Yet another will be you strongly disagree, but you can still remain friends, but they're

11:41not going to be close friends because that disagreement means you're not going to be close to me. But once in a while we'll see each other, you know, we're two degrees of separation. You get my point here, right? Are you guys following me? Yet another would be that that disagreement is so fundamental that because of it, I really cannot maintain a friendship with you, but if I see you at a gathering, I won't walk away from you. Okay. You get my point here. We're going from one side. Yet another will be so antagonistic that you cannot be in the same room as them. How can you invite this person? And by the way, this spectrum is not just religious. It's political as well, the cancel culture. I mean, we are, we have people that if you support a particular candidate or particular policy in our eyes, that's a cancel culture. You cannot be in the same room as that person. How could you invite this person to this party? How could you invite him to this? How could you, how dare you invite somebody who endorses that idea? Right? Or you're like, oh my god, if I did him, okay, well, I'll just avoid him. You put somebody because of an opinion in a

12:45particular box, right? Are you guys following me? Are we exactly right? You have the spectrum of actual respect. You will respect an opinion different than your own. Or most of our differences, no big deal. Okay. It's your why you're away. My way, no big deal. Neutral or slight disagreement, we can still be good friends or strong disagreement. We can be friendly or disagreement to the level of acquaintances. You get my point here, right? Now, here's, here's the point. Every single human being without exception has this box in their minds as they interact with people. You do an I do. Very few people analyze those boxes. Very few people think about them. Very few people reason in their own minds why somebody would be put in category A versus category B versus category C and so on and so forth. I am asking you, if you want to really be intellectuals,

13:45you have to do that. Because when you do that, guess what you will discover. What do you think you're going to discover? We actually do this exercise. Loudly. Be brave. Okay. You're going to discover your biases. What else will you discover? So I would extrapolate from that. You will discover, you didn't say the word, but I think you're hinting at this. There are inconsistencies in your own dealings with people. And you might overlook certain things from certain people that you won't overlook the same thing in other people. You will discover that you are not being faithful to your own epistemology. You will discover that at times you don't even have a reason for why you place somebody in one box. And when you try to reason, you will bankrupt yourself because you won't have one. It's going to be emotion rather than intellect. As I said, listen to me carefully,

14:49all of us operate with these boxes in our minds. We don't even know we have them, but now that I've taught them to you, you know you have them, right? All of us operate with these spectrums of how we deal with people. Hardly anybody thinks about why. Hardly anybody reasons, and as I said, it's not just theological, politics, social, gender views, right? Guys, there are people that have views on gender and they say them out loud or whatever. And you're so irritated and frustrated, you don't have anything to do with them. That's like cancel. Okay? You just, this is not somebody I want to deal with. It's not a deal with religion. It's his or her views on whatever it might be. We have this on every single issue. Okay? For some people, what is it? Veganism. Okay? There are people that are, I mean, if you ask me when you remove religion, you have to create religion. When you remove God, you have to make other things God, right? So when there is no religion, things that might be secondary, tertiary, in most people's lives become primary. And there are religious vegans. I cannot

15:55attend a gathering where meat is being eaten. You all know people like this. Because in their eyes, they're going to put that in the box of non-negotiables. Cancel culture here, right? My point is we all have these boxes for all differences of opinion. Social, political, anthropological, religious, theological. We all have them. My ask of you, if you want to be a true intellectual, you have to analyze for politics, for social issues and cultural issues, for whatever issues. And then for our class, for religious issues. Why a person goes in each box and you better have good reasons and you better be consistent. It's not my job right now to teach you because I don't want to indoctrinate you. But it is my job to cause you to think. That's my main purpose here, to force you to be uncomfortable and think. And so I am teaching you and forcing you to think. Why do

16:58you place somebody in? Oh, I respect that opinion, even if I don't follow it. Wow, you're actually better than me because you have that opinion. And why do you say, this is neutral, no big deal, okay? And why do you say, well, we'll agree to disagree. We can still be good friends and so on and so forth. That's the first thing I'm asking you. Think about those boxes. And the second thing I am telling you for me, I'm not asking you, I'm just telling you who I am. Me personally, I try to maximize as much as I can the neutral box or agree to disagree with a civil matter box. This is my philosophy. Most people don't have it. Most people want to put as many theological issues in the awkward or the cancel culture box, right? And me personally, I used to be like that and I've outgrown that phase. I like to try my best to accommodate as vast of a spectrum as possible. But yes, there are things that because you hold them, you can probably not be a close friend

17:59because that's simply theologically too beyond. But I can treat you in a civil manner. I don't have to spit in your face. I don't have to punch you. I don't have to slap you, okay? We can, we can just, if we see each other, say, how am I going to do it? But because you hold this belief, it's a little bit, I can't be close. That's fine. I get that. But my philosophy, I try to minimize that box as small as I can. I don't want to make it big. And the cancel culture, that is the small as possible. And we're going to get there. What are the red lines? That's another lecture we'll have to give because there are red lines, right? And for me, I mean, simplistically, to deny that which is known from the religion self-evidently, i.e. Allah is one and Allah is beyond our comprehension. And Allah did not come down to earth in the figure of a man. There are groups, I believe this. And the Prophet's system is the final prophet and there is heaven and hell. I mean, if anybody denies these basics as claiming to be Muslim, you got to have some lines to know. That's just not

