Post some good lectures about Prophet Muhammad :saws1:

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kiro
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 51
  • Views Views 9K
If you're looking for stories, Akhi, then I have an excellent Kitaab to recommend:

Ash-Shifaa by Qaadhi `Iyyaadh al-Maaliki رحمة الله عليه.

As for lectures: I will try to post when I find some good ones, In Shaa Allaah.
 
The ideology of Hamza Yusuf is different to that of Ahlus Sunnah wal-Jamaa`ah.

Many of his beliefs and many of the things he says contradict Islaam. For example, his statement that not a single time when the word "Jihaad" is used in the Qur'aan does it have a military meaning: That is false. Open any Kitaab of Tafseer (Jalaalayn, Ibn Katheer, Fat-hul Qadeer, Raazi, Rooh-ul-Ma`aani, Tabari, Durr-ul-Manthoor, etc.) and you will find the exact opposite mentioned.

He also claims that Sharee`ah can no longer be applied in today's times. This is, in essence, rejection of the Sharee`ah which Allaah Ta`aalaa had revealed for all time, and obviously, rejecting anything of Islaam is Kufr.

He refers to the firefighters who pulled people out from the World Trade Center as being "Mujaahideen". How on earth can a person make a statement like that? You are referring to Kuffaar as "Mujaahideen"? The core of any `Ibaadah - Jihaad, Salaah, Zakaah, Sawm, Hajj - is Imaan in Allaah Ta`aalaa. Tawheed. If it is missing, then the person is not a Musalli, or a Saa'im, or a Hajji, or a Mujaahid. Here, he is referring to Christians and Atheists as "Mujaahideen" and that what they are doing is "Jihaad". The Kufr of this statement is apparent. You cannot twist Islaam and alter the Qur'aan to make people happy. Jihaad is what Allaah Ta`aalaa has said is Jihaad. You cannot twist the meaning of it into something that the White House likes and will be pleased with. We worship ALLAAH, not America.

Another terribly deviant and Kufr belief of his is that the pleasures of Jannah is "allegorical". This belief contradicts the ENTIRE Ahlus Sunnah wal-Jamaa`ah for 1,437 years. There is Ijmaa` that the pleasures of Jannah are Real, Physical, and not metaphorical. In fact, the `Ulamaa have made Takfeer (branded as a Kaafir) the one who claims that Jannah is metaphysical or that its pleasures are allegorical.

These are not "minor" mistakes.

Again, he refers to the firefighters who died in the World Trade Center as being "Shuhadaa" (Martyrs). A Kaafir cannot EVER be a "Shaheed". How in the world can any person make a statement like this?? ONLY a Muslim can be a "Shaheed"! A Shaheed is a Jannati! According to his logic, if the firefighters are Shuhadaa like he claimed, despite them being Christians, Atheists and whatever else, then they are "Jannatis"! Wal-`Iyaadhu Billaah!

These are just some of the beliefs he has which contradicts Ahlus Sunnah wal-Jamaa`ah. He was also known as the "White House Imaam". He rubs shoulders with Kuffaar who oppress and murder innocent Muslims around the world. Wallaahi, he will answer on the Day of Qiyaamah for that.

In addition to this is his support for Bid`aat (innovations) such as Milaad, etc.

Do not listen to Hamza Yusuf.
 
He said:

03:25 CD 6-7:

"…people that love to fight are pathologically unwell. They are sick people, there are people like that!"

Now compare this statement of his with what Allaah Ta`aalaa says in the Qur'aan:

"Say: If it be that your fathers, your sons, your brothers, your wives, your friends; the wealth that you have gained; the commerce in which you fear a decline: or the dwellings in which you delight - are more beloved to you than Allaah and His Rasool, and Jihaad (physically fighting) in His Path - then wait until Allaah brings about His Decision (i.e. `Adhaab): and Allaah guides not the Faasiqoon (transgressing, rebellious sinners)."

And this Hadeeth of Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم:

“`Abd-ur-Rahmaan ibn Ibraaheem ad-Dimashqiyy narrated to us, Bishr ibn Bakr narrated to us, ibn Jaabir narrated to us, Abu `Abd-is-Salaam narrated to me from Thowbaan that he said, Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم said: “The people will soon summon one another to attack you as people when eating invite others to share their dish.

Someone asked: Will that be because of our small numbers at that time? He (Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم) replied:


No, you will be numerous at that time; but you will be scum and rubbish like that carried down by a torrent, and Allaah will remove the fear of you from the hearts of your enemy, and cast Wahn into your hearts.

