carry my speaking loud loud Lina there's a great guard here obviously there's a giant bottle of water so um thank you very much the best operations hon bill Adama be mr. Inglis about to uh so that night estate and once again thank you very much for inviting me thanks to use that for organizing this it's kind of a long long-standing ambition of mine or hope of mine invited to the UK to speak because my my mother did her PhD here in Cambridge my grandmother did a PhD at Oxford my aunt did her master's at Oxford my sister did her undergraduate at st. Andrews and my family has this long history of coming to the UK we have all sort of Charles and Diana teeth sets in our house and biscuits and things like that so we kind of lived in this American anglo-american immigrants to Anglo immigrants to America who live in the sort of cultural shade of the motherland and yet I have when we come here once or twice in my life and never ever been to these places that my family where my family studied and they respect so much so to be invited to speak at British universities mom always longed for this affirmation so thank you very much for organizing everything I got I felt me that'll probably be annoyed if I mention this but there was I I start disputed with him about the topic I and it's not going to be a good I don't want you to take as if as a non endorsement of what I'm going to speak about it I actually don't think the topic that I'm speaking about is the appropriate topic I want you I don't want you to take this the wrong way what I mean to say is when we study the way that Western scholars look at that eat traditions I think that you can very easily fall into this may be unproductive circle of looking at their methods and trying to you know use that want to refute what they're saying about heat but often I think what you'll come up with eventually or come to a certain realization is that disagreements over the reliability of the Islamic tradition of being part of it is not something that can be resolved through discussion or presentation of evidence because it ultimately stems from different premises and assumptions and that those assumptions cannot be reconciled without with deeper understanding of where they come from and they may not be reconciled whatever but the point is that you sort of you end up having a conversation which might never able to be actually taken anywhere and so I might my real interest when I look at this topic of Western study of Islam is not he's really to look at why what the West is what is the West where does it come from what is the concept of what is a Western perspective on anything and where does that perspective come from why do when we went when musa and i were talking about this movie that came out about the origins of islam which I haven't seen because somehow these websites don't work in United States I but looking at the images of in the pictures I'm reading about it where where is this why is this person making movie why is there this image of this British guy with a hat sitting and talking to bed wins going to the each you know this pyramids and things like that why is this somehow going to tell us about the origins of Islam and why is he doing this what does this this is what this is a long tradition these images are all rooted in some discourse tradition about the West and uncovering the origins of religion and of other people's religion and their own religion and that's it studying that universe that fascinates me so actually but I had this whole a whole set of slides shows about this and then he's answered many of you to talk about this issue of Orientalism entity and so people talk about that but if somebody says you know we really are sick of this topic we don't want to talk about this and we want you to do the other slides I'll be happy but don't I understand I'm here to serve but need the desires and the wishes of the community there so I want I want Jack I'll just say that I think that there's another conversation which more important and more interesting but I will be happy to do my best to answer these questions and there are they are important question but I'm trying to say is I think that there's a bigger conversation behind them which I'm sure we'll get into so this is is that image of Egypt from the 1920s and I think the reason I have it up here is because this is really the time when a lot of these oriental is the first generation of really successful thorough Orientalists are writing about the Muslim tradition and some of them were writing in in Egypt this is something that people won't know about but you know in Egypt in 1920s and 1930s bori Angela European scholars of Islam were put on the twin the Metro model Olivia the council Arabic Academy never Arabic language was founded a third or fourth of its seats were reserved for European scholars and this would not happen today I mean imagine imagine having in Egypt you know the Council of the Arabic language or the study of Islam and a fourth or a third or fifth version of the members are European scholars who are not Muslim we should be very unconceivable today but the Orientalists were at the time in the early 20th century and even in the late 19th century in – especially India they were really a book – by Muslim governments by modernizing States and Egypt like the British Imperial Authority in in India as people who were going to actually tell Muslims how to understand their religion and that Muslims were going to listen to them and some Muslims at least were out there saying yes we would like you to tell us about our religion now there was a great protest about some of the people who are on this Arabic language Academy in the 1930s and was founded Rashid Rathore really objected to the vents Inc for example being on the accountant council eventually he was the invitation was rescinded for him things he had written about Islam but this is a bit as interesting I was very surprised to find out that these generation of Orientalists that we speak about so I'm not very critically we talk about like gold to her and then and immense they were for many people not I wouldn't say majority but they were there work there were institutions and people in places like Egypt that really looked to them as authorities about Islam to tell Muslims about their religion okay so when we talk about the Western study of hadith we are talking about the application of a critical method to a scriptural tradition and that the handy term which we can use to describe this critical method is the historical critical method or HCM this is a very internally diverse method it's more of a kind of toolkit an approach it's not us it's not a you know like a method that you would use let's say to prepare your taxes or something where you know is a very regimented system you have to fill out a form or something like that it's not a method in that'sthat's a really an approach a mindset a set of tools a set of assumptions and this is something that is produced or that emerges in Western Europe in Italy and France later in Germany and Great Britain from 1300s until the nineteenth century it's a long period of development long period of development it's a product of the Western tradition it's a it's a movie it comes out of Western European Christian intellectual tradition from the Renaissance onward and this I have to I can't stress this enough people are not born someone doesn't pop out of his or her mother's belly and look at a text and say oh I'm going to approach it from historical critical method perspective or from another perspective people don't just look at religion or think about religion think about text or think about top of the past or think about claims about the past in any way automatically the way they think about these issues is conditioned by their cultural environment and this is very important because for many people in the West whatever that is and for many Muslims who are confronted by the West there's I think an assumption that this is just the way that people should think about issue religion or should think about history and if there's something weird or wrong with Muslims that they think about it differently and the Muslims have to justify why they think about history or religion in the way they do or defend that but it could just as easily be turned around why is it that you know why is it that this fellow who made this movie about the origins of some why is it that he thinks about the role in religion that it the way he does why is there some origins in Islam is different than what Muslims negatives why did he why did someone cope with this assumption why do you have to go and talk to Bedouins and put on a hat go into the desert to try and find but the origins of Slama I mean that's a seems to me to be a very odd assumption to start with so it you can it's very important we start this discussion that the playing field whose level that we not start the discussion with the assumption that you know the way that quote/unquote Westerners think about religion is correct Muslims have to justify why they think about the role of religion in a different way these are different approaches neither of which is necessarily correct I mean from if you're a Martian and you're observing the earth there's no reason to think that Muslims the way Muslims think about religion or history there's any more or less correct than the way Westerners do they're just different approaches in fact one of them historical critical method approach is much newer now there's a couple of I'm just going to go through some very important