Seminar: "God's Testimony: The Linguistic Miracle of the Quran for Non-Arabs" with Hamza A. Tzortzis (2021-06-16) ​

## Description

Learn how to articulate the linguistic miracle of the Quran without any knowledge of the Arabic language.

Summary of Seminar: "God's Testimony: The Linguistic Miracle of the Quran for Non-Arabs" with Hamza A. Tzortzis ​

This summary is AI generated - there may be inaccuracies. *

00:00:00 [01:00:00 ​

discusses the linguistic miracle of the Quran, which is a challenge that was presented to humanity by the Quran. The seventh century Arabs were the best equipped to challenge the Quran, as they were the most linguistically proficient at that time. goes into detail about the epistemology of testimony, the inference to the best explanation, and the argument for the veracity of the Quran.

00:00:00 Discusses the linguistic miracle of the Quran, which is a challenge that was presented to humanity by the Quran. The seventh century Arabs were the best equipped to challenge the Quran, as they were the most linguistically proficient at that time. goes into detail about the epistemology of testimony, the inference to the best explanation, and the argument for the veracity of the Quran.

• 00:05:00 The presenter argues that the Quran is linguistic and literary miracle, and that its inimitability is proven by scholars from various disciplines. He goes on to discuss why the Quran is inimitable, and why certain explanations for its inimitability are not plausible. He finishes by discussing why the Quran is from God.
• 00:10:00 The presenter discusses the epistemology of testimony and the influence of the best explanation, explaining that if someone is sincere and fitra-innate, they will be able to appreciate the truth of the Quran without difficulty. He goes on to explain that the Quran is intended for all people, regardless of their religious beliefs, and urges Muslims to engage non-Muslims in a way that allows for understanding and appreciation of the Quran.
• 00:15:00 Discusses the epistemology of testimony, which is the foundation of knowledge in the natural world. Testimony is a source of knowledge that is based on other sources of knowledge and is considered fundamental to knowledge. Professor Benjamin McMillan argues that testimony is useful, and Professor Cody argues that testimony is valid.
• 00:20:00 Hamza A. Tzortzis discusses how testimony is a fundamental source of knowledge and how it can be unreliable. He also discusses how experts rely on testimony to form knowledge in different areas of life.
• 00:25:00 Discusses the role of testimony in knowledge and how it is not based on empirical evidence but rather on testimonial transmission. He then gives three examples of testimonial evidence.
• 00:30:00 In this seminar, Hamza Tzortzis discusses the linguistic miracle of the Quran for non-Arabs. He points out that although the Quran is based on empirical evidence, it is fundamentally testimonial in nature. Testimonial knowledge is based on someone's assertion that they are speaking from experience, and this is how we know that Japan exists, love exists, and other words in the language.
• 00:35:00 This seminar discusses the linguistic miracle of the Quran for non-Arabs, discussing the difference between testimonial transmission of narratives and knowledge, and how eyewitness testimony is still valid despite its limitations.
• 00:40:00 The lecturer discusses the concept of inference to the best explanation, which is a way of thinking used in many fields of knowledge. He explains that the best explanation is one that is both plausible and comprehensive, and that it is important to consider all the data when assessing a hypothesis. Finally, the lecturer reads from his book on the topic.
• 00:45:00 The seminar discusses how the Quran presents a linguistic and literary challenge to humanity. It argues that this challenge necessitates that no one be able to imitate the Quran's linguistic and literary features.
• 00:50:00 The seminar discusses how the Quran challenges the masters of the Arabic language. The seventh century Arabs were the best equipped to challenge the Quran because they reached the peak of eloquence and rhetoric.
• 00:55:00 Discusses the importance of poetry in Arab culture, highlighting the linguistic and literary abilities of the seventh century Arabs. Professor Hussein Abdullah argues that the Arabs at the time had reached a linguistic peak in terms of competence in sciences, rhetoric, and poetry, but that this was not reflected in their ability to imitate the Quran. The social and political circumstances of the time were central to the Quranic message and posed a challenge to the meccan leadership, which was being challenged by the Quran. Islam succeeded in spreading due to the efforts of its early followers, who were unable to meet the Quranic challenge.

01:00:00 [01:50:00 ​

discusses the linguistic miracle of the Quran and how it provides evidence that the Quran is from a divine source. goes over various topics related to the Quran's linguistic miracle and how it is inimitable by any other text. He urges Muslims to be committed to the goodness and guidance of all people and to live their lives based on this state of being.

01:00:00 The presenter discusses the various scholars who have testified to the Quran's inimitability. He also discusses how this undermines the Quranic claim to be the most eminent literary work of mankind.

• 01:05:00 The seminar discusses the criticism of al-muttaqi al-bin-Muhammad bin al-Qasim al-Muttanabbi, who concludes that moon poetry is often poorly written and lacks originality. He also argues that the Quran is inimitable, and that scholars who say otherwise must assume absurd conclusions.
• 01:10:00 Discusses how the Qur'an has a variety of stylistic shifts that enhance its communicative effect. He also points out that these shifts are not linguistically ugly but rather part of the dynamic nature of the text.
• 01:15:00 The seminar discusses the linguistic miracle of the Quran, which is inimitable by any other text. The six premises of the argument for the Quran's inimitability are established, and it is concluded that the Quran could not have been produced by any of the three possible linguistic explanations: an Arab, a non-Arab, or Muhammad himself. The conclusion is that the Quran could only have come from God.
• 01:20:00 The seminar discusses how the quran could not have come from an Arab due to the linguistic environment at the time and how a non-arab could not produce it. The linguistics evidence supports that it came from a prophet, Muhammad.
• 01:25:00 The seminar discusses how the Quran is a literary masterpiece and with all literary masterpieces, there is careful amendment, revision, and addition. The psycholinguistic content of the Quran reveals it is from a divine voice. Trying to conclude that the Prophet was a genius based on this would be unfounded, as literary geniuses edit, amend, and improve their work.
• 01:30:00 The seminar discusses the linguistic miracle of the Quran and how it cannot be produced by non-Arabs or Muhammad. It concludes that the best explanation is that the Quran came from Allah.
• 01:35:00 Discusses the linguistic features of the Quran and how they are unique and inimitable. It argues that the Quran was authored by an Arab and non-arab, Muhammad, considering all the facts that have been discussed. God is the best explanation for the Quran's inimitability.
• 01:40:00 The seminar discusses the linguistic miracle of the Quran for non-Arabs, citing a linguistic study that concludes the hadith language is very different from the Arabic language, and that the Quran was revealed many verses for specific time and place, yet it has come together in a coherent literary structure.
• 01:45:00 Hamza A. Tzortzis discusses the linguistic miracle of the Quran, which is apparent when considering the timing of its revelation and the arrangements of its passages. He states that this phenomenon is "impossible" if the Quran were the work of a human being, and points to the arrangement of the Quran as evidence of its divine source.
• 01:50:00 Discusses the linguistic miracle of the Quran, which is based on first principles and evidences that are not going to change. He provides an overview of the seminar, which discusses various topics related to the Quran's linguistic miracle. concludes the seminar by urging Muslims to be committed to the goodness and guidance of all people, and to live their lives based on this state of being.

Full transcript with timestamps: CLICK TO EXPAND

0:00:15 brothers0:00:16 and sisters and friends and welcome to0:00:19 today's live academic seminar0:00:24 entitled god's testimony0:00:27 so what are we going to be talking about0:00:29 today well essentially my main objective0:00:32 is for you to be able to articulate the0:00:35 linguistic miracle of the quran0:00:38 without any knowledge of the arabic0:00:40 language okay0:00:42 because when one tries to show the0:00:44 veracity of the quran0:00:46 using the linguistic miracle there is a0:00:49 presupposition0:00:50 there is an assumption and that0:00:52 assumption is0:00:54 that one has access to the linguistic0:00:57 and literary0:00:58 tools to appreciate the unique0:01:02 literary form or the unique linguistic0:01:05 genre0:01:06 or the peak of eloquence or the0:01:11 multiple frequency of0:01:14 rhetorical devices of the quran0:01:17 and that assumption is a problematic0:01:20 assumption0:01:20 especially when you're giving da'awa0:01:23 when you're0:01:24 sharing islam academically and0:01:26 intellectually0:01:27 with an audience that doesn't know0:01:29 arabic and if they do know arabic they0:01:31 frankly may not have the tools0:01:34 to be able to understand the0:01:37 intricacies concerning the linguistic0:01:40 and literary0:01:41 features of the quranic discourse and0:01:44 that's why it's extremely0:01:45 important brothers and sisters for us to0:01:48 be able to0:01:50 speak about this argument but to do so0:01:52 in a way0:01:55 that we can con or at least we can0:01:59 show the veracity of the quran without0:02:02 the person requiring0:02:04 any knowledge of the arabic language in0:02:07 actual0:02:08 fact it doesn't even require you to have0:02:11 any knowledge of the arabic language and0:02:12 i think this argument0:02:14 is a powerful argument if one truly0:02:16 understands it0:02:17 and yes today it's going to be0:02:19 conceptually heavy it's going to be what0:02:21 you call0:02:22 theo philosophically heavy0:02:25 because we're going to be talking about0:02:27 very important epistemological0:02:30 stuff epistemological realities such as0:02:33 the fundamental and indispensable nature0:02:37 of testimony so we're going to unpack0:02:40 the epistemology of testimony0:02:42 and we're also going to be talking about0:02:44 the inference to the best explanation0:02:47 and when we when we understand0:02:50 those areas carefully and we understand0:02:53 them properly0:02:54 when we apply them to the quran we'll be0:02:58 able to make0:02:59 the best inference the most rational0:03:01 inference0:03:02 which is that the quran could could have0:03:05 only come from0:03:06 allah subhanahu wa ta'ala but in order0:03:08 for you to understand this properly you0:03:10 have to take this intellectual journey0:03:12 with me0:03:13 and let's do it insha allah so0:03:18 i got some slides here so what we're0:03:21 going to be covering today0:03:23 is really the epistemology of testimony0:03:26 as i0:03:27 just discussed and i think this is going0:03:28 to be quite a paradigm shift for many of0:03:31 you0:03:31 is going to make you see knowledge in a0:03:33 totally different way0:03:34 we're going to talk about the inference0:03:36 to the best explanation0:03:38 and we're going to articulate an0:03:41 argument for the veracity of the quran0:03:43 we're going to articulate an argument0:03:45 for why the quran is from allah in0:03:48 using using the epistemology of0:03:50 testimony and the inference to the best0:03:52 explanation and we're going to apply it0:03:55 to the inimitability of the quran and0:03:58 don't worry if you don't know what0:03:59 inimitability is we're going to explain0:04:01 all of these key terms and concepts0:04:03 um today inshallah so this is the0:04:07 structure of the argument this is the0:04:09 summary and we're going to unpack each0:04:11 premise so don't worry if you don't know0:04:13 what each premise means0:04:14 don't worry if you don't believe that0:04:16 the conclusion follows in any kind of0:04:18 logical way0:04:19 don't worry if you don't know certain0:04:20 key terms such as you know what does0:04:22 counter scholarly testimonies mean0:04:25 what does inimitable mean what does0:04:29 an arab mean i'm kidding you get the0:04:31 point so if you don't know any0:04:32 terminology don't worry my job today is0:04:34 to unpack all of this for you0:04:36 so don't be scared when i'm talking0:04:37 about the argument now and summarizing0:04:39 it and giving you the structure0:04:41 because the job of myself insha'allah is0:04:44 to unpack everything for you today0:04:45 so this is the structure of the argument0:04:48 number one0:04:49 the quran presents a literary and0:04:52 linguistic challenge to humanity0:04:54 number two the seventh century arabs0:04:57 were best0:04:57 placed to challenge the quran number0:05:00 three0:05:01 the seventh century arabs failed to do0:05:03 so number four0:05:05 scholars have testified to the quran's0:05:07 inimitability0:05:09 number five counter scholarly0:05:11 testimonies are not plausible0:05:14 as they have to reject the established0:05:16 background information0:05:18 and what we mean by counter scholarly0:05:20 testimonies0:05:21 is some scholars some orientalists that0:05:23 do not testify0:05:25 to the inimitability of the quran0:05:28 number six therefore from premise one to0:05:31 five0:05:32 the quran is inimitable and then we0:05:34 continue0:05:35 number seven the possible explanations0:05:38 for the quran0:05:39 and inimitability are authorship by an0:05:41 arab0:05:42 a non-arab muhammad salim or god0:05:47 number eight it could not have been0:05:48 produced by an arab0:05:50 and non-arab or muhammad sallam0:05:54 therefore the best explanation is that0:05:56 it is from god0:05:57 now what's very important to understand0:05:59 here is each of these premises when we0:06:01 unpack them0:06:03 you have to understand brothers and0:06:05 sisters that there's going to be0:06:07 certain academic and popular objections0:06:10 and we're going to be dealing with these0:06:11 inshallah so don't worry we're here for0:06:13 you today and ishala we're going to0:06:14 unpack all of this0:06:15 just be patient and patience is0:06:17 extremely important when we're trying to0:06:19 learn a new argument0:06:20 and learn certain concepts or key ideas0:06:24 and save your questions for the end i0:06:26 know some questions are coming up0:06:27 now but save it for the end and0:06:30 inshallah i will be addressing your0:06:31 questions0:06:33 now before we unpack this further i0:06:36 would like to say0:06:37 that this argument has been referenced0:06:40 it's been referenced0:06:41 in the book that you can see here i've0:06:43 got it with me i do advise you to buy it0:06:46 it was translated and annotated0:06:48 extensively by0:06:49 our beloved brother and friend dr0:06:51 safaruk chaudhary0:06:53 it's a treatise on disputation and0:06:55 argumentation0:06:56 and he uses this argument that we've0:06:58 developed alhamdulillah that actually0:07:01 was taken from my book the divine0:07:03 reality and in his book on page 74 and0:07:06 750:07:07 he referenced this argument as a0:07:10 argument with regards to using inference0:07:13 to the best explanation0:07:16 or rather he uses this argument to show0:07:19 an example of let me just go through the0:07:21 book right now just to be sure0:07:23 he's given an example of0:07:27 what is he giving an example of0:07:32 yes inference to the best explanation i0:07:35 believe that's what he's using0:07:36 this as an example of0:07:40 inshallah yes so there you go i just0:07:44 wanted to0:07:44 put that in there because you know an0:07:46 established academic like doctor0:07:47 suffered chowdhury0:07:48 has referenced this argument and um yes0:07:51 this is an argument from authority no0:07:53 problem0:07:54 but it's just there just to make you0:07:55 understand that we're not just picking0:07:56 this out from thin0:07:57 air it has been reviewed to a certain0:07:59 degree in actual fact0:08:01 dr safruk chowdhury he0:08:04 he actually helped me when i wrote an0:08:06 essay the essay0:08:07 or the chapter in my book but originally0:08:10 was an essay0:08:11 he actually helped me extensively when i0:08:13 was dealing with0:08:14 the contention with regards to which0:08:17 we're going to discuss in a few