19:00Islam. And I can be nice to you, but no, you're not going to come and give election my mosque. Where I cannot respect you, I can be nice as a human being. But this is heresy to claim that God came with the form of a man, to claim that jubidil visited a human being and gave him wahi after the Prophet's system. There are red lines. But other things will have to agree to disagree and just, okay, put them in the box as much as you can. And for me, as I said to you, main stream orthodoxy is in the neutral category for me. Sufi, Salafis, Barelvis, Ahli Hadith, Teobandis, Jamatis, Iquani's. I don't bet an eyelid at all. It doesn't bother me at all. Well, not at all. To me, it is irrelevant. You're a good person. As I said, how you treat your mother is infinitely more important and how you make that wheel of a certain theoretical characteristic of Ahli that has no implication in her daily life. This is me. I'm not asking that of you. I've reached this of my own research because I wasn't like this 20 years ago. But it's me. It doesn't matter to me because in the end of the day, this has no tangible benefit. Any of you have a belief that I really

20:05don't like. I don't like those people who disrespect the Sahaba. That is not a belief that I can admire. But I can treat this person nicely. Say salam to them, interact with them. Without a doubt, it's difficult to have such a person to be a close confidant because their interpretation of Islam is so radically different that there's just going to be a mismatch. But I can still treat them civilly and pray behind them, pray behind them and take a pray behind me who can interact with them. Even if I disagree strongly, it doesn't mean I have to be rude, crude, harsh, nasty or mean. So I will tolerate and not respect because that is not something I respect. But when you go even beyond this, for me, another red line is violence. Any group that is forcing you to believe the way that it is any group that thinks it is permissible to beat or kill other people who disagree with them, we cannot tolerate them. Likewise, any group that is intellectually violent, I.e. everybody is a

21:07kafir other than us or everybody's a mupti other than us. Okay, we're not going to be physically violent against them, but we have the right to be intellectually harsh against them as well. They opened the door to intellectual harshness. We have to respond with a firm intellectual rebuttal that is not tolerated. You're destroying the umma, you're a cancer. You are a cancer that is dividing the umma and making petty issues, the end all and be all and we will not allow this without a firm response. Other than this, me personally, I try my best to tolerate or agree to disagree or even disagree with civility. You don't have to be crude and nasty to people that are living their lives without harming us. So this point here, the second point for today, understand the spectrum of interacting with difference of opinion and analyze that spectrum and ask yourself why you are placing some opinions in some boxes and others in other boxes.

22:10And then it's up to you which box do you want to be the default for me? The default is tolerance. The default is live and let live to the best of my ability. Make this box if you ask me the largest box possible. Okay, next point here. Point number three for today. The goal if you cannot solve the difference of opinion is to manage and contain it. You see, you will not be able to convert everybody to your opinion. Understand that. The other groups are here to stay. They've been around for 500 years, a thousand years, a thousand, 300 years. Sunni and Shia, they've been around for 1,350 years. You think you're going to solve it in Dallas, Texas in the year coming year that we're in? You think you will snap your fingers, raise your voice and shout and that's it. The problem will be gone. No. So deal with it. The goal then is not to eliminate the other group. It is to contain

23:12the disagreement in a civil manner. The goal should be what do we do now that we disagree? Imagine a cousin you don't really like. He's still your cousin or she's still your cousin. You're going to meet them at family gatherings. They're going to come at Shadi's and you know, genesis are going to come. You don't want to cause a scene. There's no point causing a scene. Deal with it. Contain. Manage the difference of opinion. Be mature about this. The Muslim groups are all one large family. Again, we're not talking about those that believe in other God that God came the form of a man in Atlanta, Georgia or that, you know, there is no heaven and hell like the Duru's belief. We're not talking about those groups. The bulk of the ummah or our family, we talked about that multiple times. Having a different opinion doesn't make you a kafir. So they're family deal with it. Even if you don't like them. Make the goal after, as I said, after a person comes, they say this, they say this, they say this. After all this team has been let out. Just listen to

24:12them. After all the anger has come. Say, Jay, now what do you want me to do? Yeah, they do. What do we do now? What is the next step after you have gotten all the, now what do we do? Do they know we're present? Five percent of the ummah, one percent of the ummah, ten percent of the ummah. Do they not represent a large group? Okay, we've just seen what happened to the Board of Education and how they've, you know, taken xenophobic, Islamophobic curriculums. Should we not work with them so that we have a better curriculum? So manage the difference of opinion. Learn to disagree so that you do something, contain the disagreement, okay? The next point, fourth point here, the fourth point here is judge a group, not by its fringe or unknown or private opinions, but rather by what they preach and teach. This is one of the fundamental problems that happens in sectarian disputes. As soon as you will go to Shia Books and find one