principles I don't have I would love to spend five hours just talking about the history of where these things come from and why they emerge and how the weird mixture of rediscovering Greek history and Roman literature and the Protestant Reformation Aristotelian science how this all and discovering the new world and finding out that their tribes in Brazil and no idea what God is or Western paper having notion of God is how all of these things came together to create this approach I would love to do that a one-off time one of the important principles that comes out of the emergence of historical critical method is what's called the principle of analogy is very very important what this means is basically human society is always the same human society is always the same whether you're in Greece and in Athens in 400 BC or Arabia and 600 BC or China in 10,000 10 1000 BC or England in the eighteen hundreds people are always the same and they are the same in a negative way they are self-interested they're greedy in the feeling power they are dishonest they pursue their own agendas they twist ideas and beliefs to meet these agendas it's a it's a cynical vision of humanity that is really I think based in the greco-roman historical tradition historians like Herodotus the citizens later Roman historians like polybius who died around 110-115 BC Roman historian and look what they look at what they say is a historian and here I'm quoting Polybius in his history of the Roman Empire a historian or the history of Rome up to his time member he's writing 115 120 BC relatively early is it by historian has to be ready to praise his enemies and criticize his friends because nobody is always right and nobody is always wrong this is very important I know this sounds it's so important about what dr. Brown say it's actually a very important principle what it means is that there is no community or group of people or time that is perfect or golden or free from criticism or better than any other time and the Greek in Rebecca Romijn view of history was a cyclical there was no beginning of the world there was no end of the world there's no better time than the worst time just constant Circle Circle Circle of fate the circle of faith literally wrote em before tonight at the circle of fate going over loads at for tonight going over around and around and around nothing changes this is very important because when you when you're studying if I decide I'm going to go in Sutton and try and discover how Muslims were living or thinking and it's the Year 700 looking back in knocked out in Damascus I am going to assume that their world basically works according to the same rules as my world right now now there are differences I can say okay when an Arab says you know you know I when an Arab says you know I barely this thing is worth a camel to me I'm just making this up say well you know camel hump very very valuable today what does this means he doesn't think camels are it isn't that this thing is important now maybe camels are very important to him so he's saying this is extremely important to me so I'm not trying to human beings are always the same in every sense but adjusted for time in place adjusted for idiom and language adjusted for lifestyle that person will be motivated by the same this is that motivate II or anyone else this is clear now this is very important because it's completely different than the way Muslims think about their history is every time and every place equal is there a time in a place that is treated differently the way we think about it historically anyone think of an example the time of the Prophet in the companions exactly the Prophet says they do the best well I saw Salam said the best generation is the one in which I was sent them the one after than one after and as later scholars one scholar in the 39 person go to get mani who did a famous shower hustling Parvati he says no this was a time the prophet of the command-u is free of evil 3 of evil and you can't look at it you can't look at from the Sunni perspective from the stunning perspective I acknowledge that there's mam eti perspective there's a V shape perspective from the Sunni perspective you cannot talk about the Companions of the Prophet in the same way you speak about people today the assumptions about how their community worked about what motivated them about their decisions are not the same another important principle is a principle of anachronism anachronism an anachronism is something that is out of place in time that is outdoor waste in time so for example if I said you know I'm in England so I'll use Robin Hood as an example you know Robin Hood I find a tax or Robin Hood is using a musket this obviously cannot is not a real this is a made-up story because Robin Hood at least extent that we know who this person was and when you live live before that's the use of widespread use of gunpowder and the development of muskets this is I see a story where verily you know Robin Hood did raise his musket and shoot and accidentally shot Little John in life this text is made up because Robin Hood did not have mustard Zakhar ism now and this again is an approach that goes back all the way you can see a Greek and Roman historians using this tool to try and pick out things in a historical account that can't be true it cannot be true that can't be true because this didn't exist at the time or this wasn't spoken about at the time and this is a very important tool that gets revived and what's wrong before it gets revived in the Renaissance becomes a very important tool in Western historical critical method this is very different from Islamic tradition why it might just be different if we come across a report in which the prophet supposedly says that the cut area are the Zoroastrians in my juice of my community there is no group called the Kanto area at the time of the Prophet so if you're someone who is a Western story and doesn't believe that hundred had any knowledge of the future or anything like that or any access to divine revelation this is obviously made-up because later there's a book called the called the via and it didn't exist at the time of the Prophet this was obviously made up later to talk about the quad Libya well if you're a Muslim and you believe that the Prophet could have access to right to the knowledge of the unseen that God could inform him about something then it's distinctly possible that he could predict the future so this tool doesn't work it doesn't work when you talk about the Prophet they saw Salaam if it can work in other situations but not when you talk about someone who has access to okay even another important principle principle dissimilarity this this term I think actually the the best the actual person I've seen using this for this this technical term is a barbarian University of North Carolina but this is a principal that even when it's not discussed in as a technical term is very important and it is the idea that when you're looking at historical source if somebody appeared if something appears that seems to go against the interest of the writer or against the interests of the party to whom the historian belongs it's probably true so why because why would the person make it up why would the person make if the assumption is that people are sort of nasty it we're all pretty cynical about everybody they're always forging history to make themselves look good and make their party look better if they include a report that reflects badly on them well it's probably accurate because why would they make it up and this principle was discussed in length by early enlightenment scholar named Jacob Arizonians I think he was Dutch as an attempt to convince skip skeptics at the time scholars were very skeptical about our village and construct past and we construct history that he was saying this is actually a tool we can use to determine fact in ancient Roman sources or at least to weed out fiction yes yeah this is I mean this is something that you would the questions well how it may be there including bad things about enough bad things to make you believe there are reliable this is a very cynical approach if someone's trying to to do that they may succeed one of the things that historical critical method tends to do is to focus on something called the principle of aerosol limit verisimilitude very much so when Western scholars criticize hadith oftentimes what they say is you know I hope that you have a headache you know I was sitting with the Prophet and I remember it it was after this battle of your coming back from this river of the curve this is all extraneous information this is included to give it a sense of reality so for example I'm telling you stories that knew yesterday I came into the airport and the hallways were so long and I was walking and there was a poster of a Olympic swimmer and there was a you know I looked out in the runway and there's only airplanes and then I got to the immigration to customs they asked me questions now that information is important why did I do that because life is more interesting when we include details and stories but you could also say he was including that just to create the sense of reality and once our writer describes how they feel in a fictional account or in recollection when they're writing their autobiography when they talk about where they lived and what the room was like they'd lived and why are they doing this trying to recreate something for you so the interesting thing this really gets into this question of well talk about now default skepticism there's