this is abuz zubair's/the wahabi club's statement to the bbc that they sent out to their entire mailing list:
Know we just believe that we should disagree on issues relating to the usul (foundations) of the religion. The current issue of evolution is related to iman and kufr. Baig and his people are trying to justify bid'a. In reality no death threats were made. Neither by Wahabis or Sunnis.
Even Hindus bring quotes from Mathnavi sherif of Shaykh Rumi Rd to prove that the shaykh believed in "cycle of life " , that is, you are born again after you die. As per hindu religion if you do bad deeds you will be born as a gorilla or a poor man! The quote present in Mathanvi sherif talks about the state and station ( haal wa maqaam) of a man who is traveling on the path of tasawwuf and not "life after death'. We must stick to traditional scholars. A Scientific refutation of Darwin's theory http://www.harunyahya.com/
BismiLlah . . . as-salamu 'alaykum wa rahmatuLlah . . . SubhanaLlah, ya naqshabandi! What's happened to you recently? Who gave the death threats? It certainly wasn't Abuz-Zubair, who is being blamed! Here are the YouTube videos where the supposed 'death threats' were made: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LP2ReBIAR_A http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhFHbtTFQww This is what Hasan told the Guardian: Here is the video during which he makes the outrageous claim of Adam having parents who were 'shibhu insan': http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgR-xfJbQcQ Do you hear any death threats? I certainly don't. Indeed, Abuz-Zubair has released a clear statement denying such an occurance: http://www.islamicawakening.com/viewarticle.php?articleID=1501 Of course, objectivity goes down the drain when dealing with a wishy-washy liberal Imam being condemned by 'medieval' Islamists with 'child like' creed (his own words). Do you consider holding the position that Adam had parents who were 'shibhu insan' a valid position in Islam? Does this not expel you from the fold of Islam? His supporters always bring up the 'fact' that Muslims had developed the theory of evolution before the West, quoting Ibn Miskawayh, Ibn Khaldun, Rumi, and Iqbal. As for Ibn Miskawayh, Abuz-Zubair checked the original of the fawz al-kabir, and guess what: and guess what, Ibn Miskawayh and Ibn Khaldun's statements are simply a rehashing this idea, not related to evolution in the slightest. Here's a post I made on another forum on the same issue: --- The scientific/philosophic tradition during the 'Medieval' Islamic period has limitted relevance with regards to this legal point; a cursory look at the relationship between the 'Ulama and Falasifah would demonstrate this. Take Ibn Sina, arguably the most well-known of these people. Imam al-Ghazali declared that Takfir of Ibn Sina and the rest of the group (shi'ah) of falasifah was necessary (wajaba takfiruhum). Interestingly, UH specifically criticized our hujjah for the Ummah's lack of progression in the sciences: The 'evolutionary theory' is a broad one. However, when we move to statements such as Adam had parents who were 'shubhu insan', which is exactly what UH said, how can that be justfied? How is it possible to reconcile the hadith "wa adamu khuliqa min turab" with the statement that he had parents who were 'shubhu insan'? Allah says (to the meaning of): "Lo! the likeness of Jesus with Allah is as the likeness of Adam. He created him of dust, then He said unto him: Be! and he is." Usama Hasan commented on this stating that it could be construed as a proof for his own position: 'Isa had a mother, so the ayah didn't negate Adam having parents, and did not affirm direct creation from soil. This is disingenuous to our tafaasir. Almost every tafsir interprets this in the context of the revelation of this verse: the Christians claimed that since 'Isa had no father, he had to be the son of Allah (wal-'iyadhu biLlah!). Allah refuted them with this verse, indicating that not being subjected to natural processes does not equate you with the Divine, just as Adam -- a creation of Allah -- was free from natural processes i.e. having parents. In fact, ar-Razi, who once was quoted by an evolutionary supporter, states that there was ijma' of the mufassirun on the context of revelation of this ayah. http://altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=1&tTafs irNo=4&tSoraNo=3&tAyahNo=59&tDisplay=yes&UserProf ile=0&LanguageId=1 I totally welcome objections, based on the Qur'an and Sunnah, and the understanding of the scholars of the shari'ah [not falsafah ] was-salam --- Usama released a 'retraction', and later on told Mr. Bunglawala: --- This is not his only problematic issue; he describes the 'work' the NATO forces are doing in our lands as 'compassionate' and 'just'! Oh, and how could I forget, he has some pretty substantial support from none other than . . . the Quilliam Foundation!!!
I disagree with brother Asif strongly, and agee with kuttar. The baig person is mixing poison under the camouflage of condemning death threats. Don't give attention to the death threats. Give attention to what the beg person said. Our Sunni Aqeeda is CONCRETE. It does not need debating. This usama affair is not about an opinion. The baig person is not telling the truth. The following quote is extremely dangerous, and shows the changing trend I have noticed in yanaafi website. ninowy has the same ideas as the baig person. Ninowy has degraded to such an extent, that now he lets modernists openly insult firm shari'a rulings in his "madina institute" in North America. This is the doorstep to what aqdas mentioned about "sulah kulli".
assalamu alaykum, I heard the interview with Usaamah Hasan on Newsnight a while ago after he was dismissed from his job and death threats made. To be completely honest I also support what Allamah Nisar Baig has said above. It makes sense. I also think it is outrageous to give death threats to someone who simply expresses an opinion. Honestly, KS, despite our ikhtilaaf with Baig Sahib on certain issues to with afzaliyat, I really think it is childish to try to score points in this manner especially when what he has said is totally accurate. I know Usamah Hasan isnt a Sunni but that doesn'T mean we have to disagree with him on EVERY point, even if he is in the right on a given one. That way is extremism.
http://www.minab.org.uk/news/press-...th-threats-issued-against-british-muslim-imam Nisar Baig alTafdili:
