Shaykh Yaqoubi RIS 2013

Discussion in 'General Topics' started by muhammaduves, Mar 4, 2023.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. kattarsunni

    kattarsunni Veteran

    Hamza Yusef said:

    Where has Hamza Yusef retracted these erroneous beliefs? He hasn't. And he cannot be accepted as orthodox 'just because my Pir said it'. That attitude is for people like this:
  2. kattarsunni

    kattarsunni Veteran

    Hamza Yusuf did NOT retract the Dante comments.

    The blog is NOT down. Its gone private.

    So my former question remains as Hamza Yousef did NOT retract.

    What is your view on Hamza Yusuf's defense of Dante as he has not retracted?

    Has he retracted his views on this?:

    Khadimu has been going on about Hamza Yusuf is Sunni and expects us to be sheep and just accept it hook, line and sinker.


  3. Yasser Rashid

    Yasser Rashid Active Member

    I wasn't going to respond. But since I found your reasoning more annoying than your name I deem it necessary to respond, and continue responding till you accept your wrong.

    1. If the thread started with wadoods mentioning sharing platform with innovators, do you at least agree with wadoods first point regarding Sh Yaqoubi sharing platform with Zahir and Nasr among others?
    If you don't agree then go read what classical scholars have had to say regarding sharing platform with such people.

    If you do agree then why don't you be a man and stop crying over spilt milk. Like I've said before I've warned the likes of AQ criticising in the manner they do. So your point is superfluous. I haven't in any post inaugurated using bad manners against any scholar. So re check your facts buddy. Why? Because this thread is not yours nor is it AQs. It's wadoods. So why don't you just succinctly answer his points? Many people have already criticised AQ already, as well as ghulam and others. All my previous posts are filled with condemning their bad manners and nothing other than that. Go check. I don't run the Islamic state so I can't hang em mate!

    2. The reason why adopting orthodoxy was taken down, again, is besides the point. Which retraction did HY make that you're referring to? Again you're not being precise.

    3. You keep mentioning me along the lines of "you people" and I've also told you before I'm not associated with any cult as you probably are. I'm a Sunni Muslim and base my Islamic principles on the works of Imam Nawawi and Imam Ibn Hajar et al. So please don't apply "guilt by association". It's simply wrong and immoral to do so.

    4. How on earth did you infer that I'm the actual Yasser who's Asrars brother?! I simply mentioned something which all of Yassers buddies may easily know about him. For your information im possibly another Yasser Rashid on the planet. Again you've jumped to rash conclusions and committed the fallacy of "guilt by association". That's immoral. You're being desperate in trying to find out whose brother I maybe. That's uncalled for

    5. You mention me knowing the murids. The fact is as I've already stated the murids don't and can't answer jack all. They're brainwashed cult members "sidi". Don't act like you're born yesterday. You mention that I know you and that I ought to approach you directly. No where did I say I know you. I said I "probably" know you. But since you're adamant to meet me I have no problem. So that means in your next post you'll tell me who you are.

    Will you?

    6. You mention you're connecting the dots. Now since you seem to be good at connecting the dots can't you connect the dots between my mentioning HYs ijaza on this forum in relation to the Dante forum which STILL expects a furnished explanation.
    As for the great respect you hold for Sh Asrar I can tell from the tone of expression.

    7. Luxurious lifestyle and scholars for dollars lust for money and fame can be synonymous terms in this context. I've clearly mentioned I don't care about Sh Yaqoubis wealth or anyone else's so why are you jumping to conclusions again sidi?

    8. I didn't once accuse AQ of being mental. I clearly stated a "possibility". I said "maybe" which in fact denotes a low chance. There's a possible chance for any of us suffering psychological issues for that matter. So don't jump the gun.

    In conclusion don't divert your deep seated issues to AQ or even my previous suggestion regarding HYs ijaza. I'll be nice to you and provide a chance of answering the actual concern of this very thread which Wadoods first post was aimed towards.

    Since you're unable to tackle HYs ijaza STILL being up, since you claim me and/or AQ are diverting this thread why don't you answer a relevant question. Namely:

    What do you make of Sh Yaqoubi sharing platform with Ahl al Bid'ah?
  4. khadimu786

    khadimu786 Active Member


    The thread started with Wadood's points about non Zabiha meat at RIS, and sharing a platform with scholars who are not Sunni. AQ then made some points which need to be answered. Clearly it doesn't matter to you people if ulema are attacked without basis. You can talk about your core issues all day. I'm not here to discuss issues already addressed like Dante. A blog was made, adopting orthodoxy, and a retraction was made, which you people clearly haven't accepted, in which case, why was the blog taken down?

