Response to Channel 4's Sinister Plot to Defame Muslims
Further to my commentary on Channel 4's documentary, these are responses by two well-known Muslims, one Yasir Qadhi (not featured in the documentary), and Abu Usama (featured). I thought hard whether I should even provide the links, or promote this destructive, evil, and sinister videos. But I would be fooling myself if I think that I will prevent this Internet fire from spreading.
I was quite disappointed that Abdul Hakim Murad aka TJ Winters participated in this slanderous program against Muslims. You know personally I don't care "which" Muslims they were working against... it really doesn't matter. If we have a problem with other Muslims, we should talk about it between ourselves. "Keep it in the family"! I hope AHM will take some time out in the near future to clarify that his intent was not as portrayed. Because we would never see Hamza Yusuf or Zaid Shakir do such things? I doubt that they would ever be part of an incrimination against other Muslims, regardless of the differences and the disagreements.
The documentaries are on Youtube, some may have been removed, others in the process. Here is a link to another blog that has the videos.
Responses:
1) By Yasir Qadhi
2) By Abu Usamah
23 comments:
Mashallah, That was a very good response by Yasir Qadhi.
Excellent responses by both Shayukh.
I particularly liked the points [by Yasir Q] regarding putting aside our inter-theological differences because of the times and supporting our brothers in Islam 100% through this great trial of theirs. I pray Allah [swt] grant them security, sincerity, and patience, ameen.
--
Question to br. Amad - do you know of any other videos or lecures by Sheikh Yasir available online?
I've literally listened to everything of his except Basic Fiqh.
Jazak Allahu khayr
See this
Also on Yasir, See this and and this
Masha'Allah, Sheikh Yasir Qadhi ROCKS!
May Allah reward him in this life and in the Hereafter...
Ummm... who is Abdul-Hakim Murad? I haven't heard of him before... (then again, I haven't heard of a *lot* of people before. I'm very much out of the loop, being stuck in a tiny little city in the most boring part of Canada.)
I heard Sheikh Qaradawi speak and I take an offence when you think you can put him on the same level as Murad, pluse you know nothing on how he supports the mujhadin in Plaistine,Iraq,Afganistan,And Chcene.
anonymous: You misunderstood! I would be offended as well if anyone put the Sheikh on the same level as Murad. I am going to reword the post to make it clearer. What I meant was that the documentary pointed a finger at a variety of Muslims, and even though they didn't mention him by name, they displayed Sh. Qaradawi's picture amongst those "representing" extremism. So, in a way Murad has associated himself with people who are attacking, among others, Qaradawi. Clear now?
I missed Sheikh Qaradawi, but what disturbed me greatly were the images of Sheikh Khalid Yasin.
This brother has done soo much for da'wah in the West. Hundreds upon hundreds of people have become Muslim because of his work- by the Grace of Allah. I've heard him speak live numerous times.
Subhan Allah, what they're doing is taking the true voices of Islam - those Mashayikh who *connect* with the youth, who inspire the youth, who urge them to return to their deen and be proud of their heritage - they take them and paint them with these labels to encourge people from listening to them!
It reminds me of Sheikh Ali Tamimi. I'd never heard of him until after he had been tried. But when I did, I tried my best to listen to all of his works available on the internet because, where I reside, no Islamic bookstore carried his works.
Besides, boycotting Murad (a point I agree with br. Amad), we should also listen to the works of Sheikh Abu Usamah, Feiz, Khalid Yasin, and all others inappropriately featured in this documentary. We should purchase and listen to their lectures and show we won't ostracise them from the community just because the sham of a documentary has been aired.
Nice how you say 'muslims should unite' and then bash abdul-Hakim Murad - and I happen to know he respects Sh. Qaradawi, and that's mutual. I was with them this summer, and with many other scholars.
As for talking about 'this great trial of theirs,' that's just stupid. Afghans, Chechens, Somalis, Sudanese, Palestinians - those are people "suffering a great trial. They weren't persecuted, they just had their own stupid words put up on screen. You're telling me you don't hear things like this every week in the masjid?
I've had racist, sectarian, and takfir directed at me in the masjid, by some of Faiz's brethren. Correct that, and you might find some muslims willing to defend you next time. Until then, enjoy what your own hands (and tongues) have sent forth.