25:15snippet here, another snippet here, another snippet here. A Shia will go and find things in this book, that book, and construct a caricature of the other that the other will not even recognize. Don't interview a Sunni about Shia beliefs. Would you interview a far-right person about Islam? Even an academic who might factually say snippets of correct truth. The Quran says chapter 9, verse 4, slay the inferno wherever you find them. And the process of this and the Hadith says this and Bukhari says this and everything he says is factually correct. Would you like that? You would not like that for your own faith. Then why do you allow your own cleric to do it to another Muslim's interpretation of Islam? If you're not going to allow a kafir to do it to Islam, why do you allow, just because he's your cleric, he gets away with it? He might not even be lying, Pause your foot,

26:16note, most of the time even they are misinformed. And they will say things are simply factually incorrect, because that's what they have been taught. They have never interacted academically with the other. Trust me on this. The vast majority of scholars do not interact with scholars of other interpretations in an academic manner. They don't. Max still just says Salaman get along if even that, to actually sit and hear with humility and to learn it goes against everything you've been taught. It doesn't work that way. Rare is it to find a person that has genuinely humbly studied or at least even paid attention to multiple strands of scholarship. It doesn't work that way. That's not how scholars are formed in our tradition. I'm just telling you how it is. So if that is the case, then if there is a need for you to find out, if there's any, because you don't have, your life is limited, you can only spend so much time on sectarianism. So if there's a need, you have a close friend that has another group or fit or whatever, then get information from the people that understand

27:21and know and believe in that strand. So that you get it as the saying goes straight from the horse's mouth. Because what happens, like I said, when you go to the other, the other, if they are correct, which most of the time they're not, will take snippets and construct a caricature that might be correct in its Jus'iyyat, in its specific issues, but it's put together in an abnormal manner. In a manner that is almost sacrilegious, unrecognizable. And I've do this in my class all the time, my advanced classes. This is not for the graduate level classes that I teach. Graduate level, where the students are prepared. They have a lot of reading and I coach them. I bring in for the classes that I teach in this issue. I bring in experts who believe in their particular strands of Islam to interact with the graduate level for an hour. Say here, talk to them all you want. And what that does is that it shows that, okay, they're not coming out of thin air. I see where they're

28:26coming from, even if I disagree. And it removes simplistic caricatures and crude stereotypes. So the fourth point goes straight to the horse's mouth if you need to. You don't have to, because meaning you don't have to do your research for every single philharic as your time is limited. But if you do need to form an opinion, do not form an opinion for somebody who's already biased. Form an opinion from somebody who is an authority. And take from them so that at least you will understand why they say what they say. Because sometimes you will find a fringe opinion that is not held by any mainstream scholar. But it's held by some third tier local Molana or something. And the other guy say, oh, look, this is what they say. And they caricature or stereotype an entire group in this regard. And every group does it to its opponents. Sunnis do it to Shi'a, Salafi's do it to Sufi's, Sufi's do it to Wahhabis. Everybody does it to everybody. You will find one third rate cleric, not to top notch person. He has a bizarre lecture.

29:32And that lecture will or that incident or that will be made mainstream. Look, that's what that group does. Don't fall for that. You don't like it when the far right does it to us. When they take a preacher out of context or they take a preacher within context, but he's not mainstream. And they do this all the time. And they take some radical guy from some other place, you know, some European country. And they take some clip, oh, this is what they're saying. And you're like, no, I've never heard this in my whole life. So if you're not going to allow the far right to do it, don't allow your group to do it to another group and understand sometimes people do this without any evil intent. But they're still wrong. You don't have to have evil intent to spread misinformation, to shock you guys. Many in the far right are good people in their lives. They genuinely believe us Muslims are terrorists and evil. And if you were to meet them one-on-one, you would actually find them to be very pleasant in their personal lives and their one-on-one families that they've been brainwashed because they've never met a Muslim. If you can understand this about our society,

30:36the same thing applies to Yor Ferra and my ferraka as well. So this rule I put it as isolate, isolated opinions and keep history as history, meaning there are opinions that are fringe and isolated, keep them isolated. Don't make them mainstream. And things might have happened in the past. Don't resurrect them for our time. Oh, the suffocates did this, the automatists did that. Okay, maybe they did. What has the God to do with me and you right now? So that's the fourth point here. The fifth point that I want to mention here and that is that Iman, faith, spirituality will not be fortified by destroying the faith of other people. It will be built by fortifying your own spirituality. When you bash other people, there is a temporary, temporary ecstasy that you get. Some weird dopamine comes out.

31:36That's why we love to do it. That's why we love to gossip. That's why we love to back bite. Every group likes to have another group that they can bash, just just human nature. It's not good. It is what it is. But destroying other people's civilizations, cultures, religions might make you feel good. It's not going to build your own Iman. It's not. And that is why, listen to me carefully, those who immerse themselves in sectarianism inevitably burn out in religiosity. You see this yourself. Those who immerse themselves in constantly bashing other people, but they're not concentrating on building their own Iman. They fizzle out in their own religiosity. They stop being religious or they start cannibalizing on their own movement because once they've eaten everybody else, nothing is left other than their own. So don't follow that trend. And understand,

32:37building your own spirituality does not require you to tear down the spirituality of other people. So, if you are passionate about an idea, for example, where respect the Sahaba of a wakir is a great guy, okay, yes, I agree. There's two ways to go about this. Number one, you bash the other group. Those guys say, those guys say. And after all this team has been let out and everybody's angry, everybody goes home and nothing has been accomplished. Or you can flip the script, give an entire lecture, the blessings of a wakir asundiak. The sacrifice of a wakir in the Hijrah, when a wakir did throughout the Syrah and you don't bash anybody, when you preach positive, what happens? Iman is built. Spirituality, source, love increases. And automatically, without any evil hatred, why would people not like a wakir asundiak, you've done the job. You've done the job. And you've done it in a whole some manner.