no reason why providing details should be an indication that I'm trying to mislead you I'm simply trying to recreate something for you we're going to be drawing my own memory to relive a moment in the past but it's a more cynical approaches no no you're you're trying to this this is created to is included to create an image of verisimilitude okay or create verisimilitude and I think there's so these three important critical tools in historic critical method they are accompanied by important themes in approach one of them is a default skepticism and doubt towards texts this is very important what does critical mean what does the word critical mean when you read historians like bored after talking about what a historian does historian is critical means when he or she comes across a source he does not take it at face value he inquires as to what really happened what's really going on behind the source the assumption is that a report about the past needs to be investigated is it correct now this is very very important Muslim scholars are also skeptical of reports they're also skeptical of reports but there's degrees of skepticism when you and if you know in Muslim scholars present disease and this is one of this is something that somewhat controversial some people might disagree with me now in general Muslim scholars would say that you can't attribute something to the Prophet you cannot such a receptor to the Prophet without providing some evidence for it but actually in a reality when you look at how genes are used in law or in especially in preaching or in Sufism or in ethics or just in daily life we very almost never inquire as the authenticity of these reports and you know someone cites it's an even sort of nippon manju or soon an timothy so in that even majeure is full up to a quarter of it is unreliable at ease Timothy has many many weaken eats in it that petition self says this is a weak hadith is unreliable ID is it himself acknowledges this and nobody goes and looks that up now I don't mean to say that people in the West are critical and Muslims are not critical people are critical about different things every day when you when you when you go to school in the morning and you know you pick up the bus schedule you don't say is this is this accurate where does this come from who wrote this I need to I need to research this it's a bus schedule for God's sake it's put out by the municipal authority or something and it no reason to lie now there could be conceivably some culture that has immured itself to extreme skepticism toward municipal bus codes and they will not they will not pick up a municipal bus schedule and look at it without verifying these information and different cultures are going to and different at different times are going to place different value on affirmation or investigation of the truth a certain kind of source and form for Muslims if you if you go to Egypt where you go to Delhi and you walk into a mosque and someone the fatigue gets up and gives a football and tells you that leads the assumption is that this these are things the Prophet said okay and sometimes that might be an accurate assumption sometimes it's not an accurate assumption and you have many instances from even on Josie in the 1100s the use of Kanagawa in the present time talking about how they're sitting listening to a book buff and every single hadith that the TV uses is forged okay this is this happens but the assumption is that this is not the kids and there are many times coming from the United States I can tell you the Americans are incredibly ignorant of their history and they'll sit there listening to some member of Congress giving a speech or president giving a talk or some historian or watching movie about John Adams or something like that and they'll be all this other nonsense historical Monsun it's not true but no one will be skeptical of it because the assumption is that this material is true especially if you know George Washington was really great so John Adams was wonderful and no one's going to go and say wow that's really true was he really really good guy even they say this this is not something that is an area of skepticism to be indulged in if someone comes up and starts talking about how Muslims are good or as long as wonderful then submit from the script so people have different triggers for skepticism yes yes this is an important your your statement about the the author or the issuer of speech is important speaker is important if they think the who's a scholar but who's a scholar you don't trust I mean these people people not trust most I'm never saying you know Muslim regular Muslim Joe who's not coming to this class you know what I'd like even on Joey says you want to die demented on that side of in book the does God the scholar according to the masses the guy who gets up on the minbar what he says is gospel to mix religious metaphors so be it this is important and by the way you know this is not I'm not sitting here and saying Muslims have all these problems and again this is this is the tribe we don't want to fall into it somehow Muslims have this weird you know cultish view of their religious tradition and why don't they just get with the program and understand that they need to be critical like Western people because you know I can't tell you how many times I'm sitting there listening to the radio in the United States do you know good radio channels like NPR National Public Radio and they just say when they're talking about the Middle East is utter utter nonsense and you can't emanate if people will get up and no one will even correct gross errors that are made by from room most of the Muslim Brotherhood assassinated stood at this is one I was sitting there listening to this trying to call in but this nonsense not does not accurate why is there three people in the panel we're all supposed to be experts in the Middle East no one said it's not accurate but hit because it's just just not something that people care about okay so the approach of the Westerner for historical critical method is it when you're talking about the past you have automatically skeptical and again I want to trust not all not everything about the past certain thing when you're talking about religious traditions when you're talking about orthodoxies when you're talking about other traditions when you're talking about your own things that are important to you to your policy for your identity they're going to be less skeptical you have a question – what non-western historians you mean it I'll get to this this is an important difference because when you when you look at when a Muslim scholar is studying Haddy for example we're studying history also I'll speak mostly about the teeth but when I had a decree over them is looking at the past and there's I think is a very good I mean like most limit Ahmed have in handle is a very good example the Muslim to backhand it in handbook contains many weak a deeds there's a debate about whether or not it contains weak hadith or weak and forge to deeds and hand the leaves have debated this amongst themselves and non humbly submitted this amongst themselves I think personally that there there's good evidence that there's forged to deeds in the most mud but other scholars the mannaseo CLE Shah will be a love-in Louie I shall really death because everything in the most that hasn't also has some basis from the Prophet duty says everything in it is Maqbool it's accepted in some way or another you know whether in law or in ethics or in something it's accepted so any any time somebody comes to you with a subheading through most on Ahmed in theory according to these scholars this is true in some way Sunita's true in some and you'll see constant you know many times you go I don't need to explain this to you because you're Muslims that you come across this how many times you see a sign and I'm in the Masjid or something where it gives you a hadith and it just says most Ahmed it doesn't explain where it comes from and the assumption is this accurate because I think from Muslim scholars in the past and today if the default assumption with an attribution to the Prophet is on Santa's little Atlantic and that you should it should move you in some way if it says you know you see a heading that says oh oh oh believers go and sell your houses and give all the money to the nearest ranger I'm probably going to investigate that before I decide to sell my house and give the money to the nearest church I think this would be good approach to life if it says you know you should be kind to your mother next time you see her okay you know I already know I had to be good to my mother is established whenever living so is it really going to am I going to be very skeptical others are great for critical no but in theory if we really were to I think try to live the ethos of how we should as Muslims think about Hadees which is you don't lie about the prophet of God cannot lie about the prophet of God we should be very skeptical any anytime we attributed something to him so Muslim scholars sometimes they can be very critical but the default assumption I think in general is that attributions all things being equal attributions to the Prophet are believed and people can be free to disagree with me and we can discuss it okay another important point suspicion of Orthodox narratives that orthodoxy is suspicious the official narrative of religion is deserves to be doubted and is probably not true and we have to think about why this is why did white why does the Western scholars writing about