Dawud, my reasons for mentioning Abdal Hakim were clearly stated in my post. I further added more clarification. If you have any contact with him, we would all appreciate some words of explanation from him, only of course if he disagrees with the way his little bit was portrayed.
My post about unity was targeted towards those with open hearts. Those that Allah describes, what means: "Muhammad is the messenger of Allah; and those who are with him are strong against Unbelievers, (but) compassionate amongst each other" [Fath:29]. Not people like the Sufi council of UK, pro-regressives and those that have a vehement hatred against their brothers whose methodology they don't agree with (such as Murad).
I also understand that you have had some bad personal experiences, I am sorry to hear that. Unfortunately, some of the people of Sunnah forget the aspect of being gentle and kind to the people who are involved with innovations (dalalah for them, hasanah for practitioners)-- I get that, I have seen that. I don't know Sh. Faiz... but what I saw in the video did not impress me, in both style and content. May Allah forgive us all. So, its not that surprising that you hold some strong grudges. But there are many other scholars and tulaab, who are the most humble people you will ever meet, and it seems that you have not experienced that side.
In any case, you should see this site, where sufis and sufi-leaners have not let their differences with other Muslims turn into disunity against a common enemy (the documentary producers and supporters).
Can someone refer me to explanations of the women are deficient(particilarly in deen) hadith. Because that is very disturbing and I dont understand it.
Why dont Muslims mention this when they are rebutting critics of Islam treatment of women or doing dawah. I think its unfair to present Islam as one way to get a women to convert and then after she finds out this is the actual view of women.
Ok, did a search and found the entire hadith and can better understand the context but its still disturbing presented they way they did on the documentary
Here is one answer that makes some sense.
http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?t=rss&id=9406
Anon: In reference to the link, the answer wasn't very clear either there.
Here is a better one, that references scholars from across the board, from Bin Baz (RH) to Haddad... Click here to check it out.
in the almaghrib love notes seminar, shaykh yasir birjas covered this in some detail. he said (and i cannot remember the details of what led into it) that one meaning (and the stronger meaning) actually is not deficient in this instance and that it is a gross mistranlsation. he said that a better understanding is that it means they perceive things different emotionally.
anyhow there is a good discussion of this hadith on the islamiclawetc blog here:
http://islamiclawetc.wordpress.com/2007/01/19/deficiency-best-women/
salaam,
As some shayookh have said (and which help me better understood this hadeeth) is that it doesn't mean a woman's iman cannot exceed a man's or she cannot reach higher levels of Paradise then a man. Like, can any man from our times or all the men of our times collectively claim they have more iman then Fatima (ra) or Khadeeja (ra)?!
Can any man claim to have more knowledge then Aisha (ra)?
Definitely not.
And these noble women are not the only example. Our history is filled with women scholars where men of their times used to learn from them. ('Ideal Muslimah' has many good stories on that subject).
wAllahu ta'ala 'alam
-Umm Reem
I though Abdal Hakim Murad did a wonderful job in elucidating with regards to the fundamental problems which are within the Ummah itself and your suggestion to boycott his books etc shows a narrow minded attitude. AHM is one of the few wondeerful Scholars this Ummah has who help to show the world a true reflection of Classical Islam, those morons on Dispatches are a disgusting representation of Islam, juxtaposing the children of Prophets(The jews) to pigs, we muslims need to realize and respect them(the jews) for this fact alone-they are the decendants of Prophets. Fundamentally if they(these moronic scholars) hate the west so much then leave, go to a muslim country...as for Abdal hakim Murad he is a wonderful wonderful scholar!If you dislike him , keep quiet-it is hellfire to speak poorly about our Scholars
Imran, Oxford
asalamlikum akhi Imran... it is interesting you mention that speaking about scholars is hell-fire, yet in the comments preceeding it, you blasted the "scholars" (as much as of scholar as AHM) in the attack-o-metry on Channel 4. Don't get me wrong, much of the cut-n-paste stuff that wa said in the documentary was pretty awful and people need to be careful of what, when, and most importantly HOW they say things. Also, whether it is needed to say those things. Regardless, the few "caught-on-camera" moments does not make these brothers deserve our scorn and wrath, just as you are trying to protect AHM, isn't it?
