The title is not clickblait. I legitimately think he attacked the Quran.
2:34 I think is when he mentions the Quran. You have to go back earlier for context, though.
I've had this against Sankara for a long time. He is a very praised historical figure, I don't really have an opinion on him as a historical figure. I'm not attacking or defending him. I just don't agree with what he said about the Quran.
If we accepted Sankara's premise- wouldn't it be an attack on the authority of the Quran?
The Quran is a guide for all humanity and even for jinn.
I do think what Sankara said was blasphemous and I have a problem with it.
I think there are two issues I'd like to mention
1-seemingly, he doesn't understand sharia.
2-seemingly, he doesn't understand basics of Islamic economics.
If he understood these two, I think he would have realized that Islam already differentiates, for example, between a thief who doesn't have an excuse and someone who snatches a loaf of bread because they're hungry. I think he would have also recognized the inherent problem of usury. I don't claim to understand Islamic economics myself but I just mean understanding that riba is prohibited. I think he should have attacked usury itself and not only the debt.
2:34 I think is when he mentions the Quran. You have to go back earlier for context, though.
I've had this against Sankara for a long time. He is a very praised historical figure, I don't really have an opinion on him as a historical figure. I'm not attacking or defending him. I just don't agree with what he said about the Quran.
If we accepted Sankara's premise- wouldn't it be an attack on the authority of the Quran?
The Quran is a guide for all humanity and even for jinn.
I do think what Sankara said was blasphemous and I have a problem with it.
I think there are two issues I'd like to mention
1-seemingly, he doesn't understand sharia.
2-seemingly, he doesn't understand basics of Islamic economics.
If he understood these two, I think he would have realized that Islam already differentiates, for example, between a thief who doesn't have an excuse and someone who snatches a loaf of bread because they're hungry. I think he would have also recognized the inherent problem of usury. I don't claim to understand Islamic economics myself but I just mean understanding that riba is prohibited. I think he should have attacked usury itself and not only the debt.