33:43And you've done it in a pure methodology. And you've done it accomplishing building Iman. You got the goal. Now when somebody comes and says something nasty about a wakir asundiak, the average was going to say, whoa, why would you do that, man? It doesn't make any sense. And Allah, you've done it. But if you started the opposite and all you did was bash, bash, bash. Yes, the person will also bash, but you haven't built anything and you haven't made them love the Sahaba, love a wakir asundiak. So you see, rather than destroy other people's Iman's, I am telling you, the better thing to do, the Islamic thing to do, the Quranic thing to do primarily, because at times, refutations have to happen at the right audiences, the right context, the right language. But as a default, as a default, you build and you don't destroy others. So if you're passionate about an idea, go about it in a whole some manner. And that whole some manner is what? Spiritual building, fortifying your own, teaching in a positive manner rather than a negative.

34:48So that's what is the fifth rule. Okay, the sixth and final rule in inshallah. And then we have a very important announcement and we actually have some time for Q&A. The final rule for today, and again, I could go on and on. I used to, I still teach this class at an advanced level. Secure news and theology is one of my areas of expertise and I really enjoy teaching it, studying it, once upon a time I was spiritually invested in it. But now that investment has gone, but I still enjoy it immensely. I love reading and writing about this topic, the history of ideas. I'm writing two books currently, both of them are about intellectual history, Rasheed Al-Dawaz-1, and then the intellectual history of Islam. They both deal with these ideas like the concepts and you know, the intellectual debates that take place. So the last point that I'll say for today's class, and with this we come to a conclusion of sectarianism. Understand, cooperation in some areas is not an endorsement of all areas. I repeat, friendliness and cooperation in some areas

35:52is not an endorsement in all areas. Now here's the irony. We all know this in every single facet of our lives except sectarianism. That's how we live our lives. That is how we live our lives. We all know this. I don't need to teach you this, but when it comes to sectarianism, preachers tell you if you cooperate in an area, this means you endorse them in all areas. Nobody lives their life this way. In your workplace, have you vetted all the views of all of your colleagues? Do you agree with the person sitting next to in the cubicle in every issue that he or she has? Of course not, but you understand we're coming together for the corporation and then depending on how close you are, goes back to those boxes, the closer you are, the closer friends you're going to be. And the more radical their lifestyle, their alternative lifestyle is whatever the less friendship you're going to have outside of that, but you can still cooperate for the sake of the corporation, for the sake of your team, for the sake of your project. If we can do this for money and dollars,

36:57why can't we do this for the dean? We get along this way. That's how the world works. We all work for some greater good, even if we don't agree with one another. That's how any project is done. Yet for some weird reason, we don't seem to understand that this same reality needs to apply for the different understandings of Islam. Just because I disagree with you on one area, doesn't mean my cooperation in another area means the agreement doesn't exist, but this is the same sentiment that is used as the final card. The Trump card is the same goes. You guys don't know Bridger would not, but there's something called the Trump card, not Donald Trump, but something that it's meant to end all debate. They say those people say X, Y, and Z, how can you cooperate with them? Because if you cooperate, it means you endorse X, Y, and Z. And again, just smile at them, say, who said that cooperating with them means I endorse X, Y, and Z. We have to get along for this reason and we'll respectfully disagree on that other aspect. Simple as that. I call this, I have

38:02a Venn diagram, the circles of cooperation when I teach you to have a Venn diagram, circles of cooperation. There are circles that overlap with each other. The smallest circle, the smallest circle, religious teaching. Who do I invite to teach my children in the Sunday school? We have to agree on quite a lot. I'm not going to invite somebody that disagrees with my mainstream theology. Somebody says the Quran doesn't have to be understood literally, I'm sorry, you're not coming and teaching my kids. Somebody says, I don't believe in Qadar, you're not giving the Khudba in the masjid then because I have to monitor, there has to be some level of invite, right? Somebody rejects the Sahaba, you're not going to come to the masjid and give the Khudba, you have the, so the religious circle, teaching circle, that's the most narrow. For me personally, narrowness is mainstream sunnism, but for other people you have to follow my version of sunnism. I am banned in many masjids simply because I'm not on the strand of their sunnism, right? And we don't ban anybody in our masjid, but in most masjid, you know, they would not accept even

39:04Sunni clerics who are on a slightly different trajectory. That's the way they are. So be it, that's not me. I have my philosophy. Mainstream Ahl-e Sunnah, welcome to my masjid, epic is open to anybody that believes in the Quran wants to follow the Sunnah of the Prophet as some respects the Sahaba, then I'm not going to micromanage after that. To me that's religious you know orthodoxy in a general manner. I have my own agreements to agreements after that, but that reaches the bar of religious. But after this you have other boxes, let's just say social, social interaction. Okay, you can interact socially with people, you don't have to invite them to the Khudba, there can be your friends. Then there's going to be broader, broader. Broadest one is political cooperation. Political cooperation is the largest circle. To be in that portion of the circle doesn't mean you have to automatically come to the middle of the circle. You guys understand the Venn diagrams without me drawing it, right? So the largest circle is political cooperation. For me to cooperate with somebody who's not even a Muslim for Gaza, we all understand we do this

