Women, Islam, an interesting discussion

[SultanOrder]

The problem with many scholars today, is their own words become their judge. This sheikh is metamorphed into an extreme suufi after the 9/11 incident. You can watch some of his lectures, before he became "Bushe's aide".

lol Talo alle udaa you should know that by time he had started any public discourse he had already finished his learning in Dubai first, then Mauratani the honorable Murabit al Hajj. So if he is an "extreme Suufi" now, then he was an "extreme suufi", then aswell. At the same time the only thing I have noticed him change is that when ever he critizes someone or a state, he mentions some of their good more now. Trying to see both sides of the picture, but his stances to issues, his convictions, and his religion has never been compromised. He was invited to the white house by a non muslim, who had a son that was muslim, who knew hamza and recommended him. He also didn't go without asking permission from his shaykh Shaykh Abullah ibn Bayah, who reminded him of the hadith "the greatest jihad is to speak a word of truth to a tyrant". Anyway this is not a video concerned with the personality of Hamza but what is said, truth from a kaffir is still a word of truth, and a lie from a muslim is still a lie.

[Talo alle udaa]

I have nothing personal against suufi scholars, but its far fetched statement to say Hamza attending the sessions of Bush was "jihaad" against a tyrant. It was more of legitimization of Bush's rhetoric if anything else. These scholars often give fatwas and justifications based on whose pressuring them and when. Thus their words begin to contradict itself, today he says one thing, tomorrow something else. What has changed? what was right yesterday cannot be wrong today, but the history of our present day scholars say otherwise.

[ToughGong]

He was invited to the white house by a non muslim, who had a son that was muslim, who knew hamza and recommended him.

In his own words "I was Bushwacked"

[SultanOrder]

Tallo that is pretty narrow thinking "legitimizing", when he completely disagreed with him about the war. But you also have to understand that after 9/11 there was huge anti-muslim resentments, how many mosques got burned, and muslims attacked. George Bush had a lot to do with quelling the anti-muslim resentments by clearly coming out and telling the american people that it wasn't Islam that attacked them, it was not american muslims, but terrorists. At the height of this, George Bush wanted to get Islamic views on certain things, and Hamza told him the truth. You will never find anything that he says that resembles him as a state sponsored speaker, and it is ridiculous to claim that. So let us give credit where credit is due.



Seemeyer he did. Especially how the camera was targeted at him in the Bush speech.

[SultanOrder]

Tallo you have to also understand that Hamza is American, and that Bush was his president, and my president also.

[ToughGong]

^
You mean he was
I don't know why people go on about that though,I mean what did he do wrong exactly

[ToughGong]

[Shift]

Tallo you have to also understand that Hamza is American, and that Bush was his president, and my president also.

No one sees that as a problem,the problem is that the old hamza was shouting from roof tops he is a muslim and allah is his wali,his not the first our president is shariif who yesterday was telling us he is sayful islaam

[grandpakhalif]

Tallo you have to also understand that Hamza is American, and that Bush was his president, and my president also.

[Talo alle udaa]

Tallo that is pretty narrow thinking "legitimizing", when he completely disagreed with him about the war. But you also have to understand that after 9/11 there was huge anti-muslim resentments, how many mosques got burned, and muslims attacked. George Bush had a lot to do with quelling the anti-muslim resentments by clearly coming out and telling the american people that it wasn't Islam that attacked them, it was not american muslims, but terrorists. At the height of this, George Bush wanted to get Islamic views on certain things, and Hamza told him the truth. You will never find anything that he says that resembles him as a state sponsored speaker, and it is ridiculous to claim that. So let us give credit where credit is due.



Seemeyer he did. Especially how the camera was targeted at him in the Bush speech.

Its only gaffe that comes from his associations with political figures, far worse are statements which have been uttered from his mouth. Hamza Yusuf has been advised by his own suufi members that follow the Maaliki school of thought to abstain from utterring things which he has been doing.

The most detailed letter written to Yusuf was by Muhammad Shareef, which can be accessed in this link:
http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthr ... amza-Yusuf!

He's also been advised by a famous Daci in the U.S. called Sh. Yusuf Estes who was worried about his deliberate mis translations of some quraanic verses to satisfy his twisted understanding of the religion.

[melo]

The problem with many scholars today, is their own words become their judge. This sheikh is metamorphed into an extreme suufi after the 9/11 incident. You can watch some of his lectures, before he became "Bushe's aide".

Hamza Yusuf has defs turned down his rhetoric. I don't know if he has changed inside or not, but he has most defs changed the way he speaks

[grandpakhalif]

with all due respect to Hamza Yusuf - a fellow Muslim, alim, and scholar...

what a piece of garbage this man has become (wallah)!!

His "article" on the Egyptian uprising quotes more from the American constitution than the Quran and Sunnah. In this world O Muslims, there are good scholars and there are evil scholars. The good scholars we must respect, and we must make excuses for them, and never blemish their honor or go hunting for mistakes...and be just and humble when addressing their mistakes. For they are the inheritors of the Prophets.

Then, there are the evil scholars. Those who sell the religion for a paltry price and misguide the Ummah not on minor matters or even with regards to major sins...but on matters that deal with tawhid versus shirk, or kufr versus imaan. These learned men are dangerous, evil, and absolutly no good from their words or works should blind us from speaking the truth, exposing them, calling on them to repent, and warning our more impressionable brothers and sisters against them!!

Hamza Yusuf, whose aqeedah and sufism is ripe with misguidance and the denial of Allah's sacred attributes, is one such scholar. Despite being on the straight path for a time, he remains a supporter of nationalism (this is shirk), and even had the audacity to sit next to George Bush Jr. (the former crusader in cheif) while condemning the Mujahideen! Astagfurllah...if treason (by siding with the enemies against fellow Muslims or supporting the enemies of Islam even if it is by mere words - against other Muslims) isn't an act of kufr - then what is!?

[SultanOrder]

Well grandpakhaliff you never had much respect, or courtesy to those you didn't agree with, so I can't really be surprised at the things you've said bro, now that you have made a paradigm shift. It's unfortunate that you have always been very polar in your character, where you can not see the good and benefit from the other. Follow the path of the rasulilah scw, where he had never uttered a vile thing in his life, and did not throw insult, even to the vilest of the Kuffaar of his time. Shaykh Hamza Yusuf would never speak of you that way, so who is closer to the prophetic way?

[Du$ty]

[BlackVelvet]

I love seeing broad minded, balanced and reasonable Sheikhs. I don't think it's being liberal, to me this is Islam.