latest sh.yaqubi speech

@FaqirHaider I hope what you wrote was actually a mistake, and not that you are a selective reader.

Firstly the objection that brother ghaznawi made was not on the meaning of the hadeeth rather the actual hadeeth. It is the words of molvi yaqoubi and he ascribes them to the prophet sallalahualaihiwasallam.

Molbi Yaqubi's twitter reads: "He said, human life is more precious than the Ka'ba"
The first question is who does this the "he" refer to, and from the siyaq of the kalam it is clear as daylight this "he" refers to the prophet sallalahualaihiwasallam (it can't refer to the ice cream man). Then the second question raises is where is this hadeeth or is it made up by molvi Yaqubi sahib. This is what brother ghaznawi is asking, molvi yaqoubi loyalists to provide a reference for this hadeeth.

Secondly you are looking at molvi Yaqubi's statement out of context. Molvi Yaqubi made this statement in response to the Charlie Hebdo issue. When you assess this statement in context and for why it was written then it is clear he is saying eliminating a gustaakh is a insult to the prophet sallalahualaihiwasallam.

Yes on your final point you are correct how has Molvi Yaqubi labelled them innocent?

Anyone reading this please remember loyalty is for the prophet sallalahualaihiwasallam and His deen, thereafter our peers and teachers.

Molvi Yaqubi and sufi aslam and qari yaseen MUST present clarifications for their statements and not fool the sunni masses. It is not right for them to empty pockets using "love of the prophet sallalahualaihiwasallam" and then on the other hand when the time comes to support him or his deen they couldn't even stay quiet rather to please their friends made these silly statements.
Please someone ask a notable representative of the molvi yaqoubi circle for a reference of this hadeeth.

 

I think what was trying to be portrayed by Sh Yaqoubi's in his statement , is that if you take a life of an innocent human, you cant bring it back! as for the Kaaba-e-Mukarrama, it is known history that is was destroyed and rebuilt/reconstructed many times.

As for " No insult to Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم is worse than killing innocent people by his Name " , that is also understandable, any insult is the worst act anyone can do, and from that the worst is to "use" the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم to justify the vary thing he صلى الله عليه وسلم prohibited.

The whole issue I think that they failed to understand is that no man (after veiling of Habib-e-Aqdas صلى الله عليه وسلم) , whether kaafir/mushrik, or muslim , can be "innocent" after insulting the honor of creation Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم , proof for this can be found in Mullah Ali Qari's Al Shifa.

 

You should count yourself to be extremely lucky if you manage to get one! The way things are going on nowadays is "scholars" quoting things totally out of context to suit their deviance stance, followed by "sukoot" when called upon by the "common folk" to respond to the same!

This is a generalization based on recent events and does not reflect a trend that is developing and I am pretty sure that someone of the ilk of Shaykh Yaqoubi knows the context of narrations better than the 'common folk' We are facing a sad reality that we no longer trust our scholars or at least give them the benefit of the doubt. If the usual response coming from scholars is that people on forum are not worth responding to, then we need to think, why is that the case. Does the problem lie with ourselves or the scholar in question? The majority of scholars have no time for forums, so it is better to always refer back to the scholars. We are all attached to Scholars, so seek their opinion first and if there are issues, get them to contact the scholars in question. We are too quick to cast aspersions and then later expect that we will get clarification but it does not work like that, as by that time, the scholar in question is on the defensive. If our first thought or first step is to seek clarification, rather than work from the assumption that the scholar has erred and we need to correct them, then we might see better interaction and responses from our scholars. Instead, of forever complaining about the problem, we need to work together to find solutions and use forums like these to build bridges and foster a closer relationship with our scholars, so we can derive benefit from them and work together to resolve issues that are engulfing us.

 

@Ghaznawi
Let's put this simply: if any murid, or muqaddam, or lover of Shaykh al-Yaqoubi has any self-esteem, then please provide a reference for the Hadith regarding "human" life being more precious than the kaba.

Instead of posting this on the forum, why don't go and speak to one of the knowledgeable (the one's with self-esteem) Shadhli brothers and seek clarification.

 

You should count yourself to be extremely lucky if you manage to get one! The way things are going on nowadays is "scholars" quoting things totally out of context to suit their deviance stance, followed by "sukoot" when called upon by the "common folk" to respond to the same! Then comes the usual response by them and their admirers on how it is not even worth responding to these stupid people on the forums who have called upon them to clarify/correct/or even provide any form of response...

 

EDIT: Asma bint Marwan.

 

I am also curious about this reference.

 

I would like to make a few points regarding Shaykh Abul Huda al-Yaqoubi.

Firstly, I find it strange how Shaykh al-Yaqoubi has resorted to using Albani (a man amongst the forefathers of modern Wahhabism) in this instance.

