Who Actually Makes the Cut to Jannah?

Alhamdulillah. So now we are continuing our class, but we are starting a new segment, a new module. Our last segment was called, what was the fancy term, guys, for the last segment? Theodysy. And the next topic we're going to do is yet a new term that I'm going to introduce you to. Perhaps some of you, perhaps many of you, haven't heard of this term. It is soteriology.

So, soteriology is the study of salvation through religion. What do various faiths say the path to achieving ultimate greatness, ultimate redemption, ultimate fulfilledness, ultimate happiness, i.e., salvation? How does the faith provide salvation, and to whom does it provide salvation? This topic is called soteriology.

Now, question: this topic could have been done at any time, but it actually fits perfectly after theodysy. This topic is actually a perfect, uh, part two to theodysy. Question to all of you: think about this and tell me, why is the study of soteriology linked to theodysy? Who can tell me? And I can't see hands 'cause you guys have blinded me with these lights. So, anybody in the back? Yes. Go ahead.

Yeah. Okay. So, what the brother says is that once we've discussed theodysy and we've understood there is good and evil, and why is there good and evil, the question that happens, the question then occurs: what happens to those who do good versus those who do evil? And what if somebody who does good, I'm rephrasing something, what if somebody who does good doesn't come from our faith? What if somebody who does evil comes from our faith? Right? So that is one aspect that links theodysy to soteriology. Good. Another aspect, sisters, anybody? Why is these linked to soteriology? Another, another aspect. Anybody from the sister side? Yes.

Excellent. The same issues that we struggled with in trying to understand whence evil when God is all merciful, the same issues now come to play with why eternal punishment. What is the, what is the divine wisdom? How do we, how do we reconcile the divine attributes of mercy and compassion with eternal pain and suffering? That is another linkage from theodysy to soteriology. Others as well. One more, then we want. Yeah. Go ahead.

Excellent. So, last class I discussed the divine reward, theodysy, one of Ibn Taymiyyah's tactics, or I mean, not tactics, but analyses of how to understand theodysy. It comes into soteriology. If you believe in it, it will help you deal with theodysy. Other things can be said as well. So, one way to, to explain the, the direct correlation, theodysy is the diagnosis for why there is evil, why there's pain, why there's suffering. So, soteriology is the ultimate therapy and cure to how to get rid of that evil and pain. Right? So, the, theodysy is the here and now. Soteriology is the future, the cure, the antidote. How to get out of the pain? How do we eliminate the pain? Well, by salvation. Right?

Also, you can say that one aspect of soteriology is the presumption that, uh, and again, we just mentioned this now, that the permanent punishment of Allah seems unjust and cruel, i.e., it seems evil. Some would say this is a common notion that permanent punishment is a type of evil. And of course, the existence of evil goes back to theodysy. And so, some interpretations of soteriology would conflict with some interpretations of theodysy. Does that make sense? And vice versa. Right? Once you've set up your paradigm of theodysy, it will impact your paradigm of soteriology, and vice versa. Right?

So, for all of these reasons, it's actually the perfect time to now talk about the issue of salvation, the issue of who gets, uh, saved and how, and the mechanisms for doing so. And this will be a multiple-part series. Today will be the very, very basic, historical, bird's-eye view. And then, inshallah, we'll continue and go into more depth into our faith.

And so, what I'm going to do today, and again, one of the things I, I have taken as my philosophy when I teach you this class is to go way beyond just our tradition and to introduce you to the global traditions. I believe a current Muslim mind must be engaged with the world they live in and must be aware of it. So, I do not restrict myself only to my tradition and your tradition. I believe for you to be genuine, bonafide thinkers and contributors to the global discourse, you must at least be situated within that global discourse.

So, today I'm going to give you a brief crash course of soteriology in all of the five major faiths. Right? That crash course is necessary before we jump into solely our faith. So, today the emphasis will not be on Islam. It's just going to be very quickly: Islam, Muslims say this, or some Muslims say this, and others say this. And of course, the five major faiths should be known to all of you. The five most important, seminal faiths in the world are Islam, Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Judaism. Right? And these five faiths can be divided into two categories: the Abrahamic, and that's of course the three: Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and the Dharmic, which is Buddhism and Hinduism. And of course, there are other faiths as well, but by and large, these are the major faiths of the world. When you say the major faiths, you mean these five ones.

Now, soteriology can be discussed from a number of angles. Today, I'm going to ask six questions and answer all of them from all five faith traditions. Is that clear? Should not be confusing at all. This is a quick crash course. Okay. I'm gonna ask six questions, and those six questions deal with soteriology, and I will answer every one of those questions by summarizing the, uh, view of each one of these five faiths. That will give us at least a quick bird's-eye view of soteriology as it exists in the five main traditions. And then, inshallah, when we resume, we're going to start directly with just our tradition so that we can situate it in the broader discourse of soteriology.

What are the six questions? Number one: What does salvation look like? What is saving? Number two: Salvation from what? What are you being saved from? Number three: Who gives that salvation? Number four: How is it granted and achieved? Number five: When is it granted and achieved? And number six: And this is, of course, the most important, who gets it and who doesn't?