religion in the late 1700s or about the Bible in the 1800s or about Christianity in the 20th century why did they have this assumption that orthodoxies are constructed they are built they are not the original representation of the religion why do they have this suspicion because this is what they discovered about Christian about Christianity and we can go I would love to go into the history of how this this discovery is made and built on but they discover that or partially through reconstruction of early text partially through a kind of reimagine ation of what they think Jesus originally taught versus what the religion became partially through discovery of new taxes they conclude that what becomes Orthodox Christianity either Catholic or Protestant or sort of proto orthodoxy which becomes Catholicism in the 400s and 500 of the Common Era that this is a later development and there was something else before it that was different and at least if you think about if you have this obsession with origins if you believe that originally what people understood is the religion was the true version as this fellow who did this movie bad as mom believes apparently having not seen the movie I can't be too specific pursuit critical for all its wonderful movie the assumption that the original version is the true version this is also unnecessarily correct I mean this is this is not there's no reason why that's true necessarily if you believe that a religion is defined by a body like the church or by the OMA as a whole as time goes on it constantly speaks and defines a religion for itself then the original version is not necessarily the correct one if it changed those changes are not necessarily illegitimate but this disbelief that Orthodox narratives orthodoxies are constructed and that they are not the original correct true message brought by either a historical figure or a prophetic figure this is also an important theme in historical critical method finally and I've gone where you probably want way too long about this but the belief that scholarly investigation can uncover just true history that by using our minds using our critical faculties applying this method we can actually uncover the truth of past and if we can't uncover it then we'll come and say you know what we can't figure this out but we certainly know what you think what the Orthodox narrative is wrong what you've been told is wrong we nest we can't necessarily tell you what's right but we know that what you've been told is incorrect and if we're feeling optimistic we can go back and uncover the real urges of something and then you have lots of Discovery Channel documentaries coming out of this booth yes do how is this similar to the race LF you think about I think that there is a similarity but it's not structurally determined it's a similarity that just comes up consonants so a sudden sound of these would look at let's say the way that Islam is understood in the year 1400 in Damascus with med heavy and rigid people following certain schools of law like a guild you know sufi practices and KO visiting graves and saints that's very important called religious practice they're gauging speculative theology this is important to them too they would say these are all constructions that are not originally part of the religion as understood by the Prophet and the Companions but they wouldn't I don't think that they would automatically look at any expression of religion and assume it's illegitimate or sumn it's it's constructed and it has to be some origin has to be determined they're concerned only with Islamic origins and if they didn't feel that some practice was illegitimate or was important or lacked roots in the early period they wouldn't be skeptical and there's lots of orthodoxies for example that the sub that's other piece completely blind to the idea of the the rightly guided caliphs the idea of the set left I mean the idea of the Sunnah is an orthodox the idea that somehow the early Islamic period deserves to be followed and is more correct or rightly guided than what happens later this is an arbitrary distinction I don't know I'm not translate it's incorrect to stick to what I'm trying to say is that you you don't you know walk into a room and knowing nothing about Islam and understand automatically that the first three generations and Muslims are different than it wells is it something that you buy into as an orthodoxy does that answer your question okay where's Nissan someone should just you know either hit me on the head with something when I first gone on for too long tell me when this when this session ends otherwise I'll just speak endlessly so I think okay so I let's talk about oriental finally at long last let's speak about basically Muslim Western Western scholars start studying Islam really seriously in this late sixteen hundreds of 17th and early 1700s the Koran gets translated into Latin really bad translation in 1142 the robert of chutney it's a very i'm difficult to understand it's translated into french in the sixteen hundreds into english in the 1700s it's really i think in the 1700s that you start getting western scholars who have a very good understanding of islam but for that I mean they really do not know understand anything about beforehand they don't understand anything about the Prophet is also mom didn't understand anything about Islamic law they basically it's it's essentially polemics it's just anything bad you can say about prophet or about Islam it you'll find it books and it just has no relation to reality you know the Prophet was started out as a cardinal in Rome and you didn't realize that you wasn't going to become senior Cardinal so you go to the desert you keep sorts of religion I mean stuff that is just really distant from reality even if you're not Muslim what happens in the 1700s you start getting translations of is sure general Islamic histories like this the target of a brief it gets translated into Latin kram translations and despite it by the late 1700s if scholars like Edward given the famous British historian of the Roman Empire died 1794 his section I in his decline and fall of the Roman Empire on Islam is excellent I mean it's better than what stuff is written today I was reading it I was just stunned how much this fellow knew he knows about you know the different faiths collections you know is that their psycho pottery you know is that there's nuts you know those abrogation he knows about the prophets wives he knows about the different Hadees to talk about the rewards that await people in heaven he knows a tremendous amount and this is a dissertate of difference between his work at a hundred years earlier I mean he's not Muslim he doesn't believe in the prophets message she believes the prophets ultimately an opossum imposter but it's really you starting really uh influx of good knowledge and awareness about Islam and into 1800s even more now Muslim Western Europeans start really learning about the Muslim world through three main routes two of them are directly related to colonialism in fact you guys a to conform eight rounds really one is this the British East India Company's attempt to understand Islamic law mobile court records Indian history because they are now ruling by 1815 1816 the majority of the subcontinent is not actually being administered by British authorities spirit they are administering Sharia Courts using Anglo Mohammed in law they have to translate books at Islamic law if by the way they're doing exactly the same thing with non Islamic religious traditions in India as well another way is the European study of the Ottoman Empire because European diplomatic efforts to understand infiltrates deal with Ottoman power in the Mediterranean world in the hundreds especially another way one could say is actually Dutch the Dutch study of Islam in Southeast Asia because Southeast Asia music becomes a giant coffee plantation for Dutch rubber and coffee and there's tremendous study of Islamic law as understood in in what's now the little Malaysian Indonesia by the duction final the last route which is the one we'll be talking about specifically because it deals with things like hadith for an early Islamic history is an extension of biblical studies Western study of Islamic theology and hadith is a direct extension of this study of the Bible the earliest figures in the Orientalist tradition in Europe are German scholars like Julius Wellhausen who write very important books about the study of the restoral critical study of the Bible and then they say hey you know I really want to understand the lifestyle of the is rigid tribes of Israel what better way to go and you know look at Bedouin nowadays late 18-hundreds and see how they're living and then they start studying Arabs and they start studying the Arabic tradition they start studying Islamic tradition and their study of the hadith in the grant is just all it is is a transposition of the circles to critical study of the Bible on to Islamic tradition the assumption is we did this with the Bible on the Christian tradition now let's just take it apply it to Islamic tradition which they assume will yield exactly the same results William Muir is a great example of a Indian or a British East India Company functionary in South Asia he was a major affect a very important person the East India Company in the mid nineteenth century he was actually in the Agra fort during the rebellion of 1857 and he did he was sending intelligence reports he's a very important person in East India Company and then in the posts 1857 administration he's