(Explanation of the Mu'tazilah's preference of Greek reason and logic over transmission, and the refutation of the claim that the indications of the Qur'an and Sunnah are speculative) They made their minds more deserving of taking what ***
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh :"They made their minds more deserving of taking what *** in it from the reports and the Qur'an"
From the reports, this is connected to "more deserving." You made, yes, they made their minds more deserving of taking what is in it. More deserving of what? Of the reports and the Qur'an. And you also made
"His speech does not yield certainty, so for this reason the two disputants do not accept"
Do not accept what?
"His arbitration when they differ" They made the speech of Allah not yield certainty. Why? He said because the indication of words is speculative. The indication of words is speculative, did you understand? Even if I said "Zayd stood up," its indication of his standing is speculative. There is a possibility that "stood" means "became upright," and a possibility that "Zayd" is the person who was likened to Zayd, so the name Zayd was borrowed for him. Look how it is. And for this reason, they said that all verbal indications, in their view, are based on the principle that all verbal indications are speculative. Glory be to Allah. The rational indications, which are mere conjectures, are considered certain in their view. For this reason, he says: "And you made"
"His speech does not yield certainty, so for this reason"
That is, because certainty is not derived from it.
"The two disputants do not accept His arbitration when they differ" If they are called to the Qur'an, they say, "By Allah, the Qur'an's indication is verbal, and verbal indication does not yield certainty."
As for when they come to the hadith, they tear it apart first, before they speak, before they speak about it. What do they say? They say, "It is a report from a single narrator, and reports from single narrators do not yield anything but suspicion." Yes, demolish it from the start and do not trouble yourselves with interpreting it. Yes.
"That is, the disparagement, that is, the disparagement after this, were it not for the *** audacity and boldness, O you who transgress"
He means, where is the disparagement? If we rule by the Book of Allah and you do not rule by it, where is the disparagement, in us or in you? Yes. But he says: The audacity that comes from you, and the transgression, is what made you say this statement, even though Allah knows that you are the ones who disparage. Yes.
From the reports, this is connected to "more deserving." You made, yes, they made their minds more deserving of taking what is in it. More deserving of what? Of the reports and the Qur'an. And you also made
"His speech does not yield certainty, so for this reason the two disputants do not accept"
Do not accept what?
"His arbitration when they differ" They made the speech of Allah not yield certainty. Why? He said because the indication of words is speculative. The indication of words is speculative, did you understand? Even if I said "Zayd stood up," its indication of his standing is speculative. There is a possibility that "stood" means "became upright," and a possibility that "Zayd" is the person who was likened to Zayd, so the name Zayd was borrowed for him. Look how it is. And for this reason, they said that all verbal indications, in their view, are based on the principle that all verbal indications are speculative. Glory be to Allah. The rational indications, which are mere conjectures, are considered certain in their view. For this reason, he says: "And you made"
"His speech does not yield certainty, so for this reason"
That is, because certainty is not derived from it.
"The two disputants do not accept His arbitration when they differ" If they are called to the Qur'an, they say, "By Allah, the Qur'an's indication is verbal, and verbal indication does not yield certainty."
As for when they come to the hadith, they tear it apart first, before they speak, before they speak about it. What do they say? They say, "It is a report from a single narrator, and reports from single narrators do not yield anything but suspicion." Yes, demolish it from the start and do not trouble yourselves with interpreting it. Yes.
"That is, the disparagement, that is, the disparagement after this, were it not for the *** audacity and boldness, O you who transgress"
He means, where is the disparagement? If we rule by the Book of Allah and you do not rule by it, where is the disparagement, in us or in you? Yes. But he says: The audacity that comes from you, and the transgression, is what made you say this statement, even though Allah knows that you are the ones who disparage. Yes.