    Right, so we've established that you're Mawlana Asrar's brother. So you should be able to answer many if not all of your own questions you are asking me. You know the murids of Sh Ya'qubi as well as me so why are are you wasting your time here and not approaching them directly. They are in "your area" and you would be at the front of the gatherings with them. Yes that's right, at the front.

    No not all. I'm just connecting the dots. I actually have great respect for Mawlana Asrar.

    So exactly does AQ's comments which I have quoted equate to you mentioning Sh Ya'qubi's supposedly luxurious lifestyle? No blag, you stated it, for all to see. I have nothing to be ashamed of here, it is you and AQ that should be examining their writings and what side of the scales they will go on.

    This is what you wrote

    "Then maybe we can meet and fruitfully discuss one day the psychological issues the likes of AQ may be suffering and the socio/political factors which most likely act as major contributing factors to."

    So what do you mean by psychological issues????? They are your words not mine.

    If I understand correctly, you're trying to imply that somehow murids of the Shaykh are responsible for AQ's comments, and they are responsible for the vile words which AQ utters because they fall short in questioning their own Shaykh? Sorry bro, AQ is responsible for his own words. And if you're defending him, and attacking me, you play a part in it.

  5. Yasser Rashid

    Yasser Rashid Active Member

    Again. A fine example of diversion and "emotional reasoning" is kuadimu's chosen way.

    1. By me telling you to go away doesn't mean I'm being emotional. Why? Because the 'core issues' as mentioned by others here you're not tackling at all and mentioning luxury yourself. After several attempts in pre conceiving you to be sincere I realised I was wrong and that you're not in fact as sincere (and important of course) as I thought. So having realised how I've wasted my time discussing with you I'm bound to get a little emotional. Am I not? I am human brother.
    Therefore I've resorted to telling you to get a life, so to speak.

    2."Yasser brother of Asrar", as you're told, did NOT give bay'ah to Sh Yaqoubi.
    It was something Yasser chooses to call "bay'ah of baraka". (As for how seriously or lightly people in the West take bay'ah per se, that's an issue for a different thread)

    3. Again, what has my brotherly status got to do with diverting this thread? Are you somehow implying that Sh Asrars a usual troublemaker and by the possibility of me being his brother shows why I'm also a troublemaker?

    Because in your eyes Ive diverted this thread (from shallow conversation regarding the wealth of scholars) to an actual issue (ijaza of HY)

    Heavy implications indeed. Again you're being vague and cunning in your "emotional reasoning". In fact this is quite interesting because I'm starting to guess who you really may be.

    4 the luxurious lifestyle point you've just blagged. You've previously said yourself when I tried diverting the issue to HYs ijaza point:

    "I am here to question AQ's accusation that Habib 'Ali and Sayyid Abul Huda are in his words "all scholars for dollars, and their lust for money and fame needs to be publicly exposed and disgraced."

    End of quote

    Now who's mentioned luxury first? You or me?

    5. I don't think it's illogical to say AQs disrespectful because you don't (can't) answer core questions. Why? Because I'm certainly sure AQ didn't set out from the beginning by mentioning their luxurious lifestyles.

    So again you're beating around the bush.

    6. Who's allowed AQ to slander due to mental issues? Come on man! Why are you twisting things and putting words in my mouth?!

    So the proofs in the pudding. You've proven yourself to be sheerly lacking in any logical thought or constructive criticism. Either you're a good liar or you suffer from memory lapses and seem to disagree at times with your own previous thoughts. Or youre simply mad yourself. I must leave it as that since I don't see you worthy of response any longer.
  6. kattarsunni

    kattarsunni Veteran

    Khadimu: What is your view on Hamza Yusuf's defense of Dante?
  7. Haqbahu

    Haqbahu Veteran

    It would be nice if we all could stick to the core-issue(s) about which this thread is. And NO I do not disrespect Shaykh Sayyid al-Yaqoubi (hafizahullah), infact I have a good opinion about him. But some seemingly valid objections are made here. It would be good if those could be tackled.
  8. khadimu786

    khadimu786 Active Member


    So much for pulling the emotional card out, brother. Couldn't care less about your area.

    Er no. Because I'm told that Yasser brother of Asrar, took bay'ah with the Sh Ya'qubi and attends gatherings of the murids at Woodlands Rd.

    Not much. But it has a LOT to do with how this thread has been diverted by you.

    ...but you still had to mention it (the luxurious lifestyle) - it says a lot about you. AQ didn't actually say that, and I didn't infer that from what he said.