As for the boycott, I was clear, that my issue is not personal with him, or sufis in general... it is simply to do with his role in this hit-job against Muslims. If he clarifies that he was 'setup' or doesn't agree with his portrayal, I will be the first one to take this off. To be honest, the accuracy of what he said doesn't matter. When it is a matter between Muslims, it should be solved BETWEEN Muslims, not in a documentary that will hurt ALL Muslims in UK and abroad, not just the ones that were shown on TV. Also, do remember that AHM has a history of hatred and vitriol against other Muslims that he doesn't agree with, including his support of Kabbani's 80% of all Mosques in US are "fundamentalist" or something... Here's the proof. Are you ready to defend that as well?
Amad,
Wallaikum sallam bro. I hope Allah finds you & your family to be well. I think there are afew fundamental issues to be made.
Firstly, I think this notion that the comments by those 'scholars' within that show(dispatches) were a well picked cut & paste job is completely incorrect.What we saw them spew were long segments showing an expression of views which are in complete antithesis with Traditional Islam. I would thus think any dis- association with such people would be a benefit to the Brtitish Muslim community. AHM merely represented and expressed the views of the majority, exposing the Whahabbi movement and its perversion of Islam.
2)The rejection of ‘Ijtihad-the use of Islamic rulings based upon the understanding of scholars who have spent their life studying Islam-is fundamentally the reason for the rise in such heinous thinking within some Muslim communities. Being able to read Arabic does not give you any Islamic right to make any Islamic rulings. Traditionally people adhered to a school of Thought. However Whahabbism rejects this notion based on the misguided premise of ‘they were men and we were men’so we can understand the Quran by our own (limited) intellects.The only scholar these whabbi scholars know and cite is the dubious Ibn Taymmiah.
3)AHM, in his acceptance of the notion of 'Ijtihad' gives him greater credance as a Scholar then any so called scholars, who reject this fundamental of fiqh.
$)I agree that in these times the creation of 'fitna'(if this is what you see the great AHM doing)is not what the Muslim Ummah needs. However I do not see him role in this regard. I feel he was merely elucidating the fact that the views those guys expressed-and let us be honest, they were vile, were in contray to the teaching of Traditional Islam and anything expressed by the 4 Imans.
5)i think vis a vis the comment by Kabbani AHM did not say he agreed with that particular comment as it was stated but merely said rightly that there was some truth to the remark i.e there were elements within the Muslim American community who were being radicalized and thus to dismiss Khabbani's view completely as words of a demagouge would be incorrect. I would moreover agree with such a view. There is wisdom to be found from most lesrned people-even from say Ibn Taymmiah, now I would not agree with everything he(ibn Taymmiah) said but neither would I dismiss him completely. I feel this is all AHM meant in that, quite wonderfully written, article.
I do not think we are in disagreement here bro not do not I think you are against AHM and I accept your point of view.I am just of the view that AHM is a wonderful asset to the Islamic Ummah and someone who I admire greatly. I do not think his actions on Dispatches should be condemed but moreover he should be praised for giving the mainstream a wonderfully articulate and fair voice.
Allah hafiz
Imran, Oxford
asalamalikum again akhi Imran. Family is doing great, hope yours is as well. Jak for asking. Good comments make for good discourse, so thanks for making some nice points:
(1)As for AHM appearing on the video, I think many will disagree with you. I have read many of his supporters' comments, who have voiced the opinion that this was a setup otherwise he would not be on the same side as the British Sufi council, which is apparently a pretty awful organization in Britain. So, we'll just have to agree do disagree.
(2)The constant use of the term "Wahhabis" drops the level of the conversation, because this is a slur/scape-goat term that is already being dealt with here. If you have disagreements with the article, you can voice it on that entry inshallah.
(3)You are being hasty in your dismissal of the brothers on the video. You may have them confused with the takfiri/jihadis such as the guy who wanted to drink a blood-shake of the kuffaar! Perhaps, you should look for other articles/videos of these people to see if they fit the profile you think they are fitting.
(4)Many of the "traditionalists" will disagree with you that these guys voiced opinions that were anti-thesis to traditional Islam. Most, including me, will agree that there is at time, place and context of these statements. For instance, Br. Jinnzaman, who has been a strong critic of the non-traditionalists (here's his disclaimer before you read the other comments by him), is a voice of reason on this subject. Trust me, he probably agrees with AHM on most stuff, but on this one, he has an important message, that you can read here, here and here.