moments0:08:19 if you don't know what that's about0:08:19 don't worry0:08:20 so may allah bless him and grant him the0:08:22 best in this life and0:08:24 the life to come i mean so let's0:08:26 continue0:08:28 now the first thing we under we have to0:08:30 understand is why are we articulating0:08:31 this argument because0:08:33 in the world when we try to0:08:34 intellectually articulate a positive0:08:36 case for islam0:08:38 and in this case the quran we usually0:08:40 say the quran is a linguistic and0:08:42 literary miracle you know we reference0:08:44 it in our pamphlets and our books and so0:08:45 on and so forth0:08:46 and we even may even have discussions0:08:48 using arabic and using0:08:50 examples of eloquence from the quran0:08:52 using examples of0:08:54 of a unique genre literature genre0:08:57 using examples of a unique literature0:08:59 reform using examples0:09:01 of a supernatural0:09:04 frequency of rhetorical devices and so0:09:06 on and so forth0:09:07 but all of this all of this is premised0:09:10 on the idea that we have the tools to0:09:12 access0:09:13 the kind of linguistic literary arabic0:09:16 technical stuff that we're talking about0:09:18 right0:09:18 like you know when we talk about things0:09:20 like ill-tifact which is0:09:22 you know grammatical shift or0:09:24 referencing shifting0:09:25 you know we have to actually know what0:09:27 that's about and how it's used in a way0:09:29 to enhance0:09:31 the communicative effect of0:09:34 the the the meaning portrayed by the0:09:37 book of allah subhanahu wa ta'ala but0:09:38 you need knowledge of that and this is0:09:40 very deep it's a science0:09:42 in in in arabic in classical arabic0:09:45 belera rhetoric eloquence it's a deep0:09:48 science and0:09:49 even arabs themselves don't have the0:09:51 tools to understand this0:09:52 so it's premised on the fact that you0:09:54 know you have the tools or the person0:09:57 you're talking to has the tools to even0:09:59 understand what you're saying even if0:10:00 they don't have the tools and they agree0:10:02 with you0:10:03 they have to trust you right they have0:10:05 to actually0:10:06 trust you that what you're saying is0:10:07 true that this is the nature of the0:10:09 arabic language this is how the arabic0:10:11 language works0:10:12 this is how the quran produces a0:10:14 supernatural eloquence for example they0:10:16 would have to actually believe0:10:18 you not based on believe what you're0:10:20 saying not based on for example any0:10:22 technical expertise that they have0:10:24 but just by virtue of the fact that they0:10:25 just trusted you0:10:27 so it's very important that we in the0:10:29 hour that we create arguments that are0:10:31 timeless0:10:32 that absorbs if you like or transcends0:10:35 any of the kind of key contentions0:10:37 and key objections that may come today0:10:40 or even tomorrow so you know when we say0:10:44 the quran has supernatural eloquence the0:10:46 quran's arabic is inimitable the quran0:10:48 is the best expression of the arabic0:10:50 language0:10:50 well that is all premised on what an0:10:53 assumption and that assumption is0:10:55 do you know arabic right do you know0:10:58 classical arabic0:10:59 do you have the tools at your disposal0:11:01 to understand what you're saying0:11:02 or does the person that you're talking0:11:04 to have the tools at their disposal0:11:06 to understand what they're saying and0:11:09 this is very very critical because this0:11:11 assumption is actually assumption that0:11:13 defeats the argument0:11:15 because if you don't have the tools and0:11:17 they don't have the tools which is0:11:18 usually the case especially in the0:11:20 english0:11:20 western context then well you know0:11:24 they just have to trust you but if they0:11:26 have to trust you then it doesn't really0:11:28 matter what you say0:11:29 right so this is why it's very important0:11:31 for us to0:11:32 future proof the dollar for us to be0:11:34 able to transcend some of the objections0:11:36 that come up and first have more0:11:38 robust robust arguments for the book of0:11:41 allah0:11:44 now so the background to this argument0:11:46 is extremely important the concept that0:11:48 we're going to be talking about now0:11:49 before we formulate the argument before0:11:51 we unpack the premises0:11:53 is the epistemology of testimony and the0:11:55 inference to the best explanation0:11:56 however i really want to mention0:11:58 something and brothers and sisters0:11:59 please take this very seriously please0:12:01 take it very seriously0:12:03 the book of allah for me0:12:07 the book of allah if someone is sincere0:12:10 and they read the book of0:12:12 allah that is enough i believe that0:12:15 because the articulation of who allah is0:12:19 the tawheed of allah the divine oneness0:12:22 of allah0:12:23 the oneness of his divinity the wonders0:12:25 of his creative power the oneness of his0:12:27 names and attributes0:12:28 as articulated and expressed in the0:12:30 quran0:12:31 if one is sincere if one's fitra innate0:12:35 disposition is not clouded0:12:37 they will be able to appreciate the0:12:40 truth of the quran0:12:41 without a doubt they need to engage with0:12:43 the quran we0:12:44 and people and non-muslims need to0:12:46 engage with the quran0:12:48 in a way that is phenomenological0:12:52 phenomenological meaning have an0:12:54 experience with the book of allah0:12:56 subhanallah0:12:56 ta'ala read the meaning0:13:00 read the meaning when when we understand0:13:03 the virtues of reciting the quran0:13:05 you have to understand that those0:13:06 virtues were just were describing the0:13:10 arabs0:13:10 yani what i'm trying to say here is it0:13:12 was talking to0:13:13 the the primary audience which was the0:13:16 sahaba they already knew arabic so0:13:18 when we were talking about the virtues0:13:20 or when the process was talking about0:13:22 talking about the virtues of reciting0:13:23 the quran0:13:24 it was already assumed that they're0:13:26 going to understand what they recite0:13:28 so it's very important that we do tata0:13:30 even allah says in the quran0:13:34 on their hearts so from this perspective0:13:36 we could mirror the meaning and the more0:13:39 we do the more pondering we do our0:13:40 hearts become unlocked0:13:42 to receive the guidance and mercy of0:13:44 allah0:13:45 this is why brothers and sisters do not0:13:48 underestimate the power of getting0:13:50 people just to reflect on the quran0:13:52 for yourself as a muslim but also0:13:53 non-muslims if they are sincere0:13:56 the fitra is not clouded the innate0:13:58 disposition is not is not0:13:59 is not clouded then what has to then0:14:03 and they engage with the quran and they0:14:04 do they ponder over the quran0:14:06 inshallah this would be enough for them0:14:08 because the quran really its main0:14:10 message0:14:10 was to announce allah to humanity that0:14:12 he is worthy of worship0:14:14 that he is worthy to be known to be0:14:17 loved0:14:18 to be obeyed and and to and for us to0:14:21 direct0:14:21 all of our internal and external acts of0:14:24 worship0:14:25 to allah alone so this is very important0:14:28 i wanted to mention this because i don't0:14:29 want i don't0:14:30 want to you know create a narrative0:14:32 where the quran has to be proven0:14:34 philosophically in this way all the time0:14:36 no not at all0:14:37 please understand what i've just said so0:14:40 let's go back to the essential0:14:42 philosophical conceptual background that0:14:45 we need to understand which is the0:14:47 epistemology of testimony and the0:14:48 influence of the best explanation0:14:50 in actual fact these things are going to0:14:52 be amazing tools for you0:14:53 that you can apply in your intellectual0:14:56 journey when you're dealing with0:14:57 with other areas of knowledge especially0:14:59 dealing with atheists and philosophical0:15:01 naturalists0:15:02 and all of these people who claim to0:15:03 have some kind of truth claims which we0:15:05 know0:15:05 are actually false because their0:15:07 understanding of philosophy and even0:15:09 theo philosophy and theology0:15:11 is extremely weak and is not founded on0:15:14 anything from that perspective so let's0:15:17 and that's why it's very important these0:15:18 concepts are going to transcend today's0:15:20 discussion0:15:22 so the first thing we need to understand0:15:23 is about testimony the epistemology of0:15:26 testimony now0:15:28 testimony is an indispensable and0:15:30 fundamental source of knowledge okay0:15:33 and when it comes to the epistemology of0:15:35 testimony0:15:36 which is really questioning0:15:39 how does testimony yield evidence0:15:43 is testimonial knowledge based on other0:15:46 sources of knowledge0:15:47 is testimony fundamental how do we0:15:51 ensure that testimony0:15:54 actually provides0:15:57 knowledge what kind of other concepts or0:16:01 ideas0:16:02 or philosophical criteria must we have0:16:05 in order to assess if testimony0:16:09 constitutes knowledge if one's testimony0:16:11 actually constitutes knowledge0:16:13 and these are the kind of questions that0:16:15 the the epistemologists of test0:16:17 testimony if you like the0:16:18 epistemologists those who study0:16:20 knowledge0:16:21 they ask these questions and what's very0:16:24 interesting is0:16:25 that in even western philosophy0:16:28 testimony is actually one of the sources0:16:30 of knowledge0:16:32 and it's this is not controversial and0:16:35 in the past 30 or 40 years has been a0:16:37 revival0:16:38 in the kind of epistemological0:16:41 assessment0:16:42 of testimony as a fundamental and0:16:45 essential source of knowledge0:16:46 now many people because we live in this0:16:48 kind of you know metaphysical0:16:50 naturalistic world and we live in the0:16:51 age of science we're like testimony what0:16:53 on earth is that about0:16:54 i'm not going to just trust what0:16:56 somebody says now that is a very shallow0:16:58 response and when we discuss further0:17:00 today you're going to really understand0:17:01 that most of your knowledge and my0:17:02 knowledge and even most of0:17:04 the knowledge of a scientist is actually0:17:06 not empirically founded0:17:07 from the point of view that they0:17:08 actually have to believe it believe in0:17:10 it to be true0:17:11 by virtue of testimonial transmission0:17:14 because when you read a science book0:17:15 you haven't done the experiment yourself0:17:17 they've done it and they've testified0:17:19 that they've done it0:17:20 and you believe it no by virtue of you0:17:21 doing the experiment but you believe it0:17:23 by virtue of the testimony which is0:17:25 in the ink and the paper of the0:17:28 scientific book that you're actually0:17:29 reading0:17:31 so let's continue with this idea of0:17:33 testimony so0:17:34 professor benjamin mcmillan i think is0:17:36 an associate professor0:17:38 he provides a very beautiful summary of0:17:40 testimonial knowledge0:17:42 he says here are a few things that i0:17:44 know0:17:45 i know that the copperhead is the most0:17:47 common venomous snake in the greater0:17:49 houston area i know that napoleon lost0:17:52 the battle of waterloo0:17:54 i know that as i write the average price0:17:56 for gasoline in the us0:17:57 is 4.10 cents per gallon0:18:00 all of these things i know on the basis0:18:03 of what epistemologists call0:18:05 testimony on the basis of being told of0:18:07 them0:18:08 by another person or group of persons0:18:10 and a lot of the knowledge that we have0:18:12 is actually0:18:13 testimonial transmission and this is not0:18:16 controversial at all0:18:18 yes there are different criteria and0:18:20 there's a there's a discussion0:18:22 in the academic literature on what0:18:24 constitutes valid0:18:26 testimonial knowledge but that's not0:18:28 really our discussion today our0:18:29 discussion is to show that testimony0:18:31 is a fundamental and valid source of0:18:34 knowledge0:18:34 once we understand this clearly then0:18:36 we're able to move on0:18:38 and we're able to understand this0:18:39 argument properly insha allah0:18:42 so as i said there's a discussion on0:18:45 the validity of testimony and i'm going0:18:47 to discuss briefly about this but the0:18:49 first thing i want to really0:18:51 really get you to understand is that0:18:54 testimony is fundamental0:18:55 so there was a discussion obviously a0:18:58 lot of these type of discussions0:18:59 are you know you could trace them back0:19:01 to the scottish skeptic david hume0:19:04 and he spoke about testimony and he0:19:06 basically said that testimony is useful0:19:09 so he didn't dismiss it he understood0:19:12 its instrumental value0:19:14 we can't dispense away with testimony0:19:17 and he said testimony is very important0:19:19 but we only accept testimonial0:19:21 transmission we only accept it as0:19:23 knowledge0:19:24 if it's in line with our collective0:19:27 experiences0:19:28 now professor cody many hundred years0:19:30 later he writes the book0:19:32 uh testimony i think is called a0:19:33 philosophical discussion of0:19:36 philosophical study he and it was0:19:38 published in 1991 i believe and it was a0:19:40 it was a it was a landmark book0:19:42 uh with regards to the discussions and0:19:44 epistemology of testimony0:19:46 he basically argues against david hume0:19:48 he says hold on a second david hume0:19:50 obviously he doesn't use those words but0:19:51 i'm just0:19:52 kind of uh trying to eloquently0:19:54 summarize his point0:19:55 he says hold on a second david hume0:19:58 you agree that testimony is instrumental0:20:01 you agree that it's very useful and0:20:04 maybe necessary so0:20:06 but you say we only accept it as a valid0:20:08 form of knowledge if it's in line with0:20:09 our collective experiences0:20:11 so he turns the table and says how do0:20:14 you know0:20:15 what our collective experiences are0:20:18 you haven't experienced other people's0:20:20 experiences you haven't seen you haven't0:20:22 done you haven't experienced the0:20:24 experiences you haven't done the0:20:26 scientific date or the empirical stuff0:20:28 that they have done you have to0:20:31 find out through their testimonial0:20:33 transmission0:20:34 so to understand collective experiences0:20:37 you have to rely on testimony0:20:39 which shows the fundamental nature of0:20:41 testimony it's not just instrumental it0:20:43 is fundamental0:20:44 and this is a powerful argument he i0:20:46 think he refutes david hume and0:20:49 what's amazing here brothers and sisters0:20:51 is now if someone says0:20:53 or if david hume retorts and says well i0:20:56 could just rely on my own experiences0:20:58 ha but if you were to rely just on your0:21:00 own experiences you won't have any0:21:02 knowledge especially when you're talking0:21:04 about today's type of knowledge in the0:21:05 sciences0:21:06 and in philosophy in mathematics you0:21:09 can't do everything yourself you have to0:21:11 rely0:21:11 on other people's research and0:21:13 investigation0:21:14 right so i think professor cody really0:21:18 shows0:21:19 that testimony is a fundamental0:21:23 and indispensable source of knowledge0:21:25 now there is a discussion on what0:21:27 constitutes0:21:28 you know valid testimonial knowledge0:21:31 because some testimony can be absolutely0:21:32 wrong of course you know as you know you0:21:34 know when0:21:35 when a politician says something we're0:21:37 not going to believe him just by virtue0:21:38 of his testimony of course not because0:21:40 usually politicians unfortunately0:21:42 they lie so you know just because0:21:45 someone's testimony is is usually not0:21:49 true0:21:49 or it's not founded on on reality0:21:52 it doesn't mean that we throw the baby0:21:54 out with the bath bomb because if we did0:21:55 that with all sources of knowledge you0:21:56 won't have any knowledge at all because0:21:58 even experience and empirical data0:22:00 we could misunderstand it or we could0:22:02 have illusions for example0:22:04 or it could be you know theory laden we0:22:06 could presuppose0:22:08 an idea onto the experience and it makes0:22:12 us look at the experience in a way0:22:13 that's not a representation of reality0:22:15 so all sorts of knowledge have those0:22:17 problems anyways you can't throw the0:22:18 baby out with a bath or otherwise you'll0:22:20 have no knowledge at all0:22:21 so there hasn't been a discussion on the0:22:24 kind of validity0:22:25 of what kind of philosophical criteria0:22:28 you have0:22:29 uh in order to that you need in order to0:22:33 understand what is valid testimonial0:22:35 knowledge so dr elizabeth fricker she0:22:37 makes a really good point0:22:38 she says look we have to rely on experts0:22:41 our limitations0:22:43 you know we have cognitive limitations0:22:45 epistemic limitations0:22:47 we can't know everything we have to