Someone asked:


What is Wahn, Yaa Rasoolallaah? He replied: Love of the Dunyaa, and hatred of death. {Hubb-ud-Dunyaa wa Karaahiya-tul-Mowt.** [Narrated in Sunan Abi Daawood.]”


In another Riwaayat it appears:


{Hubb-ud-Dunyaa wa Karaahiya-tul-Aakhirah.**


“Love of the Dunyaa and hatred of the Aakhirah.”


And finally, a third Riwaayat:


{Hubb-ud-Dunyaa wa Karaahiya-tul-Qitaal.**


“Love of the Dunyaa and a hatred for fighting.”


Decide now for yourself whether his ideology is truly in line with that of Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم and Sahaabah-e--Kiraam or not.
 
Last edited:
Also, with regards to his statement:

03:25 CD 6-7:

"…people that love to fight are pathologically unwell. They are sick people, there are people like that!"

This is why we encourage people to read Kitaabs of history like Futooh-ush-Shaam, Futooh-ul-`Iraaq, Futooh Misr, etc. Hadhrat Khaalid ibn al-Waleed رضي الله عنه, Hadhrat Dhiraar ibn al-Azwar رضي الله عنه, Hadhrat `Abdur Rahmaan ibn Abi Bakr رضي الله عنه, Hadhrat Baraa ibn Maalik رضي الله عنه, Hadhrat Raafi` رضي الله عنه, etc. - all of these Sahaabah loved "fighting". So according to this man, they were all "sick people" who were "pathologically unwell".

Islaam is against males being neutered, emasculated, spineless. Be Men.
 
...if he's that wrong maybe he should be the chosen spokesperson for Islam by the western media.

I for one do think that all people of the book will have places in heaven.. based on gods judgement of them..

how their numbers vary i have no idea.
 
Last edited:
:bism: (In the Name of God, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful)

:sl: (Peace be upon you)

@Huzaifah ibn Adam

I have seen many refutations of Sheikh Hamza Yusuf done online and most of the times they are distortions of his positions. For example, when you give the example of him saying that Jihad is not mentioned in the Quran, this is directly contradicted by this YouTube video called Jihad of the Sword in Quran.

Secondly, there are people in our times who go on killing apostates and perceived blasphemers willy-nilly; so not applying shariah (Islamic law) when you do not have legitimate state authority is actually about knowing that extremist Muslims are misunderstanding and cherry-picking Islam. For example, Farkhunda Malikzada was killed by a mob for supposedly burning the Quran, which was later found to be an untrue rumor. Astaghfirullah. Killing a woman in a brutal way for supposedly blasphemy when she's a martyr. AllahuAkbar.

Thirdly, jihad means struggle. Tell me something who did the Quran come for as Revelation? The entire humanity. Then how can we say that the hadiths of RasulAllah :saws: (peace and blessings be upon him) is only for us Muslims when Prophet :saws: had been reciting the Revelation to the pagans of Arabia? I do not see any kufr (disbelief) in his statements because they're fighting a jihad as well when they go into burning buildings trying to save lives of the innocent; to see kufr in statements that can be explained away by husn-dhann (good of opinion of others) is to not have husnn-dhann.

Fourthly, I do not know if he does believe that the pleasures of Paradise are allegorical because he's talking in this YouTube video about virgins in Paradise given to men.

No one can know when someone has died on kufr (disbelief) or iman (faith). It may be that a "seeming" kaffir has died with iman though you and I would not know that. If someone chooses to apply the hadith (prophetic tradition) "Verily, having an excellent opinion of Allah is part of excellent worship of Allah" (Sunan Trimidhi 3970) by believing that Allah would have enabled those persons to die with iman cannot be said to be in the wrong. It can take less than a nanosecond for Allah to grant any person iman before that person dies as all Allah has to say with anything is "Be" and it simply is into existence.

There is a scholarly difference of opinion on Milaad; I do not know if you know this, but awliyaAllah have been the foremost in love of Prophet Muhammad :saws: (peace and blessings be upon him) and if you look deeper into the stories of awliyaAllah you'll find that they're the foremost in putting the love of Prophet Muhammad :saws: into the hearts of the people because you can only follow the one who you love anywhere and we're supposed to love Prophet Muhammad :saws: so that we come onto the Straight Path and real faith.