So, to reiterate: Number one, soteriology means to be granted salvation. What is salvation? Right? So, what does it mean to, what are you looking for? What is the end result? That's number one. Number two, from what? Because if you want something, that means you don't have it. So, there's something that you need to be saved from. Number three, who is the primary entity that will grant that, or is it not even an entity? Number four, how? What do you have to do to get it? Number five, when? Number six, who gets it and who doesn't? And that is, of course, the gist of soteriology. Number six, of course, and we'll come back to number six in great detail afterwards.

J. So, let us begin. First question: Salvation. What is salvation? What is salvation? What are we looking for? For Christians and Muslims, the answer is simple and crystal clear. And that is God's kingdom in the next life, i.e., heaven, i.e., Jannah. That is what we're looking for. We're looking for everlasting peaceful life in paradise. That is salvation. We want Allah's, we want the pleasure of Allah. And the pleasure of Allah is manifested in causing us to enter the kingdom of heaven, causing us to enter Jannah, uh, uh, of the next life. And that is salvation.

For the Dharmic religions, and by and large, I'm going to keep them together. We don't have to really discuss the differences between them. And of course, this is a crash course. So please, if you're doing your PhD in Hindu studies, don't critique me that I said something a bit simplistic because when you say these types of things, you have to teach at a basic level. So, Hindus and Buddhists, what is salvation for them? Salvation for them is to, uh, freedom from the cyclical reality of the cosmic life. And so, for the Hindu, it is Moksha. For the, uh, Buddhist, it is Nirvana. Because the Dharmic faiths believe in cyclical. You are reincarnated. You come back and you keep on living and living and living and living. What is salvation? Salvation is to stop that cyclical coming back and forth, the coming and the rebirth and the dying. That you just need to stop that. And you stop it. We're gonna, we're gonna talk about how they do that. But the minute you stop it, the minute you are not going to come back to earth and you go to a different realm or whatever, that is what salvation is.

For Judaism, in this particular case, it is a very interesting, uh, uh, case study, and it's actually quite complicated. It is not that easy. And that is because Judaism has never emphasized the issue of the hereafter. Even in medieval times, it's not a core part of their tradition. Even when he wrote his, as I told you multiple times, uh, Judaism by and large emphasizes their covenant with God, the fact that they're the chosen people, and the fact that they have to live up to the covenant via law. Theology, ology has always been relegated to a distant third or fourth. Theology has not been a major issue by and large for Judaism. And Moses Maimonides, who lived amongst Muslims and studied in Madras, says and memorized portions of the Quran and graduated from schools and from Islamic law colleges, and he studied Fiqh and others. Moses Maimonides took aspects of Islamic theology and then introduced it as core theological beliefs. And in particular, Moses Maimonides was greatly influenced by the philosophers and by the Mu'tazilites. He really liked that school. So much of his creed is similar to the creed of Mu'tazilism. So when he wrote his creed, which is considered the standard creed. So the, the Jew, the Jewish people do not have an emphasis on creedal textbooks unlike us. We are, we are, uh, you know, uh, drowning in creedal textbooks, all these different creeds. Uh, Judaism is not really interested in that. Moses Maimonides was perhaps the first person to even write a book on creed, and that's like 2,000 years after Judaism, 3,000 years. Moses comes, he writes a treatise, a little treatise, and in it he has a number of points. And the point we're interested in, he says that, and we must believe in, uh, resurrection. Resurrection. There's no emphasis on Jannah and Jahannam, not even a mention. It's just resurrection. And in fact, he denied a bodily resurrection, like the philosophers. The philosophers said the body will not be resurrected. We, Sunnis believe, actually all Muslims believe the body will be resurrected. Well, Muslims, meaning non-Fi Muslims, non-Bani Muslims, they all believe the body will be resurrected. Moses actually denied bodily resurrection. He didn't believe the body will be resurrected. So, what will be resurrected? A concept of a humanity, whatever, a soul, whatever. So, automatically there's a, a bit of a less emphasis on the hereafter. And by and large, by and large, most modern Jews do not consider belief in the hereafter to be a core part of their identity. If somebody believes, that's fine. If somebody doesn't, that's fine. And one thing that I've mentioned to you, and this is not the time to go into a lot of detail, but it, it is a good study that somebody should do. It's very clear to me that Zionism has supplanted basic aspects of theology for most Jewish people. So rather than venerating God, they're venerating a nation-state. And rather than belief in, you know, the, it is belief in the protection of the state. And rather than sacrificing, you know, for the pleasure of Allah and donating for the, everything goes to sustain the state. That's why they're motivated to give as much as they give because it's quite literally an idol. It's quite literally an, you know, a, a golden calf, you can even call it that, literally in this regard. And so, for them, even it's not even the hereafter, it's this messianic belief, when ironically many of them don't even believe in God, but they believe that God promised them the land. It's this messianic belief that we now have the holy land, right? This is the, this is the promise. This is the divine. And so, modern Judaism, I would argue many amongst them are quite literally viewing the modern state as the result of salvation. This is what they wanted, and they think they have it. Right? So that explains a lot of their, their mentality. But again, technically they don't say this, but they act in this manner. And if you were to ask the average person amongst them, do you believe in a hereafter? And I have spoken to many of their rabbis. Most of the orthodox, most of them would say, "Well, yes, it is in our books." Okay, but how much do you emphasize? How many sermons do you give about it? Is this something that you keep on bringing up? Look to our, and we constantly remind, look at the Quran, constant reminder of the hereafter. It's not a core theme, even if they technically believe. And as for the Conservative and the Reform, it has pretty much become, uh, something neglected or even outright rejected. It is not something that is a part of their core belief.