rely0:22:50 on the authority of others and this is0:22:52 quite interesting because when i had my0:22:53 kind of0:22:54 you know famous debate many years ago0:22:56 with0:22:57 professor lawrence krauss towards the0:22:58 end we had a discussion0:23:00 on this issue and i tried to expose that0:23:02 he had an empirical presupposition0:23:04 and that empirical presupposition was0:23:06 what it was you know0:23:08 all knowledge comes from experience and0:23:10 i said this is not true0:23:11 right this is this is a presupposition0:23:13 that's unfounded and he said well what0:23:15 other sources of knowledge0:23:16 do you have and i said testimony then he0:23:17 almost snicked at me and i said well and0:23:19 he said i just do the science and i said0:23:21 well do0:23:22 this science and i said do you believe0:23:25 in evolution0:23:26 he said yes and i said have you done all0:23:28 the science have you done all the0:23:28 experiments yourself0:23:30 he said no people started to laugh0:23:32 because they exposed what0:23:33 it exposed the reality that this vast0:23:36 area of knowledge in science0:23:37 you can't do everything yourself even if0:23:41 the experiments are repeatable0:23:44 that's still testimonial evidence0:23:45 because you have to believe they're0:23:46 repeatable by virtue of them saying it's0:23:48 repeatable0:23:49 you'll have to repeat yourself to0:23:51 actually know it's repeatable but you0:23:52 can't it's too much stuff going on in0:23:54 this domain of knowledge0:23:55 and this is why even the berkeley0:23:57 website when it discusses science0:23:59 it actually talks about the say-so or0:24:01 the authority of0:24:02 the the body of scientists other other0:24:05 scientists there's a body of knowledge0:24:07 going on0:24:07 and you can only access that body of0:24:09 knowledge by virtue of what by virtue of0:24:12 the testimonial transmission not by0:24:13 virtue of you actually doing that0:24:15 science yourself0:24:16 because it's practically impossible and0:24:18 even epistemologically impossible0:24:20 for you to do all the experiments in the0:24:21 research yourself so testimony is so0:24:24 significant0:24:25 even in science pick up any science book0:24:27 all the scientific facts that you have0:24:29 just think about brothers and sisters0:24:30 the scientific facts that you have0:24:32 most of them are based on testimony not0:24:34 empirical data0:24:36 yes the book that you read claims it0:24:38 came from research it came from0:24:40 empirical data0:24:41 but did you do it yourself no0:24:44 you had to actually just believe the say0:24:47 so0:24:48 of the person who basically0:24:51 uh wrote the book0:24:54 now moving on from this you have other0:24:56 discussions in the epistemology of0:24:58 testimony by the way epistemology0:25:00 epistemology for those who don't know0:25:02 means0:25:02 actually the study of knowledge so the0:25:05 the epistemologist0:25:06 someone who studies knowledge they0:25:09 actually talk about0:25:10 trust as you know a concern when it0:25:13 comes to0:25:14 valid testimonial knowledge and for0:25:16 example professor0:25:18 keith lehrer he basically discusses this0:25:21 and he says that you know in order for0:25:23 testimonial knowledge to be0:25:24 valid we have to be trustworthy in our0:25:28 assessments of the trustworthiness of0:25:30 others allahu akbar what am i talking0:25:32 about here what does this sound like to0:25:33 you0:25:34 they're talking about this what in 20060:25:38 we've been talking about this for over0:25:39 1400 years right also0:25:41 because this is actually articulating0:25:43 maybe the philosophical basis for what0:25:47 hadith the science of hadith right0:25:49 because in the science of hadith0:25:51 you know we we actually have developed0:25:55 philosophical theo philosophical0:25:56 criteria to understand if someone in the0:25:58 in the snod which is the chain of0:26:00 transmission if they're trustworthy or0:26:02 not0:26:02 what constitutes their trustworthiness0:26:05 right0:26:06 and so on and so forth so it's very0:26:07 interesting that in 2006 because it's0:26:09 been taken from0:26:10 uh one of the essays from professor0:26:12 keith lehrer i think he's an amaretto's0:26:13 professor0:26:14 and he talks about that we have to be0:26:16 trustworthy in our assessments of the0:26:18 trustworthiness of others0:26:20 and also the person providing that0:26:22 testimonial knowledge has to be0:26:23 trustworthy0:26:24 too sounds like animal hadith to me the0:26:26 science of0:26:27 prophetic narrations to me also0:26:30 professor benjamin mcmilla he talks0:26:32 about the right to referral0:26:34 meaning that you know when someone is0:26:36 expressing a test0:26:37 testimonial knowledge he's his his he or0:26:41 she0:26:41 is is giving testimony to some knowledge0:26:44 then there must there must be a right to0:26:46 refer or meaning that the one who's0:26:47 giving the testimonial transmission0:26:49 they have to accept the responsibility0:26:51 that someone could refer back to them0:26:52 and say0:26:53 let me question you further and the0:26:55 audience themselves they have to accept0:26:57 also a kind of epistemic responsibility0:26:59 of responsibility to dr knowledge0:27:02 in order to to question the person that0:27:04 is0:27:05 actually providing that testimonial0:27:07 knowledge to say hey what do you mean by0:27:08 that actually do you have evidence for0:27:10 this can you explain this further0:27:12 and i think that's what benjamin mcmilla0:27:13 was actually trying to say which is very0:27:16 interesting0:27:16 now there's much more concerning the0:27:19 testimony0:27:20 of knowledge much much more it's not the0:27:22 role of the webinar or the seminar today0:27:25 to actually unpack this i've just given0:27:27 you a little taster to understand0:27:28 that there is a philosophical discussion0:27:31 on0:27:31 on what constitutes valid testimonial0:27:34 knowledge0:27:35 but our main issue here today is to show0:27:36 that testimony is fundamental it's a0:27:38 fundamental0:27:39 and indispensable source of knowledge0:27:42 brothers0:27:43 and sisters now let me unpack this0:27:46 further i want to give you three0:27:48 key examples i think you're gonna love0:27:49 this okay every time i do this when i0:27:51 sit at universities0:27:52 when i talk to students even academics0:27:55 it's it's it's a bit of a laugh actually0:27:56 because they0:27:57 they realize that some key key aspects0:28:00 of knowledge0:28:01 is not based on on science it's based on0:28:04 testimonial transmission so let me ask0:28:06 you a question0:28:07 is the world flat by the way before you0:28:10 go crazy i don't believe the world is0:28:12 flat okay i believe it's0:28:13 it's spherical all right but let me ask0:28:16 you a question is the word flat now many0:28:18 of you may say of course it's not flat0:28:20 it's spherical now let me ask you0:28:22 another question0:28:24 do you have any what's your proof0:28:27 many of you may say well we have many0:28:29 pictures that show that the world is0:28:31 spherical0:28:33 we have you know it says in the science0:28:36 books0:28:37 okay but those two answers0:28:40 or those pieces of so-called evidence0:28:42 they're not empirical0:28:44 they're testimonial because a book is a0:28:46 testimonial transmission0:28:48 it's telling you you have to believe0:28:50 what it says and the photographs0:28:53 they're not empirical the testimonial0:28:54 why yes you see an image it's empirical0:28:57 but fundamentally this testimonial why0:29:00 i tell you why because when someone0:29:02 takes a picture of earth they have to0:29:04 say to you0:29:05 this is earth so you take0:29:08 their testimony that this is earth and0:29:09 you apply it to the picture0:29:12 i don't care if there's millions of them0:29:13 i don't care if there's billions of0:29:14 those pictures on google the point is0:29:16 fundamentally that evidence that the0:29:20 world is0:29:20 round or spherical by virtue of a0:29:22 picture is not empirical0:29:24 it's actually testimonial so0:29:27 what are you guys going to say now many0:29:29 of you haven't done0:29:30 the mathematics many of you haven't you0:29:33 know0:29:33 done much of the science yourself you0:29:35 know many of you haven't0:29:36 gone in a rocket and actually launched0:29:39 yourself0:29:40 and actually seen in space the spherical0:29:43 nature of the earth you haven't done0:29:44 that yes other people have done that but0:29:46 you haven't done that so you have to0:29:47 believe what they said even if they took0:29:49 a video of it0:29:50 you still have to believe that that is0:29:51 earth because one point in time when you0:29:53 were developing as a child or a young0:29:55 adult or whatever0:29:56 they had to basically say this is earth0:29:58 so that's a testimonial transmission of0:30:00 being applied0:30:02 to a picture so the fundamental0:30:05 essence of this piece of knowledge is0:30:07 actually testimonial not empirical0:30:09 now many of you say well if you go on a0:30:10 read a high mountain you can see the0:30:11 curvature of the earth0:30:12 well then again it doesn't mean it's0:30:14 round maybe it's a flower0:30:15 maybe it's a semicircle right the point0:30:19 i'm trying to say here is0:30:20 that you don't have many of us0:30:23 at least maybe 80 90 of us we don't have0:30:26 scientific0:30:27 direct empirical evidence for the world0:30:30 being around0:30:33 right it's testimonial fundamentally0:30:38 so you know we could unpack this more in0:30:41 the q a but let me give another question0:30:43 does japan exist does japan exist0:30:48 how do you know japan exists many of you0:30:50 gonna say yes of course it exists okay0:30:53 now here's a caveat if you haven't been0:30:55 there0:30:56 right if you haven't been there0:31:00 that you haven't experienced it0:31:02 empirically if you're like0:31:04 then how do you know it exists well0:31:05 you're going to say it's on a map i've0:31:07 met a japanese person before0:31:09 before you know i've been learning0:31:11 japanese but that doesn't mean0:31:13 anything that's all fundamentally0:31:14 testimonial knowledge because0:31:16 someone's saying that they're japanese0:31:18 you have to believe them that they're0:31:19 japanese0:31:21 right you know i say to you i'm greek0:31:23 i'm ethnically greek0:31:26 i'm british but ethnically greek my0:31:28 mom's from cyprus my dad's from greece0:31:30 so i'm ethnic she's greek cypriot my mom0:31:32 so i'm ethnically greek right0:31:36 is that empirical evidence no you have0:31:38 to believe what i said it's it's it's0:31:39 it's testimonial transmission0:31:41 many of you won't even believe me anyway0:31:42 you probably think i look arab or0:31:44 persian or pakistani right0:31:45 so there you go so the here the point0:31:48 here is see0:31:49 meeting someone who's japanese is not0:31:50 proof that japan exists from an0:31:52 empirical point of view it's proved from0:31:54 a testimonial point of view it's0:31:55 testimonial0:31:56 knowledge i'm not dismissing it it's0:31:57 valid and fundamental but that's why i'm0:31:58 trying to0:31:59 show you today even if you look at0:32:01 things in a map0:32:02 even if you look at videos of0:32:04 documentaries and books on history and0:32:05 you have a library of japanese0:32:07 cultural studies or whatever the case0:32:09 may be or you eat lots of sushi and they0:32:11 say this is a japanese0:32:12 culture dish that's all testimonial0:32:15 knowledge because someone told you0:32:17 right in actual fact even if you went to0:32:19 japan itself and you went on a plane it0:32:21 says going to japan you arrive in tokyo0:32:23 that's still all testimonial really0:32:26 because0:32:28 you just have to believe them isn't it0:32:30 you have to believe that yes you're0:32:31 you're in japan now0:32:32 you have to believe them yes that the0:32:34 people you're speaking to are actually0:32:35 japanese and they're in this area0:32:37 that looks like the picture that you're0:32:39 looking at right now0:32:41 so it's fundamentally testimonial but in0:32:44 essence if you've never been there0:32:45 before0:32:46 all your evidence that japan exists is0:32:49 actually testimonial fundamentally even0:32:51 if you have pictures even you have0:32:52 videos0:32:53 again just like the earth being0:32:55 spherical it's testimonial transmission0:32:57 because someone has to say0:32:58 this to you they have to say well we're0:33:00 in japan right now or this person's0:33:02 japanese0:33:03 or what i'm speaking to you is actually0:33:04 japanese or0:33:06 uh um this food that you're eating is0:33:08 called sushi and it's from japan0:33:10 you know this is testimonial0:33:12 transmission0:33:14 right hopefully this is you're going to0:33:16 understand this now0:33:18 this one's very powerful brothers and0:33:20 sisters i'm telling you this one is what0:33:21 i would call a0:33:22 smackdown right0:33:25 a smackdown okay so0:33:29 this is a smackdown brothers and sisters0:33:32 how do you know right how do you know0:33:35 how to pronounce this word that you see0:33:36 on the screen right now0:33:38 how do you know how to pronounce love0:33:40 tell me0:33:42 how do you know how to pronounce love0:33:48 why do we say love and we don't say love0:33:52 why do we say love and we don't say love0:33:56 e why do we say love and we don't say0:33:59 lo vi right0:34:03 why do we say love and we don't say love0:34:05 and we just have the e0:34:07 as silent right0:34:10 why do we do that tell me0:34:15 the pronunciation the correct0:34:17 pronunciation of the word love0:34:19 is through testimonial transmission0:34:22 there is no empirical reality other than0:34:26 testimonial transmission so there's no0:34:28 empirical reality all you have is0:34:29 testimonial transmission to understand0:34:31 how to pronounce words0:34:32 now you may argue no hamza you know in0:34:34 these special dictionaries0:34:36 you have the word and you have these0:34:37 symbols these international type of0:34:39 symbols that teach you how to pronounce0:34:40 those words0:34:41 hold on a second what came first the0:34:43 pronunciation of the book0:34:45 that tells you how to pronounce it was0:34:47 the pronunciation0:34:48 that didn't you do you know we weren't0:34:50 revealed from the skies0:34:51 a book on how to pronounce words in0:34:54 certain languages0:34:55 and then we used that and then started0:34:56 to pronounce the words correctly that0:34:58 wasn't the case0:34:59 we learned how to use how to pronounce0:35:01 words in any language0:35:03 through testosterone testimonial0:35:04 transmission so if you deny0:35:07 testimonial transmission it's0:35:08 fundamental indispensable nature0:35:11 u is tantamount equivalent0:35:13 philosophically logically equivalent0:35:15 of rejecting0:35:18 all known languages it's very powerful0:35:23 so that's testimony brother brothers and0:35:26 sisters now there's some important0:35:27 distinctions we have to make0:35:29 we know in academia there is a0:35:31 difference between testimonial0:35:32 transmission of narratives and knowledge0:35:34 and eyewitness testimonies because0:35:36 eyewitness testimonies0:35:37 according to according to research0:35:41 you know they do suffer with regards to0:35:44 um you know the testimonial transmission0:35:47 of a particular event that happened0:35:49 and you know some of them suffered due0:35:51 to due to people's imperfect short-term0:35:53 memories0:35:54 the psychological influence and so on0:35:56 and so forth as i write in my book here0:35:58 eyewitness testimony may suffer due to0:36:00 our imperfect short-term memories and0:36:02 the psychological influences and0:36:03 constraints0:36:04 on recalling the sequence of a0:36:06 particular event0:36:08 the testimony of knowledge ideas or0:36:10 concepts does not suffer from such0:36:12 issues because the acquisition of0:36:14 knowledge is usually a result of0:36:15 repetition0:36:16 a relatively longer duration0:36:18 internalization and study0:36:19 so it's an important distinction to make0:36:21 between transmission of narratives and0:36:24 knowledge0:36:24 and actually eyewitness testimony as0:36:27 well0:36:28 but then again this doesn't mean that0:36:29 eyewitness testimony0:36:31 is is not valid there could be some0:36:33 criteria in place to ensure0:36:35 especially especially if it's multiple0:36:38 eyewitness testimony that is actually0:36:41 uh true and you know what's really0:36:43 interesting david hume0:36:45 who was who was0:36:49 a skeptic right he actually argues0:36:52 you know when he argued argues against0:36:54 miracles because0:36:55 traditionally miracles were only proved0:36:57 by testimony0:36:59 he said in actual fact you can believe0:37:01 in miracles0:37:02 if there's something called something0:37:04 called uh recurrent reporting mass0:37:06 testimonial transmission overnight