    Your belief is completely illogical.

    Are you saying AQ has psychological issues which leads him to slander the ulema without any basis?
  9. kattarsunni

    kattarsunni Veteran

    Khadimu786 said:

    When valid points are brought up they are simply dismissed. The Dante issue is not something that simply disappears. It is not vague. It is a serious issue from a 'shari'a perspective'.
  10. kattarsunni

    kattarsunni Veteran

    What are the answers to those questions? Does Yasser know the answers to those questions?
    @Khadimu: You said:

    I will ask you one clear question: What is your view on Hamza Yusuf's defense of Dante?
  11. Yasser Rashid

    Yasser Rashid Active Member

    First of all Who gives a toss about you wanting to discuss what you wanna discuss.
    You seem to diss this forum and its people time and again. Well my friend in my area they'd tell you to "do one" and in others "trap".

    Also why would my being Shaykh Asrars brother aid me in answering my own questions? Is he Shaykh Yaqoubis PA?

    Third, what has it to do with the price of fish if I'm Asrars brother?

    Don't divert the issue. Why? Because if Shaykh Yaqoubi did retract his ijaza from Hamaza Yusuf (in which he's praised him highly not to be dismissed) and at least had spoken against him the way he spoke against Hasoun I suppose the likes of AQ wouldn't dare mention Sh Yaqoubis luxurious lifestyle- which really isn't any of our bizzwax.

    The reason I believe- as I've clearly said previously!- AQ and ilk express such behaviour is because you and your ilk can't answer simple questions/ objections!

    Point out one issue which me and others here have concurred upon as a truth when in fact it's a false. Just one example. You cannot. That's why I contend you're emotional.


    Besides you're doing it again "emotional reasoning" by mentioning what me and others on this forum have made our mind up about.
    Hold on a second sir! Am I the one with 60+ posts or you?

    I'm a recent member on this forum. And all for the right reasons. Im sick and tired of meeting people almost daily having a chip on their shoulder and yet not being able to fruitfully and openly discuss the issue they have. Rather they choose to be "keyboard warriors" and express freely behind a screen. The din is not vague and nor is it a cult which only a select few may discuss and know about. Even ma'rifa and tasawwuf (not the way it's practised nowadays of course) are public matters at all costs.

    So to answer your question as to whether I'm Shaykh Asrars brother why don't you disclose your true name and identity and be a man the way I choose to be?

    Then maybe we can meet and fruitfully discuss one day the psychological issues the likes of AQ may be suffering and the socio/political factors which most likely act as major contributing factors to.

  12. khadimu786

    khadimu786 Active Member

    Yasser Rashid, I'm not here to discuss matters which you and others on this forum have already made their mind up about. Are you Mawlana Asrar's brother? If you are, I'm sure you can answer all those questions yourself.

    I am here to question AQ's accusation that Habib 'Ali and Sayyid Abul Huda are in his words "all scholars for dollars, and their lust for money and fame needs to be publicly exposed and disgraced."

    AQ - please provide proof for the above. Amman statements, teaching Dante, calling coptics holy brothers etc etc etc.... all irrelevant here, as much as one may disagree with those things.
  13. Yasser Rashid

    Yasser Rashid Active Member

    Where are you gone Khadimu 786 (aka mr "takfiri hunter") I'm awaiting your response.

    I've objectively answered both your points:

    with respect, I don't see how, in AQ's posts, he has made ANY valid point against either Habib 'Ali, or Sh Ya'qubi. Most of it vague and does not present any clear objection from a shari'a perspective. As such, the terms sayyid, and wali are extremely valid to make in the context of HIS posts.

    End of quote

    For which I've provided the hamza Yusuf ijaza point above.

    And your point:

    He can email the Shaykh through his Facebook page - and I'm sure the Shaykh's email address is easily available if he asked the right people. I don't see the point of diverting responsibility of AQ's posts on sunniport upon the murids of the Shaykh. He is responsible for what he writes, nobody else.

    End of quote

    For which I've mentioned face to face as being the best option. The reasons are all there. I've also added that the Shaykh mentions "hikma" for which reason I also said murids do matter and are therefore involved.

    No one diverted AQs post to any murid, as you emotionally contend. To be frank I don't know who AQ is and nor does he or I matter in such a case. This is the Din and not a fan club or cult. Your association with your shaykh or fellow murids OUGHT to hinge on Shari'ah first and foremost and at all times, otherwise you've simply lost your marbles my dear friend.

    I would like to make a few more points, but once you answer these most rudimentary and basic ones first.