Genuine question: Have you ever talked to a self-confessed Daesh member? I have and more than one on another Muslim site. And yes, they do seem pathologically unwell. One member of Daesh had been saying that he enjoys killing, and he boasted about the killing. Compare that attitude to that of Sahaba (Companions) :ra: wherein their hatred and love was for Allah and so they did not fight because their nafs (ego) enjoyed killing as that would have been a satanic attitude. In fact, Ali :ra: even refrained from killing a man with his sword when that person spat on him.

The thing is that I know you mean well; but jihad has always been meant to be fought as a legitimate warfare. Currently, Salafist Islam in the case of Daesh is really about cherry-picking how to do jihad and in case you think I'm making it up, I'll tell you that I was part of a site that had many Daesh fanboys and so I was reading everything that they were posting about how they were thinking and applying the fiqh of jihad. Most of it is copy-and-paste out-of-context quotes of classical scholars with inclusion of any and all minority opinions for sake of expediency. Now, I ask you, a person of knowledge studying to be a scholar, if someone cherry-picks the most minority and obscure of opinions of everything and anything for expediency's sake justifying it with the idea of fighting jihad such as not allowing widows iddah or mutilating bodies and burning people, will that religion come out to look like Islam?

I have already decided what ideology is compatible with Islam; Islam must rise the way it began; and Daesh are part of the problem and not the solution. Just in case you think I'm wrong, I ask you what the purpose of Islam is. The purpose of Islam is to not to establish shariah or even a Caliphate as that comes but dawah, and even IslamQA has that opinion when it is a Salafi site and I myself am not a Salafi nor a proponent of that site; this does not even go into the facts of whether end-time prophecies support a rise of such Caliphate which it does not because Allah doesn't reward the unjust (i.e. Muslims) with goodness of power. Also, I've long come to the conclusion that Allah appoints leaders over us that we deserve based on the hadith of RasulAllah :saws:. Since the ummah is corrupt, unjust ones are going to be ruling over us. And anyone who tries to change that is going to be swept up in a tidal wave of tsunami of confusion; therefore, we should be patient and ask Allah to deliver us from punishment by sending us the man who could change all that with heavenly power and that is only Mahdi :as:.

:wa: (And peace be upon you)
 
Huzaifah ibn Adam said:
Also, with regards to his statement:

03:25 CD 6-7:

"…people that love to fight are pathologically unwell. They are sick people, there are people like that!"

This is why we encourage people to read Kitaabs of history like Futooh-ush-Shaam, Futooh-ul-`Iraaq, Futooh Misr, etc. Hadhrat Khaalid ibn al-Waleed رضي الله عنه, Hadhrat Dhiraar ibn al-Azwar رضي الله عنه, Hadhrat `Abdur Rahmaan ibn Abi Bakr رضي الله عنه, Hadhrat Baraa ibn Maalik رضي الله عنه, Hadhrat Raafi` رضي الله عنه, etc. - all of these Sahaabah loved "fighting". So according to this man, they were all "sick people" who were "pathologically unwell".

Islaam is against males being neutered, emasculated, spineless. Be Men.
Click to expand...

apparently you could chuck 20k men at a field.. and the field would win!

in hindsight I think many people thought it a bad idea.. and tried not to do it again.

so if you ever have 20k manly men to spare.. chuck them at something more useful.

probably.

as for various narrations regarded in high esteem.

here is something that requires second thought.

..and remembering first.

http://www.comp.leeds.ac.uk/nora/html/2-216.html

it goes from dislike, hateful, repugnant and probably a few others?

..I have no idea I don't even speak Arabic!!

I admit as something other than a manly man.. I don't like fighting.

I have much respect for you, everybody gonna die!!!

...but hopefully not today.


I hope you forgive me.

honestly, when things go down its often very strange..

wouldn't wish it on anyone.


all praise is due to Allah swt.. and he needs nothing and no one.

http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=66&verse=6


....there ya go..

now we firefighters.

..and you know, I wish I could.

hopefully we won't be built up just to get knocked down.
 
Last edited:
Huzaifah ibn Adam said:
If you're looking for stories, Akhi, then I have an excellent Kitaab to recommend:

Ash-Shifaa by Qaadhi `Iyyaadh al-Maaliki رحمة الله عليه.

As for lectures: I will try to post when I find some good ones, In Shaa Allaah.
Click to expand...

pleeeaaaaase nooo reading
 
Jihad on the path of Allah, means that you do not act upon your nafs & ego, but upon Shariah, which means you act according to Justice and wisdom.