(5)Ibn Taymiyya (RH) was Shaikh-ul-Islam. Even his critics cannot but accept this man's intellect, his valor, and his scholarship. We need to be careful of when talking about the scholars of the Ummah. For instance, I may have many disagreements with Al-Ghazali (RH)'s works, but I will not risk my own good deeds, by name-calling. No scholar was and will be perfect. At the same time, we have to be careful of who we consider to be at the level of scholar. I doubt that AHM himself believes he has reached that level. Today's scholars would be the like of Ibn Bayyah, Qaradawi, Saleh al Fawzaan, Ibn Jibreen, Taqi Uthman, etc., not AHM, Hamza Yusuf, Yasir Q. or others at a lower level; regardless of their affiliations and their methodologies as long as they are generally ahl-Sunnah.
(6)If you noticed, AHM was the only one in the documentary. Why did others like Hamza Yusuf, who have bigger names/profiles not choose to be on a program like this? Or anyone else on the traditional path?
(7)To be honest, in today's times, I am personally getting sick of those who are very strongly vitriolic about other Muslims. And that applies to some of the 'super-salafis' that I refer to in other posts. Argue decently and discuss; no problem. But, to make a living out of it, and to became the head-honcho of a witch-hunt against a certain people that you don't like is NOT the characteristic of any of the Imams before us and amongst us. If you think objectively, you will see, as I myself am seeing and understanding, that people just can't take the hate anymore. Its time to start discussing the issues that affect all of us collectively than to focus on what a group of people is doing. Many of the "wahhabis" that AHM is accusing, many of these same people brought many people out of non-practice to practice i.e. to pray and to be just Muslims. The same way many of the Tableeghis, despite their "issues" have done a lot of good. Even the sufi groups, such as Hamza in America has brought a lot of people who were not practicing, to start being "basic" Muslims...
Well, that's enough of a banter... hope to discuss issues of common interest with you bro one day.
wasalam
Hi Bro,
I do hope all is well with you-insha Allah.I feel and think that fundamentally we are in agreement and our issues of contention are merely peripherey. we are both in agreement taht any intentional 'fitna' by a Muslim, Sufi, Salafi or otheriwse(I accept your point vis a vis the term Whabbai' as being somewhat of an invective and so thus will not use it)aas being counter productive to the Muslim community.
Regarding the Dispatches programme I will make a brief point.AHM's intention for going on there was sincere and just I am sure. Now if he has been misrepresented by the media machine I feel we should judge him by his honest intentions and not lambast him or wish to bring about a boycott. The logic of this thus could stem towards the other gentleman on the show who I have previously criticized. However, and I should be clearer in my use of language and not make generalisations; if they have been misrepresented I accept my judgement of them was unfair. I do have a huge problem with anyone terming Jews as being 'pigs' and I do not feel this was taken out of context. Such ideas are unfortunately quite prevalent amongst Muslims but should not ever be expressed or thought by Muslims. The Jews are an honourable people who are moreover descendants of the Prophetic Tradition and should be respected not demonised. Issues regarding Israel are a separate issue and should not be used to collectively punish all Jews. There is no wisdom in such an undertaking. Islam is not the property of anyone, Muslims need to stop trying to covert it or make it exclusivist. Islam is for all mankind and should be represented beautifully and made appealing for all those who have of yet nor accepted. Dawah is not to prolyitize, it is merely an invitation and if someone rejects an invitation we should not curse them but wish them well.
I feel religion can be seen as similar to language; any language has different dialects, which are all acceptable as a correct usage of that language. Now there are rules are grammar and we could all just focus on grammar and rules but in so doing I fear we would lose the beauty of language. Moreover very few people can master a language-if you can only speak a language and not read or write it you are considered illiterate. I fel much of the Muslim ummah have little or no knowledge of the universal language of Islam and yet still wish to undertake a discourse. This is a fruitless undertaking.Moreover there are those who think they understand a poinnt of syntax but in truth has misunderstood its actual purpose. Islam like language is not so norrow and allows for many levels of understanding, but as AHM says in his Contentions 'most people would benefit by leaning a first language'.
Imran, Oxford
ASA Imran, you make good points again. I agree that the pig snorting was very distasteful. I think this whole AHM thing in the post is diverting attention from the real intent, and causing other misunderstandings. Also, the more I evaluate circumstances around Muslims, the more I am thinking that this action has no real futility. So, I'll change the post and remove the call.
Post a Comment