40:10all the time. Doesn't mean I endorse your politics, does it mean I endorse your alternative lifestyles? When the encampments happened across this country and I spoke at half a dozen of them, you know I told you this, I spoke at Harvard, MIT Yale, Northwestern, I spoke at a whole bunch of them. I'm telling you with my own two eyes, along with the Muslim's association, the Arab, the Palestinians, one of the main groups that helped worthy LGBT groups. This is just a fact. They stood up, they petitioned, they lobbied, they went against their own institutions. What are we going to do? When I speak in that audience, I am not talking about the issues of difference between us and them. I'm talking about Felslín and Gaza and a genocide. At that stage, I'm not giving them an interrogation inquisition. What is your views on morality? My presence there is not an endorsement of everybody

41:11on that camp and anybody who says so, honestly, is speaking from within his own figment of imagination. What do I remember this? Nobody in the right mind associates a person who's speaking at an encampment with every single person and their causes that encampment. The encampment is about Gaza. Everybody understands what has brought these diverse people together is Gaza. Okay, nobody associates all the groups to agree with everybody about everything except Gaza because that's what the banner is about. The only people who problematize it are the sectarian people who problematize it. You understand? There's a circularity here. Oh, but you're going there is going to endorse, oh no, you're the only one that's saying it endorses. You're the only one problematizing. The one that's saying it endorses is the one who's problematizing. The one who's problematizing is the one who's saying is endorsement. The only group that says this are the people who problematize. Ignore them. Marginalize them. There is minority voice. Understand, when we're living in a diverse

42:12society, we have to work with diverse groups of people and when we work with them, when the banner underneath, when the slogan, when the cause is legitimate, cooperation is legitimate. Allah tells us in the Quran what a Awanu ala l-Birri wattakwa cooperate in aspects of piety and good when the aspect is pious, when that material is good, we will cooperate with anybody. A kafir, a mulhed, a zindir, anybody who wants to come and help us for the Palestinian cause come. But he wants to give a khutbah, we're going to make it narrow. No, no, you cannot come if you don't believe in Allah, His Messenger, if you don't respect the Quran, His Surah, you see my point here, circles of cooperation. We do this in our entire lives for all aspects of our life. Only when it comes to the religion that we say, no, no, we cannot do this. So bottom line, and with this we conclude all of sectarianism. I want you all to first and foremost have a pure heart.

43:15Secondly, follow your gut instinct about sectarian issues. Does it make sense or not? Thirdly, ask Allah to help you and fourthly, trust wise senior scholarship. Don't follow young, overzealous, undereducated people in these very complex issues. Follow seasoned, respected, wise elders. I have said this to you in multiple issues. Youth have vitality, it is true. Youth have more energy, it is true. But youth don't have experience and wisdom. It's not your fault, you're only 20, 25 years old. How can you possibly have the wisdom of somebody who's lived three times more than you? Actually, technically they've lived five times more than you because you haven't really lived when you're 15 to 25 is 10 years, not 25 years. First 15 years of life you're not really living with wisdom. You've actually only been an adult 10 years when you're 25 less than 10 years. So somebody who's 70 years old has been an adult

44:19seven times more than you. Seven times more than your experience. How can you not understand this is a person that has gone through life more than I have? Let me listen to this person. Do not follow the youth and the overzealous online roles when it comes to these very sensitive issues. Go to people older than me, senior than me, and there are people like this in America. Ask them, they've lived life more than you, and they've seen more than you, and they've experienced more than you. You might have more book knowledge, you might, but you do not have even a fraction of their experience and wisdom. So in these sensitive issues, follow your gut instinct, use the intel Allah has given you, make dua to Allah to help guide you in these regards, and then follow these basic principles and you will insha'Allah to other than navigate. And many things can be said, cooperation with other groups is contextual. That's another point. I can just quickly add here. In some contexts, maybe there's not that much benefit to work with

45:19a particular group, in other contexts, maybe there is benefit. So it's a case by case basis, and it varies from time to place to location. It varies from era to era. So don't be so dogmatic and narrow-minded. I've given you this example before when the Muslims first came to this country, the immigrants came. They didn't have the luxury of asking which firka you follow. There were two few. Nobody cared. Sunni, shia, Ehliya, these, but you were five students in a city. How could you possibly divide upon firka? That's how all massage it in this country started without exception. Do you really think any mustier started only my firka is going to pray here? No mustier in the whole country, including here in Dallara started like this. Go speak. The elders who still alive. Go speak to them. I told you this. My father founded their first mosque in Houston. He was the vice president. The president was an Iranian student. He was the vice president. He goes, we didn't even think Sunni, shia, we're two few. We're going to divide amongst five students to our Iranian,

46:20one is Turkish, one is a person. We're going to divide amongst that. Impossible. So context plays a role. As organically, the numbers increased organically, some small tensions began organically, the shia has built their own masjid. No problem. Live and let live. No problem. We're not. When the context allows for it, we can move on. Similarly, other things might happen as well in this regard. My point is that don't be so dogmatic. Understand a person who disagrees with you by and large is still a Muslim. Understand for the sake of the ummah. You must still unite for the great to good of things. Follow your instinct and gut in this regard and follow the elders and those in shah Allah who are the Allah that have experienced more than you. Before I open for questions, there is an important announcement that sister Yada will make. So inshaAllah, what I am here and the lighthouse team on behalf of all the lighthouse team to talk about today is the lighthouse luminary's program. So at hand in Allah, you guys are all here. You've been here. Some of you almost every Tuesday.

