“My Lord! Increase me in knowledge.” (Qur’an 20:114)
﷽
This fascinating video came to our attention. It appears to be two AI bots having a conversation about the Ibadi school. As regards the YouTube channel, CIISR is not affiliated or registered with any known university or college in the world. Dr. M A Mufazzal seems to be an individual not known to be attached to any reputable college or university in the world. In fact, leave the reputable aside, he is simply not known at all.
This is the video. We give our comments below.
@4:37 minutes, we were curious where the idea came from that we upheld divine predestination (qadar) in the sense of fatalism. Which was curious given that the AI bots speak about the Ibadi, avoiding binaries. We do not uphold the view of the Mutazil’i nor the Jabariyyah. We hold to the doctrine of kasb (acquisition). This is something the Ash’ari followed us on.
@6:16 this is also incorrect. We do not believe that Ali was a divinely appointed leader. A good portion of the community made shura and among them were the ansar and the muhjirin, who agreed upon him. Once that is done, it is obligatory for the others to pledge allegiance. No such thing as being divinely appointed.
This becomes abundantly clear in our article here:
In fact in that article we stated the following:
The battle of Siffin and practical implications of the above verse.
O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best [way] and best in the result. (Qur’an 4:59)
The battle of Siffin gives us a demonstration of how some of the companions understood the above verse. If we are to believe the historical narrative as told by Shi’i and Sunni sources.
If we are to believe the Shi’i narrative.
Ali agreed to arbitration with Muaviya on the basis that they would judge by the Qur’an. If Ali understood that he was of the same authority as the Qur’an and the Messenger (saw) he would not have submitted to arbitration. He would have been on the same page as those in his army who wanted to continue the fight. However, if he did think he was of the same authority as the Qur’an and the Messenger (saw), then he would be a hypocrite for going against what he himself believed. Or he was not sincere in submitting to the authority of the Qur’an.
If we are to believe the Sunni narrative.
If those in Muaviya’s camp believed that the Shi’i held any of the views about Ali that Imami Shi’i held, namely that he (Ali) was maʿṣūm (معصوم) and he (Ali) held ʿiṣmah (عصمة) they themselves would have never asked for arbitration as it too would have simply been a ruse. This becomes very clear that these concepts were not among the followers of Ali because Muaviya’s camp would have known this and would have never cooked up the idea of raising the Mushafs as it would have easily backfired.
@9:03 “They also believe that Ali was wrong to arbitrate.” So this is a contradiction with the AI chatbots. You cannot have a belief in a divinely appointed Imamate and then believe that same Imam is wrong in a decision he makes!
@6:34 is also a tired trope that we hear time and again. Fiqh and Itjihad are a part of Islam. It is something that has been with us in the beginning. The companions who opposed Ali were not claiming you cannot arbitrate God’s law with mortal men. That is a flawed misunderstanding. It is that you cannot make a ruling in place of where the rule is already established and clear.
None of our scholars say that human beings cannot arbitrate. The Qur’an specifically says they can in several places. It is just that humans cannot arbitrate on a matter on which Allah judged. If Allah (swt) gave his ruling on a matter, a human being cannot come along and do otherwise. This is a huge miss by this AI-generated dialogue.
This was established by the companions in their debate with Ibn Abbas (ra). And Ibn Abbas (ra) eventually understood that the people of the river were correct.
And by repeating these same tired tropes, the Sunnis have actually mocked their own Imams. With stories that make Imam Abu Hanifa look ignorant of other people’s positions.
The same ignorant trope that was used by Shi’i reformist Syed Ali Hur Kamoonpuri here:
@12:02 to miss out on the robust populations of the Ibadi in Tunisia, Zanzibar, Tanzania, Ghana is unfortunate. To skip the presence in East Africa altogether is unfortunate.
@13:09 We didn’t quite get the point the AI bots were making: “But again, like with the kharijites question, they take it to its most extreme logical conclusion.” We don’t see the connection they were trying to draw?
@13:40 we were curious as to which verse mentions Allah “sitting” on a throne?
There were other things we could have picked apart, but we did not want to be overly pedantic.
Other than that, for an AI-generated dialogue over all it is o.k. It is what you would expect from agnostic secular academics or historians discussing the matter. Although they would probably refrain from throwing in the occasional ‘eww’ as we saw from the female AI bot. The lasting thoughts were very profound, especially from an AI algorithm.
May Allah Guide the Ummah.
May Allah Forgive the Ummah.
Prima Quran 