DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - Hamza Yusuf on the Lahori Ahmadis / Qadianis

**duceswild** · 10-08-2012, 12:04 AM

None of what you're saying has anything to do with anything and nor does it even make sense. Why don't you go clean your own house? Or do you not love the Sahabah? Cite the 'Salafis' who hold this opinion. I can think of a few you might cite:
1) Usama Hasan : murtadd, not Salafi.
2) Jamal Badawi : Modernist, not Salafi.
3) SA Rahman : Modernist, not Salafi. (if you want to argue that the two are synonyms, please come up with common factors between ibn 'Uthaymeen and Jamal Badawi, preferably fully cited with reference to their works; thanks).
4) MH Kamali : pseudo-traditionalist and co-hort of Abdul-Hakim Murad, not Salafi.
5) Yusuf Qaradawi : darned if I know WHAT he is.

On the 'traditionalist camp,' we have:
1) Suhaib Webb (studied at al-Azhar, received authorization from Ali Gomaa, self-admitted Ash'ari/Sufi in recent lecture)
2) Abdullah ibn Hamid Ali
3) Abdul-Hakim Murad
4) Hamza Yusuf
5) Ali Gomaa.

Looks like the count is even so far. Even it up on your end or stop your blabbering.

@ahmad12
Yes, that's very well said. Wa iyakum.

I have already nullified the foundations of your argument. The difference and the fallacy of your comparison is that our foundations are traditionalist while that of yours or your salafi camp are that of a innovator. Our authorities are quite clearly laid out and opinions other than that, are quite easily thrown away if they cant prove themselves within the madhab.

Secondly, no one you cited claimed that this opinion is the only right opinion or that they only understood the Quran and Sunnah or that everyone who disagrees with them are kaffirs or mubtadis meant for the hell fire or that people should necessarily accept his opinion or anything of that sort that is a hallmark of salafi cult. Thirdly, their positions are quite frank in that they admit of their opinion being lone rather then distorting and creating a false perception with their rhetoric, as the salafis would do.

Fourthly, among those you cite, only Mufti Ali Jumah really comes as a heavy personality. Others come from western background and context and their opinions in plenty of issues retain that problem. Don't forget Shuaib Webb, Hamza Yusuf were all neo-salafis in origin. Their shift to traditionalism only means salafism is dying cult. If you had cited the opinion of large ulemas of Sham or yemen or others where traditionalists give respect, then you would have an argument.

As for Mufti Ali Juma, then I admit im simply not even close to being qualified to make a critic of his any opinion let alone something as in depth as this. So i invite you to go have a debate with him if you carry even 1//100 th of the boldness of criticism you display here. I prefer to stay silent and let scholars in equal par with him do the talking.

Fifthly, your coming from the same camp that defends to the death the opinion of IT and MIAW that are in blatant opposition to the ijma. In fact those opinions form the basis of the existence of your camp. So your criticism makes it even more hypocritical.

Finally, do inform me with evidences as to the ijma on this issue and as to what kind of ijma it was, etc. Lets see how much you know it yourself.

Edit:
Not to forget how salafism was flirting with modernism for years.
http://hornofsatan.wordpress.com/201...abism-in-1929/

The basis upon which salafism even spread and gained followers was largely because of their protestant modernism.

10-08-2012, 12:04 AM	#33
duceswild Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 464 Senior Member	None of what you're saying has anything to do with anything and nor does it even make sense. Why don't you go clean your own house? Or do you not love the Sahabah? Cite the 'Salafis' who hold this opinion. I can think of a few you might cite: 1) Usama Hasan : murtadd, not Salafi. 2) Jamal Badawi : Modernist, not Salafi. 3) SA Rahman : Modernist, not Salafi. (if you want to argue that the two are synonyms, please come up with common factors between ibn 'Uthaymeen and Jamal Badawi, preferably fully cited with reference to their works; thanks). 4) MH Kamali : pseudo-traditionalist and co-hort of Abdul-Hakim Murad, not Salafi. 5) Yusuf Qaradawi : darned if I know WHAT he is. On the 'traditionalist camp,' we have: 1) Suhaib Webb (studied at al-Azhar, received authorization from Ali Gomaa, self-admitted Ash'ari/Sufi in recent lecture) 2) Abdullah ibn Hamid Ali 3) Abdul-Hakim Murad 4) Hamza Yusuf 5) Ali Gomaa. Looks like the count is even so far. Even it up on your end or stop your blabbering. @ahmad12 Yes, that's very well said. Wa iyakum. I have already nullified the foundations of your argument. The difference and the fallacy of your comparison is that our foundations are traditionalist while that of yours or your salafi camp are that of a innovator. Our authorities are quite clearly laid out and opinions other than that, are quite easily thrown away if they cant prove themselves within the madhab. Secondly, no one you cited claimed that this opinion is the only right opinion or that they only understood the Quran and Sunnah or that everyone who disagrees with them are kaffirs or mubtadis meant for the hell fire or that people should necessarily accept his opinion or anything of that sort that is a hallmark of salafi cult. Thirdly, their positions are quite frank in that they admit of their opinion being lone rather then distorting and creating a false perception with their rhetoric, as the salafis would do. Fourthly, among those you cite, only Mufti Ali Jumah really comes as a heavy personality. Others come from western background and context and their opinions in plenty of issues retain that problem. Don't forget Shuaib Webb, Hamza Yusuf were all neo-salafis in origin. Their shift to traditionalism only means salafism is dying cult. If you had cited the opinion of large ulemas of Sham or yemen or others where traditionalists give respect, then you would have an argument. As for Mufti Ali Juma, then I admit im simply not even close to being qualified to make a critic of his any opinion let alone something as in depth as this. So i invite you to go have a debate with him if you carry even 1//100 th of the boldness of criticism you display here. I prefer to stay silent and let scholars in equal par with him do the talking. Fifthly, your coming from the same camp that defends to the death the opinion of IT and MIAW that are in blatant opposition to the ijma. In fact those opinions form the basis of the existence of your camp. So your criticism makes it even more hypocritical. Finally, do inform me with evidences as to the ijma on this issue and as to what kind of ijma it was, etc. Lets see how much you know it yourself. Edit: Not to forget how salafism was flirting with modernism for years. http://hornofsatan.wordpress.com/201...abism-in-1929/ The basis upon which salafism even spread and gained followers was largely because of their protestant modernism.
	Quote