also one of the most important historians of early Islam he writes very influential study of the life of the Prophet and in it you see some teams that will repeat themselves over and over again in the Western study of youth that petites are made up they're made up to glorify the Prophet they're made up to promote certain religious agendas Orthodox religious agenda and a very important point you make is that Muslims only look at the transmission of Hadees they don't look at the contents of that eats when they're criticizing them to see if they're authentic or not and that's why they don't see that there's all these anachronism they don't see that I did say things that are plainly crazy and scientifically accurate from his perspective important to say that oh another and I think maybe the Modi most important person in the Western study of Islam and the hadith is Ignacio Zaragoza a Jewish Hungarian or a Hungarian Jew at the time that's probably the better way to say to identify him and he is he actually goes and studies in Eleazar this is a picture about his heart in the 1920s the other our courtyard he goes and studies in a lot ha and he learns here he knows obviously Hebrew very well and he comes out of the German academic tradition so very well-versed in Latin and Greek and Hebrew and Syriac and everything Arabic very well he goes and he studies in Eleazar and you can see this in his work actually he's the first he's sort of the first case of a Western scholar who goes benefits from Muslim scholars comes back and doesn't give him credit which is I have to say I give them credit I thought that the dominated say one good thing about myself today it'll say that I give credit where it's due I freely admit that I might anything I've accomplished in my work is completely due to my teachers in Egypt and in other countries I feel like I'm a translator their work more than an independent scholar and you see things in his and go to his work that I haven't seen written anywhere I've not seen them in any written sonic book but they're like our traditions you know it's a at Ramallah broken uh turkey instead into identity that Iijima is the firm column on which the religion rests and he says in one of his books it Iijima is the bedrock on which the Church of Islam is founded I feel like this is something he heard and kind of translated that just might be and I have no proof for that anyway he's at Venice actually his work on early songs amongst the best meaning he really knows what he's talking about nowadays you see a lot of people regularly some have no idea what they're talking about and there have nasty agendas or something but II know he had his biases but he was a very good scholar very thorough what his argument was again the assumption is that orthodoxies construction hadith sir made-up and his argument is that hadith don't tell us about the prophet's life they are a reflection of the communities will the muslim communities will and does and what the history they want to construct for themselves how does he notice because of anachronism so if you have hadith to talk about you know there will come a time when you know there will be black banners that will come from the east from Khorasan and you should join this army because this is the army of the method so well this is clearly made up during the Abbasid revolution because the Abbasid had black banners they were faced and Khorasan and this they made up as propaganda to get people to join their causes if you find a hadith that says that's a site a bedroom that men's room they would fit the happy person is the one who doesn't get involved in any kind of civil strife he doesn't get involved in politics well this is clearly concocted by Muslims during the Abbasid period when they're trying to basically get everybody to calm down and not get involved in political strife anymore or if you find a hadith that says that paddy is i ali is to me what baron was to moses well this was clearly made up by Shiites in their attempt to convince others that Hadees in the family the Prophet should lead and another hadith that says that you know while we uh it's as if he was another example that the Prophet inquired after a while yeah and he wasn't there and it became later and he said you know I was sitting beneath the throne of God okay this is clearly made up by problem I yet forces to legitimize the figure of model so he looks at if you in in theory in theory the Prophet could have said all these things if you believe the Prophet can knows the future he could have said all this and this could all be completely accurate but because the assumption that is that he doesn't know because the assumption is that people are making the subject to construct an orthodoxy determining what interest these various hadith serve tells you when they were made up and by home not clear this is golda hers argument so there's he eats that are made up to shore up in my legitimacy and that's where you get a lot of the political hadees the law that eats of law go there since we're made up during the Abbasid period from the mid 700 to 800 because the abasa decided they wanted to rule through the disposition of Islamic legitimacy as people who are going to bring back the Sun not the Prophet and they have to figure out how to provide some aslam for people to follow and they just make up they support aidid scholars and these cities scholars just make up all these idiots to create a legal code the people of Iran either sort of the Hanafi school more he says they just took the existing provincial laws and made them Islamic he says that the the bay at least were they were creative but not dishonest Aidid scholars were dishonest because they attributed all this stuff to be offered it's okay the general bodies have had eat that we find in the heath books that are used in Schieffelin theology were created in his opinion during the early abasa period you had a question sorry this is a good question a lot because Wendy's had this problem say for example the haddock about the black banner he was never heard in the time the domain and sunny appeared in university we could assume that he was one way of looking at it wind is a disco yeah well then we'll speak also we go to speak about that right now because you have to unless you happen to have lived throughout the Ambassador in my period which I doubt you did unless you know you're an immortal and we're Highlanders am i dead no one you know yeah I just above these movies when I was a kid so the point is the we don't know that how do you figure out if I went ahead he found off the nuts before he gets the next figure which is Joseph shaft the German scholar very interesting figures German scholar but he needs Germany I think right before over one books are World War two it not very enamored with direction which his country was going and he moved to England and eventually United States and he is a very key whereas going to her is really looking at the Metin if I eat the content of the hadith to tell you when it's made up what agenda is this hadith advancing if that tells you when it was made up for shocked he looks at the estat as well so yes we already saw you thank you okay here's oh look even have a green line that has been preserved for you wonderful so this is a shock looks at the snap and what he says is he mostly rely on the the six books he relied on the ohm of the Shapley Shapley's sort of compiled writings by his student or be up into the mountain Laura D and he looked at the hadith dealing with legal issues and what he says is if we collect the different narrations of a hadith what we find is that the the Prophet is tributed to a prophet than a companion and a successor and then let's say at some point you get this what he calls the common link and if you look at all these Mads you can create an Assad tree what you see is that it's after this common link that it really spreads out so what he says is our assumption is that this common link is the person who actually originated this ID they made it out they tributed to the Prophet because if it had existed earlier it would have been transmitted more widely we would have all these other you know it's nads going out from the companion and a successor so what shocked also does is he this is a way you can figure out when this appeared it appeared with this figure this common length what he finds is if you look like say this the the mawatha of Maddock mem Malik died 179 795 796 you find a hadith or a report that is attributed to a successor someone like Sayyidina Musa died around 93 injury the son of maha bua and then you look in home of the Chateau HFE is Malik student died 820 at the Common Era and you find the same report this time it's attributed to a companion let's say it's Jimmy to a Ferreira and then you look in sahih al-bukhari Pahadi is the two people away from safley two people away from Malik or actually sometimes one person away from heaven often one person and you find the same ID and it's tribute to the Prophet so what shop says is that this is back growth of the status that is growing backwards as time goes on and what he says is in the early Islamic period the time of the Companions sorry the time the successors between the let's say the beginning of the second Civil War in 680 and the late seven hundreds the Islamic law is actually low football Islam is actually these different local schools Medina of cool of Basra everybody has their there's no there's no notion that some of the Prophet is something that unifies them all which has their local schools kufan the bus