So, this is salvation. The first question is, what is salvation? We answered. The second question: From what? This is interesting. Christianity, by and large, was obsessed with the notion of sinful man. So, salvation is from the sin of man. That's what salvation becomes. They were obsessed with man being evil, man falling from the grace of God. So, when Adam ate the apple, when Adam came to earth, so then all of man is born in sin. So, salvation from sin, basically.

Muslims, salvation is from the confines of this dunya, and frankly, from the pains and sufferings of this dunya, to the everlasting pleasure of Allah via Jannah, in which there is no evil and there is no pain and suffering. And so, for us, Jannah is the abode of no evil. Right? So, salvation for us is to achieve the pleasure of Allah. And to, and we can also add here, to constantly be in a, in a, in a state of purity where we're not committing any sins, because in Jannah, there are no sins. And to enjoy blessings around us. That is what salvation is. Uh, your salvation from this world and from the sufferings of this world and from the negatives, and the fact that we are not worshiping Allah constantly. We become pure in every single sense.

The Dharmic religions, salvation is from the notion called Samsara. Sam, Samsara. This is a term that you should all be aware of, or know, or learn. Samsara is the cycle of life, cycle of birth, cycle of death. And Dharmic religions believe that, uh, there is no one life and one death and one resurrection. Rather, life is cyclical. So, salvation from Samsara, that's what the Dharmic religions say. Uh, of course, as we said, Judaism has a really, you know, atypical belief, and there's not much to be said about this. Uh, by and large, uh, they, for them, I would argue that they are acting as if the salvation has occurred from the persecution that existed throughout all of history. And the salvation is the state of Israel. And so, quite literally, they have made the state of Israel their Jannah on earth, and they have to, they have to protect it at every cost. Now, again, they wouldn't say this theologically. So, please understand, but effectively, that is how they're living their lives. Effectively, what is salvation from? From persecution. Listen to their talk all the time. Jews have always been persecuted. They always have been. So, what happened? They believe now that they have a state, they're never going to be persecuted. Right? That is their notion. So, quite literally, I would argue, effectively, the state of Israel has become their Jannah. Effectively, it's become their goal and purpose. Effectively, it has become, and this is Zionism. For us, our problem is Zionism, it's not Judaism. And because they, most of them are Zionist, right? Because that issue exists now. So, for them, they would say, we have been saved from what? From World War II, from the Holocaust, from this, from that. And so, the whole, you know, aggregate persecution that they have. They believe this is their salvation. And that explains a lot about their, their, uh, understandings and their political, uh, motivations.

Thirdly, who grants it? Well, obviously, the Abrahamic religions would all say God. But here again, we get technical. Christians would say, actually, yeah, of course God, but it's actually Jesus. Jesus saves. And that's the phrase, "Jesus saves." Right? So, salvation is granted through Jesus. And I would say modern, uh, Judaism is conflicted on this. So, many of them don't quite believe in that God anymore, especially the Reform, and they are the, they form a large majority. There is no notion of religiosity. For them, Judaism is an identity. It's a cultural identity.

Hinduism and Buddhism is interesting because they don't quite believe in a God. So, what grants salvation? Dharma. Dharma is a cosmic force. Dharma is just the way things are. It's not a God. It's not a, a supernatural entity. It's just the way the world is. If you act in the proper way, then Dharma will come in, and it will automatically grant you that saving grace.

So, who grants it? For Muslims, and only Muslims, it is Allah, and exclusively Allah, God. For Christians, it is, of course, they say God, but they mean Jesus Christ. Jesus is what saves, right? And then, as we said, the others have their, uh, uh, notions in this regard.

Fourthly, how is salvation granted? What must you do to be saved? Here is where, for the Muslim side, we're going to leave this to our next class because that's the whole point here. What do Muslims believe? But we'll just say generally speaking, Muslims say you have to have Iman. Okay? So, let's leave it at that for now, and then we're going to come back and really go into a lot of detail because this is what the, the class is about, uh, that what do Muslims say about salvation and how it's granted.

Uh, Christians, how do Christians believe you're going to be saved? Everybody should know this. We're living in Texas. Come on. Accepting that Christ died for your sins, right? Accepting the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Salvation is granted by the acceptance of Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior. Right? When you accept, then you will be saved. And then there are differences amongst them. Does that acceptance require baptism? And that's why for many Christians, Baptists and Catholics, you must be baptized to be saved because that is the symbolic, if you like, acceptance of Jesus as your Lord and Savior. And so the symbol of baptism, the ritual, I should say, baptism takes on a very, very important role. Uh, Catholics would argue that you must also observe the sacraments, and, you know, overall, uh, have some type of, you know, relationship with the church, and, you know, uh, uh, partake in the, you know, the, the Holy Communion, etc. So, basically, they would say, along with Jesus, you must have some rituals and the sacraments. And Protestants, as you should be aware, by and large, they're like, no, you know, salvation is by grace alone, God's, God's, you know, grace when you believe in Jesus, uh, by faith alone. And by faith, it would also, many Christians would also require baptism with that. So, uh, how is it granted? Christians would say through belief in accepting Jesus as your Lord and Savior.