Regarding the Hadith of Asma bin Marwan, at least it has a reference! Steady on Shaykh Sahib, I think you're jumping the gun.

Let's put this simply: if any murid, or muqaddam, or lover of Shaykh al-Yaqoubi has any self-esteem, then please provide a reference for the Hadith regarding "human" life being more precious than the kaba.

If this isn't tahrif, then what is? Stop cherry picking stuff and using it for your own desires

We look forward to your replies

 

@Khadim of Shaykh Shukri
@Ikhwaan
@Wadood
The Charlie Hebdo issue is a contentious one but that extends beyond Shaykh Aslam, as there were others who condemned the killing but have not been 'highlighted.'
I have not said the Charlie Hebdo is a minor issue but I have said that it a contentious issue, which goes beyond Shaykh Aslam and that Ulema need to sit one another and come up with what should be or should have been the right response to the Paris attacks. Shaykh Aslam has been highlighted (Morarity has mentioned that others have been mentioned on a separate thread) but no one else has had the same treatment. At the time of the Paris attack, most scholars stayed silent or tried to be diplomatic. There was no cohesive response but today, one person is being made a scapegoat but what about those scholars who also tried to be diplomatic and what about those that stayed silent, surely the enormity of the issue should have propelled them to show the Jazba that has been shown on this forum. This is why a creation of a Fiqh council is not a secondary concern but it is a grave need because if such an issue arises again, a more cohesive, structured response would have tackled a massive issue like this better. We fail to look at the big picture and instead of thinking about how we can resolve issues, we make all these claims and are quick to condemn our scholars.

' Or mufti shams siding with Aslam does not close the issue either. This issue is beyond and above all personalities this issue concerns Allah tàla his Beloved.'

when did I say that this closes the matter but rather I said, why is he not questioned to why he has supported Shaykh Aslam, as he may give the clarification that Shaykh Aslam has failed to do (I have said in my other posts that he should have clarified and his response at best has been questionable ). Also, why have scholars not come out and condemned Shaykh Aslam and others who condemned the attacks. Are they are not aware of the narrations that you have provided? I have not downplayed this issue but rather I have said that we need to defer to the scholars and Mufti Shams ul Huda statement shows that the scholars are looking into the issue. What I strongly condemned was how Shaykh Aslam has been discussed on this forum and on social media (I exclude Kaydani1 from this because he raised pertinent points and stuck to the genuine issues) and again I wanted to highlight this because it is not the first time that on this forum that a scholar has been slandered, disrespected and labelled. Most of the people (including myself) are not scholars, so we have no right to make judgments about scholars and must reserve that for the Ulema. There are too many people on here and on social media, who just enjoy hypes and make it their business to speak badly about scholars, when they are not qualified to do so. I only posted on the forum (not because I am a soft spot for Shaykh Aslam) to highlight these issues, which you probably relegate as 'secondary.'

'All of Tasawwuf, All of Islam revolves around the Honour of His Beloved salAllaho alaihi wa alihi wa sallam; the adab for him, the suluk for him; His Honour is the Honour of Allah ta'ala; without his honour, there is no Islam, there is no spirituality, there is no ma'rifah, there is no life!'

'Asl al usool bandagi uss taajwar ki hai'

These are all certainly true and if you ever read the posts of Shaykh Aslam on facebook, similar sentiments will be seen but we do not look at his Facebook to read those posts because that might expose him for what he is, a Sunni. I mentioned this because that is something we do not see enough on this forum, praise for our ulema and encouragement for them to help with their efforts in helping the deen. This is a general point, I have made, independent of the discussion of the issue in question. We spend too much time trying to kick people out of 'sunnism' rather than doing our best to strengthen the cause of Sunnis, which lets face it is not in a good state.

'It is clear the people who have a soft touch for molvi aslam and his likes, whoms side they would be working on if they were in the time of mujadid sahib radhiallahu tabaraka wa tàla anhu.'

There is no proof of Shaykh Aslam taking the principles of the deen lightly and that is a erroneous conclusion that you have made. Your statement above is another slander because to rank Shaykh Aslam AND MUFTI SHAMS UL HUDA with those crooked maulwis time shows that you feel that these people are sell outs and there is no proof of that. Your argument is a tenuous at best but it aptly demonstrates how quick we are to charge individuals with crimes that have yet to been proven , as I repeat, NO SCHOLAR HAS COME OUT AND CONDEMNED SHAYKH ASLAM AND OTHERS WHO CONDEMNED THE PARIS ATTACKS. Who are you then to equate Shaykh Aslam and 'his like' to the sell outs in the time of mujadid sahib radhiallahu tabaraka wa tàla anhu.' You need to be very careful what you say.

