Shaykh Yaqoubi RIS 2013

Wadood

Wadood

Veteran
assalamu 'alaikum brothers, a few concerns that were very disheartening. Perhaps someone can relay the message to Shaykh Yaqoubi mureeds and Shaykh Faisal 'abd al razzak in Canada.

Shaykh Yaqoubi is scheduled for both the RIS conference and the RIS retreat, this year. looking at the flier of this event, it shows that one of the main sponsors of this event is Maple Lodge Zabiha Halal. This supplier of meat is not halal, but sells MACHINE slaughtered meat as zabiha halal.

According to "minority fiqh", the fiqh for all Muslims that has been developed by ISNA and its partners, it is allowed by Shari'ah to eat meat that has been mass slaughtered by a machine. It would take a second for the machine to cut off the head of the animal. Perhaps the 15,000 Muslims attending the event will all be fed with Maple Lodge Zabiha Halal meat (non-halal).

Looking at the flier, the third most prominent shining face is that of Hoosein Nasr, father of western perennialism, and who is not a Muslim. He wants Muslims to become shiite or accept the perennial truth. He is being promoted to the Muslims, and is the main invited speaker at both the conference and retreat.

The insulter of our Prophet salAllaho 'alaihi wa alihi wa salam, zahir mahmood of Birmingham, UK, has his face shining as one of the speakers, he being the heartthrob of the current Canadian deobandi population.

The inaugurators of RIS are members or deep friends of deenport.com. They most likely are aware of this blasphemer. deobandiforum has a long list of members attending RIS, and they are aware of zahir mahmood controversy, so it is not surprising that the blasphemer is promoted
 
Well expressed and valid critique of heresy by brother wadood.
He maturely outlined above unanswerable and non objectable points regarding the event. Now that's how we as Sunnis ought to express our concern for heresy as opposed to what we normally come across as what I've already termed a "blazing match".
That is criticising based on personal grudges.

May Allah grant us success to make valid criticisms and refers to people as their real names as opposed to what we choose to name them.

Amin! Bi jaah al nabiyy al Amin!
Sall Allahu alayhi wa sallam
 
after such a long time have i read something so genuinely disgusting!

https://www.facebook.com/risevents/posts/10153535433050608

The highest honor (in a worldly sense) a philosopher can receive is to be nominated by his peers for inclusion in the series of The Library of Living Philosophers. And the highest honor a theologian can receive is to be invited to deliver the Gifford Lectures in Glasgow, Scotland. Dr. Seyyed Hossein Nasr is the only person ever to have received both of these honors. We are very proud to have Dr. Seyyed Hossein Nasr at #RIS2013 inshallah.
Click to expand...

and it is impossible that yaqoubi doesn't know who's who or what's what. he is with them all the way and just like them. he was great when he spoke against the zindiq hassoun, but now it seems he's turned into another ali jifry. these people are all scholars for dollars, and their lust for money and fame needs to be publicly exposed and disgraced.
 
he is with them all the way and just like them. he was great when he spoke against the zindiq hassoun, but now it seems he's turned into another ali jifry. these people are all scholars for dollars
Click to expand...
brother AQ! you are too quick to come to conclusions, kindly wait and see.
 
AbdalQadir said:
it is impossible that yaqoubi doesn't know who's who or what's what. he is with them all the way and just like them. he was great when he spoke against the zindiq hassoun, but now it seems he's turned into another ali jifry. these people are all scholars for dollars, and their lust for money and fame needs to be publicly exposed and disgraced.
Click to expand...

AQ should watch his tongue/pen/keyboard and fear Allah. A direct accusation that eminent ulema such as Habib Ali al-Jifri and Sayyid Sh Muhammad Ya'qubi are:

1. 'scholars for dollars'
2. lustful for money
3. eager for fame

I'm pondering over exactly how you will prove that in the court of Allah t'ala and His beloved Habib [salla Allahu 'alayhi wa alihi sallam], whose grandsons are being slandered here, and gave up - because it's your akhirah, not mine. Perhaps you have the ability to look into people's hearts, even the awliyah, and examine their intentions.