went0:37:09 over0:37:10 over an event that many people witnessed0:37:12 and i went at a particular event0:37:13 and there are so many of those people0:37:15 and they didn't meet and they kind of0:37:17 came from different places and times or0:37:18 something like that0:37:19 that you have to believe in what they0:37:20 say to be true and this is very0:37:22 interesting because david hume was0:37:23 actually0:37:24 talking about what we understand in the0:37:25 islamic intellectual tradition0:37:27 as the mutawatyrat or muttawater0:37:30 or tawator mass recurrent reporting0:37:33 because0:37:34 you know a or hadith or something that0:37:36 is mutha water0:37:38 you know there's there's no there's no0:37:40 doubt about that testimonial0:37:41 transmission0:37:42 right because it came from different0:37:44 places uh0:37:46 rather it came from people that came0:37:47 from different places at different times0:37:50 and many of these people never never met0:37:51 each other but when you go down the test0:37:53 testimonial transmissions0:37:54 they all say the same thing or they all0:37:56 witness the same thing it's impossible0:37:59 to say that they actually uh you know0:38:01 conjured up some kind of massive0:38:03 conspiracy0:38:05 in order to uh you know come up with0:38:08 with a certain claim and david hume look0:38:10 what he says0:38:11 look what he says he says the following0:38:14 i beg the limitations here0:38:15 may made me remarked when i say that a0:38:18 miracle0:38:20 can never be proved so as to be the0:38:22 foundation of a system of religion0:38:24 for i own that otherwise there may0:38:26 possibly be miracles0:38:28 or violations of the usual course of0:38:30 nature0:38:31 of such a kind as to admit a of proof0:38:34 from human testimony0:38:36 though perhaps it would be impossible to0:38:38 find such0:38:39 in all records of history thus suppose0:38:43 all authors in all languages agree0:38:46 that from the 1st of january 1600 there0:38:49 was a total darkness over the whole0:38:51 earth for eight days0:38:53 suppose that the tradition of this0:38:55 extraordinary event is still strong and0:38:57 lively among the people0:38:59 that all travelers who return from0:39:01 foreign countries bring us0:39:02 accounts of the same tradition without0:39:05 the least variation of contradiction0:39:07 it is evident that our present0:39:09 philosophers0:39:10 instead of doubting the fact ought to0:39:12 receive it a certain0:39:14 it's very interesting that many of these0:39:16 atheists who quote hume to reject0:39:17 miracles0:39:18 don't read further down and see what he0:39:21 said about mass transmission0:39:22 he's saying if there's this type of mass0:39:24 transmission and there's no difference0:39:26 in the eyewitness testimony0:39:27 then we have to believe in what they0:39:29 said is true and what's very interesting0:39:31 he said we didn't have an example0:39:33 well he doesn't know about the quran0:39:35 because the quran is a tawatur it's0:39:37 it's based on the mutawwatirat it's0:39:39 based on the mass0:39:40 transmission of our scholars and the0:39:43 sahaba0:39:43 and the muslim community just like0:39:47 the way we pronounce words like the word0:39:49 love has come down to us by this mass0:39:52 reporting this mass transmission i know0:39:54 this is a bit of a sight0:39:55 uh topic but i thought it was important0:39:57 to discuss0:39:58 another important distinction to make is0:40:00 just because that testimony can be wrong0:40:03 you don't throw the baby out with the0:40:04 bath wall as we discussed earlier0:40:06 because even empirical data or0:40:07 experience could be wrong0:40:09 and we've known this this is well known0:40:11 in the philosophy of science this is0:40:12 well known in0:40:13 you know in metaphysics when you're0:40:15 studying empiricism and so on and so0:40:16 forth0:40:17 so just because testimony can be wrong0:40:20 you don't you don't now say it's not a0:40:22 fundamental source of knowledge now what0:40:23 you discussed now0:40:25 is well what constitutes valid0:40:26 testimonial knowledge0:40:45 so it's very important for you to0:40:47 understand as well brothers and sisters0:40:51 so brothers and sisters let's now0:40:56 let's now talk about0:41:00 inference to the best explanation now0:41:02 brothers and sisters0:41:03 inference of the best explanation is0:41:05 what you call0:41:07 an invaluable way of thinking right it0:41:09 involves0:41:10 trying to clearly explain a particular0:41:12 set of data or background knowledge0:41:15 and the way to understand this really0:41:17 well is0:41:18 a medical diagnosis if you go for0:41:20 example to a doctor0:41:22 and you give the doctor your symptoms0:41:24 they have the background medical0:41:26 medical academic study the background0:41:29 medical experiences0:41:31 the background medical knowledge they0:41:33 look at the data0:41:34 which is your symptoms and they0:41:36 basically0:41:37 give you the best explanation that0:41:40 explains your symptoms0:41:42 what the doctor is basically doing is0:41:44 inference to the best explanation0:41:46 they're saying right there are all these0:41:48 symptoms based on my background0:41:49 experience0:41:50 based on my medical knowledge based on0:41:52 my academic0:41:53 uh medical academic background0:41:56 i think there are four possible0:41:58 explanations then i'm assessing these0:42:00 explanations and i pick one of them0:42:02 because this explanation0:42:04 best explains your symptoms this0:42:06 explanation0:42:08 is more comprehensive this explanation0:42:10 has explanatory sculpting0:42:12 explains all of your symptoms and he0:42:14 explains your medical history0:42:16 as well so what the doctor is actually0:42:17 doing here is something called0:42:19 inference to the best explanation um0:42:23 peter lipton who wrote the book0:42:25 inference to the best explanation0:42:27 actually summarizes this and he says the0:42:29 doctor0:42:30 infers that his patients patient has0:42:33 measles since this is the best0:42:35 explanation of the evidence before him0:42:37 and then he continues with other sources0:42:39 of knowledge he says the astronomer0:42:41 infers the existence of the motion of0:42:43 neptune0:42:44 since that is the best explanation of0:42:46 the observed0:42:47 perturbations of uranus given our data0:42:50 and our background beliefs0:42:52 we infer what would if true provide this0:42:55 best of the competing explanations we0:42:58 can generate0:42:59 of those data and yes there is a0:43:01 philosophical discussion on0:43:03 what explanations are the best0:43:05 explanation out of0:43:06 a competing set of explanations and0:43:09 there's this discussion on simplicity0:43:12 and comprehensiveness and we don't have0:43:14 to go too much into it because0:43:16 you know we already understand that0:43:18 inference to the best explanation is a0:43:19 valid0:43:20 way of thinking but just to be a little0:43:23 bit academically0:43:24 nuanced from that perspective and i'll0:43:26 read from my book here0:43:29 you know when we talk about inference to0:43:31 the best explanation as with most things0:43:33 we can have competing explanations for0:43:35 the data at our disposal0:43:37 what filters these explanations it's not0:43:39 only the plausibility0:43:41 but the ability of other pieces of data0:43:43 that could help us discriminate between0:43:45 them and0:43:46 lipton explains we begin by considering0:43:48 plausible0:43:50 candidate explanations and then try to0:43:51 find data that discriminate between them0:43:54 an inference may be defeated when0:43:55 someone suggests a better0:43:57 alternative explanation even though the0:43:59 evidence doesn't change0:44:01 now the accessibility to additional data0:44:03 is not the only way to0:44:05 to access which of the competing0:44:07 explanations is most com0:44:08 most convincing the best explanation is0:44:10 one that is0:44:11 the simplest simplicity however is just0:44:13 the beginning0:44:14 as there must be a careful balance0:44:16 between simplicity and comprehensiveness0:44:18 comprehensiveness entails that an0:44:20 explanation must have explanatory0:44:22 power and scope the explanation must0:44:24 account for all of the data0:44:26 including disparate or unique0:44:28 observations0:44:29 now another criterion to assess the0:44:31 comprehensiveness0:44:32 of an explanation includes explaining0:44:34 data or observations that were0:44:36 previously unknown0:44:37 unexpected or inexplicable an important0:44:40 principle in assessing the best0:44:42 explanation0:44:43 is that it is most likely to be true0:44:45 compared to competing explanations0:44:48 given our background knowledge and you0:44:50 also have the0:44:51 the academic philosopher from princeton0:44:54 university gilbert h harman0:44:56 he assesses this as well now0:45:00 the point here is i just wanted to0:45:02 explain0:45:03 that inference to the explanation is0:45:04 actually a valid form0:45:06 of thinking now what's very interesting0:45:08 is this is that we use it all the time0:45:10 say you're a mother and you told your0:45:12 seven-year-old cheeky son0:45:13 not to have any biscuits and you go0:45:16 upstairs i don't know to send an email0:45:18 to someone from your desktop0:45:20 and your son goes to the kitchen opens0:45:22 uh0:45:23 the the cupboard takes a cookie jar or a0:45:26 biscuit jar0:45:27 he eats all the biscuits then he's0:45:28 soulful he falls asleep on the couch0:45:31 now the jar is empty but you see crumbs0:45:33 all over his face now when you go0:45:35 downstairs to see what he's doing0:45:37 would you conclude you don't conclude0:45:39 that somehow miraculously0:45:41 the cookie jar the or or the biscuit jar0:45:45 came out of the cupboard and and someone0:45:47 took the cookies and someone crumbled0:45:49 them over your son's face of course not0:45:51 you're gonna infer the best explanation0:45:54 given the background data of your son0:45:56 and his cheekiness throughout his seven0:45:58 years of living0:46:00 and given the fact that he loves0:46:01 biscuits and he already told him not to0:46:03 have them because sometimes he's very0:46:04 cheeky and he wants to have those0:46:05 biscuits0:46:06 and given the fact that he's done this0:46:08 before and given the fact that he has0:46:10 crumbs all over his face and the biscuit0:46:12 dries right next to him0:46:13 then obviously the best explanation the0:46:16 inference to the best explanation is0:46:17 what0:46:19 he ate them right so we use this in our0:46:22 day-to-day lives0:46:23 we use this in medicine we use this0:46:25 everywhere0:46:26 we use his brothers and sisters0:46:27 especially in science0:46:29 as well so let's continue0:46:32 let's now formulate the argument if you0:46:35 remember brothers and sisters0:46:36 we formulated the argument we we0:46:40 we gave you the premises and now it's0:46:42 about unpacking the premises so let me0:46:44 give you the premises again0:46:46 number one the quran presents a literary0:46:48 linguistic challenge to humanity0:46:50 number two the seventh century arabs0:46:52 were best placed to challenge the quran0:46:54 number three the seventh century0:46:55 absolute to do so0:46:57 number four scholars have testified to0:46:59 the quran's inimitability0:47:01 number five count scholarly testimonies0:47:03 are not plausible as they have to reject0:47:05 the established0:47:06 background information which is0:47:07 important concerning inference to the0:47:09 best explanation0:47:10 number six from one to five the quran is0:47:13 inimitable0:47:14 number seven the possible explanations0:47:16 for the quran's inimitability are0:47:18 authorship by an arab and non-arab0:47:19 muhammad salem or god0:47:21 number eight it could not it could have0:47:23 not been produced by an arab0:47:24 and non-arab or muhammad sallam0:47:28 number nine the conclusion therefore the0:47:30 best explanation0:47:31 is that it is from god so now we're0:47:34 gonna unpack0:47:35 all of these premises together brothers0:47:38 and0:47:38 sisters in sha allah so the first0:47:41 premise0:47:41 the quran presents a literary and0:47:43 linguistic challenge to humanity and by0:47:45 the way when we unpack all of these0:47:46 premises0:47:47 we're not going to need to know any0:47:49 anything about the arabic language and0:47:51 the way we articulate to people they0:47:52 won't need to know anything about the0:47:54 arabic language too0:47:55 because we've spoken about testimony as0:47:57 background information we've spoken0:47:58 about inference to the best explanation0:48:00 and we're gonna now expand and unpack0:48:02 some of these premises0:48:03 and premise number one is the quran's0:48:06 the quran presents a literary0:48:07 and linguistic challenge to humanity0:48:10 this is true you can read it in any0:48:12 language0:48:12 the quran chapter 3 verse 23 so the0:48:15 quran chapter 2 verse 23 allah says0:48:18 if you have doubts about the revelation0:48:20 we have sent down to our servant0:48:22 referring to the prophet muhammad0:48:25 then produce a single chapter like it0:48:27 and list whatever supporters you have0:48:29 other than allah other than god0:48:31 in kuntum if you are truthful in your0:48:34 claim0:48:34 okay so this is the challenge and if you0:48:37 go to0:48:38 the the tafasir if you go to the0:48:40 multiple0:48:41 exegesis concerning this verse and0:48:44 there's lots of discussion on this verse0:48:46 and other verses similar to it you know0:48:48 you have a suyuti0:48:49 you have ibn ketir you have to be and0:48:53 and and so on and so forth they have a0:48:56 discussion0:48:56 and they talk about there is something0:48:58 special about the literature0:49:00 and linguistic features of the quranic0:49:02 discourse but yes they mention other0:49:03 things too0:49:04 and there are other opinions but they do0:49:06 mention that there is this0:49:07 literary intellectual challenge because0:49:10 the quran was sent down0:49:11 to a populist to the 7th century arabs0:49:14 where they had the peak of eloquence0:49:16 they were the masters ticketing0:49:18 themselves articulating themselves in0:49:20 the arabic0:49:20 language and the quran came to challenge0:49:23 them in order to show0:49:25 the quran is from the divine so we have0:49:28 a literary linguistic challenge that the0:49:31 quran0:49:32 presents now this opens a kind of kind0:49:35 of theological or theo philosophical0:49:38 development of the inimitability of the0:49:41 quran or as0:49:42 is known in the arabic language as uh0:49:45 the quran the jazz the miraculous0:49:48 nature of the quranic discourse and what0:49:52 this basically means is that no one is0:49:53 able to0:49:54 imitate or to match the quran's0:49:56 linguistic0:49:57 and literary features that's what it0:49:58 means when we say the inimitability of0:50:00 the quran0:50:01 that no one can match or imitate the0:50:04 quran's literary or linguistic features0:50:07 now the word jazz is a verbal noun that0:50:09 means miraculousness and0:50:12 it comes from the verb which means to0:50:15 render incapable or to make0:50:17 helpless you understand here the jazz0:50:19 the jazz of the quran0:50:21 the fact that people try to imitate the0:50:23 quran they they are rendered and capable0:50:25 they are incapacitated0:50:26 and they they are they are made helpless0:50:29 they cannot0:50:30 match the beauty and the linguistic and0:50:33 and0:50:34 literary features of the quranic0:50:35 discourse now0:50:39 the kind of linguistic understanding of0:50:41 jazz you know makes us understand the0:50:43 kind of theological doctrine0:50:45 of the inimitability of the quran of the0:50:47 elijah of the quran0:50:48 and this was based on the idea that the0:50:50 linguists or the arab linguists of the0:50:52 seventh century arabia0:50:53 the the period of revelation they were0:50:56 masters0:50:56 are expressing themselves in the in the0:50:58 arabic language0:51:00 and basically what this challenge is0:51:03 is that the quran came to challenge the0:51:05 masters0:51:06 of the arabic language those who reached0:51:09 the peak0:51:10 of the language of expressing themselves0:51:12 in the arabic tongue0:51:13 the peak of they reached the peak of0:51:15 eloquence and the quran came0:51:16 and basically dumbfounded them0:51:19 incapacitated them0:51:21 made them helpless and incapable to0:51:23 produce anything0:51:24 like the book of allah subhanahu wa0:51:26 ta'ala now0:51:28 so yuti the prolific 15th century writer0:51:31 and scholar he summarizes this doctrine0:51:33 of the ijazal quran in the following way0:51:36 he says0:51:37 when the prophet sallam brought the0:51:39 challenge to them0:51:40 and they were the most eloquent0:51:42 rhetoricians so he challenged them to0:51:45 to produce the entire likes of the quran0:51:47 and many years passed and they were0:51:49 unable to do so0:51:50 