    As you clearly are a person concerned with the states of souls and inner well being have you not noticed, my brother, how people such as yourself are the very cause for AQ's bad manners. I'm not in any way justifying such behaviour but since you apparently seem wiser than the likes of AQ I believe you to be clever enough to apply "wise action".

    Why? Because when stuck you use the wilaya/sayada card which you've been taken to task for above. And since that scheme no longer helps you get emotional. The emotional card has also been proven redundant.

    So now my friend you seem to be in a state of check mate. Therefore I suggest next time you don't bother responding to anything polemical at all.
  14. kattarsunni

    kattarsunni Veteran

    No one has done 'takfir' of any scholar. That is a pure rumour spread by people who have their own motives. The real 'takfiris' have joined the Syrian revolution:

    Those who have condemned Hanson's defense of Dante have done exactly what they did when they defended Shaykh Yaqoubi's stance on Ahmed Hassoun.

    “Should the stomach of anyone of you be filled with pus is better than it be filled with poetry in which I am reviled” (Hadith in Bukhari)
  15. Yasser Rashid

    Yasser Rashid Active Member

    Khadimu said:
    He can email the Shaykh through his Facebook page - and I'm sure the Shaykh's email address is easily available if he asked the right people.
    (End of quote)

    I disagree with that method and would recommend face to face interaction which would be free of any "takfiri" stereotypes. As its a modern trend unfortunately that when valid concerns are presented "people" tend to align such a person as "takfiri" or more recently "ultra-Brelwi".

    You mention diversion to murids. Again emotional argument. Why? Because if the Shaykhs unapproachable the protocol no doubt consists of murids and not ex sas members.

    Besides if the Shaykh hardly visited the UK I'd probably agree with emailing but since he regularly visits recently face to face is the most viable option.

    Moreover if the Shaykh dismisses an email/Facebook message fully or by merely saying that "there's hikma involved" then there's nothing one can do save approaching and discussing the issue with senior murids.
    Why? Because the Shaykh is being dismissive in such a case which is a major problem in and of itself.

    Murids do not- for some unknown reason- relay such concerns to their Shaykh.

    Now for such unapproachability do we blame the Shaykh or murids?
    I don't know. Maybe Khadimu will enlighten us. Or will he?

    You ask for one major point: Hamza Yusufs ijaza for his translation of aqida tahawiya STILL being up on sacred

    Now anyone with a basic concept of the Sunni definition of love for the messenger of Allah (Most High and peace be upon him!) will admit that this is a valid and major question.

    Khadimu please provide a logical response devoid of mentioning the sayada or wilaya. Why? Because both terms may do itlaq upon Hassoun also, as demonstrably mentioned by Kattarsunni.

  16. AbdalQadir

    AbdalQadir time to move along! will check pm's.

    he is lauded as a wali and a mujaddid of Islam for this century.

    there is a difference of opinion, though, among the west-infatuated groupies - nuh 'i swear to tell the contingently impossible truth, the whole contingently impossible truth and nothing but the contingently impossible truth' keller is also a contender, as is ali 'coptics are my holy brothers' jifry, as are many others.

    for the curry-munching subcontinental groupies, cardinal tahir is a major contender

    then of course there are also mehdi contenders too, in a class of their own

    it all depends on who serves the vatican with the utmost devotion

    they should just hold a 'Mujaddid Idol', with three judges from the christian clergy - the queen of england, the pope, and some russian or greek orthodox church head - and decide once and for all.

    will be a major hit with the groupie cults.
  17. kattarsunni

    kattarsunni Veteran

    Shaykh Yaqoubi openly criticised and condemned Sayyid Habib A'li Jifri in his lecture 'The Way of the Ulama'. He also condemned the 'Radical Middle Way' and the scholars who were a part of it.

    Habib A'li Jifry is a signatory of the Amman agreement. The Amman agreement calls for many aberrant things. Many prominent people have signed this agreement.

    Sayyid Hossein Nasr is also someone with a lineage going back to the Messenger of Allah (sallAllahu alayhiwasallam). He is invited to the Canada conference as well. He is definitely not on the methodology of Ahl alSunnah walJama'ah.

    I wander if the groupies would consider Hamza Yusuf a wali as well? I wander what these scholars who share a stage with him and keep close ties with him make of his defense of Dante?

    Ahmad Hassoun has a lineage going back to the Messenger of Allah (sallAllahu alayhi wasallam). His father was a major scholar from Halab and has been described as a wali by some. When Shaykh Yaqoubi refuted him (and rightly so) the groupies gave no consideration for his lineage and credentials. In fact many of them had not even heard Hassoun's statement. They based their refutation solely on what they were told and what was relayed to them.