Hindus and Buddhists, how is it granted? So, both Hinduism and Buddhism have their rather complex, um, understandings. The Eightfold Path of wisdom, the Four Noble Truths. Uh, for Hindus, they have Bhakti, and some, some Hindus have, uh, Yoga. So, yoga, uh, is not just posing at sunrise and sunset. You know, there's actually, there's some rituals associated with it. And yoga itself is manifested in different ways, not just, not just the Californian yoga that you are not familiar with. That's a different thing altogether. And I have a whole lecture, by the way, on yoga. You can listen to it because a number of fatwas are given. Yoga is haram. So, I have a longer lecture about this. The problem comes, I'll go into a quick tangent here. Yoga, it's in its core, originally the term was one of the ways that Hindus felt you could achieve salvation by worshiping in a certain manner, in a certain posture. Right? And when, you know, a bunch of western, I'm being very simplistic and crude, when a bunch of western hippies discovered it, they liked it because you're stretching the bones and body and whatnot. And so they imported it to California, and then from there it went all over the world. And so you have a different type of yoga in which yoga has nothing to do with Hinduism by and large, but it has to do with basically, you know, relaxing the body and whatnot. So, I have a long fatwa about this because it is a serious question. What do you do when a concept comes from another faith, but it has been shorn of the theology of that faith? Right? That's a very serious question. It's not a joking question at all. And, um, uh, the examples of this are many, as I have mentioned in that lecture. Us from Dii backgrounds, the Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshis, all of our marriage rituals are basically Hinduesque in origin. Right? What is the Mehndi? You know, what is the Uptan? What is all of these, you know, various things that we do? They're basically their origin is Hindu. Uh, is it haram? Sisters, you can breathe a sigh of relief. No, it's not haram. Okay? It's okay. You can do it as long as other things are met, conditions are met. And I've spoken about this in the lecture. Just because something originates in paganism, it doesn't mean it's going to retain as paganism for all of eternity. And that's the, you know, a reality that we all live in, even in these, uh, uh, in these lands that we live in. So, uh, point is that yoga, originally the term is a Hindu term. So, when I say yoga here, I don't mean the yoga that, that you are used to. I'm talking about the original concept as it exists. For Hindus, one of the ways to achieve salvation was through the path of yoga. And this is a group of people would become ritualistic, and they would do these types of deeds to achieve, uh, Moksha, to achieve salvation. And Buddhism has its teachings as well. Uh, primarily by accepting, you know, uh, the, the, the Four Path of Wisdom, the Four Noble Truths, excuse me, and then living your life on the Eightfold Path of Wisdom. That is how you will achieve, uh, Nirvana. That is, that is how it is granted.

Judaism, how is salvation granted? Salvation is granted by and large to, uh, the saved people. If you are from the chosen people and you fulfill the covenant of God, then you will be given the ultimate reward. Now, as I said, technically, at one point in time, many would have believed that is life in the hereafter. But now that is not emphasized. But that is technically what they should believe. And for them, only they will be given the highest reward. Will others be given it? I'll come back to this in question number six. But they get what we would call, they get the crème de la crème because they are who they are. As you know, that's what the chosen people means, right? They have privilege. And this privilege is manifested in this world and in the next, in salvation. And it will be given to all those of their race who uphold the covenant of God. And hence, the Orthodox are insistent to uphold the covenant that if they want to get, you know, to fulfill God's promise to them, they have to, uh, fulfill their part, which is to fulfill the covenant, which is the law. So, that's who gets, uh, sorry, how is it granted?

The fifth question: When is it granted? Well, for Muslims, we have a very clear belief. We believe that there is a major and a minor granting. A minor and a major granting. We get a partial reality at the time of death in this world, and we get the permanent reality in the hereafter. So, we believe in something called the Barzakh, and the Yawm al-Qiyamah, and the major resurrection. And that's, I have a whole series of lectures, you can listen to when I first moved to your community in Epic, I gave a whole series of lectures consisting of over 85 lectures of five different parts: number one, the signs of the Day of Judgment; number two, Barzakh; number three, Yawm al-Qiyamah; number four, Heaven; number five, Hell. So, I have series, each one is like 10 lectures, 15 lectures, each one has all those lectures on there. So, in the second lecture, I went over Barzakh in a lot of detail. I think 15, I don't know how many lectures you listened to. So, in that, I went over the reality of Barzakh. And then in the third series of lectures, I went over Yawm al-Qiyamah and what happens in Yawm al-Qiyamah. Then I went over Heaven and Hell. So, you will find this all on my website and on Epic's website from six years ago. Uh, so, when is it granted for us Muslims? We believe partially it is granted when you die. So, the Barzakh becomes the beginning, and the Yawm al-Qiyamah becomes the beginning. And then it is fully granted when the trumpet is blown and the resurrection occurs.

As for Christians, they have different opinions depending on different sects. And the most interesting segment of Christianity in our times, and you've all heard of them, you've all seen the reality, and that is those who believe in the rapture, right? Those who believe in the rapture, and you know, there's a lot of TV shows and books and, you know, popular messages about this. There is this notion that, so they believe when, uh, Jesus comes back, this is when it will be granted. And this is why, by the way, Christian Zionism exists because they want Jesus to come back in order that, uh, the rapture will be expedited. And they believe if they support the coming of Judaism, Jews to the land of Israel, this will expedite the coming of Jesus Christ. So, Christian, and some Christians believe that this is, there is no rapture, but when Jesus comes back, that is when the salvation will, will occur. So, for most Christians, it is the return of Jesus, or it is the rapture.

For Hindus and Buddhists, it is a bit more complicated because for them, death is not an end, because the whole cosmos is cyclical. So, it's not as if they have a clear point in time. And some would argue that this is at the end of the cosmic cycle, that when a cosmic cycle finishes, the fact that you don't come back to the next cosmic cycle, you have basically been granted your, uh, salvation.

The sixth and final point: Who gets it and who doesn't? Who gets to be saved in each of these traditions and who doesn't get to be saved? As I said, we will leave Islam's stance for now. That's the whole purpose of our class. We're going to come back, uh, in our next lesson and start going into a lot more detail about Islam's views, about classical Islam, the various sects of Islam, about is there any room for reinterpretation, about what do we do about these verses and that verses, all of that will be a part of our class after today's class. Today's class, we're going to just go over the other ones in, in, in more detail.

So, who gets it and who doesn't? Let's start with the easier ones. Judaism. Judaism believes that because they are the saved, uh, they are the, um, chosen people of God, that they get privilege. They are. Now, some, uh, some segments of Jewish thought literally state that the life of a Jew, a Jewish person, is more sacred and more blessed than all other non-Jews. Right? And others say, no, no, that's not the way you should interpret it. We should all treat humanity equal. So, you find that discourse amongst, uh, them. But without a doubt, they do believe that God has chosen them and given them privilege because of their race. That's not something a Muslim ever says. Muslims say because of taqwa, you might be better, but not because of your mother or father, not because of the, the, the, the people that you come from. And then they believe in the hereafter, they will get special perks and privileges. And even earlier Yehudi people believe this. Allah says in the Quran that, uh, uh, that the Yahood said that Allah is not going to punish us, even if he does so, it's going to be for, this is in the Quran. They felt privileged about soteriology. This is very explicit that the, the B is said, even if, even if we live a bad life, even if we do all of this, Allah is not going to punish us. Even if he does, it's just going to be for a few days, and then we will have eternal life after that. And Allah says, do you have a promise with Allah that you can make this claim? If so, then Allah will not renege on his promise. But if you do not have that promise, are you saying about Allah something you're not certain? So, this is very clear in the Quran that they felt privileged. So, soteriologically, they felt themselves, they're going to go to Jannah, right? And this is even more explicit in another verse that, uh, Allah says that they said, uh, both the Yehud and the Nasara said, "We are God's chosen people, we are the children of God, and we are the chosen of God." This is in the Quran. And Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala, once again, criticizes this notion. That's why you don't find this notion amongst us. We are not at all. We don't believe we are the chosen people. We don't believe we are privileged because of our background or ethnicity. Now, what did they say? So, that's clear that they believe that. And this is, by the way, explicit in Moses Maimonides and others, that he actually said that even if there's a punishment, it's going to be temporary, and then just because of our race, because of who we are, we will not be punished. And this is in the Mishnah, and it is very explicit in their texts. And so, the Quran literally describes their belief, and we find their belief in their current books as well, that they're not going to be punished because of who they are. So, they get salvation eternally.

How about non-Jewish people? There is this notion that exists, but it is not something that is, that is, uh, emphasized, but it's there. And that is that non-Jewish people have the potential to basically occupy a lower place, like they're going to, they're going to live somewhere in the periphery region if they live up to what are called the Seven Laws of Noah. The Seven Laws of Noah. So, there is this concept that there is salvation, but not, not even, even Firdous is too high. I mean, so again, the, the, the constructive theology that we have of the hereafter, we're unique to that. Even the Christians don't have the amount of information we do about the levels of Jannah and whatnot. So, Yehud is hardly anything. So, we're kind of like extrapolating, but you get a sense that, yeah, sure, these people that are outside of our, our, our race, if they follow the Seven Laws, they're going to get something. They're going to get the crumbs from the table. There's that notion. It's there. Again, they don't use this language. What are the Seven Laws? Number one: Don't worship idols. So, you have to have monotheism. Number two: Don't blaspheme against God. Number three: Establish justice. So, you have to live your life with justice. Number four: No murder. Number five: No zina. Number six: No stealing. And number seven: No eating dead meat, any carrion. So, you have to practice, or whatnot. So, these are the Seven Laws of Noah. So, if you follow these laws, and by the way, these Seven Laws of Noah, um, by and large, I would say they're coming from, because Moses is the one who mentioned them. So, Moses is the one who, and these are very Muesite, as we're going to come back to this in a few weeks here. So, they did have this notion of salvation for non-Judaic people, partially, if they follow these Seven Laws. And if they don't follow the Seven Laws, then there is no salvation. Uh, that is in Judaism.

In Hinduism and Buddhism, if you don't follow their paths, then basically you're eternally, basically in the Samsara, okay? There is no getting out. You just, you're like the rocks and the animals, you just keep on going in and out and in and out and in and out. So, until you discover their path and you follow their path, you are doomed to the cosmic, you know, Samsara over and over again. And that is the eternal, uh, um, punishment and, and life. And there's no hope for you until one of your iterations, one of your future, you know, peoples or whatever, uh, uh, manifestations becomes Hindu or Buddhist, who discovers, uh, the, the path of enlightenment, and then you follow it, and then you keep on rising. Because again, for them, as you're probably aware, how you live your life will impact your future life, right? And so, if you try to be good, your future, future life will be even better. If you were a bad person, you might go down. That's the way they, they view, uh, uh, the transmigration of the soul.

Christianity is actually very interesting. We're going to spend a little bit of time because here's my argument, guys, and now we get to the deeper stuff. The evolution of Christianity has clearly impacted us as well. And we're going to come back to this point. So, I hope, inshallah, all of you who attend now will come back in the next class. And I hope the problem comes, those who don't, I mean, I'm not trying to put people, I mean, those who come without having attended, they're going to kind of feel a bit lost because we have laid precursors to this. But Christianity is super interesting. Why? Because there is an observable shift of discourse in Christianity over the last 600, 700 years. Christianity, out of all of the world's traditions, without a doubt, was the most sectarian and the most intolerant and the most soteriologically exclusive. Forget other religions. Christians, as a default, would not even give salvation to fellow Christians outside of their narrow sect or strand. That was the default within Christianity for the bulk of its history. And there are too many examples that all of you, when you study high school with this knowledge now, when you go back and look at what you were taught, you will understand, uh, this reality. In fact, even before the beginning of the Protestant Revolution, the Protestant Reformation, sorry. Even before that, when Christianity was divided into, uh, the Latin Church, the Roman Church, the Byzantine Church, right? So, they had the, the Roman Church in Rome, uh, the Latin Church, and the Byzantine Church in Constantinople, which is now Istanbul. As you're aware, these two schisms between Christianity, they really viewed one another with a lot of suspicion. So much so that the Fourth Crusade in 1204, the Fourth Crusade was launched in Europe to go save the Holy Land, Jerusalem. But it ended up attacking the Byzantine Church and the Byzantine Empire and ransacking Constantinople, attacking the, you know, uh, Hagia Sophia, which is, as you know, what is now, right? The Hagia Sophia was the Vatican of the Byzantine Empire, right? That's why it is so painful for the Orthodox to go there now because from their perspective, this was their Vatican for a thousand years, right? And of course, now it is the, and then Ataturk banned it, as you know, that's an interesting story which you should all be aware of. And then the modern country has moved back to Masjid. So, there's a lot of symbolism in the Hagia Sophia. The point is that the 1204, before Istanbul, when Constantinople was Constantinople, the Fourth Crusaders, when they got to Constantinople, they decided to wage war against who? Their fellow Christians, because they were Latin, they were Rome-based, and the Byzantine Church is, of course, you know, uh, Byzantine-based. And so, the Fourth Crusade ended up being a war between Christianity and the ransacking of Constantinople. And historians say that ransacking was necessary for the Ottoman conquest of Constantinople a few centuries later. Had that not happened, then the Ottomans wouldn't have been able to do that. Again, Allah works in his own ways. And so, Christians basically destroyed half the city, rampaged it, ravaged it, and it never quite recovered from that. But this shows you that Christianity was always at odds with one another. Of course, when the Protestant Reformation began, that's history that you should all remember from high school and university, right? And I know you guys just zoomed over those classes, not even caring about them, but in reality, those classes are very important. You should go back and refresh your memories. Uh, the curriculums that you are taught, even if they're slanted and biased, even if they are meant to frankly brainwash you, still now that you understand them, because that's the reality. Every civilization does. I mean, there's nothing, this is going to sound sinister. There's nothing wrong with that. What do you expect people to do? They want, they want their citizens to love and to like and whatnot. That's normal. That's no problem with that. In the grand scale of things, we don't like it because it's preaching, uh, half-truths and, and it's against us quite a lot. So, um, the, the, the Reformation, as you should all be aware, clearly each side is damning the other to hell. You know, the Protestants and Catholics did not get along at all. And you should all be aware of this that, uh, from the 17th to the 19th, uh, century, from the 17th and 19th century, Europe is nothing but a bunch of religious civil wars. In fact, the foundation of this country, the formation of this country is a direct result of the intolerance between Christian sects. Who were the Puritans? What were the 13 colonies? Every one of those colonies had a unique Christian sect to them. You should know this much of your American history. Every one of those 13 colonies, believe it or not, in the colonial America, pre-1776, every one of those states was actually a particular sect of Christianity because they couldn't tolerate each other. So, they wanted, you know, each one of these places to be their own version of, uh, Christianity. And throughout Europe, you had so many wars. The 30 Years' War, the French Wars of Religion against the Huguenots, the English Civil Wars from 1639 to 1653, the Spanish Succession Wars of 1701, the 80 Years' War of the Dutch Revolt in 1600, the German Peasants' War, the Lutherans against the princely Catholics, and on and on and on. All of Europe is basically various Christians fighting other Christians because each one has a slightly different interpretation of what it means to believe in Jesus as a son, or what it means of the sacrament, or what it means of this and that. There is zero tolerance between Christianity. In fact, I grew up in the 80s, right, as a child in the 80s, and every single month there was another issue between the Irish IRA and the British, you know, the, I mean, it was just like, you, you just, as we are accustomed to issues of our times, between our faith and whatnot. In the 80s, it was almost every day. The Irish bombed this in London. The Irish did this and that. They almost assassinated Margaret Thatcher. They successfully assassinated the Viceroy, uh, the last British Viceroy, uh, Lord Mountbatten, who was the one who, you know, was there when Gandhi and, and Jinnah, he presided over the creation of Pakistan. Mountbatten came back, uh, to England, lived a peaceful, quote-unquote life, even though he has a lot of blood on his hands, but still. And then the IRA successfully, uh, assassinated him. They, they literally managed to kill him, and it became a huge thing because they actually wanted to kill the Queen and the Prince, but only he got, he was, he's royal as well. He's a cousin, or he's an uncle, or whatever, of the, the current king. So, point is that the Irish were what? Catholics, and the British were Anglicans. And that became, to it became a massive point of contention between the two. The, of course, there were politics, but they brought in religion. So, up until the '90s, sectarian wars were a thing that I was accustomed to between, uh, uh, Christians. And this reality leads to a thesis that I'm going to come back to later on, maybe in a few months or, or maybe next year. And that thesis is not mine. That position is not mine, but I'm an advocate of it, and I will teach it to you, and I'm a firm believer that it is true. And that is the following: Modern secularism was born out of Christian sectarian warfare. And the notion of nation-state being a primary identity was a necessary tactic that Europe needed in order to live peacefully amongst themselves by relegating religion as a secondary identity, and by promoting the nation-state as the primary identity, which hitherto was an unknown, imaginative construct, the nation-state. You should be aware of this because we're going to come back to this point. What does it mean to be an American Muslim? What do we do when we balance between nation-state and, um, these are very difficult questions, and I'm going to be very blunt, and we'll talk about them when we get there. But now I'm going to teach you something that we're going to come back to, and I will teach you why that is the case then. But this should give you already the idea. Look at how Europe was divided. Look at the civil wars taking place. Look at the construction of this country. The founding fathers had to be secular, otherwise they couldn't have formed a country. The founding fathers had to adopt the ideas of John Locke. John Locke was one of the first people to write about a type of secular understanding where religion is relegated. Religion becomes a secondary, tertiary identity. And the founding fathers then come and say, okay, we are primarily American. That's what we must be, because that's the only way we're going to get along here. We didn't have this problem as Muslims because we have a very clear understanding of how to deal with other religions and other movements. Christianity did not, because they did not. Salvation was linked to your church. Therefore, people outside the church were subhuman. You might as well just go and kill them and rape them and plunder them. And that's what they continued to do. The only way they could solve that problem was by inventing the notion that is now the norm across the Western world. And that is the notion of secularism. You could not have secularism if you didn't have soteriological problems in Christianity. This is my thesis. They couldn't solve soteriology. They couldn't. And so they had to construct this idea, which is, of course, there are patent illogical philosophical problems with secularism because there is no such thing as neutrality. Right? We're going to come to this more when we get there. For now, just understand soteriology actually leads to political realities of them, is secularism. When you don't have a soteriological basis, you form ideologies that will take the place of, uh, of notions of identity.