as god says let them then produce a0:51:52 recitation similar to it0:51:54 if indeed they are truthful then the0:51:56 prophet challenged them to produce 100:51:58 chapters like it0:51:59 where god says say bring say bring 100:52:02 chapters like it0:52:03 and call upon whom who met whomever you0:52:06 can besides god0:52:07 if you are truthful then he challenged0:52:10 them to produce a single chapter where0:52:12 god says0:52:13 or do they say he in other words the0:52:14 prophet saslam has forged it0:52:16 say bring a chapter like it and call0:52:18 upon whomever you can besides god0:52:20 if you are truthful and then suti0:52:22 continues when the arabs were unable to0:52:25 produce a single chapter like it the0:52:26 quran0:52:27 despite their being the most they they0:52:30 being the most eloquent reterritions0:52:32 amongst them0:52:33 the prophet sallam openly announced a0:52:35 failure in in0:52:36 inability to meet the challenge and0:52:38 declared the inimitability of the quran0:52:41 then god said say if all of humankind0:52:44 and the jinn gathered together to0:52:45 produce the like of the quran0:52:47 they could not produce it even if they0:52:49 help0:52:50 one another and this brothers and0:52:52 sisters is0:52:53 a summary of the doctrine of their jazz0:52:56 of the quran and yes i do0:52:57 understand their differences of opinion0:53:00 concerning0:53:01 what type of challenges this is what0:53:03 this is what is the nature of the0:53:04 challenge0:53:05 what is the linguistic and literary0:53:07 features that this challenge refers to0:53:09 but this is not needing our discussion0:53:11 today because remember0:53:12 we don't need to know anything about the0:53:14 arabic language you're going to0:53:15 understand0:53:16 further why that's the case so0:53:19 i think we have substantiated the first0:53:22 the first premise brothers and sisters0:53:24 that the quran provides a challenge to0:53:26 humanity a challenge0:53:28 to the 7th century arabs who reached the0:53:30 peak of eloquence0:53:31 the quran provides a literary and0:53:34 linguistic challenge0:53:35 so the second premise is very important0:53:37 to understand the second premise is0:53:39 the seventh century arabs were best0:53:40 placed to challenge the quran0:53:43 now this is so true because when you0:53:44 study the seventh century arabs0:53:47 you see that they reached the peak of0:53:48 eloquence this is affirmed by0:53:50 western and eastern scholarship they0:53:52 lived in a social cultural environment0:53:55 that had all the right conditions to0:53:57 facilitate the unparalleled expertise in0:53:59 the use of the arabic language0:54:01 you know for you to study poetry you0:54:03 didn't go to university for just three0:54:05 years0:54:05 you stayed with a poetic master for 100:54:08 years0:54:09 sometimes in the mountains you0:54:11 internalized yourself0:54:12 in these rhetorical sciences you0:54:14 internalized0:54:16 these kind of this ability to produce0:54:19 you know0:54:20 superior eloquence to anybody else and0:54:23 what's very interesting0:54:24 from a social political perspective that0:54:26 that that0:54:27 a poet was could start a war and could0:54:30 end0:54:30 a war you know they were seen as the0:54:32 extremely0:54:34 important uh features of0:54:37 you know society it's extremely0:54:39 important you know0:54:40 people in society you know the scholar0:54:43 usmani0:54:44 may allah preserve him he he asserts0:54:46 that for the 7th century arab0:54:48 eloquence and rhetoric were their0:54:50 lifeblood0:54:52 also the 9th century biographer of0:54:55 the poets he says0:54:58 verse was to the arabs the register or0:55:01 they knew0:55:01 and the utmost compass of their wisdom0:55:04 with it they began their affairs0:55:06 and with it they ended them you have the0:55:09 14th century scholarly0:55:11 he highlights the importance of poetry0:55:13 in arab life0:55:14 he says it should be known that arabs0:55:17 fought highly of poetry as form of0:55:19 as a form of speech they made it in they0:55:22 made it0:55:22 in they made it to the archives of the0:55:24 history the evidence for they considered0:55:26 right and wrong0:55:27 and the principle basis of reference for0:55:29 most of their sciences and wisdom0:55:31 also you have the linguist that also the0:55:33 linguistic ability and expertise0:55:35 of the 7th century arab is highlighted0:55:37 by the literary critic and historian0:55:39 ibn rashid he illustrates the following0:55:42 he says whenever a poet emerged in an0:55:45 arab tribe0:55:46 other tribes will come to congratulate0:55:49 feasts0:55:49 feasts will be prepared the women would0:55:51 join together on loots as they do0:55:53 as at weddings and old and young men0:55:56 would all rejoice at the good news0:55:58 the arabs used to congratulate each0:56:00 other only on the birth of a child0:56:03 and when a poet rose amongst them0:56:06 and there's so much more evidences0:56:08 brothers and sisters to show0:56:09 and to talk about the importance of a0:56:12 language in seventh century arabia there0:56:15 was a socialization0:56:17 from that perspective you know the ninth0:56:19 century scholar ibn qutaba0:56:21 he defined poetry as the arab soy he0:56:24 says0:56:24 the mind of the ara the knowledge of the0:56:27 arabs the book of the wisdom the0:56:29 truthful witness on the day of dispute0:56:31 the final proof at the time of argument0:56:34 also0:56:34 nabeed karmani who is an academic and an0:56:38 expert in islamic studies0:56:39 he explains that the 7th century arab0:56:41 lived in a world that revered poetry0:56:43 there was the correct kind of0:56:45 socialization and environment for this0:56:47 he says old arabic poetry is a highly0:56:50 complex phenomenon0:56:51 the vocabulary grammatical indie0:56:54 idiosyncrasies0:56:55 and strict norms were passed down from0:56:58 generation to generation0:56:59 and only the most gifted students fully0:57:02 mastered the language0:57:03 a person had to study for years0:57:05 sometimes even decades under a master0:57:08 poet0:57:09 before laying claim to the title of poet0:57:11 muhammad sallam grew up in a world0:57:13 which almost religiously revered poetic0:57:18 expression so i think we can say0:57:21 just from the basic evidence that we've0:57:23 given you there's much more0:57:24 and the references are there for you to0:57:26 to to access0:57:28 that the seven series since seventh0:57:31 century arab0:57:32 was the best at expressing themselves in0:57:35 the arabic language this is well known0:57:37 based on eastern and western scholarship0:57:40 so now we can move to the third premise0:57:42 the third premise is0:57:43 the the seventh century arabs failed to0:57:45 do so0:57:46 now this is very interesting because we0:57:48 know that we're incapacitated0:57:50 okay so for instance linguistic expert0:57:53 professor hussein abdullah if he asserts0:57:54 the following he says the arabs0:57:56 at the time had reached the linguistic0:57:58 peak in terms of linguistic competence0:58:00 in sciences0:58:01 rhetoric oratory oratory and poetry0:58:05 no one however has been able to produce0:58:07 a single chapter similar to that of the0:58:09 quran0:58:10 even professor of quranic studies0:58:11 angelica knew worth0:58:14 argued that the quran has never been0:58:15 successfully challenged by anyone past0:58:17 or present0:58:18 she says no one has succeeded that is0:58:21 this is right i really think that the0:58:22 quran has even brought western0:58:24 researchers embarrassment0:58:25 who weren't able to clarify how suddenly0:58:28 in an environment where there was no0:58:30 appreciable written text appeared the0:58:32 quran with its richness of ideas0:58:34 and magnificent wordings and0:58:37 i think the most powerful argument0:58:39 brothers and sisters to show0:58:41 that the seventh century ad was0:58:42 incapacitated0:58:44 is in the following statement and this0:58:45 has been taken from my book0:58:48 and i really want you to listen to this0:58:49 very carefully because i think it's a0:58:51 it's a phenomenal argument you don't0:58:54 have to even go to the language itself0:58:56 think about it from a social political0:58:57 perspective listen to this0:59:00 a powerful argument that supports the0:59:02 assertion that the 7th century arabs0:59:04 failed to imitate the quran relate to0:59:07 the social political circumstances of0:59:09 the time0:59:10 central to the quranic message was the0:59:12 condemnation of the immoral unjust and0:59:14 evil practices0:59:15 of the 7th century meccan tribes these0:59:18 included the objectification of women0:59:20 unjust trade polytheism slavery hoarding0:59:23 of wealth0:59:24 infanticide and the shunning of the0:59:26 orphans0:59:27 the meccan leadership was being0:59:29 challenged by the quranic message0:59:31 and this had the potential to undermine0:59:33 their leadership and economic success0:59:36 in order for islam to stop spreading all0:59:39 that was needed0:59:40 for the prophet sasam's adversaries was0:59:42 to meet the linguistic0:59:44 to meet the linguistic and literary0:59:45 challenge of the quran however0:59:47 the fact that islam succeeded and0:59:50 listened to this0:59:51 in its early fragile days in mecca0:59:54 testifies to the fact that its primary0:59:56 audience was not0:59:57 able to meet the quranic challenge no1:00:00 movement can succeed1:00:02 if a claim fundamental to its core is1:00:05 explicitly proven false1:00:07 the fact that the meant that the meccan1:00:09 leadership had to retort1:00:10 resort to extreme campaigns such as1:00:13 warfare and torture1:00:15 to attempt to extinguish islam1:00:17 demonstrates that the easy method1:00:20 of refuting islam meeting the quranic1:00:22 challenge1:00:24 failed and i think that is enough for1:00:27 this premise1:00:29 fourth premise brothers and sisters1:00:31 scholars have testified to the quran's1:00:33 inimitability so scholars1:00:35 have testified to the quran's1:00:38 inimitability so let's talk about this1:00:40 well there's many scholars you can't fit1:00:42 all of this on the presentation slides1:00:44 but there's so many1:00:45 you have professor ovirento studies1:00:47 martin zames he says1:00:49 notwithstanding the literary exodus of1:00:51 some of the long pre-islamic poems1:00:53 the quran is definitely on a level of1:00:55 its own as the most eminent written1:00:57 manifestation of the arabic language1:00:59 you have the orientalist and literature1:01:01 aj arbury1:01:02 he says in making the present attempt to1:01:05 improve1:01:06 on the performance of predecessors and1:01:08 to produce something which might be1:01:09 accepted1:01:10 as echoing however faintly the sublime1:01:13 rhetoric of the arabic quran1:01:15 i have been at pain to study the1:01:16 intricate and ritual rhythms which1:01:18 apart from the message itself1:01:20 constitutes the quran's undeniable claim1:01:23 to rank amongst amongst the greatest1:01:25 literary masterpieces1:01:27 of mankind and there are so many more1:01:29 arabist1:01:30 hamilton gibb and so on and so forth and1:01:33 there's a whole list that you can find1:01:35 on my book which you could for free on1:01:37 the sa prince institute website1:01:39 now moving on from this you have those1:01:42 some key contentions right1:01:44 because some people will argue hold on a1:01:46 second hamza well what about1:01:48 shakespeare and al-muttanabbi the famous1:01:52 isn't shakespeare is that shakespeare1:01:55 inimitable1:01:55 right is it shakespeare in imitative1:01:58 inimitable1:01:59 well there's something that we need to1:02:00 really clarify here right1:02:03 so let's first talk about so who was1:02:07 it1:02:13 right he was considered an inimitable1:02:15 poetic genius by1:02:16 by many arabs right and some have argued1:02:19 that although1:02:20 other poets have used the same paneeric1:02:23 genre and poetic meter as the great poet1:02:25 they have not been able to match his1:02:27 level eloquence and stylistic variants1:02:29 therefore they conclude that1:02:31 al-muttanabbi is inimitable1:02:33 because we have the blueprint of his1:02:34 work and the linguistic tools at our1:02:36 disposal1:02:37 but cannot emulate anything like his1:02:39 poetic expression1:02:41 if this is true then it undermines the1:02:42 quranic inimitability however this is1:02:44 totally false okay1:02:46 this acclamation of false1:02:50 firstly there have been many imitations1:02:54 by jewish poets moses even ezra1:02:57 and solomon even gabriel interestingly1:03:00 the andalusian1:03:02 poet in bin ibn hani al andalusi1:03:05 was known as the al-mutanabi of the west1:03:09 and what's very significant is that when1:03:12 you study medieval arabic poetry1:03:15 medieval arabic poetry didn't create new1:03:17 literary genres1:03:18 right this was due to the fact that it1:03:19 depended on previous poetic work1:03:22 and the academics the academic denis e1:03:24 mcauley writes that medieval poetry1:03:26 largely hinged1:03:28 more on literary president than on1:03:30 direct experience1:03:32 also in classical arabic poetry it1:03:33 wasn't unusual it's not unusual for a1:03:35 poet to attempt to match a predecessor1:03:37 poem1:03:38 by writing a new one in the same poetic1:03:40 meter rhyme and theme and this was1:03:42 considered a normal practice1:03:44 so it's not surprising that the1:03:45 professor of religion emil1:03:47 hamerin explored the literary expression1:03:50 of even al-farid1:03:51 and described his work as very original1:03:54 improvisations of1:03:57 and to fight to highlight further that1:03:59 al-muttanabbi could be emulated1:04:01 and you you you see that he disclosed1:04:04 himself i think in his biographical1:04:06 works1:04:06 that the another poet abu nawaz1:04:10 uh he actually borrowed work from abu1:04:13 nawaz1:04:14 and many medieval arabic literary1:04:16 critics1:04:17 such as even abbad and1:04:20 abu ali muhammad even1:04:24 they wrote criticisms right even a bad1:04:26 for example1:04:28 he he wrote um stuff against1:04:32 me for example wrote a biographical1:04:34 account of his an1:04:35 encounter with al-muttanabbi in his1:04:39 allurissala and he basically concludes1:04:41 that you know1:04:42 his work wasn't that great and it could1:04:44 be emulated from that perspective1:04:46 and and al-hatimi presents a stronger1:04:48 polemic against alimutanabe and argues1:04:50 the case that his poetry does not have a1:04:52 unique style and contains error1:04:54 even the academic professor sega a1:04:57 bona backer who studied al-hatimi's1:05:00 literature criticism of al-muttanabbi1:05:02 he concludes the following judgement is1:05:04 often well-founded1:05:06 and one almost ends up feeling that that1:05:09 moon1:05:10 was after all a mediocre poet who was1:05:13 not only lacking an original1:05:14 originality but also had insufficient1:05:17 competence in grammar1:05:18 lexicography and rhetoric and sometimes1:05:21 gave evidence of incredibly1:05:23 bad taste now if you consider1:05:25 shakespeare as well1:05:27 sexy is thought to be unparalleled in1:05:29 his use of1:05:30 the english language however you have to1:05:33 understand he's not inimitable1:05:35 his sonnets are written predominantly in1:05:37 a frequently used meter called the1:05:39 iambic1:05:40 pentameter which is a rhyme scheme in1:05:42 which each sonnet line1:05:44 consists of consists of ten syllables1:05:46 and the syllables are divided in five1:05:48 pairs called iams or1:05:49 ambig feet and also since the blueprint1:05:52 of his work is available it's not1:05:54 surprising1:05:55 that the english dramatist christopher1:05:57 marlowe has a similar style1:05:59 and that shakespeare has been compared1:06:00 to francis beaumont john fletcher and1:06:04 other playwrights of his time1:06:06 so that you can't use so-called other1:06:09 instances1:06:10 of inimitability now one contention is1:06:12 which is a valid contention1:06:14 if someone would argue we're holding a1:06:15 second hamza just because academics1:06:18 they say that the quran is inimitable1:06:21 they give you a testimonial transition1:06:23 that it's inimitable right1:06:27 it doesn't mean now the quran is from1:06:28 god because1:06:31 why do these scholars who say the quran1:06:34 cannot be imitated1:06:35 they haven't concluded that the quran is1:06:38 from the divine1:06:39 well there's a problem with this1:06:40 contention it conflates testifying to1:06:43 the quran's invitability1:06:44 with inference to the best explanation1:06:46 there's a conflation the conflation here1:06:48 because the argument that we're1:06:49 presenting here today does not conclude1:06:52 the divinity of the quran from the1:06:54 statements of the scholars1:06:55 all it's saying is the quran is1:06:58 inimitable1:07:00 in order to now understand that it's1:07:01 from the divine you have to apply1:07:03 inference