The War-Wager Hadith Paradox (Debunking Dogmatism) -Mufti Abu Layth

I want to present something people this is called what I've termed the war wager hadith paradox okay now what is this hadith paradox and why does this show that hadith dogmatism is kind of unacceptable let me make us through this I aim to kind of show you that people who are who are trying to assert hadith dogmatism the reason they're doing it is

because they have this loyalty to the east nad concept - this is not concept that the chain everything is about the chain and they've gone away from the actual teachings of people like imam malik and saying look people will at times black the chain as well they will at times kind of pull on over you with the chain never let go of your faculty of reason and the holistic understanding of islam Imam Malik said and Imam Abu Hanifa but we do have people that are had these dogmatists they don't care about whatever the hell it has to say as long as we have a chain that is acceptable

they will compromise everything so I want to show you a fine example that is a paradox you see and whites a paradox I'll explain see there is a hadith a very famous hadith that is in several books of hadith in Sahin in body in Muslim it's in Abu Dawood it's in Nasser eat and the Muslims of Ahmed it's in a few a few a few other books as well and let me read this hadith to you people this hadith the one I'm going to read the wording is from Sahih Muslim it's from Abu Huraira love your loved one and you've heard of this and it is the

hadith about waging war the Prophet said Omer - and no cartel and mass had a shadow I have been commanded and instructed to fight people fight mankind until they testify hotter yesh hadu an la ilaha illa-llah that there is no God except Allah what you mean OB and they must have faith in me believe in me what we match it to be and believe in that which I have brought for either for I lose Alec if they do that awesome human

need in my home world home in Lobby hockey huh weii sir boom Allah Allah then then they have protected from me their wealth and their lives and their blood except unless it is by an Islamic right and the accountability is with their Lord now this hadith I want to not screw man but still man the argument of the hadith dogmatists and amongst them people like you've got the Salafi Wahabi

scholar a voice hoc way me the Egyptian scholar who has detailed explanations of this and let me bring bring let me steal man the best of what is to be said including what he said so this is what people are saying he says that this hadith cannot be problematized why let me tell you because he says it's motivated to start off with okay that this is as widespread it is has multiplicity of change that it reaches the rank of the or an in its strength

and in its establish established nature that it is as established and as conclusive as the Quran so pointman he says up to 17 companions have transmitted it today I'm not going to critique in this wool wager hadith paradox I'm not going to critique the chains I'm going to show you the paradox 17 companions have transmitted a fine this hadith has up to let me tell you it has up to 17

narrations it has sorry multiple narrations in Bihari and Muslim about you've got multiple you've got four five in party four five in Muslim you've got up to 17 narrations in sauna and nursery in the book of necessary you've got 17 narration sorry 18 narrations in the muslims of ahmed you've got in other books as well so look at how many chains we have to prove this hadith I want you to look at that and then you've got people saying this is motor

water so what people are doing is they're bringing all these chains to support and to show that you cannot question this happy but then the paradox begins to unfold because you see the thing is now we say okay so what is the hadith the hadith is that the Prophet said I have been commanded to fight mankind until they believe in me and

until they believe in Allah and believe in me then they have safeguarded their wealth and lives from me now you see first of all including people like Hawaii and others will say that the scholars unanimously accept that we cannot fight a Kaffir for being a cafe that just for a cafe simply being a cafe like a non-muslim simply being a non-muslim does not legitimize him being

fought that that is impermissible he himself says this each man on this everybody says in fact they will say all of these scholars regarding the verse of the Quran la Achrafieh dean there is no compulsion in Islam they will interpret it to mean that there is no compulsion in making people enter Islam okay so they will say there's no compulsion in making people enter so remember that so they also agree also although they disagree with people like me and many of the scholars that say

that there's no compulsion at all in Islam all the verses of the Quran of answer to Korean asset economic meaning you force people until they believe unless the Elayne be much later you are not somebody imposed on people like a 15 there is no compulsion at all in matters of the Deen they will although they don't agree or together with us on these things but they do agree on making people embrace Islam there is no compulsion they also agree that a Kaffir cannot be fought for simply being a kaffir now this is the

paradox you see when you cement all these chains to bring this hadith you're showing that this procedure is airtight and now this is the chain you see this is the hadith but then the hadith that you end up with you can't accept so what these scholars start to say right okay so what wainy and other people say let me steel man their arguments for you they say right no not no no we don't say you can fight somebody because they say this hadith an ass here mankind doesn't

mean all of mankind because it doesn't mean Muslims you can fight Muslims or hypocrites or mushrikeen or non-muslim it meant you for the mushrikeen all you fought the Kafar okay hmm okay so let's take that fine let's take let's take away knee oh these people's understanding that you're fighting the mushrikeen okay they say and then then then what it means is there's a hadith of bladder or the allahu on the the prophet he sent his companions and he sent marade and he sent these people these

are the companions and what he said is that when you go to these people that's by the way this is not this hadith but that's a different hadith but he sent them and said when you go to these people present them these three that you can either embrace Islam if you accept that then come with us or you can stay where you are as Muslims or you can pay the jizya that these kind of three conditions were put forward to these people so they say fine that's what the hadith is talking about that you can so basically we're going to fight I can