Also, another point, uh, that we need to discuss. Time is very limited, but as usual, I always have to rush at the end of things. But I'm, I want to teach you this, and if you know more than me, excellent. Sometimes you don't know this stuff, so I'm teaching you. If you do know it, then I'm not an expert, I'm just a student of knowledge in these fields. When it comes to the other religions, I'm a student of knowledge. But one aspect you should all be aware of as well, when it comes to soteriology, when it comes to Christian understanding of soteriology, and that is the impact of Vatican II on soteriological theology and on the modern mindset of the Western psyche. Strange topic, but it's relevant to us as Muslims because we are post-Vatican II, and we are seeing the results of Vatican II. What is Vatican II? Okay, Vatican II is the last, or the final council of the Church. The Church, as you should be aware, that what we call the Roman Church, the Catholic Church, is nothing but a series of councils, edicts. And in early Christianity, they had a whole bunch every few decades and centuries. Then it just kind of sort of dwindled out. The last one that occurred was last generation, 1965. This was the last one. There might be another one in a century or two, Allah knows best. But I mean, this was the most significant council for centuries. And it impacts the world as we currently see it. Vatican II, it's called, right? Vatican II. And they did a lot of changes. Them in the 1960s, all churches all over the world, their liturgy, their services were in Latin. Every Christian would have to learn Latin and pray in Latin. Vatican II changed it, and it became the language of the people. And so every church in America now is basically in English. Uh, we're talking about.

Catholic church here. Now, for us, Vatican II made radical changes in soteriology because before Vatican II, the notion of salvation was very clear. You must be a Catholic to be saved. If you are a Protestant, you are damned. You're not going to go to heaven. And that's why when JFK was running for office, JFK, John F. Kennedy, he was the first Catholic president. You should be aware of this. There was so much anti-Catholic sentiment in this country. There were accusations: "He's a Catholic. He's going to be loyal to his religion above the country. He's going to be loyal to the Pope." And he had to publicly, publicly distance himself. It's not just Muslims that are grilled and say, "Oh, are you Muslim? Sharia?" This and that. This is the 1960s. That's not that long ago. You know, that's why my father was here when the elections were happening. That's how it's not that long ago. So when JFK was running, his Catholicism affected his polls, and he had to go out and publicly say that, uh, religion is private, whatever he had to say things that, you know, placated his people.

So, Vatican II, what was Vatican II? So Vatican II is a master deceit when it comes to soteriology. It is crafted language that can be interpreted any which way you want. You need to study Vatican II just to study Machiavellian tactics, to be honest, because soteriologically, the language they used is absolute genius. On the one hand, they can't abolish their notion that salvation is only through the church because if they do so, then Catholicism ceases to have any meaning. They can't do that. On the other hand, it is 1965, and you can't continue to say, "Oh, you Protestants are all damned to hell." That's just not politically correct, even back in the '60s. So, what do they do? Go read Vatican II.

