If a hadith is sound in its chain but the intellect does not accept it, like the hadith (The Nile and the Euphrates spring from Paradise), what is the limit of the intellect in judging the text as sound or weak?

The questioner : I mean, as long as we agree on this issue and within these rules, we now come to the higher rank and enter into the text. I mean, now, if the intellect, even the Islamic intellect, finds a text strange that is sound in its chain based on the rules of hadith science, which are the rules of the chain, and it finds it strange, and to be precise, this means that finding it strange is permissible, there is nothing wrong with it, as evidenced by the fact that even the Salaf found such things objectionable... Al-Khatib and others.

The Shaykh : It exists, it exists.

The questioner : For example, the hadith .

The Shaykh : Yes.

The questioner : .

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner or in a narration .

The Shaykh : Yes, exactly.

The questioner : These are undoubtedly sound in terms of the rules of the chain, and the scholars have judged them as sound.

The Shaykh : Yes, exactly.

The questioner : But in terms of the text, the intellect, even the Islamic intellect, sees that the certain reality does not apply to the text. And when one investigates it, his investigation is not whether the intellect was placed before the text or not, something like that, and the question...

The Shaykh : I am telling you.

The questioner : I mean, what are the limits of the intellect?

The Shaykh : Allow me, because you said the certain reality denies this text that is established in its chain as sound.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : You understood correctly.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Now, I am telling you, does the intellect testify to the truth of this statement regarding the certain reality?

The questioner : The intellect testifies to this, yes, yes, in my opinion and belief!

The Shaykh : No problem, are you saying in your belief, or in the belief of everyone who hears this text?

The questioner : By Allah, I think everyone who hears this text sees that the reality indicates this.

The Shaykh : Okay, what do you think? You have someone who says no!

The questioner : Who is you!

The Shaykh : The one who is...

The questioner : We are listening, I mean.

The Shaykh : No problem, now you are claiming the reality. Have you gained knowledge of the reality? Say it plainly, do not claim it for others, say it plainly? Have you gained knowledge of this reality? Say yes, say no? You are free, but do not drag us into argument and discussion. Say what you wish, say what your intellect dictates.

The questioner : I have not gained knowledge of the reality myself! But...

The Shaykh : Yes, the discussion is with you now, and one might understand your neighbor...

The questioner : It does not happen, I say, but I have answered you!

The Shaykh : No problem, you answered that you have not gained knowledge of this reality, correct?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Now, you have room to speak, but on the condition that it is around what you admitted, not around deviating from it and doubling down on it.

The questioner : If Allah wills.

The Shaykh : Around this, so I do not need it, what do you think!

The questioner : As you wish, go ahead.

The Shaykh : Do you think that my explanation benefits you?

The questioner : I mean, now, no problem, I mean, I can say a sentence like this between...

The Shaykh: Go ahead.

The questioner : Between two objections, I mean, you have the right to compel me, to compel me to answer you with this or that, but sometimes the question requires some explanation!

The Shaykh : No problem, I did not prevent you, now do not hold me accountable. You are going to waste our time on something...

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : But before you explain, does this explanation benefit me, such that what I understood from your brief, concise answer, as I want, might change my understanding of the issue?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : I would say now, take the carpet of Ahmad! Explain.

The questioner : For me.

The Shaykh : But I am going to tell you in advance, stay in your place!

The questioner : Okay, fine.

The Shaykh : Otherwise, you are going to fall into contradiction!

The questioner : Of course, first of all, I myself wanted to answer you so that I would be done with the topic. I am telling you, I have not gained knowledge of it myself!

The Shaykh: Go ahead.

The questioner : But the people, I received this knowledge through the people and through mass transmission, that is, based on what is available to me as a result, I have a comprehensive understanding of the reality that the Nile and the Euphrates do not spring from Paradise, they spring from a lake... or only the Nile, excuse me, and the Euphrates springs from the mountains of Turkey or elsewhere. If they spring from the earth, those who investigated!

The Shaykh : And I testify with you!

The questioner : It is finished, if I have a comprehensive understanding of this reality in terms of the outcome.

The Shaykh: No.

The questioner : The outcome, the result.

The Shaykh : How is the outcome, it means the end, while it is the beginning.

The questioner : I mean, the result, the result is that I am certain that the Nile does not spring from Paradise.

The Shaykh: Good.

The questioner : And the reality certainly judges this, and this is what I claim everyone agrees with me on!

The Shaykh : Beautiful... I believe that the one who said "stay in your place" was not truthful. Clear? Okay.

The questioner : I learn more than I discuss, I mean.

The Shaykh : Go ahead, may Allah guide you. I am, what am I saying, he has the right to object to me! I am with you, okay.

The questioner : Of course, I have the right.

The Shaykh : And I wanted to say, I did not consider you an arguer.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : But I knew you as a debater, and there is no harm in that, do not be afraid, I mean...

The questioner : ... I am ready, I mean.

The Shaykh : Allow me to give you an example now.

The questioner: Go ahead.

The Shaykh : I throw two birds with one stone. Many people today, due to the narrowness of their scientific horizon, first, and I mean religious science, and the narrowness of their intellectual horizon, second, think that religious science conflicts with empirical science. For example, if you asked doctors today, where is the center of the intellect, in the head or in the chest, they would answer you in the head, and they would give you empirical examples that if the brain is disabled by a disabling factor, the person no longer reasons, is this statement correct or not? If the center of the intellect is the head, and this contradicts the Noble Qur'an, where it said: And He confirmed it, peace be upon him, by his saying in the well-known hadith: Then He said, the Exalted, confirming the previous verse: And where So from the religious, transmitted aspect, there is no room for us to say that the intellect is in the head, but rather it is in the heart. But science says otherwise. So I gave my brothers in Damascus the following example more than once, and you may understand it easily. We have water like this water, extended by pipes to most of the city, but its sources are different. It is clear to us in Damascus that there is water called the Feijah water, and Feijah is a village that is, I do not know, twenty or thirty kilometers from Damascus... Yes.

Another questioner: Thirty.

The Shaykh : It does not concern us whether I am close or far, about thirty kilometers. The important thing is that the water there springs from a spring, and they drew this water from about thirty kilometers to the tops of the mountains, and from there Mount Qasioun, which you hear about today, and then they brought it down with these pipes to the center of Damascus. But the technical method of drawing this water, it cannot be drawn with all pipes in one pull from Feijah to Damascus. There must be basins, I mean centers. And indeed, there are several basin centers on this Mount Qasioun that are filled with water and then distributed from them with these pipes. So if one of these basins is struck, the water is cut off from the town. The one who does not know this scientific fact that this water springs from Feijah says to you, where is this water coming from? From this basin. But the one who knows more than the first one says, why not from the basin before it, and before it, and before it? And then human knowledge reaches where to the spring of Feijah. Now you said that the Euphrates and the Nile spring from known lands, and I say with your saying...