Salaam
Yasser Rashid said:
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.
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?
Yasser Rashid said:
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)
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.
Yasser Rashid said:
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?
No not all. I'm just connecting the dots. I actually have great respect for Mawlana Asrar.
Yasser Rashid said:
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."
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.
Yasser Rashid said:
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.
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.
Wasalaam