47:21Some of you guys come in and come out and we really appreciate it. And we want to emphasize that you are lighthouse. The community of lighthouse is what makes lighthouse. And for that reason, we want to take it to another level and we want to start something called the luminary's program. And what that is is that it's an academic program where you still come in every Tuesday, nothing like a different class or a different location. It's just where you are. But the differences is that you can register and become a student. And when that happens, then we take your attendance every Tuesday. And then you join Google Classroom and you get assignments by weekly. Now that sounds like the tough part of it. But the perks of that is that you get a certificate of achievement in topics of modernity. So there's an option to register every semester, every semester you can re-register. And then you get exclusive Q&A opportunities with Dr. Asakaldi. You get a free tote bag and an notebook with lighthouse luminary's brand. You get a one-day retreat potentially depending on YQ schedule. A one-day retreat where we can further discuss and critically engage with the topics that are mentioned in class. And we really, really encourage everybody that

48:24is maybe more academically inclined or maybe likes to take more notes, maybe wants to more critically engage with what we talk about here today to join this program. And if you have any questions, I really want to ask very quickly if Etina, she is our sister's luminary's lead. If you can just stand up so the sister's can come to you for questions. If you know a most lighthouse, okay, see right there in the back. You can reach out to him for questions. If you can also reach out to Etina for questions and they would love to help you out. So Jizakalohir. So to add to that, the request came from many of you that you want more time and more reading material or more Q&A and stuff. So what we decided to do, the idea was from you, not from me, from the much older the board. What they decided to do, which I'm totally happy and fine to do, I'm humbled and honored is that a group of you will in ShAllah to add to then be given very basic quizzes after we finish a module. So for example, sectarianism. There will just be a Q&A, multiple choice essays, whatever. Every time we finish a module, very basic assessment being done.

49:29You might have some extra reading, but the main point is the course here and you finish that up and just remain with the program in ShAllah and that will allow you basically to be on a WhatsApp group. You're going to get every time I'm able to, which Allah will know how, Allah Allah, how many often. But still, the goal is every maybe six weeks or every two months, special maybe dinner or Q&A. Once every six months or so, the goal is maybe to have a retreat somewhere an hour from Dallas like a full day where we do a deeper dive or a course, many course, with time for intellectual discussion and maybe some fun in games as well. So the goal is basically to have a bit of a more rigorous training than just a Tuesday afternoon. That's the goal. So this is the luminary's program. So if you're interested, there is the bar code. You can just fill out a form and in ShAllah, it will be accepted. The other announcement, very important announcement, very exciting announcement. One of the biggest questions that I believe is unsolved when it comes to

50:36religion and science is the question of evolution. My analysis, I'm not a biologist, is that there are still unanswered questions with the Quranic story and with what we know of biology and the theory of evolution. Very, very, very few people are qualified to discuss this at an academic level. Hamdurillah next Tuesday, one of the, I would say, premier experts in this field has agreed to come to Lighthouse. He has a PhD in evolutionary biology and two postdocs in evolutionary biology and he's published papers in this field and he is also a Hamdurillah, a believing Muslim who has spent his whole life trying to reconcile or whatnot to understand what we can do about the Quranic story and about the theory of evolution. The problem comes, this is a very convoluted topic.

51:40It's a very lengthy topic. He's written multiple papers on it. We only have one session. So what I've told him to do is that between Mahgrab and Aisha, he will have a brief overview of some of the main theories he has of how to reconcile and then after Aisha, open Q&A for as long as you guys want. He's coming from another city just for you guys. So he's going to just come after Aisha. So we especially want those of you with biology backgrounds, pre-med backgrounds. Those of you, so we need to spread the word and make sure a new batch comes next week because it's a one-off only. He's flying in just for this class. We'll have the flyer out and his name and everything will be on there. Inshallah, he will be coming next Tuesday. So we need you to come especially those of you as I said that have understanding of this field and we have answered questions. Whatever question you ask him, I can assure you, he's already thought about it because that is his field. Evolutionary biology, literally that's his field. So what Hamdurillah, that's going to be next Tuesday,