runs and the medina 'ns now what happens is they're all competing with each other the kufan says I think the correct position on drinking to beat is this and the bus run says I think it's that how do they be each other over the head we have it it's what evidence that they can find well successor says this so even the same says this support me and then the Buster and says oh yeah well look what I have it's actually a companion in my book who says this and then eventually his argument is that a man the shadow he comes along in the late 700 and makes the Prophet Muhammad be source that everybody has to go to he sort of the ultimate trump card was the Prophet and his argument is that since salmon if you look at the six books these are the majority vast majority of their contents are idiqs from the Prophet that go back to the Prophet they must originate after the time of the shaft early in the late 700 s so it's really in the late 702 the early 800 s that this the world of hadith fed Sunni Muslims know and love is created it's created as a back projection of what was originally actually local schools of law pinions of successors that gets pushed back first the companions and then to the prophet so his argument is that if you come across a six if you see something in tribute to a successor it is more historically accurate and earlier then something that's attributed to a companion and more historically accurate and earlier than something in tribute to the Prophet is this clear have I lost anybody yes some spin around the world from page one top recycles sometimes certain Jotham Jotham certain cookies but I have to knowledge so isn't it at least that came Central Asia were probably around by the time that's a very good point that these are locally they're locally limited okay that's an important point which will be brought to bear on shat beyond shocked because shucks an important assumption here is very important is the idea of an argument Eisel nto or out of silence I think I wrote that down somewhere it's not on this slide I should be e e Silencio sometimes you can get a little pen and I will add right in terrible handwriting students let this might do it like an etch-a-sketch or refuse anyone argument from silence absence of evidence is evidence of absence whereas former US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said adjusted absence of evidence is not evidence of absence which is actually correct from an Islamic perspective Donald Rumsfeld not good ideas but sometimes pearls of wisdom my wife always gets angry when I hate when I say that VI so but the argument is if you don't have it if in fact Maddock is this Muslim scholar he should want to create the strongest argument possible for his position if the includes only includes a successor opinion in his book and not a prophetic hadith of the same content it must mean that the prophetic he didn't exist because if it did he would have included that's the argument you Silencio as you made as you've said there are numerous reasons why this might not be there this is something that is then it's a criticism of his work a good criticism but that's the army this is actually core for his argument because the back roads of his nads is based on the idea that they're originally there was not a prophetic hadith there was no prophetic hadith and it gets pushed back farther farther two more more and more powerful sources of legitimacy until it ends up with the ultimate source of legitimacy which is the Prophet now of course it would stop the questions I think this question can be answered later yeah I'm just going to be very quick very quick great so did it un-bell ji-hae joinville is a Dutch scholar who died about a year and a half ago he's very interesting fellow his family actually the joinville family was a merchant family that was involved in Dutch East India Company and Dutch colonial activities in Southeast Asia and some of his relatives the previous generation and the previous generation were leading scholars of Islam in Southeast Asia so he comes from a family really of that proves both you know the certainty orientalist of an Angels tradition of studying Islam but it's also linked to colonialist a colonial activities it's very important so he did he did a tremendous number of studies of hadith and he really builds on shox methods and kind of yes we saw you're ready and you and you ah here we go so here we he really kind of elaborates shocks methods more and creates a new jargon for discussing them so what his argument is again the common link is the where's my three Oh the common link is the person who makes out buddy his argument is Muslims love Hetty they're always talking about it they're always talking about how you should listen to the Prophet they're always talking about how many gazillions of people went attended the the hadith circles of Sufjan even Rihanna or Sean Patton a judge in Basra hundreds thousands of people they're attending these lessons hearing hadith if really this was happening you have dozens of people transmitting these ADIZ if you don't have them then means these cities must not have been transmitted his argument is that if you go back and you construct its NAD trees based on hadith collections those moments of contact of connection that are testified to or established by numerous transmissions from that source those are historically reliable moments of transmission you can say this happened the hadith existed this this person actually said this if you don't have these numerous transmissions from a supposed source since Muslims are obsessed with it even they love attending these sessions and listening and transmitting if it doesn't tap and then it must not have happened the hadith didn't exist so where are all the people from this companion where all people are supposedly transmitting this from the successor it didn't exist the hadith wasn't around this guy made it up how do we know that because we have these other sources and he talks about partial common links who are figures who transmit the material from that original source but if we look at hadith collections that say Buhari subside Muslims under Nevada we find there's other material as well we see let's say in the Monticello October tani aljahmeir the computer photo by Ronnie died three sixty nine seventy one album Qasim Paula Ronnie from this phone originally from type Tiberias on the Galilee see moves to as spawn for 60 years and learns three words of Persian just enough to order out so he he said you know he didn't know very much Persian this is a mark of pride because he never really got involved in non Arabic enough to say hello and things like that so you find a chant in his dad in let's say table Ronnie's it doesn't go by this relative ayat is commonly how do we explain this now according to your angles method and shox method is this a historically reliable mo it is historically reliable transmission anyone have an answer for that why not exactly this just made up because if it were real you'd have all these people coming out of this transmitter in this transmitter so this guy made it up why did he make it up he wants his own it's not he wants a shorter risk map or he wants to help in this great conspiracy to make this HEVC more liable because of the diet's Natha kind of dives in around the side and sometimes you'll have a hadith that doesn't have a common link it's just a bunch of single strands he calls those spiders and those for him or not you can't establish them as existing at any time basically until the collection in which they're found now a very important position of un goal is that and it's implicit in shaft it's explicit in Ewing Bowl is that the foot in effect all hadith they're made up I mean we read you can if you if this is your criteria if these are your criteria for determining when ID enter circulation but it happens with a common link and if the common link is always someone who's let's say a successor or beyond for you involved he says that these people usually exist in the early you know 700 to 720 700 730 of the Common Era this is when hadith SAR made up there are no in effect there are no reliably authentic hadith of the Prophet and he has an article on the the famous hadith of man cat about a was an identity development Illuminati whoever lies about me misrepresents me intentionally let him prepare for himself a seat in Hellfire he is no article on this in which he shows according to his methodology that it cannot be established as going back to the Prophet so if this hadith which is for Muslims the most authentic hadith between 60 and 100 companions transmitted from Bahrani has a whole book on the people who transmit this hadith if this is not reliable than nothing is there is no reliably established reliably establish a bull a D for the Proctor so what you have what the honey tradition is is a gigantic conspiracy Muir had been critical he says you know looks at Bukhari he says a third to a half of this book is nonsense but the rest is you know the Prophet had to say something and it's generally reliable the you know with with gold – here you have skepticism you have a hadith if it seems to be support some agenda you take it out not something made up later but this idea I implicit in Shaa explicit in Joinville is that nothing in the hadith tradition is really representative of something the Prophet actually said okay I will and air will go start next time yeah we're just making sure fresh for break 10 minutes and some of these wouldn't do with the basic dude registration get later and also welcome here