to the best explanation1:07:05 so whether these scholars accept our1:07:07 inference or not1:07:09 is irrelevant we're just using the1:07:11 scholars to show the inimitability of1:07:13 the quran not the divine nature of the1:07:15 quran1:07:16 to now explain that the quran is from1:07:18 the divine you have to apply the1:07:19 inference to the best explanation1:07:21 so there is a conflation this is a1:07:23 interesting contention but it's not1:07:25 a valid contention premise number five1:07:28 we're almost there brothers and sisters1:07:30 premise number five is counter scholarly1:07:32 testimonies are not plausible1:07:34 as they have to reject the established1:07:36 background information1:07:38 remember when it comes to epistemology1:07:40 of testimony you need to have background1:07:42 information1:07:42 specifically with regards to inference1:07:45 to the best explanation1:07:46 you have background information that's1:07:48 very important in order for you to make1:07:50 the correct inferences so yes i agree1:07:54 there are some there are some1:07:57 scholars past and present muslim and1:08:00 non-muslim maybe specifically rather1:08:02 non-muslim that they say that the quran1:08:04 is not inimitable it's1:08:05 bad arabic it's got grammatical errors1:08:08 it's got1:08:09 you know bad prose or whatever the case1:08:12 may be1:08:13 now we don't have to take the testimony1:08:15 seriously1:08:16 by virtue of the testimonies that we1:08:18 just discussed that talk about the1:08:20 inimitability of the quran1:08:21 but also because of important background1:08:23 background information1:08:25 because in order to take the counter1:08:28 testimonies meaning1:08:29 in order to take seriously the scholars1:08:32 who say1:08:32 the quran is not inimitability1:08:34 inimitable in order to take them1:08:36 seriously1:08:37 you have to conclude some absurd1:08:40 absurd conclusions there are some absurd1:08:42 um1:08:43 implications brothers and sisters1:08:47 so let me explain what these1:08:50 absurdities are now1:08:54 if you adopt the counter testimonies of1:08:56 these so-called scholars that say the1:08:58 quran is not inevitable1:09:01 you need an explanation you what is1:09:04 required is an explanation1:09:06 to answer why the 7th century arabs1:09:09 couldn't produce anything like the quran1:09:12 you have to provide an explanation1:09:15 and possible explanations would have to1:09:18 reject the validity of this established1:09:20 history that the best arabs couldn't1:09:22 produce anything like the quran1:09:26 so therefore these counter-testimonial1:09:28 claims1:09:29 don't have a basis they have to remake1:09:33 or reinvent arabic history or arabic1:09:37 literature history from that perspective1:09:41 and one would argue that rejecting the1:09:43 established history would have to1:09:44 remake the history of arabic literature1:09:47 and not only that1:09:48 they would have to assume these scholars1:09:50 who provide counter testimony that say1:09:52 the quran is not inimitable1:09:53 they would also have to assume that they1:09:55 are better than their seventh century1:09:57 lingua1:09:57 arabic linguists which is ridiculous1:10:00 because1:10:01 we're going to explain this later that1:10:03 today's arabic you know1:10:04 one is doesn't internalize arabic1:10:08 in a pure way because of what you call1:10:10 linguistic boring we live in a1:10:11 heterogeneous linguistic culture1:10:13 not a homogeneous linguistic culture1:10:15 we're going to explain that later so1:10:16 those who are saying1:10:18 nothing special about the quran they1:10:20 have to basically1:10:22 show that they're better than the 7th1:10:23 century arabic linguists1:10:25 again remaking history these are all1:10:27 absurdities1:10:29 also they would have to deny the1:10:30 challenge of the quran because it's1:10:32 implied1:10:32 in the previous points that we just made1:10:36 but what's important is though is that1:10:37 when we understand and we1:10:39 go deep into the accusations of some of1:10:42 these scholars who provide counter1:10:43 testimonies1:10:44 and say the quran is not inimitable you1:10:47 know when we go into the1:10:49 the accusation we see that they have1:10:51 very bad arabic in the first place now1:10:52 you don't have to understand this for1:10:54 the argument but i just want to bring1:10:55 this to you1:10:56 for example take the highly acclaimed1:10:58 german orientalist theodore nolteka1:11:00 you know he said that the quran is ugly1:11:04 it has a perceived ugliness there's all1:11:06 these grammatical shifts1:11:08 well with all due respect he didn't1:11:09 understand bellaga he didn't understand1:11:11 a deep1:11:12 science of arabic rhetoric and eloquence1:11:15 he had a very shallow understanding of1:11:16 classical arabic1:11:18 because these shifts in in grammatical1:11:21 shifts1:11:21 or these reference shifting in the1:11:23 quranic discourse1:11:25 is part of the dynamic nature of the1:11:26 quran it enhances the communicative1:11:29 effect of the quranic discourse1:11:31 and this is known as ill-tifat1:11:35 in the arabic language i believe means1:11:37 moving from one direction1:11:39 to the other moving from one1:11:42 direction to the other there are many1:11:45 grammatical shifts and these include1:11:46 change in person1:11:47 change in number change in addressee1:11:50 change in tense1:11:51 change in case marker using a noun in1:11:53 place of a pronoun1:11:54 and many other type of shifts and1:11:56 changes and the function of these1:11:58 reference shifting or these grammatical1:12:00 shifts are there to in1:12:02 to to to have a change of emphasis to1:12:05 alert the reader to a particular manner1:12:07 to enhance the style of the text to1:12:09 enhance the communicative effect1:12:11 it also impacts on1:12:14 the generating rhythm and flow to1:12:16 maintain the listeners attention and so1:12:18 on and so forth so1:12:19 a very powerful example is in the1:12:21 shortest chapter of the quran1:12:23 surah al-khalfa when allah subhanahu wa1:12:25 ta'ala says verily we have given you the1:12:27 abundance therefore turn1:12:28 to your to in prayer to your lord and1:12:31 sacrifice1:12:32 for he is the one who will be cut off so1:12:34 in the beginning allah says1:12:37 verily we have given you the abundance1:12:40 so the kind of1:12:41 reference to himself from a grammatical1:12:43 point of view1:12:44 the kind of plural the majestic plural1:12:46 we1:12:47 that's in the first line then the second1:12:49 verse allah says1:12:53 therefore or so turn1:12:57 to your prayer turn in prayer1:13:00 to your lord turn to your lord in prayer1:13:03 rob bicker1:13:04 your lord in prayer and and sacrifice1:13:08 for solely therefore pray for sally li1:13:11 rob bicker1:13:12 for your lord uh for sullivan1:13:16 uh one half turn to your lord1:13:19 and sacrifice1:13:22 so this is very imp and now there is a1:13:25 shift here what's the shift1:13:26 in the first verse allah refers to1:13:28 himself1:13:29 from the kind of the the personal use of1:13:32 the pronoun1:13:33 the majestic plural we have given the1:13:36 abundance1:13:37 then there's a grammatical shift for1:13:39 salli1:13:43 yorab so there's a shift from we1:13:46 to rabb your lord there is a shift in1:13:49 reference in the referring to allah the1:13:54 personal pronoun1:13:56 the kind of shift in terms of majestic1:13:59 plural1:14:00 to the more intimate arab now why is1:14:03 that shift in place this is not1:14:05 linguistic ugliness1:14:06 this is illiterate fact it's enhancing1:14:09 the communicative effect of the message1:14:11 because in the first verse it's about1:14:13 ability allah says verily we we have1:14:15 given you the abundance the al-qaeda1:14:18 the river in paradise but it also comes1:14:20 from cathara which you have1:14:23 and so many things and you could see1:14:24 this as a form of ellipsis as allah has1:14:26 given1:14:27 abundance not only the river in paradise1:14:29 but many things to the process of1:14:31 he's the most praised everyone is1:14:33 praising the prophet1:14:34 every micro second on this earth because1:14:36 of the constant of on because the time1:14:38 changes and people1:14:39 praising the prophet sallallahu1:14:43 so we could unpack that later but the1:14:45 point here is1:14:46 so allah is saying we have given you the1:14:48 abundance so the majestic1:14:50 plural is used for ability and this is1:14:52 used in european literature as well the1:14:54 we1:14:55 kings would say we to indicate power and1:14:57 ability1:14:58 so it's enhancing that the meaning of1:15:01 the first verse1:15:02 but then it shifts to things like1:15:04 spirituality and intimacy1:15:10 to sacrifice prayer and sacrifice these1:15:12 are intimate spiritual matters1:15:14 so allah now is saying1:15:18 therefore pray to your lord and1:15:19 sacrifice allah is not saying1:15:21 you know pray to us and sacrifice no1:15:24 pray to your lord1:15:25 because rabb is more intimate it means1:15:27 your master your lord the one who1:15:29 nurtures you the one who loves you no1:15:30 one who cares for you1:15:31 so this is enhancing the communicative1:15:33 effect of the1:15:34 second verse so this shift is not hazard1:15:37 and when you study the quran and we1:15:39 don't have time to do this1:15:40 these shifts happen and they're in line1:15:43 with the meaning1:15:44 of the co-text the surrounding1:15:47 linguistic1:15:48 items around the verses and the1:15:50 surrounding verses it's there to enhance1:15:52 the cumulative1:15:53 communicative effect of the message so1:15:55 it's not linguistic ugliness1:15:56 in all due respect theodore nordica1:15:58 didn't know his arabic very well1:16:02 so this leads us to their six premise1:16:04 brothers and sisters the very important1:16:05 premise brothers this is the sixth1:16:07 premise so the six premises as follows1:16:12 therefore from premise one to five the1:16:14 quran is inimitable because1:16:16 this is very simple to follow it follows1:16:18 from points one to five that we just1:16:19 discussed1:16:20 premises one to five that the quran's1:16:22 inimitability is justified1:16:25 so now we it leads us to premise number1:16:27 seven1:16:28 the possible explanations for the1:16:30 quran's inimitability1:16:31 are authorship by an arab by a non-arab1:16:35 by muhammad sallallahu alaihi wasallam1:16:37 or by allah1:16:39 okay let's talk about this a little bit1:16:40 further so these are the plausible1:16:42 explanations this is what we're saying1:16:44 to articulate the divine origins of the1:16:46 quran without referring to specifics1:16:48 about the arabic language1:16:50 we're using testimony and inference okay1:16:53 and we've already established1:16:55 using testimony epistemology of1:16:56 testimony that the quran is inimitable1:17:00 by a valid testimonial transmission and1:17:02 now1:17:03 we're trying to infer from the1:17:06 inimitability of the quran1:17:07 which is based on valid testimony that1:17:10 the quran can only be from god1:17:12 and the possible explanations are that1:17:14 it came from an arab1:17:16 it came from another arab and it came1:17:17 from oh it came from muhammad sallallahu1:17:19 it came from allah1:17:21 now however it can be argued there are1:17:23 other possible competing explanations1:17:25 but we don't know what they are well1:17:26 hold on a second this is irrational1:17:29 because this assertion commits a type of1:17:31 fallacy that some have called1:17:33 the fallacy of the phantom option it's a1:17:35 ghost option1:17:36 there may be another option we're just1:17:37 not aware of it this is not rational1:17:39 reasoning this is not1:17:40 a valid use of the inference to the best1:17:42 explanation if you do have another1:17:44 explanation1:17:45 bring on the table and let's discuss it1:17:47 if you don't have a valid explanation1:17:49 then deal with the explanations at hand1:17:53 so premise number eight the premise1:17:55 before the conclusion1:17:57 it could not have been produced by an1:17:58 arab it could not have been produced by1:18:00 non-arab1:18:01 and it could not have been produced by1:18:02 muhammad sallallahu alaihi wasallam1:18:04 let's now1:18:05 unpack this and get into this into1:18:08 detail1:18:09 first and foremost we know it could have1:18:11 been produced by an arab because the1:18:12 best linguist the seventh century abbs1:18:14 of the time1:18:15 admitted defeat for example al-waleed1:18:17 ibn morirah1:18:18 he was one of the famous linguists of1:18:20 the time he actually admitted defeat1:18:23 and he says and what can i say for i1:18:25 swear by allah1:18:27 there is none amongst you who knows1:18:28 poetry as well as i do1:18:30 nor can any compete with me in1:18:32 composition or rhetoric1:18:33 not even in the poetry of jinns and yet1:18:35 i swear by allah1:18:37 muhammad's speech meaning the quran does1:18:40 not bear1:18:40 bear any similarity to anything i know1:18:44 and i swear by allah the speech that he1:18:46 says is very sweet and is adorned with1:18:48 beauty and charm1:18:49 okay and one would argue why did he1:18:51 become muslim well from what i remember1:18:53 he didn't become muslim because he1:18:55 thought that someone promised him1:18:56 that him not being a muslim he still be1:18:58 saved or something to that effect1:19:00 such was the arrogance of such people1:19:02 but the point is the best arabs admitted1:19:04 defeat from that perspective and1:19:05 remember what we said previously1:19:07 from the argument that i i refer to that1:19:11 that's in my book referring to the1:19:12 chapter god's testimony1:19:14 and just repeat1:19:17 no movement can succeed if a claim1:19:20 fundamental to its core is explicitly1:19:22 proven false1:19:23 the fact that the meccan leadership had1:19:25 to resort to extreme campaigns1:19:26 such as warfare and torture to attempt1:19:29 to extinguish islam1:19:30 demonstrates that the easy method of1:19:33 refuting islam1:19:34 which is meeting the quranic challenge1:19:36 failed they couldn't do it they couldn't1:19:38 produce it because remember as we read1:19:40 out the rest of the1:19:41 passage previously that the quran came1:19:44 and refute the social political moral1:19:46 realities of the arabs of the time and1:19:48 this was affecting their lifestyle1:19:50 their culture their economic activity1:19:52 but1:19:53 all they had to do and this is when1:19:55 islam was weak1:19:57 in his early stages all they had to do1:19:58 is produce three lines like it no one1:20:00 would have taken it seriously would have1:20:01 been dismissed1:20:03 but they know they they couldn't do it1:20:05 and they knew they couldn't do it so1:20:06 what did they do they resorted to war1:20:08 and boycott and torture what does this1:20:11 say1:20:12 about the ability of the best hours of1:20:14 the time that were best placed to1:20:16 challenge the quran what does it mean1:20:17 about1:20:18 the inc that they were incapacitated of1:20:20 course they were they couldn't imitate1:20:22 the quranic discourse1:20:23 so they failed to do so it and we could1:20:25 argue1:20:26 from that perspective it couldn't have1:20:28 come from an arab because these were the1:20:29 best arabs of the time1:20:31 now one would argue what about today's1:20:32 arab well hold on a second just from a1:20:34 kind of1:20:35 philosophical linguistic perspective we1:20:37 can't even take this seriously1:20:38 today's arab today's arab comes from a1:20:41 linguistic culture1:20:42 which is basically called a1:20:44 heterogeneous culture1:20:46 you know just as a crude example when1:20:48 you go to egypt and you say1:20:50 to uh and you and you you hear like a1:20:52 mother saying1:20:53 uh you know where is the phone she1:20:56 should say something like aina hatif1:20:58 where is the phone uh1:21:00 but what she might say is ain't a1:21:02 telephone1:21:03 right or any television or where is the1:21:06 tv1:21:07 right so there's so much linguistic1:21:08 boring i don't know wrong there was1:21:09 linguistic boring of that at that time1:21:11 as well1:21:12 but the type of linguistic boring at the1:21:14 time of the seventh century1:21:16 was a linguistic boring that didn't1:21:17 affect the purity of the language1:21:19 and the internalization of the language1:21:21 because those though that linguistic1:21:22 boring1:21:23 became part of the arabic language and1:21:25 this is well known because there are1:21:26 some1:21:26 you know foreign origin words in the1:21:29 quran such as jannam i believe in other1:21:31 words1:21:31 but those words were already naturalized1:21:34 there was a naturalization process1:21:36 but when it comes to today's arabic we1:21:37 have this kind of1:21:39 less pure environment linguistic1:21:40 environment it's not homogeneous it's1:21:42 heterogeneous1:21:43 as i've just discussed and therefore1:21:46 naturally1:21:46 you know