52:42introductory lecture between the program Aisha and after Aisha, open Q&A for advanced students. Inshallah. And with that, we have a solid 15 minutes of Q&A. Mashallah. So Hamdurillah, let us go Bismillah, Rahman Rahim. I try my best to do the ones upvoted. The biggest sectarian divide in the subcontinental Muslim world is based on a pure hypothetical of a hypothetical with nothing practical about it. Can Allah create another problem? Muhammad, peace be upon you. How are such useless debates taken seriously by those that claim to be inheritors of the Prophet to the point they make to the creative of another? Why do scholars take this seriously if this is the bulk of their history? So I didn't want to get into too many examples but this hits the nail on the head. The Burelvis and the Deobandis represent the two largest groups in India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal. The Indian desi subcontinent, the Burelvis and the Deobandis dominate 95% or 90% of the Ummah. 90 maybe 85%. Okay, large amount. No exaggeration. The Ahli had these

53:46are less than 5% very small and this, the Shi'a are probably 10, 15%. So maybe 80, 85% are basically this division between Burelvis and the Obandis. And do you know what the difference of opinion is? Many but this is the main one. Hypothetically, can Allah create, could Allah have created in the past a Prophet who was equal to or may be in better than the Prophet, Allah, Allah, you said them? Hypothetical question. And the Burelvis say to say this is kufr because the Prophet's sallam is the best of all. So to say that another being could have possibly theoretically, hypothetically been created is wastaqe rasool and you are qafir al-Dalmudil murtat and that the Obandis say to limit the power of Allah is kufr and Allah can do as he pleases. He won't do

54:46that because the Prophet sallam is the best but could he have done it? Yes, he could have done it and to say he couldn't is to limit the power of Allah. And so they say this is in his own way a type of kufr because you cannot limit the power of Allah. Can you believe this is one of the fundamental differences between the two largest trans of desi muslims because of which they make taqfeed of one another. They say and you will find this online and why a raza was happening last year in England in should I even say the city's name but anyway okay not London some Shari city close by. They actually had in the proper street british accents two groups of clerics debate and make taqfeed of one another in their massages in England over this issue and it was uploaded onto youtube and it had hundreds of thousands of views or tens of thousands of views.

55:47Each one of which is dressed the same they see a background in the indian pakistanis of continent background okay both of them iid baryani and halva puri at breakfast whatever right no the irony of ironies they're a shadi that they're abundi they're hanifi and the amount of hatred they had for one another because of this hypothetical issue. This is what frustrates me. It frustrates me to the point of I don't even have words for it it's just it's just it is what it is right multiple issues I play here one of them being and this is it needs to be said the educational levels of the peoples involved here. Generally speaking the less one has read the more isolated one has lived one's life the less educated one is the more prone one is to these narrow minded sectarian issues so I want to educate you and that's why by the way in America generally sectarianism is not as much

56:49as in many other places in the world because by and large the average person with two digits IQ understands even if you disagree she'd be put in the neutral category okay it's a hypothetical issue we both love Allah Azwa Jalla is the only god we both acknowledge this the irony not just we both every Muslim acknowledges the process is the greatest of all human beings we all acknowledge this so what's the point of anger and hatred it's a complete hypothetical that has no substantive reality to it but again it shows you how I can't help you use a harsh word here but how foolish sectarianism is that two people two massages are going to make toqueer it wasn't just you're wrong your nika has balkal your children were not inherent from you we cannot pray behind you if you slaughter a chicken your chicken in the baryani is not halal for us to eat and they're saying this in their brami accents to each other right they're literally and and she's like what are you living

57:52but again it is what it is this is any you know it is what it is listen you just don't go down to that level and understand in shahla you will always find people of a more any open minded and more world right let these people be you you can you can only do so much in this regard but this is my problem exactly now I would say the bulk of our differences really are theoretical with with utmost respect even the sifat controversy what what is the result of it even the Sunnisya I was talking with somebody they came to her office he was talking about these issues okay who should have been the first Khalifa I said to this brother you know what if you believe that's a lulm happened 1400 years ago there's something called yomal piyama and a law will take the volume and deal with the volume on yomal piyama why do you when I have to fight over something that happened 1400 years ago I said to the brother why do you when I have to have an issue you just live your life and let a large on the day of judgment if you really feel this way and I live my

58:55life and expect a level also jolidia judgment right why do I have to resurrect what happened and carried in my heart and pass it down to my children what do we benefit what happened happen khalla s okay if you feel so strongly Allah will judge don't you agree he is ahkam al-Hakimine he is a haqqam yama lakiyaomiddin so yes a lot of our iqa differences really are theoretical in this regard so in yeah I agree with you what can we do in this educate and keep on and believe me the silent majority understands it's the vocal minority that clouds the silent majority right don't be fooled by this reality okay question here to what extent do you think the tension between the more liberal and traditional interpretations of islam is healthy at what point does it become harmful from an outsider's perspective wouldn't these constant internal disputes undermine the credibility of muslims especially with the social media wars and for ordinary muslims looking for guidance how are they supposed to navigate these competing ideas yes I understand this point

1:00:00our modern sectarian issue is not over Sunnisya for most of us in this hall for most of you living online even our modern sectarian issues are over hijab gender music the spectrum of fichha vechtilaf that's what it's over and may Allah help you navigate this again my goal is not to indoctrinate you my goal is to teach you guidelines to help you and yes you will have to face and decide which version of islam you're going to follow I maintain what I've been teaching you for the last years and that is to disagree with civility even if you disagree strongly there's no need to be crude or nasty even if you disagree with somebody fundamentally but they are also acting in a civil manner you can also return the civility you don't have to you know become nasty or or take the tension beyond what it needs to be I do not sympathize with those that want to destroy the classical