Author Since: Mar 11, 2019

  1. Hate this relative, filosófical, approach to everything
    i think is the best way for dum people to go to sleep
    like they are superior not intellectually because they know they are stupid
    But morally, and they chose marxism , socialism, communism which is immoral behind any doubt today.

  2. muslim thinking about their history he said?, history is the reality but not just in mind your thinking,,historian needed to open way to the better future,the right way,not to make people keep going into wrong way,

  3. One of the many cultural differences between Islam and the West is the concept of "deceit". One of Allah's 99 names is the great deceiver. The shortest Hadith is "War is deceit." said by Muhammad. There are numerous examples of Allah and Muhammad utilizing deceit and deception found in the Qur'an and the Sunna as a means of furthering Islam. Today deceit has become an active part of the Islamic values system just as truth is a major point found over and over again in Jewish and Christian sources. This fact answers the question of why Muslims have no difficulty in telling us with straight faces that Islam is a religion of peace and nothing found in the Qur'an has anything to do with violence or terrorism. Deceit is looked upon as a good thing in Islam and a good Muslim will deceive you for the sake of Islam…

  4. Holland can be faulted on a number of basis. He restricts himself to English translations certain primary non-Muslim sources not bothering to consult others. For instances Armenian and Byzantine Greek sources which are quite q few dealing with the rise and expansion of Arabs and their new faith. Holland may be able to get away with this when dealing with Greco-Roman history since many more and quite reliable English translations exist of the relevant sources. Equally one can't simply dismiss Arabic accounts simply because they are by Arabs ( and in this instance by Muslims). The same can be said for the history of the compilation of the Quran, doubts about which gave rise to wild theories, esp. by the likes of John Wansbrough. While there are issues that were / are recognized for the latter, some of the alternatives presented by western textual scholars in the past also sound implausible
    Historical critical analysis combined with archaeological and numismatic evidence can indeed be useful but relying entirely on them produces strange results as the work of Puim et al has given us, where, according to them , "real" Islamic history only begins with the Umayyad king, Abdul Malik ibn Marwan! This is just nonsense because it implies that events like Battles of Badr, Ohud, Basrah or Siffeen did not take place and are all later recreations as were the events of Karbala, and the rise and fall of a figure like Abu Obaid Mukhtar as-Saqafi! These events, and many more, occurring well-earlier than Abdul Malik have been mentioned in fair detail. To say that they never happened and were all later creations is simply nonsensical and demands that somebody / some people had hugely creative imaginations detailing events that gave did give rise to later historical events of the Umayyad and Abbasid dynasties. There seems to be a certain arrogance about all this, reeking of a certain sense of superiority: "We really know how to analyze history, not you!" The historical critical method together with supporting archaeological and numismatic evidence are very useful but need to be used with some caution. Sometimes apparently "supporting" evidence (or apparent lack of any) is apt to lead us astray.

  5. It is strange to say that al-Shafi'i was the first to state that the Sunnah of the Prophet is the one to follow, and not the "sunnah" (practices) of the people of your locality. This may be true of the group that eventually gave rise to the "Ahl as-Sunnah" who strayed from the path followed by the Ahlul Bayt (the Prophet's immediate family and blood relations), when the latter continued on the path of the "sunnat-ur-rasool" (Sunnah of the Prophet) as stated by Imam Ali (13 Rajab, 21 BH – 21 Ramadan, AH 40 = 15 September 601 – 29 January 661) in Nahjul Balaghah. It needs to be noted that Imam Ali preceded al-Shafi'i (150–204 AH [767–820 CE]) by almost one and a half century!

    IMAM ALI'S SERMON 152 (153 in some editions)

    ومن خطبة له( علي عليه السلام)يذكر فيها فضائل أهل البيت(عليهم السلام)

    وَنَاظِرُ قَلْبِ اللَّبِيبِ بِهِ يُبْصِرُ أَمَدَهُ، وَيَعْرِفُ غَوْرَهُ وَنَجْدَهُ. دَاع دَعَا، وَرَاع رَعَى، فَاسْتَجِيبُوا لِلدَّاعِي، وَاتَّبِعُوا الرَّاعِيَ.