someone's natural expression of1:21:48 the arabic language is not going to be1:21:50 anywhere near1:21:51 the seventh century arabs also what we1:21:53 said in the beginning about the culture1:21:55 and the social political linguistic1:21:57 environment of the time1:21:58 facilitated people to become masters in1:22:01 arabic1:22:01 we don't have that today from that1:22:03 perspective so to say today's arab1:22:05 is actually completely unfounded and one1:22:07 would have to claim1:22:08 better expression and intuitive and1:22:11 natural expression of the arabic1:22:12 language1:22:13 than the 7th century arabs which is1:22:14 totally unfounded1:22:17 so we know it could have come from an1:22:18 arab what about a non-arab1:22:20 well the quran mentions this very1:22:22 clearly in chapter 16 verse 1031:22:24 and indeed we know that what they that1:22:26 they that they the politicians and1:22:27 pagans say1:22:28 it is only a human being who teaches him1:22:30 meaning muhammad1:22:32 the the tongue of the man they referred1:22:33 to is foreign but this speech is1:22:37 this is clear arabic now this is so true1:22:40 and non-arab couldn't produce the quran1:22:43 because1:22:44 it had to come from an arab right you1:22:47 have to know arabic to try and produce1:22:49 anything like the book of allah1:22:51 subhanahu wa ta'ala1:22:53 so this is extremely important for us to1:22:55 you know1:22:56 understand now one would argue about if1:22:58 a non-arab learn the act1:23:00 learn the language now that would that1:23:02 would make the person arabic speaker and1:23:03 therefore would refer1:23:05 to the previous point we just made1:23:07 however and this is very interesting1:23:08 in linguistics there are differences1:23:10 between native and non-native speakers1:23:13 of language1:23:14 as various academic studies and applied1:23:16 linguistics1:23:17 and similar fields have concluded for1:23:19 instance in the english language there1:23:21 are differences between native and1:23:22 non-native speakers1:23:23 in reliably discriminating between1:23:25 literal and idiomatic speech1:23:28 differences exist between english1:23:30 speakers with one non-native parent1:23:32 and those with native parents the1:23:34 speakers with one non-native parent1:23:35 exhibit worse linguistic performance on1:23:37 certain tasks than those with native1:23:39 parents1:23:40 even in cases of non-native speakers1:23:42 having indistinguishable1:23:44 indistinguishable linguistic competence1:23:46 with native speakers there are still1:23:47 subtle linguistic differences so1:23:50 research conducted by kenneth1:23:53 haldensterm and nicholas abrahamson1:23:56 in who can who can1:24:00 become native like in a second language1:24:02 all some or none1:24:04 concluded that competent non-native1:24:06 speakers exhibit features1:24:08 that are imperceptible except under1:24:10 detailed and systematic linguistic1:24:12 analysis1:24:13 therefore to conclude that the quran1:24:15 with this inimitable features1:24:16 as a linguistic masterpiece is a product1:24:18 of a non-arab or non-native speaker1:24:21 is untenable so the next option maybe it1:24:25 came from the prophet1:24:26 sallallahu alaihi was sent them right1:24:29 well there's a few things to say this is1:24:31 this is impossible number one he was an1:24:33 arab1:24:33 right and the best arabs failed to1:24:35 produce anything like it1:24:37 so logically it follows he didn't1:24:39 produce the quran1:24:40 secondly after the initial accusations1:24:43 that1:24:44 the the arab lingua is after the initial1:24:46 accusations that he produced the quran1:24:49 when they started to understand the1:24:50 literary power of the quran1:24:52 and the literary inimitability of the1:24:54 quran the arabic linguist1:24:55 never accused him of being the author in1:24:57 actual fact they said it was magic1:24:59 also we have to understand that the1:25:00 quran is a literary masterpiece1:25:03 the quran is a literary1:25:06 masterpiece and with all literary1:25:09 masterpieces brothers and sisters1:25:11 we have to understand that you know1:25:14 literary masterpieces are not revealed1:25:17 instantaneously1:25:19 right they're revealed over a particular1:25:20 time with careful1:25:22 amendment careful expression careful1:25:25 articulation1:25:27 careful addition careful revision and so1:25:30 on and so forth1:25:31 no one produces a literary masterpiece1:25:34 as sustained1:25:35 instantaneous eloquence but the quran as1:25:37 it was revealed1:25:38 it it it stayed the same it wasn't1:25:41 edited1:25:42 it wasn't changed even in abrogation1:25:44 when we talk about abrogation in the1:25:46 quranic discourse1:25:47 the verses the abrogate are still in the1:25:49 quran and is still part of the literary1:25:51 excellence of the quranic discourse1:25:53 there was no there was no stylistic1:25:56 editing there's no editing with regards1:25:58 to rhetoric and eloquence1:25:59 yet it's known to be a literary1:26:01 masterpiece but literally masterpieces1:26:03 are developed over time1:26:04 with addition and revision but the quran1:26:07 as the literary masterpiece as it was1:26:08 revealed it1:26:09 remained how could this be a human being1:26:12 from a human being1:26:13 how can it be from muhammad sallallahu1:26:15 alaihi because1:26:17 the human reality when it comes to1:26:18 literary masterpieces that you edit1:26:20 change revise but the quran1:26:24 as a literary masterpiece was no1:26:26 addition no revision1:26:29 also we have to understand the1:26:30 psycholinguistic content of the quran1:26:31 now we can't unpack this right now but1:26:33 it does require further study1:26:35 but when you do a psycholinguistic1:26:36 analysis of the quranic discourse1:26:38 you see it's in the divine voice how can1:26:41 this be the case1:26:43 if it was the words of the process1:26:44 solemn then you would see from a1:26:46 psycholinguistic perspective1:26:48 under careful linguistic analysis you1:26:50 see subtle1:26:51 linguistic emotional cues to indicate it1:26:54 came from a man1:26:55 to indicate came from the process to1:26:57 reflect his life1:26:58 because his life was peaks and troughs1:27:00 we know he was boycotted and1:27:02 tortured and abused and his sahaba1:27:03 passed away his wife passed away his1:27:05 children died1:27:06 he went to war and so on and so forth1:27:08 all of this emotion cannot be found in1:27:10 the quranic discourse from a human1:27:12 perspective1:27:13 when you do a psycholinguistic study and1:27:15 psycholinguistics is part of1:27:16 it's a domain of knowledge when you do a1:27:18 psycholinguistic study of the quran it1:27:20 remains in the divine voice1:27:22 how can this be the case how can you1:27:24 have such a distinction1:27:25 how can you have such a1:27:26 psycho-linguistic distinction between1:27:28 the prophetic statements1:27:30 and the quran if you claim the quran1:27:32 came from the prophet sallallahu alaihi1:27:34 wasallam this is impossible1:27:36 but finally this is one it's a it's a1:27:38 defeating argument it defeats this1:27:40 argument so called that the prophet1:27:43 actually produced the quran1:27:46 if the blueprint exists you can imitate1:27:48 it any form of expression1:27:50 literary expression artistic impression1:27:53 expression1:27:53 if you have the blueprint the tools at1:27:56 your disposal1:27:57 you are able to produce it we'd see this1:28:00 with art1:28:01 with uh impressionism or1:28:03 post-impressionism with the art of monet1:28:05 or whoever the case may be1:28:06 when you have the blueprint you have the1:28:10 the tools at your disposal you could1:28:12 actually1:28:13 now reproduce reproduce and that's why1:28:16 many replicas are very very expensive1:28:19 from an artistic perspective now1:28:22 we have the blueprint today which is the1:28:24 quran we have the tools at our disposal1:28:26 which are the finite 28 letters1:28:28 and we have the grammatical rules but we1:28:30 can't put this together to produce1:28:32 anything like the quadratic discourse if1:28:34 it was human expression1:28:35 and if the blueprint exists and the1:28:37 tools at our disposal exists1:28:38 we can exhaust those tools or use those1:28:40 tools to produce1:28:42 uh that expression but given the fact1:28:44 that the quran's blueprint exists1:28:46 and the tools exist namely the grammar1:28:48 the letters and so on and so forth1:28:50 we can't use them to produce anything1:28:52 like the quran and the arabs were best1:28:54 placed to do so in the 7th century1:28:56 couldn't do so either so this means it1:28:58 cannot come from a human being because1:28:59 if it came from a human being and the1:29:01 blueprint exists1:29:02 and the tools exist then we should be1:29:05 able to replicate it1:29:06 but it wasn't imitated in any shape or1:29:09 form1:29:10 so it couldn't have come from the1:29:12 prophet1:29:16 now what's very important for everybody1:29:19 to understand is1:29:21 that you know trying to conclude that1:29:25 well the way to argue this is to show1:29:26 that the person was like a literary1:29:28 genius1:29:29 well how can you make such a claim how1:29:31 can you say that the person is1:29:33 is a genius that's like an argument that1:29:36 doesn't really make sense by virtue of1:29:37 what we've just discussed1:29:38 it's unfounded why because remember1:29:41 literary geniuses1:29:43 what they do is when they produce1:29:45 excellent work1:29:46 they edit amend and improve the work as1:29:48 we just discussed previously1:29:50 this was not the case with the quran and1:29:52 all human expressions can be imitated if1:29:55 we have the blueprint1:29:56 and tools at our disposal as we just1:29:58 discussed and this has been shown for1:30:00 geniuses such as1:30:01 shakespeare and al-mutanabbi1:30:05 if the quran had been a result of1:30:07 muhammad some genius1:30:09 it should be able to be imitated by1:30:10 virtue what we discussed concerning the1:30:12 blueprint and the tools1:30:13 at our disposal1:30:18 so1:30:20 this is something very important for us1:30:22 to to to highlight and discuss1:30:24 so and that's why when you say oh what1:30:26 about shakespeare what about1:30:28 well shakespeare didn't have sustained1:30:31 unedited1:30:32 and unchanged unmatched eloquence1:30:36 didn't have sustained unedited and1:30:38 unchanged unmatched eloquence1:30:40 but the quran had sustained unedited and1:30:44 unmatched eloquence or unmatched1:30:46 superior literary1:30:47 features and that's why you can't claim1:30:49 he is a genius1:30:51 from that perspective because genius is1:30:54 when they produce a linguistic1:30:57 expression or linguistic work or1:30:59 literary work it's1:31:01 it's it's a sustained effort1:31:04 but it's edited and amended over time1:31:07 but with regards to the quran it was1:31:09 sustained1:31:10 unmatched eloquence sustained1:31:13 unmatched and unedited eloquence which1:31:15 is not a feature of any literature1:31:17 genius1:31:18 especially concerning the size of1:31:21 the book of the the the quran itself1:31:24 so finally our conclusion brothers and1:31:26 sisters1:31:28 god is the only best explanation since1:31:30 the quran could not have been produced1:31:31 by an arab1:31:32 it could not have been used could not1:31:34 have been produced by non-arab or the1:31:35 prophet sallallahu alaihi1:31:37 wasallam it follows that the best1:31:39 explanation1:31:40 is that it came from allah1:31:44 this provides the best explanation for1:31:46 the quran's inimitability1:31:47 because the other explanations are1:31:49 untenable1:31:50 in light of the available knowledge and1:31:52 the background knowledge1:31:54 now why would i get this stage what1:31:55 about alternative inferences1:31:58 you know you know alternative inferences1:32:00 could include1:32:01 that the quran is best explained by a1:32:03 higher being1:32:04 or that it could have come from the1:32:07 devil1:32:08 as as some of our christian brothers1:32:11 and sisters actually say but this is1:32:14 unfounded brothers and sisters1:32:16 because the reason it's unfounding is1:32:19 that look1:32:20 postulating that the quran comes from a1:32:22 higher being1:32:24 seems to be a semantic replacement for1:32:26 god this is like a good replacement1:32:27 right also what is meant by a higher1:32:30 being1:32:32 is not the best explanation of a higher1:32:33 being god himself1:32:35 if higher being implies a greater1:32:37 linguistic power capacity and ability1:32:39 than a human1:32:40 then who can best fit these criteria1:32:42 than god himself1:32:44 also if you want what you need to1:32:46 understand as well1:32:48 is that you know when we have separate1:32:50 evidences for god's existence we also1:32:52 understand that it's very likely that1:32:53 that god will only communicate with us1:32:55 this follows from the fact that not only1:32:57 is allah or god the creator and designer1:32:59 of the entire cosmos that we inhabit1:33:01 but he also made it fit for our1:33:03 existence in addition he created us with1:33:04 souls or consciousness1:33:06 and instilled a sense of morality so1:33:07 clearly god is very extremely invested1:33:11 in our existence and flourish1:33:13 so as such it's it's extremely likely1:33:16 that he would want to communicate to us1:33:17 in the form of revelation1:33:19 so this this is very important when you1:33:21 say high being it's a semantic1:33:22 replacement of god and high being is1:33:23 very ambiguous is this another phantom1:33:25 option1:33:26 is this the fallacy of the phantom1:33:27 option okay what is this high being1:33:29 right we've given you a really good1:33:31 explanation which is god himself1:33:33 what is this higher being right or is1:33:36 this just another phantom option right1:33:38 which is a logical fallacy as we1:33:40 discussed in the beginning now there is1:33:41 a1:33:42 theistic response to this like many1:33:44 christians or christian brothers and1:33:45 sisters would say1:33:46 that maybe the quran came from the devil1:33:49 well this explanation is untenable as1:33:50 well1:33:51 and listen and i've and i've written1:33:52 this in the book that you can download1:33:54 for free on our website the quran could1:33:57 not have come from the devil or some1:33:59 type of spirit1:34:00 because the basis of their existence is1:34:03 in1:34:03 the quran in revelation itself not in1:34:06 empiric not empirical evidence1:34:08 therefore if someone claims that the1:34:09 source of the quran and is the devil1:34:11 they would have to prove that his in1:34:14 other words the devil's existence1:34:15 and ultimately would have to prove1:34:17 revelation in the case of using the1:34:19 quran as the revelation to establish1:34:21 that there was existence1:34:22 then that would already establish the1:34:24 divine text1:34:25 it would establish it as a divine text1:34:27 because to believe in the devil's1:34:28 existence would presuppose the quran to1:34:30 be divine and therefore this contention1:34:33 is self-defeating1:34:34 if however the revelation that you refer1:34:36 to is the bible1:34:37 it must it must be shown to be valid it1:34:41 must be shown to be a valid basis to1:34:42 justify the belief in the devil1:34:45 now with all due respect you can't use1:34:46 the bible to justify the belief in1:34:47 anything1:34:48 in my view because in light of1:34:50 contemporary studies in the textual1:34:51 integrity and historicity1:34:53 and historicity of the bible this is not1:34:55 feasible1:34:56 also for a further content analysis of1:34:59 the quran will strongly indicate that1:35:01 the book is not the teachings of the1:35:02 devil as the quran rebukes him and1:35:04 promotes1:35:05 morals and ethics not in line with an1:35:07 evil world1:35:08 view so in conclusion1:35:11 brothers and sisters we have formulated1:35:14 a powerful argument1:35:16 developed eight premises with a1:35:17 conclusion1:35:19 which rests upon the background1:35:21 information and understanding of1:35:22 epistemology of testimony and inference1:35:24 of the best explanation1:35:25 and we really haven't even referred to1:35:29 any of the special features linguistic1:35:32 features in the quranic discourse1:35:34 and you're able to articulate this to1:35:38 to non-muslims and and people who don't1:35:41 have the expertise and even to1:35:43 to non-arabs and let me just summarize1:35:45 this argument for you to see how easy1:35:48 you can summarize this uh with regards1:35:50 to1:35:51 the tao with regards to articulating1:35:53 this to our brothers and sisters1:35:55 in humanity so1:35:58 it it could be done just in a couple1:36:01 couple of paragraphs1:36:07 the quran was revealed in arabia to the1:36:08 prophet muhammed1:36:10 7th century in the 7th century this1:36:12 period was known as an era of literature1:36:14 and linguistic perfection1:36:16 the 7th century arabs were socialized1:36:18 