'Muslims are probably leaving Islam for atheism because of non-scholars like mr green, and zaheer mahmood. If they hear about Islamic Spirituality, Tasawwuf, from the likes of Shaykh Asrar, they will come back to Islam. Any non-Muslim would'

This point is extremely weak because it is just a generalization that is based on what you think, rather that what is actually on the ground. There are plethora of reasons to why Muslims are leaving Islam but it is not a secondary concern that we can afford to sweep under the carpet. We must be honest with ourselves and strive to find out what are the roots causes for this sharp increase of Muslims leaving Islam rather than making lazy statements that are based on sectarianism rather than solid proofs. Tackling this is absolutely vital and we must be objective in our method of approach for this. Shaykh Asrar labelled this the biggest challenge facing Muslims

'These scholars should at the very least respond to questions posed regardless of how the question is asked.'
I agree with you to a certain extent because as Shaykh Aslam gave a public speech, the public have a right to pose questions about it. However, when various people start inboxing you with threats and not approaching to seek clarification (I again exclude Kaydani1, as he went about it the right way) but to expose and slander, then that is why the particular scholar might not respond. Who is he meant to respond to and that is why it is best that when it comes to comments made by scholars, the layman should take a backseat and contact other scholars for clarification and not flood facebook with insults, threats and slander. I started my last post with saying that leave issues with ulema to the ulema to sort out. All the narrations that you have mentioned and the principles that you have highlighted are 100% correct but it is not our job to pass judgement and rather we should wait for the scholars to inform us of the judgement. The issue is massive and that is more the reason why we need to defer to the scholars and move on from discussing Shaykh Aslam, until at least the scholars have passed a judgement about him.

 

@Waqar786

" .........instead at nitpicking at peripheral issues with our Ulema"

Alahazrat (radiAllahu anhu) said:

Asl al usool bandagi uss taajwar ki hai

I hope this brings into perspective the enormity of the issue.

 

Sayyiduna Abu bakr siddiq radhiallahu tabaraka wa tàla anhu went against his own fiqh when it came to the honour of the prophet sallalahualaihiwasallam. He left his own constitutional points when it came to the honour of the prophet sallalahualaihiwasallam. When Sayyiduna abu bakr radhiallahu tabaraka wa tàla anhu came into power he made a rule that no badari sahabi (companions who were at battle of badar) shall participate in battles. But later when the likes of musaylama kazzab lanat ullahi alaih declared prophet hood Sayyiduna abu bakr radhiallahu tabaraka wa tàla anhu said "badari or non badari get to yamama" to defend His honour. He broke his law which he made himself. In the eyes of Sayyiduna abu bakr radhiallahu tabaraka wa tàla anhu His honour came first and his own law/fiqh came second.

 

@Waqar786 our pious predecessors never took attacks on principles of our faith lightly. It suffices to mention that mujadid alf thani radhiallahu tabaraka wa tàla anhu lead a campaign to lift the ban of consuming cow meat in his time, and spoke against the crooked molvis of his time who claimed the ban had a part in the religion. If that is how cautious they were on a masla of consuming meat imagine how worked up they would be for His honour. He is the deen sallalahualaihiwasallam. He is our religion. It is clear the people who have a soft touch for molvi aslam and his likes, whoms side they would be working on if they were in the time of mujadid sahib radhiallahu tabaraka wa tàla anhu.

 

All of Tasawwuf, All of Islam revolves around the Honour of His Beloved salAllaho alaihi wa alihi wa sallam; the adab for him, the suluk for him; His Honour is the Honour of Allah ta'ala; without his honour, there is no Islam, there is no spirituality, there is no ma'rifah, there is no life!

 

Muslims are probably leaving Islam for atheism because of non-scholars like mr green, and zaheer mahmood. If they hear about Islamic Spirituality, Tasawwuf, from the likes of Shaykh Asrar, they will come back to Islam. Any non-Muslim would

Siraj Wahhaj is a very moderate hamza yusufite, and green is a militant. They dont know about Islamic Spirituality and are juhala about most of Islam.

Why not give da'wa to atheists on his own through tasawwuf? [ a question for Shaykh Aslam ] @Waqar786 And it must be reminded that the atheist is the worst gustakh of the eminence of RasulAllah salAllaho alaihi wa alihi wa sallam, generally speaking, but with exceptions.

 

Please read this thread: http://sunniport.com/index.php?threads/paris-attack.12202/page-3

This is where the Hebdo issue was discussed. 'Sacred' aka Aslam posted the BBC video stating that 'Aslam said we should not be apologetic'.

Khadim, Kaydani et al please read through that entire thread as others aside Aslam were discussed.