1:01:00tradition it is entirety I believe that is very dangerous to islam and I will tell you that is dangerous but there's a way to do so without fermenting hatred I know many of them are sincere I know because I interacted with them I know them I know many of them believe this is what islam should be like I'm not doubting their sincerity I just think it's not going to be healthy for the future so in the end of the day it's a battle of ideas you guys you guys are the ones that are going to have to decide you're the judges not me because I've already judged what I think is right I'm presenting my opinion you're going to hear other opinions you guys are the judges I feel empathy for you because it's a tough decision to make but I'm not going to make my arguments stronger by being nasty about the other guy I'm not going to prove my point by using vulgar adjectives about the other group that's not how I solidify and if that's what you want then frankly you don't know how to judge between arguments I need to prove to you why my point is stronger academically intellectually

1:02:02islamically if I cannot do that and I can only resort to ad hominem I can only resort to vulgarities I can only resort to raising my voices and accusing them then yes some people will like that but those people weren't even waiting for the evidence as they already made up their minds anyway so I agree with you that it's not healthy to exacerbate so let us as I said understand we are talking about a battle of ideas made the strongest argument win in the end therefore we better make sure our arguments are the best our evidences are the strongest our mechanisms are presenting are the best I agree with you this is a problem there's no need to exacerbate let us present our views and in the end you will all have to decide uh you know what which quote-unquote understanding or version of islam uh and again I mean there are strands there are shades not all fundamentalists are the same not all modernists are the same not all progressors are the same there's many shades

1:03:05and you know where one ends the others just beginning there's a continuum and there's an overlap the closer you are to segments of the continuum the more you can interact with them question here why are the Muslims imitating Christians by debating over abstract theological issues didn't the same thing lead them to sectarian wars which led them to secularism which caused the state of Christianity today to sectarian mind and Muslims want islam and muslims to be weakened as well so one of my theses that I mentioned in my phd and others is the following many of our theological controversies of the past emanated from intra-Christian debates and they were taken in absorbed in the first and second centuries of islam and they were Islam asized and I've proven this in my phd and this is what one of the main causes of me personally becoming more mature once I understood the origin of the whole divine attributes controversy it originated when Christians were disputing the nature of jesus versus the nature of god

1:04:07they were disputing does jesus have different characteristics than god is jesus the the word is the word created is the word the creator is the logos created logos uncreated all of this comes is the Quran created uncreated all of this absorbs in we don't have the logos we have the Quran kalamullah so the whole controversy is the Quran created uncreated it comes from a Christian Byzantine controversy awarded the logos is created uncreated is the logos creating or is the logos the creator or is the logos created this is a Byzantine Christian controversy six century CE and muslims conquer the Byzantine lands muslims hear this muslims absorb this debate and then they back project it onto their religion the whole siphad controversy is over jesus and god are they one nature is their human element or they want that's all of Christianity is over sectarian issues right muslims absorb this oh so what does it mean god has a hand is the hand the part of god is the hand separate is hand this and what does it mean Allah has knowledge is not all of the same language if you read my phd if you listen to my library chats literally the same language used by Byzantine

1:05:11Christian theologians was adopted by early Muslim groups on this site early Muslims on that site I quoted it in my phd I literally quoted Byzantine theologians and then more tezida Byzantine the ologians and then the proto other groups there basically you can see the whole spectrum here right once you understand the origins of this controversy are foreign and it was islamicized then you got to ask yourself was it really worth it did we really have to fight over these abstract issues the nature of god who amongst you has ever thought to a point of it bringing doubt about how do you understand the sif at the god it's a bygone controversy let it be no need to resurrect it but yet as I explained to you this is the main controversy still happening online between the dhawa bros between the sectarian groups here so and where does it originate from it originates from Christianity so yes the more you learn the more humble and open minded you become let's do our final question here I've heard that Wahabism is a plot by the Zionist entities to dissonite the umma

1:06:14and it has infiltrated into this government in that no that's not true be academic as a person who subscribed to that movement who taught it who preached it who absorbed who believed in it and who has studied it and written an academic book about it that movement has a lot of good it prioritizes the tradition more than others it respects the classical training of islam it has roots in early islam and it is not a plot by design it's not at all it is a movement that was taken by a political entity and they have their reasons to do it and the scholars of that movement are sincere they believe in it they make a lot of sense in some ways and in some areas they can improve I don't view them as being a sakhfor Allah sakhfor Allah enemies of Allah they're not evil people are uthvilla they are a mainstream strand of islam they go back to their earliest of islam they have major icons like ibn tamia me personally I say that ibn abduhwahab and ibn tamia are not the same ibn abduhwahab invented ideas ibn tamia did not have and he extrapolated things he did not have that's

1:07:17my opinion the followers say no ibn abduhwahab followed ibn tamia 100% but in the end they are mainstream sunnis they are within sunnis and they have views that might potentially be harmful that can be toned down but all movements sufi is but all of them have views that can be harmful the goal is to maximize the benefit minimize the harm