Someone who has not tamed his ego may in Jihad be overcome by his nafs by enjoying to kill, i.e. If I fight for the sake of Allah, but at the moment of killing my ego takes over, would it be ok for me to kill would I have fought for Allah or my nafs? my nafs, and thus one shouldn't.

If one kills kafir a because of one's nafs or one's ego enjoys it, that is NOT Jihad on the Path of Allah.

The example of Ali r.a. who when he was about to kill a kafir, and the kafir spat, Ali stopped, and didn't kill him. Why? Because if he killed the kafir, he would not have fought for Allah, but for his nafs.This shows that we do everything for the sake of Allah, and not because of our nafs.

AFAIK, in physical Jihad, the only reason the Muslims win is because of their servitude to Allah. And one should not rely one's success and victory based on numbers and power, but based upon obedience to Allah.

Allahu alam.
 
Last edited:
With regards to the issue of the terms Mujaahid and Shaheed being applied to Kuffaar:

Words in Arabic have both a linguistic meaning and a Shar`i meaning. For example:

Linguistically, the word “Hajj” comes from the Arabic verb حَجَّ يَحُجُّ“Hajja - Yahujju”; meaning, “to undertake to do a great task,” or “to undertake to go to a great place.”

Now let’s look at how the Sharee`ah (Divine Law of Islaam) has defined the word:

In his commentary on Mukhtasar al-Qudoori (The Summary of al-Qudoori in Hanafi Fiqh), “Tas-heel azh-Dharoori”, the great scholar of India, Maulana `Aashiq Ilaahi al-Barni رَحْمَةُ اللهِ عَلَيْهِ (1343 - 1422 A.H.) gives the definition of Hajj as follows:

وشرعاً هو زيارة مكان مخصوص في زمان مخصوص بفعل مخصوص​

Wa Shar`an Huwa Ziyaaratu Makaanin Makhsoos fee Zamaanin Makhsoos bi-Fi`lin Makhsoos.​

“In terms of the Sharee`ah (Divine Law of Islaam), it (Hajj) refers to visiting a certain place, in a certain time, and carrying out certain actions.” [Tas-heel azh-Dharoori, v.1, p.149]

So linguistically, even going to India or Pakistan to meet with some `Aalim there could be called "Hajj". But is that what Hajj is? Obviously not.

Now:

We mentioned earlier that words have both a linguistic meaning and a Shar`i meaning, and an example was given. When the Shar`i meaning of a word comes, the previous, linguistic meaning drops away. It no longer gets used. Hence, you will never find someone saying that a person who traveled to Pakistan has "gone on Hajj". That is because the Shar`i brought a new definition for the word Hajj, which is the Hajj that is well-known, travelling to Makkah Mukarramah and carrying out the Manaasik there.

Similarly, the linguistic meaning of Salaah is "Du`aa". The Sharee`ah came with a new meaning, which is the Salaah which we know, making Fajr, Zhuhr, `Asr, Maghrib and `Ishaa. If a person now comes and says that no, the "Salaah" mentioned in the Qur'aan actually means "Du`aa", and thus, all we need to do is make Du`aa five times a day - what will people say? They will say that this man is a Kaafir. He has rejected Salaah. That is because words used in Islaamic terminology must be understood according to how Islaam has defined them, not how a modern day dictionary defines them. They must be understood according to how Rasoolullaah صلى الله عليه وسلم and Sahaabah-e-Kiraam understood them.

Now:

Jihaad linguistically means to "stive". However, the Sharee`ah brought a new meaning, and that is the fighting on the battlefield. Islaam brought a new meaning for "Mujaahid" and "Shaheed", and that is, "A Muslim who engages in Jihaad fee Sabeelillaah", and "A Muslim who gets killed fee Sabeelillaah". The Sharee`ah has defined the word "Mujaahid" and "Shaheed" respectively as applying only to Muslims. Never ever to Kuffaar. To say that a Kaafir is a Mujaahid or a Shaheed is like saying that a Kaafir on a diet is a "Saa'im" (someone doing Sawm), or a person travelling to America is a "Hajji", or that a Christian praying in a church on a Sunday is "performing Salaah". This is Baatil and tampering with the terminology (Istilaahaat) of the Sharee`ah.
 
Last edited:
thanks, wow..

literally so much is lost on me..

that puts me in my place moreso than most replies and rebuttals..

thanks again.

the thing about being a sarky bugger is that people can't tell when your actually serious.

the amount of depth I am missing is almost made up for by my inthusiasm in being opinionated..

thankfully the Internet is not real life.
 
Last edited:

Similar Threads

Back
Top