This is what Sh Yaqoubi wrote:


Muhammad Al-Yaqoubi @Shaykhabulhuda
No insult to Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم is worse than killing innocent people by his Name. He said, human life is more precious than the Ka'ba

12:05 PM - 9 Jan 2015

• 
  
  
• 
  336336 Retweets
  
• 
  245245 favorites

 

@Waqar786 Ustadh Asrar not highlighting this issue in his latest talk does not make the issue worthless. Or mufti shams siding with Aslam does not close the issue either. This issue is beyond and above all personalities this issue concerns Allah tàla his Beloved.

 

@Waqar786 no matter/issue is greater than the honour of the prophet sallalahualaihiwasallam. Defeating atheism, making a fiqh council or propagating a tareeqa are secondary issues the honour of our beloved prophet sallalahualaihiwasallam is primary issue and has always been since the time of the companions. You and others like you say "is it a big issue" I say this is the ONLY issue worth working for. Just to put things into perspective and for the better understanding of the masses I would like to remind all of the battle of yamama the first battle to be fought by muslims after the prophet sallalahualaihiwasallam lead by Sayyiduna abu bakr sadiq radiallahu anhu which was fought for the honour of the prophet sallalahualaihiwasallam and Sayyiduna abu bakr went against his own made laws. More companions passed away in this single battle which was fought for His honour than all the companions that passed away in battles in His life time accumulated.

Aslam and his likes must present a response and it is not sufficient to say that they are being approached in a non suitable manner hence it is fine for them to remain silent. Their roles as imams and scholars are public roles and the public doesn't always ask in the politest of manners but as public servants they are obliged to give a answer. Our president David Cameron and many other highly ranked politicians get asked questions about their policies and other stuff in most harsh of ways yet still answer. On the other hand our molvis like aslam and the lot if you don't say shaykh or give a title they won't answer your question. In the time of Sayyiduna Umar children of madina use to play a game, they would approach Sayyiduna Umar and say: "fear Allah" then Sayyiduna Umar would start to cry and children would take this in turns. These scholars should at the very least respond to questions posed regardless of how the question is asked.

I sincerely pray to Allah subhanahu wa tàla that he give these people tawfeeq to do rajoo and if not rajoo give them tawfeeq to respond and give a clarification.

 

I feel it is best to move on from Shaykh Aslam and concentrate on how we can face the challenges of our time, instead at nitpicking at peripheral issues with our Ulema. Leave issues about ulema to the ulema to sort out and speculation about pseudonyms and who are behind them is not in anyway beneficial or conducive to improving the conditions of Sunnis. Is it really a big issue that Shaykh Aslam is avoiding being photographed with Shaykh Asrar or even if he was 'Sacred'. The Charlie Hebdo issue is a contentious one but that extends beyond Shaykh Aslam, as there were others who condemned the killing but have not been 'highlighted.' Why do not ask those questions to Mufti Shams ul Huda, who has supported Shaykh Aslam. 'Issues' with Shaykh Aslam have been discussed at length on this forum and on social media and accusations have been shot to and fro but tell me what have they achieved. Have they strengthened the Sunni cause or have they exacerbated the divisions that have almost become deep rooted. If issues with Shaykh Aslam were so big, then the likes of Shaykh Asrar would have highlighted in his latest speech on Saturday but no, he found it more pertinent to discuss that many Muslims are leaving Islam and how we can meet the challenge off countering athesim, so tell me is that the issue that should be highlighted, discussed and awareness promoted or the fact (or fiction) of Shaykh Aslam sitting with Zaheer Mahmood. Its time to get a grip with the grave realities of our time and focus our energies on them, rather trying to mind 'mud' on scholars and expose them. I am not on social media but I have heard what is being said about certain scholars and it makes me think, ' can we really be surprised about our current state, when this is how we view our scholars.' I have yet to see one scholar on record speak out against Shaykh Aslam but the 'Muftis' on facebook have already passed fatwas. Seriously, leave these matters to the Ulema and concentrate on real issues.

 

@moriarity....

Totally agree.

How can you justify sitting with these people and then scurry away when asked about real matters? It goes beyond me.

At least everyone (I think) has now agreed he should answer the questions posed and clarify issues. If unity is to be achieved,it will be achieved through talking with the ahlu Sunnah wal jama'ah. This is where unity counts.

Uniting with non-sunnis is easy.....just let go of your central beliefs....done...you're united...

However, uniting with the ahlu Sunnah, this requires conforming your beliefs to those which the established and sound ulema have shown and proven for the past 1400 years.

'man shazza shuzza fi al-naar'

The work of @kaydani is commendable because he has stuck to the issues and not been derailed because of some people saying he should have done X Y Z........ JazakAllah

 

If this is true, its embarrassing to say the very least.