    قَدْ خَاضُوا بِحَارَ الْفِتَنِ، وَأَخَذُوا بِالْبِدَعِ دُونَ السُّنَنِ، وَأَرَز الْمُؤْمِنُونَ،وَنَطَقَ الضَّالُّونَ الْمُكَذِّبُونَ. نَحْنُ الشِّعَارُ وَالاَْصْحَابُ، وَالْخَزَنَةُ وَالاَْبْوَابُ، [وَلاَ] تُؤْتَى الْبُيُوتُ إِلاَّ مِنْ أَبْوَابِهَا، فَمَنْ أَتَاهَا مِنْ غَيْرِ أَبْوَابِهَا سُمِّيَ سَارِقاً.

    The virtues of the Ahlu'l-bayt (of the Holy Prophet)

    He who has an intelligent mind looks to his goal. He knows his low road as well as his high road. The caller has called. The shepherd has tended (his flocks). So respond to the caller and follow the shepherd.

    They (the opposers) have entered the oceans of disturbance and have taken to innovations instead of the Sunnah (the Prophet's holy deeds, utterances and his unspoken approvals), while the believers have sunk down, and the misguided and the liars are speaking. We are the near ones, companions, treasure holders and doors (to the Sunnah). Houses are not entered save through their doors. Whoever enters them from other than the door is called a thief.

  6. What is he talking about? HE IS MENTALITY ILL AND DANGEROUS MAN. AND ALSO A POTENTIAL TERRORIST. HE DOESN'T KNOW "CHANGE IS IN HUMAN NATURE". HUMAN EXISTS ONLY BECAUSE HUMAN HAS ABILITY TO CHANGE.
    THIS MAN IS TALKING LIKE MUSLIMS WHO NEVER GO BEYOND 6TH CENTURY.

  7. His argument seems to be a relativist one; basically that critical methods aren't appropriate to to the historicity of Islam because non-critical methods traditionally used in Islam struggle with the empirical evidence. There seems to be a whiff of unfalsifiable pseudoscience to this line of reasoning. It doesn't seem to me that different methods must necessarily produce contradictory results if their premises are sound, so the rejection of critical approaches can only be because they are uncomfortable or embarrassing to those whose beliefs hang on objectively less rigorous approaches.

  8. Wow, I thought reading the quran was tedious, but this guy certainly knows how to make a potentially interesting subject very dull.

  9. The whole point and valifity of Holland's book is thst he looks at the origins of Islam as a historian, not as a muslim. Clearly, he is quite likely therefore to be less, nor more, biased, if at all.

  10. Jonathan Brown's rebuttal to Tom Holland's Book, Under the Shadow of the Sword is weak and lacking substance.

  11. I knew this idiot was familiar. He works at a Saudi funded "think tank" at Georgetown. They do nothing but spread wahbi-jihadi bullshit. And oh yeah he's a convert. God I wish Georgetown would just catch fire or drop into a gigantic sink hole.

  12. Muhammad was a poor man who make his way to the top by ling to the poor uneducated people. Muhammad was not no God sent .he is in hell and crying for his big mistake. Muhammad was a rapist full greed. my friend Jesus is the light and the truth. you can't go to heaven expect through Jesus

  13. he is no different to Islamic apologists who simply tries to make Islam look true and although it seems he is a convert to Islam he doesnt seem to follow everything Islam teaches

  14. Seems like these orientalists never opened a book of Hadith in their lives nor have they studied it seriously. All of their arguments can be easily refuted.

  15. Pseudo scientist. Using his method we would never invented anything but a vague reason why we should believe rubbish. 

  16. Brown is afraid of Islam's missing historicity and avoids it…cravenly. When there are as many ANOMALIES as there are in the story of early history, there is something else going on. There are lies and coverups of conspiracies.

    WHAT REALLY HAPPENED?  Anomalies DEMAND other explanations besides the orthodox one. Brown is running away from the question in fear.

  17. The can of Right Guard cannot deaden the smell of this Death Cult or of the SMELL OF BROWN'S FEAR of analyzing the MISSING HISTORICITY of the first 70 years after the Hegira!

    There is no historic basis for Islam.

  18. what a dihmmi. As if there is no difference between higher criticism and faith. An Islamic scholar is not a scholar in the same way as an orientalist scholar. You can know the Hadith forwards and backwards but that doesn't tell you whether they are true or based in history.

  19. This is beyond nonsense.  I want my money back!! But you didnt pay:  Dosnt matter truth is not relevant.

  20.  This piece of Idiot who is speaking, has any Idea of how to put in order his ideas. this guy is so horrible boring he is making people going to sleep.

  21. 15:54 Yes, that is true Muslims are supremacists, and therefore think they are different (better and superior and motivated differently) from Kafir who are less than human beings…Muslims believe they are beyond flaw because they follow the example of the bloodthirsty genocidal child rapist Akh-Mad (which if he existed, which is doubtful, is what his name, piss be on him, would have actually been)…Muslims are just like ZOG conspiratists Nazis…stupid as fuck.

  22. Well obviously a Muslim is going to want to defend their faith. Doesn't mean they're wrong. When someone presents evidence in they're own defense at court do you say "OH WELL THEY WOULD DO THAT SO THE EVIDENCE IS FAKE."

    nope. you judge the evidence.

    atheist logic fails again. 🙂 but us theists are always happy to give you guys a helping hand whenever you need it in terms of common sense.

  23. Of course he would, saying that we shouldn't look at Islam from the same contemporary western traditions that he lives by.

  24. Cont.
    Cannibalism for example is a social construct, scientifically its wrong to eat meat for humans, let alone human meat.
    Thus making science our religion, figuratively, and that it is the basis of skepticism and doubt as its foundation. As opposed to religion where blind faith and belief is the main pillar.
    It fascinates me how in another video he argues that one Hadith is to be taken to the word while another to be taken figuratively.

  25. I know! It got me that way as well, still his point is about the western view of the religion.
    He builds his argument on "Social Constructions" and how we view things now from a western point of view to criticize Islam. As a Saudi I was brought up as a Muslim, naturally, yet universal rights and wrongs are not debatable, lets say the reason for not marrying a 9 year old isn't because its icky, but because you have no right to marry someone who clearly can't choose for themselves at this age.

Related Post