As for what follows by way of public exposing and disgracing, why don't you do it, AQ? Why are you egging others on to do it? If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

Salamat wa ad'iyat
 
Perhaps you have the ability to look into people's hearts, even the awliyah, and examine their intentions.
Click to expand...

perhaps you have the ability to look into who's a wali in front of Allah and who's not!

but wait - your criteria for wilayah are nothing other than popularity in the tabloids and youtube, and an odd conference at a luxury hotel in montreal or geneva or something.

i am not in the kitchen mate and neither did i egg others to do anything. it was about driving a point.

ali jifry's playing with the deen has reached unprecedented levels in the recent past and he only gets bolder by the day, thanks to blind cult followers who can't see the obvious.

ali jifry and omar bin hafiz in my books are "Sayyid" claimants no different than ahmed khan of aligarh or maududi or indeed jifry's buddy hossein nasr! wadood was spot on about hossein nasr, and ali jifry is a big time chum and cheerleader for zanadiq like him, and martin lings and others.

granted yaqoubi so far hasn't displayed the levels of wickedness as that displayed by ali jifry and omar bin hafiz, but his knowingly supporting other perennialists like jifry and hanson and his whole antics with the Syrian crisis and so on is enough reason to stay the distance from him. a momin doesn't get bitten from the same hole twice.

i'd rather hope to Allah i have tawfiq to follow the certified ways of the certified Sayyidi Imam Hussein - stand up to yazeediyat, and do not bow to the vatican and the pope!
 
AbdalQadir said:
perhaps you have the ability to look into who's a wali in front of Allah and who's not!

but wait - your criteria for wilayah are nothing other than popularity in the tabloids and youtube, and an odd conference at a luxury hotel in montreal or geneva or something.
Click to expand...

1. You simply can't see that you're doing it again - looking into my heart and assuming that 'my' criteria for wilayah are 'nothing other than popularity in the tabloids and youtube....' Dear brother, look to yourself and think before you type.

2. I don't need to prove myself, but the testimonies of several other ulema and awliya suffices me. Not this forum and definitely not you.

AbdalQadir said:
i am not in the kitchen mate and neither did i egg others to do anything. it was about driving a point.
Click to expand...

And you've made your points very clearly. Stand by them and prove them in a true Islamic way, rather than insinuations, what you 'perceive' and other such nonsense.

Get a grip, brother. My sincere advice, don't destroy your soul by your posts on this forum.
 
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.

1)
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.


2)
The criticism must be levelled against him or others based on logical syllogisms which simply construct an irrefutable argument (against him or others "equally").


3)
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".

4)
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.
 
Yasser Rashid said:
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".
Click to expand...

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.

Yasser Rashid said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
2. I don't need to prove myself, but the testimonies of several other ulema and awliya suffices me. Not this forum and definitely not you
Click to expand...

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 - www.sunniport.com/masabih/showthread.php?t=10171)

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

Like Hamza Yūsuf Hanson likes to talk about Dante’s Divine Comedy or mentions it in his recommended reading list. Even more surprising are those scholars who do not feel Hamza has committed any error and wave it away as a fly upon their noses.
Click to expand...

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

Abu Hasan writes:

I wonder, if Hamza Yūsuf were in Andalusia a thousand years ago, would the judge [most likely a Mālikī] spare him from the gallows or do istitabah? I wonder
Click to expand...

Imam Qadi I'yad (rahimahuAllah) writes:

statements that are insulting to the Prophet or things that are disparaging and derogatory to his exalted station should not be narrated by way of stories and casual chatting or just to be novel
Click to expand...

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:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylXxx-jBoaw

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

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=drMiHuiFASo

Like I said politics is a messy game.
 
I wander if the groupies would consider Hamza Yusuf a wali as well?
Click to expand...

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.
 
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 knowledge.com.

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.

Shukran!
 
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:

Mohammed is a non-practising Muslim who believes that Syria should continue to be a secular state, and that religion is a private issue.

That stance, however, was enough to prompt ISIS to declare that he was a "kafir" - a non-believer - who deserved to be punished.

The group has used such designations to force out moderates in areas under its control, whether they are local councillors, opposition activists or even fellow rebels.
Click to expand...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-25109708

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.

http://www.sunniport.com/masabih/showthread.php?t=10448

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

I've objectively answered both your points:

Quote:
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.
 
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.
 
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.

Simple?

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.

Wassalam
 
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.
Click to expand...

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

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.
Click to expand...

I will ask you one clear question: What is your view on Hamza Yusuf's defense of Dante?
 
Back
Top