into being a people who were best1:36:19 who were the best at expressing1:36:20 themselves in their native tongue they1:36:22 would celebrate when a poet was among1:36:24 them amongst them and all they knew was1:36:25 poetry1:36:26 they would start with poetry and end1:36:28 with poetry the cultivation of poetic1:36:31 skills and linguistic1:36:32 mastery was everything for them it was1:36:34 the oxygen and lifeblood1:36:37 they could not live or function without1:36:38 the perfection of the linguistic1:36:39 abilities1:36:40 however when the quran was recited to1:36:43 them they lost their breath1:36:44 they were dumbfounded incapacitated and1:36:46 stunned by the silence of the greatest1:36:48 experts1:36:48 they could not produce anything like the1:36:50 quranic discourse it got worse1:36:52 the quran challenged these linguists par1:36:54 excellence to imitate1:36:56 its unique literary linguistic features1:36:57 but they failed some experts1:37:00 accepted the quran was from god but most1:37:02 reported to boycott war murder torture1:37:05 and a campaign of misinformation1:37:07 in fact throughout the centuries experts1:37:09 have acquired the tools to1:37:10 challenge the quran and they too have1:37:12 testified the quran is inevitable1:37:14 and appreciate why the best linguists1:37:16 have failed however1:37:18 can a non-arab or non-expert of the1:37:19 arabic language appreciate the1:37:21 inimitability of the quran1:37:23 and to now the role of testimony the1:37:25 above assertions are based on an1:37:26 established written oral testimonial1:37:28 transmission of knowledge1:37:29 from past and present scholars of the1:37:31 arabic language if this is true1:37:33 and the people best place to challenge1:37:34 the quran failed to imitate the1:37:36 divine discourse then who is the author1:37:39 this is where testimony stops1:37:41 and the use of inference begins in order1:37:43 to understand the inference of the best1:37:44 explanation the possible1:37:46 rationalizations of the quran's1:37:47 inimitable nature1:37:48 must be analyzed these include that it1:37:50 was authored by an arab1:37:52 and non-arab muhammad considering all1:37:55 the facts that1:37:56 that we discussed so far it is1:37:58 implausible that the quran's1:37:59 inadmittability1:38:00 can be explained by attributing it to an1:38:02 arab and non-arab or muhammad1:38:04 sallallahu alaihi he was still in for1:38:06 that reason1:38:07 god is the inference to the best1:38:09 explanation and that's a summary of1:38:10 everything that we've unpacked today so1:38:12 far1:38:13 so after 1 hour and 38 minutes and1:38:17 17 seconds brothers and sisters let's1:38:20 now take some questions1:38:31 okay so1:38:44 there's some really funny questions so1:38:48 yeah this this this that's uh let's be1:38:51 um1:38:52 let's be a mature here right so um1:38:56 let's get some questions so if you if1:38:58 you don't mind start asking some1:38:59 questions now1:39:23 okay so i'm just waiting for some1:39:24 questions there seems to be a slight1:39:26 delay1:39:30 why does georges rhyme with gorgeous1:39:32 that's very funny1:39:33 uh let's keep your professional mature1:39:38 please1:39:42 uh okay so muhammad says this argument1:39:45 this argument1:39:45 is so watertight i i don't think there1:39:48 are any questions subhanallah1:39:50 well there's always questions there's1:39:52 always questions1:40:02 okay so there's not many any questions1:40:05 um okay there's one question here i1:40:06 believe okay very good so1:40:09 oh it's disappeared so the question here1:40:11 is1:40:12 i recall reading somewhere that the1:40:13 hadith language is very different from1:40:15 the arabic language very1:40:16 similar very few similarities and words1:40:18 have you heard this as well1:40:20 in actual fact i have got a video on1:40:21 this is a very old video with me and1:40:22 sabor1:40:23 we cite a actual linguistic a linguistic1:40:26 study in a paper which was very good it1:40:28 did like a kind of linguistic1:40:29 statistical analysis between bukhari and1:40:32 the quran1:40:32 and it concluded just based on the kind1:40:36 of um1:40:37 statistics that they that they that they1:40:40 came up with that it shows that it was1:40:43 completely two different authors1:40:45 and now obviously like with most1:40:47 academic studies the reason i haven't1:40:48 referred to this study because1:40:50 there were some you know kind of1:40:51 academic limitations to the methodology1:40:54 of the study1:40:55 but yes you're right and when we do a1:40:57 study of the hadith literature1:40:59 when you do a study even from a1:41:01 statistical perspective on the use of1:41:03 words1:41:04 and the style and the stylistics of the1:41:06 particular1:41:07 hadith literature whether it's in1:41:09 bukhari or muslim whatever the case may1:41:10 be1:41:11 you see there is a clear distinction1:41:13 between the quranic discourse1:41:15 and the hadith of the prophet1:41:20 uh and this is very important to1:41:22 understand and one would argue well this1:41:23 doesn't make it1:41:24 you know from god no we're not saying1:41:26 that but it's one1:41:27 it's one of the features it's one of the1:41:29 criteria of ensuring that it didn't come1:41:31 from the prophet sallallahu alaihi1:41:32 wasallam1:41:33 that that there is that clear1:41:34 distinction yes we know you know normal1:41:36 human beings1:41:37 they have different uh use of language1:41:40 and statistical1:41:41 linguistic variants and so on and so1:41:42 forth when they do when they sing when1:41:44 they1:41:45 write songs on when they recite poetry1:41:47 or when they1:41:49 um you know if they're rappers for1:41:52 example there is a distinct style1:41:54 but yet from a statistical linguistic1:41:56 point of view there are1:41:58 you know one would argue many1:41:59 similarities from their normal speech1:42:01 and from the speech if they're rapping1:42:03 or singing or reciting poetry1:42:05 but you know when when it comes to the1:42:08 quranic discourse there is a very very1:42:10 clear distinction1:42:11 um and that's it doesn't mean it's from1:42:13 god but it's a very important thing to1:42:15 mention1:42:16 because if there was similarities in you1:42:19 know linguistic1:42:20 uh in statistical uh1:42:23 uh use of certain words and there was a1:42:26 similarity1:42:27 in stylistic uh variants and style and1:42:30 so on and so forth1:42:31 then it'll be very problematic to say1:42:33 that it came from god because it looks1:42:35 like1:42:36 very very similar to the prophet's words1:42:39 but given the fact that there is a clear1:42:41 distinction between prophetic narrative1:42:44 and quranic narrative then this is1:42:45 extremely helpful and there has been1:42:47 some research on this um and i ha and i1:42:50 have1:42:50 cited that research previously but i1:42:52 removed it because1:42:54 an academic uh show to me there were1:42:55 some methodological issues i i don't1:42:57 think they were major1:42:58 but it's always best to be robust but1:43:00 your point is very true1:43:01 and it's a very key point which i should1:43:03 have mentioned and jazakallah bless you1:43:22 this1:43:33 yes it's very good very good question so1:43:36 wouldn't1:43:37 the method by which the quran was1:43:39 revealed many times on the spot1:43:41 to address questions social social1:43:43 social political issues etc become part1:43:44 of the chronic challenge1:43:45 it is part of the chronic challenges and1:43:48 you know at sapiens institute we're1:43:49 developing a course1:43:51 to basically um articulate the veracity1:43:54 of the quran1:43:55 this is one argument but we have an1:43:57 argument concerning its structural1:43:58 coherence1:43:59 and this is very important for us to1:44:01 understand because you know the quran is1:44:03 revealed many of its verses were1:44:04 revealed for specific time and place1:44:06 for specific issues and circumstances1:44:09 and many of these verses address those1:44:10 issues yet1:44:11 the quran has come together in a1:44:13 coherent literary structural piece in a1:44:15 structural way1:44:16 and very very very coherent and you know1:44:19 for example we have things like1:44:20 ring composition and other structural1:44:22 coherent features literary features1:44:25 and you know one would argue that's not1:44:27 very special because people have1:44:28 coherent writing all the time yeah for1:44:30 sure1:44:31 but the nature of his coherence is quite1:44:33 specific i.e1:44:34 ring ring composition and other aspects1:44:37 but1:44:38 it it it was done so with1:44:41 with you know it's done so you have to1:44:44 understand it was done so1:44:45 with the idea or from the perspective1:44:48 that many of the verses were revealed1:44:49 for specific time in places yet they1:44:51 formed a coherent piece a deep1:44:53 structural coherent piece from a1:44:55 literary perspective1:44:56 this is phenomenal why because it means1:44:58 the author knew the future1:45:00 that's what it means because1:45:04 how can you develop a literary1:45:06 structural piece when you're1:45:08 addressing specific situations across a1:45:10 particular period of time1:45:13 in order for you to be able to do that1:45:15 it means you already1:45:16 knew what was going to happen and you1:45:18 [Music]1:45:19 provided those verses or those responses1:45:22 in a way that would create1:45:24 uh that type of structural coherence1:45:27 and there's a really good book by1:45:29 muhammad abdullah draz1:45:31 it's called the eternal challenge and he1:45:33 discusses he's got a beautiful quote1:45:35 a beautiful quote concerning the1:45:37 structural features1:45:39 of the quranic discourse i don't know if1:45:42 i put it in my book i should have1:45:43 it's just it's phenomenal um let me see1:45:46 if i can find it1:45:47 just bear with me it's concerning the1:45:49 kind of structural features1:45:51 of uh of the quran and this point that1:45:54 i've just made and he's made1:45:55 he made it in a much eloquent way uh1:45:58 when he talked about1:45:59 you know how on earth could uh1:46:02 the the prophet sallallahu alaihi he was1:46:07 how could on earth the quran be from a1:46:08 man from a human being1:46:11 based on on what we just said actually1:46:13 let me try1:46:14 let me try and find it online because i1:46:17 i do believe1:46:18 i have referenced it on uh in another1:46:21 essay1:46:21 or somewhere else uh just bear with me1:46:25 lot but i really want to read it it's a1:46:27 beautiful quote1:46:28 um coherence and1:46:35 it's it's a beautiful beautiful um1:46:39 the type of my saying as well because it1:46:41 might come together1:46:42 because i have referenced it bear with1:46:45 me1:46:46 yes i think it's here there's a pdf1:46:53 okay so let me just find a few1:46:56 all right search1:47:01 yeah here we go are you ready guys1:47:05 when we consider carefully the timing of1:47:07 the revelation of the quranic passages1:47:09 and surahs and the arrangements1:47:11 we are profoundly astonished we almost1:47:14 belie what we see1:47:16 and hear we then begin to ask ourselves1:47:18 for an explanation of this highly1:47:20 improbable phenomenon1:47:21 is it not true that this new passage of1:47:23 revelation has just been heard as new1:47:26 addressing a particular event which is1:47:29 its only concern1:47:30 yet it sounds as though it is neither1:47:33 new nor separate from the rest1:47:35 it seems as if it has been along with1:47:37 the rest of the quran1:47:38 perfectly impressed on this man's mind1:47:40 long before he has recited it to us1:47:43 it has been fully engraved on his heart1:47:46 before its composition1:47:48 in the words he recites how else can it1:47:50 unite so perfectly and harmoniously1:47:53 parts and pieces that do not naturally1:47:54 come together is it a result of an1:47:57 experiment that follows a spontaneous1:47:58 thought that could not be the case1:48:01 when each part was put in his position1:48:03 the one who placed them1:48:04 never had a new thought introduced any1:48:06 modification or rearrangement1:48:08 how then could he have determined his1:48:09 player how could he have1:48:11 made his intention so clear in advance1:48:13 when we consider such detailed1:48:15 instructions1:48:16 on the arrangements of passages and1:48:17 surahs we are bound to conclude that1:48:19 there is a complete and detailed plan1:48:21 assigning the position of each passage1:48:24 before they are all revealed1:48:26 indeed the arrangement is made before1:48:29 the reasons leading to the revelation of1:48:31 any passage occur1:48:33 and even before the start of the1:48:34 preliminary causes of such events1:48:37 such are the plain facts about the1:48:38 arrangement of the quran as it was1:48:40 revealed in1:48:40 separate verses passages and surahs over1:48:43 a period of 23 years1:48:45 what does that tell us about its source1:48:48 brothers and sisters what else can i say1:48:49 that was the eloquent words of sheikh1:48:51 muhammad1:48:51 abdullah and subhanallah1:49:02 absolutely boom islam is true that's1:49:05 what big boss says1:49:08 maryam says allahu akbar indeed allah is1:49:12 greater1:49:26 so1:49:31 okay so brothers and sisters in order1:49:32 for you to get all the references in the1:49:35 slides1:49:36 all you need to do is go to sapience1:49:38 institute.org forward slash books and1:49:40 download the divine reality1:49:42 and go to chapter 13 i think it's1:49:44 chapter 13.1:49:45 and i have an essay called god's1:49:47 testimony1:49:49 and it's everything i've mentioned is1:49:51 mentioned this essay with a little bit1:49:52 more1:49:53 and it's got all the references for you1:49:55 brothers and sisters okay1:49:57 so without further ado i uh i need to go1:50:00 now may allah bless you1:50:03 it's phenomenal i'm going to do more of1:50:04 these inshallah please give us your1:50:07 feedback1:50:07 please share this with people you know1:50:09 this is we provide this content for free1:50:12 you know if you you know i think you1:50:13 appreciate that it's nuanced1:50:15 it's uh philosophically robust it's well1:50:17 referenced there's a lot of research1:50:18 that's gone behind this it is you know1:50:21 hopefully1:50:22 uh timeless from the point of view that1:50:25 it's not based on certain evidences that1:50:27 we know today1:50:28 it's based on you know on on concepts1:50:31 and first principles and evidences1:50:33 that are not going to necessarily change1:50:35 in any shape or form1:50:36 and therefore it's a timeless argument1:50:38 that we can use today tomorrow and in1:50:40 the future1:50:40 our job is to internalize it and be able1:50:42 to articulate on a popular level and1:50:44 academic and intellectual and mid-range1:50:46 level as well1:50:47 but that's your job to continue the1:50:48 journey so this is just part of the1:50:50 journey1:50:51 please download the book read the1:50:52 particular chapter1:50:54 go to the references understand this1:50:56 argument revisit1:50:58 this seminar even further again1:51:01 revisit again brothers and sisters and i1:51:03 pray you know it's inspired you1:51:05 in in in some way and uh1:51:08 you know we're gonna have we're gonna do1:51:10 these academic webinars1:51:11 inshallah every week uh the first one1:51:14 was1:51:15 on beauty god god1:51:18 god's beauty and uh the recognition of1:51:22 god1:51:22 last week was by that was by far1:51:26 this week last week was by dr utman the1:51:28 teeth and he was i can't1:51:29 i can't breathe on empathy1:51:31 dehumanization othering1:51:33 and racism today it was on the1:51:37 god's testimony articulating the1:51:39 linguistic miracle of the quran in1:51:41 in in a way that doesn't require you or1:51:43 the person that you're talking to1:51:44 to know anything about the arabic1:51:46 language and it rests upon1:51:48 the epistemology of testimony and1:51:49 inference to the best explanation and1:51:51 next week we're going to have a special1:51:52 one for you as well in sha1:51:54 allah so brothers and sisters may allah1:51:57 bless every single one of you and1:51:58 grant you the best in this life and the1:52:00 best in the life to come1:52:02 um and you know stay safe1:52:06 stay peaceful stay1:52:10 well be good to each other love for1:52:12 others1:52:13 for yourself which is a sahih hadith1:52:15 from the prophet sallam narrated by1:52:16 bukhari1:52:18 and and the specific arabic is not it's1:52:21 not just your brother it says1:52:23 human beings and we know this means if1:52:25 you go to the works of anawi1:52:27 and maliki scholar even this means that1:52:30 we must be committed to the goodness and1:52:31 guidance for all people1:52:33 and that's what muslims should be1:52:36 should be that's our state of being so1:52:39 anything i've said that is1:52:40 good has come from allah anything wrong1:52:43 or bad it's come from my ego my nose1:52:50 is