    To this day Hamza Yusuf has not made a public retraction. In fact he has defended his comments in public on his own blog (even then in a footnote).

    Shaykh Abu Hasan was right when he stated:

    Not only did he mention it in his lecture and defend Dante, he also recommends him in his reading list.

    Abu Hasan writes:

    Imam Qadi I'yad (rahimahuAllah) writes:

    Hamza Yusuf has definitely shown his true colours by teaching Dante's 'Inferno' (akin to teaching Rushdies 'Satanic Verse') and then defending Dante and recommending his book to be read. When rebuked he still defended himself.

    He definitely has shown himself not to be a 'faqih' as he is wrongly described. But politics is a dirty game. As soon as the refutations of Hamza Yusuf came up Hamza Yusuf places a video on youtube praising Shaykh Yaqoubi:

    And hey presto another video is up where Shaykh Yaqoubi praises Hamza Yusuf (at the time when the anti Hamza Yusuf blog was active):

    Like I said politics is a messy game.
  18. AbdalQadir

    AbdalQadir time to move along! will check pm's.

    neither of us needs to prove himself to the other.

    how about we start with you just listing 3 good reasons of why you think ali jifry is a great wali, and i will list why i think the opposite, we then give reasons for that

    (if you're interested, you can peruse the search function on this forum, and you will find multiple posts by posters with relevant links and references highlighting the kind of citations you seek and criticisms or justifications by other posters. see this thread for example -

    we can then repeat the same exercise in regards to yaqoubi.
  19. khadimu786

    khadimu786 Active Member

    with respect, I don't see how, in AQ's posts, he has made ANY valid point against either Habib 'Ali, or Sh Ya'qubi. Most of it vague and does not present any clear objection from a shari'a perspective. As such, the terms sayyid, and wali are extremely valid to make in the context of HIS posts.

    He can email the Shaykh through his Facebook page - and I'm sure the Shaykh's email address is easily available if he asked the right people. I don't see the point of diverting responsibility of AQ's posts on sunniport upon the murids of the Shaykh. He is responsible for what he writes, nobody else.
  20. Yasser Rashid

    Yasser Rashid Active Member

    A few genuine "itchy thoughts" which I must outline. In doing so I expect genuine responses from both sides. That is AQ and Khadimu. Or others

    I've observed far too many times such issues being discussed and then being swept under the carpet, so to speak, left for a year or so to be rediscovered due to not being "properly tackled" in the first place. Which they must in order to dispell doubts regarding such luminary figures; doubts which are usually lurking in ones soul eventually spreading the disease of hatred throughout and blockading altogether the road to ma'rifa due to the birth su al zann.

    Na'udhu bilLah min dhalik!

    Alhamdulilah! I don't take the din as jest which is the very reason why I choose not to appear with a nick. Rather I prefer my real name so that people take my points seriously but moreso so that they may take the quintessential maqsid more seriously. Namely the din of Islam.

    Brother AQ you have a point, but again the manner of expression is what stands as the greatest obstacle for the likes of brother khadimu.

    Even if Shaykh Yaqoubi- Allah forbid!- is an innovator, it doesn't grant us right to refer to him or others the way you have.

    The criticism must be levelled against him or others based on logical syllogisms which simply construct an irrefutable argument (against him or others "equally").

    Brother Khadimu, with all due respect, your arguments are emotional for the most part. Such as using the sayyid card or wilaya card both of which are irrelevant in this moment in time. Why? Because the likes of brother AQ believe that there's too much turmoil and lack of sincere 'aqida promotion. He has a very valid point which cannot be simply dismissed with what I've already called a "blazing match".

    AQ I suggest the quickest and sincerest way out of this loophole is to contact Shaykh Yaqoubi directly outlining point by point perceived errors/flaws.

    The best way to do this is by person as opposed to telephone or email (or any other medium) since many voices and keyboards unfortunately get involved resulting in distortion of the simple mans genuine concerns.

    I of course have first hand experience in knowing of such people who regret even having attempted email or phone call due to misunderstanding on the part of murids which is a separate issue altogether.

    5) Khadimu if you're a murid or know murids I kindly suggest you make way for people like AQ who have genuine concerns to approach the shaykh openly and ask such questions in order to clarify misconceptions and in order to facilitate the way of suluk also for them so that their akhira may also be one of felicity as opposed to burning in hell due to offending a sayyid behind his back.

Share This Page