fight I've been commanded to fight them but in that hadith it applies but what no no no no no no no no let's read this hadith let's read this hadith this is in Sahih Muslim and this hadith remember is motivator according to them so the change that could not make a single mistake in its representation and it reads I have been commanded to fight people and last mankind until they testify and believe in Allah and they

believe in me believe look fight them until they believe so there is coercion in entering the Deen even though these people everybody accepts there's no coercion in entering the Deen and they must believe in what I have brought and then their lives and blood and wealth is safeguarded from me now the problem is they say no but this content of this heavy no it doesn't what it means is that yes we will fight them but they have an option two pages yet you see and

that is the paradox because what they've done is it's a person who is building an airtight container but what they've the only way to build it is from the inside and by doing it they self suffocate because the whole the paradox in this example people is that well if the net result which we have is that the Prophet saying I've been fortified I've been sent to fight mankind and the only way they must believe to save their lives if

that net result is incomplete or insufficient in advocate lacking misrepresenting which they all agree it is then that shows that the preservation practice is also lacking you see and that's the paradox because since this was supposed to be remember it's insulin and necessary the 17 narrations in Muslims of Ahmed these 18 narrations these four narrations of more embody and four or more Muslim and it's motor water

and the 17 companions and so this is supposed to be on look this is supposed to be so tight yet it's supposed to be bulletproof bomb-proof it's supposed to be a tight yet the result we have is something that people are saying no no Nastya doesn't mean mankind no it can't be mine everybody seems to accept that to take this hadith literally or not even literally take this hadith with what it means is unacceptable in fact

that is exactly what Isis did you can't fold them they took this hadith literally not literally they just took the hadith it's not even about literally that is what they're these reads us most Muslims never accept this hadith including the salafiyyah including hélène including all these people do not take this hadith they say yes but the hadith can't mean that because we don't accept so if it lacks because you think if something was so airtight then surely what it preserved to have been a perfect preservation

rather than saying no enas doesn't mean this this doesn't mean this no but that one hadith of breda or something is really what qualifies this whole motor water thing now you see and so what they did by solidifying all these chains they created a paradox because now all these chains and water worth their narrations ought to show well you ought to accept this and since that's faulty the paradox is that will so must the system be

lacking the system must be inconclusive and not motivated and faulty and the only way you can let go of this is truly to also challenge that that is never conclusive it is like people the old tale of catching the monkey by leaving some you know some some kind of sweet so whatever the monkey was interested in in a part that the the monkey would kind of put his hand in and the only way is

either and once it tries once it grabs the debate the hand can't come out of the pot but the only way could come out is to release but the monkey don't think like that and that's what we've got here with hadith dogmatism you see this is the perfect example to show the paradox that you've created such a the way the wall wager hadith paradox demonstrates

that the system is is problematic as is the result because if the result is problematic the system is problematic if the system is sound the result must be sound which it isn't you see so with that people I present that to you it's a bit light you see they're stupefied because whatever if you ask them the result is like it's like the paradox people I don't know if you've come across the crocodile paradox but the cracker or the crocodile peridot is where the parent it's the mother has had in this in this

story in this story that the mother has had its child kidnapped by a crocodile and the crocodile one that has surprisingly reasoning faculties besides to reason to give a chance to the parent and he says well says to the mother I tell you what if you can tell me what I'm going to do with this child I will if you get it correct right I will give you the child you see so the mother was

about to say well I hope you'd let the child go but then it the mother realizes and says to the crocodile that you're going to eat the child like you will not give the child the by setting up a paradox because now whatever the crocodile is about to do backfires because if that because if the crocodile was going to keep the child it must

therefore honor its word and give back the child you see so and if it and if it wasn't and it keeps the child it's still stuck because do you get the paradox you see it's an amazing product because it totally stupefies the person because the crocodile in that situation is kind of stuck that it thinks well you see because if I now eat the child well well that's what I was going to do so I now if I honor my word or to return the child and if I were

turn might return the child because I was gonna return the child anyway then the child gets away anyway so in both situations the mother kind of wins it's a win-win so in the same way when you ask these people well is this system ear tight because if it is why then the result is a tight and you see it becomes a kind of paradox so I wanted to share that and I've turned that the war wager had these paradox and it just goes to demonstrate that this hadith dogmatism this hadith cancelling out or on

perspective does not work and we need to really resort to the method taught to us by the likes of imam malik the dawn of our own medina who said that who's who taught us that look this one-on-one may snatch the Deen from in front of you right people with that I know it's me wow that is late guys all right shall la got a wrap up with that shall LA as always you've been awesome it is incredibly late here I think I need to get some food in Charlotte so

with that gonna love you and leave you all in Charlotte may you all have an awesome week may allah subhanaw taala bless you and keep you all forever smiling take very good care of yourselves people Shalala stay in touch stay awesome stay blessed over and out people Salam o aleikum or a little lighter ila or butter cattle