i didn't attack shaykh ibn taymiyyah(rahmatullahi alayhi) in fact i quoted the top shaykh of recent times the pride of deoband the alim , the muhaddith, the faqeeeh, the muhaqqiq. Shaykh imam as asr anwar shah kashmiri(ra) and his words were full of respect for shaykh ibn taymiyyah(ra) but expressing khilaf-read it carefully. Where did i defend shaykh hamza yusuf in my posts? But i will say this, i asked him about schuon in makkah when i met him(shaykh hamza yusuf) and he said one or two of the perennialists were my friends.however i havent read schuon and he said the perennialists say strange things which are not from the ulema and he told me they twist the words of the ulema- he had nothing positive to say about them. After this-if you want to continue making gheebah of shaykh hamza yusuf,ahlan wa sahlan- i have presented the truth as i heard it from his lips in the city of the house of allah(swt) i also saw him and heard of him telling a brother from egypt to take off western clothes in madina, saying this is an islamic city and you shouldnt wear western clothes here.
wadood gustakh statements by hamza yusuf brother abdalqadir called hamza yusuf a wahabi. Brother haroon asked for evidence. I have evidence that hanson is not only a dirty wahabi, but he has insulted the prophet salallahu 'alayhi wa alihi wa sallam as well. I ask the faqir from marifah forums if he would promote hanson from now on. I cannot repeat his horrendous statements. This is his 1995 speech in toronto, canada. I know the host of this speech, who has ties in england linked to radicalmiddleway. Listen from 2:35 minutes onwards; the gustakh statements are at 4:54 minutes forward concerning our mother sayyida ayesha radyallahu 'anha http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktwjosxqxjo this is kufr ------------------------------------------------------------------ abdalqadir i did say this that he was a wahabi in a former life. This clip may be from that life or maybe not, because he mentions the 4 imams and ilham and so on. In any case now he is a perennialist through and through. You don't need to work so hard to find his problematic sayings like the one you have linked (where he has a lot of tawil to play with if picked on his comments). His current sayings show his true colors for what exactly he is! This clip is a good example of the saying "neem hakeem khatra-e-jaan" in action. Or to speak bluntly in english, "give a monkey a microphone..." a couple of ironies that have developed over time, in my opinion - 1 ) he says going against the teacher means losing a grade in the western model. Try saying hanson committed blunders in circles of his students now! He has bred the exact same arrogance that he speaks against. 2) his blind followers too learn early on that to regurgitate the nonsense of the few western and internet "shuyukh" like him and others is the only path of the ahlus sunnah. They think the world of ahlus sunnah scholarship is confined to these few names that show up in google search results! 3) he says something went terribly wrong in our educational system when we began to give absolute authority to the teacher - the irony is that's exactly what has gone wrong with the murid fanclub of hanson, nuh "not intrinsically impossible to be a liar" keller, faraz rabbani, et al. The jahalah as i see it (those who know please correct my mistakes) and as pointed out by brother kattarsunni - 1) calling the questioning to learn of our mother 3aisha, radi allahu 3anha a "refutation". What is his explanation for the angels "questioning" allah "ataj3alu feehaa man yufsidu feehaa wa yasfiku-d dimaa'". Questioning to learn is different than questioning to refute/object. 2) calling the quran as a "higher authority" than the prophet. It was none other than the same ummul mu'mineen who said that the prophet's character is the quran. The prophet is the law giver. It is he who calls the quran as the quran - and it is he who explains the commands it contains. He has full right to make any exception to any rule from within it. In fiqh, we place the quran above the sunnah, for reasons of the sciences of narration!