When it comes to salvation, uh, in the church, the first paragraph sets it out clearly. "The church is necessary for salvation." Crystal clear language. No ambiguity. The church meaning the Vatican, meaning the Pope. The church is necessary for salvation. "Whoever, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter it or remain in it could not be saved." Now, there's one thing they added: "Knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ." If you know this, and for their minds, a reading of the New Testament means you know it because they say that St. Peter was chosen by Jesus directly, and it's in the New Testament. So, whoever rejects this cannot be saved. This is the first paragraph. It is crystal clear. Salvation is through the church.

But when they come to other Christians, listen to the language here: "The church, meaning the Catholics, is linked in many ways with those who, being baptized, are joined with us in the Holy Spirit." "The council sees these other communities as means of salvation, and God uses their churches." Notice, "means of salvation." "God uses their churches." What do you think that means? So, Mustafa jumps and says they have the potential for salvation. Is that what the language says? You could, if you wanted to. Exactly. Exactly. I agree. You could, if you wanted to. And if you wanted to, you could say other churches are stepping stones that you need, you can use to get to the real final stage. So they're useful because they're a means to salvation. They are not actual salvation. So the language is very clearly crafted here.

And they, they go on and on. For Muslims, listen to this: "The church regards with esteem the Muslims. We respect you guys. We have esteem for you. They adore the one God, living and subsisting in himself, the Creator of the heavens and the earth. The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst them are Muslims who adore the one and merciful God." "The plan of salvation also includes." Notice, "the plan of salvation," not salvation. You could easily just say, "Ah, okay, Muslims are saved," or you could say, "Allah can include the Muslims in his plan if he wants to, if they meet other conditions," and those conditions are mentioned in the first paragraph right above. This is very tactical language, and frankly, most academics have seen Vatican II to be a crafted mechanism to preserve Catholic soteriology, but in a language that can easily be misunderstood. So it's a, it's a lesson in crafting. But others argue, "No, no, it clearly says there are means. They're in the plan." Yeah, Allah can plan anything, but are they actually saved? That's not there in the document. So again, that's the whole point in this regard.

But Vatican II did soften, uh, a lot of the, the, the rhetoric. And so, bottom line, most modern Catholics and most modern Protestants view the others as being misguided but still redeemable. Like, you're wrong, you're just a bit weird or whatever, but, you know what? You're, you're, because you believe in Jesus Christ. And they would not give that same credibility or credit to those outside of the faith. Why? Because outside of the faith, don't believe in Jesus Christ. So, bottom line, modern Christians, and when I say Christians, I mean the Orthodox, the Catholic, and the Protestant. These three are the main groups here: the Orthodox, the Catholic, the Protestants. By and large, mainstream sentiment is the other groups are a little bit weird. You have some wrong ideas, but you do believe in Jesus. Because you believe in Jesus, then you will be saved. Okay? So, whatever Vatican II was or meant, it failed to achieve that soteriological exclusivity.

Now, final point before we, uh, conclude. Why is this topic so difficult or hot in our times? Why are we having to rethink through it? Number one, because we are living in a pluralistic society the likes of which we have never seen in all of human history. Because of secularism, because of democracy, because of identity politics being different than it used to be. We are now Americans. We are now British. We're now Canadians. And so in that identity, never before have people of so many faiths come together and interacted so closely. So closely that there's intermarriage. Even if there's not intermarriage, but there's always great friends of the other groups. With this, you have to start thinking, well, then what's going to happen? What's going to happen to my best friend? What's going to happen to my in-laws? What's going to happen to this? So that leads to a crisis of soteriology.

Number two, we are now living in an ethics-first culture where theology is relegated to something secondary, and there's a strong emphasis on dignity, justice, and equality. So when you're talking about justice and fairness, then you think a person who is just deserves that salvation. That was not common a hundred years ago where theology was at the forefront.

Number three, there's a collapse of institutional trust and religious leadership. Christians and even Muslims don't trust their institutions and their scholars and their sheikhs. That's just a reality that there's just a sense of, "Who are these people? They're not qualified." And that is especially in the Christian church, the Catholic Church. So what the church says ceases to have meaning. What mainstream Muslims used to say ceases to have the same level. Mainstream clerics cease to have the same level of potency amongst many educated lay people who think, "Ah, what do these imams, these molanas, know? They don't know any better. I know better." So that gives that, that sense of confidence, which again, um, is a modern notion.

Number four, the rise of secularism. Because when you have secularism, automatically religiosity is taken to the background.

And number five, last point I'll mention, the obvious repercussions of intra-religious war and strife and and destruction and the bitter realities that we see of hatred and animosity has led many people to figure out or to say, "The only way to solve it is to say everybody is saved." Right? So political grievances lead to a soteriological recalibration amongst many people. That is not a justification. I'm going to stop here. I'm going to say, well, we're going to come back. We will now start doing a deeper dive. What does the Quran say? What does the Sunnah say? What did the various scholars of the past say? What do modern scholars say? Can is there any room for reinterpretation? All of this will be in our future classes. Fire. What the? What do we down the river of me?