[tLO0hFNy]

http://www.youtube.com/user/flagofta.../4/TyCm2RfDIEA
(comments from Shaykh Abul Hasan)

I listened to it all and he tried to be just initially but then his method of showing that Abu Usama had a basis to say that Imam Abu Hanifa was weak in hadith due the quotations that he started to mention himself only played into the hands of the likes of Abu Usama.

For had Dimashqiyya wanted to be absolutely just he should have not only mentioned the quotes but explained that most of them are not valid Jarh or themselves are of no validity. The latter was done nicely by Dr GF Haddad in his vindication of Imam Abu Hanifa, as it was also done in arabic by the likes of the late Shaykh Abdar Rashid al Nu'mani of Pakistan in reply to al-Albani.

I noticed that Dimashqiyya also got muddled up himself! He said on the 13th minute - 20th sec, that al-Kamil fil du'afa is by Ibn AQIL! This work is by Ibn Adi and he probably meant al-Du'afa al-Uqayli.. Also, 14min: 40 sec he said Dua'afa Ibn Uqayl - when it is known as Du'afa al-Uqayli.

He should have also said that a Jarh made a contemporary like that of al-Thawri on Abu Hanifa is not a dependable jarh at all!

Just shows that the man is not fully acquainted with Jar wa Ta'dil and so once again they have left the opening for pseudo-Salafi's to show how to weaken Imam Abu Hanifa and then at the same time play the game of having some form of respect for Imam Abu Hanifa. This is part and parcel of their anti-Hanafi agenda.

Wassalam

Abul Hasan

[feqlmwtuqx]

السلام عليكم

I've seen some of his debates against SHia and he always has a really hard time getting his ideas through because of his bad English, sometimes he uses words which he shouldn't use and ends up confusing the people as a result.

[tLO0hFNy]

Salaam

I think Abdur Rahman Dimishqiyyah is a prime example of an individual who can't stay quite in any issue even if he doesn't know the field. This can be seen in his debate on bid'ah with Asrar Rahid and Yasin, baralwies from Birmingham. (Rumor has it that he's going in for round 2)

Recently he's been doing many talks on the topic of tasawwuf and sufis. I recall in one of them his saying that he is a expert in the Naqshabandi tariqah (Whatever that means). In the same talk he claims to have read all the books that sufis have to offer.

His style of debating is very childish and lacks any basic academic credentials. In trying to refute Sufis he puts on youtube videos on a projector where some sufis are doing crazy free mixing dancing with music. Then he would look at the audience and say a few funny comments. You find this style throughout his refutations of the different 'deviant' sects.

In conclusion he is more of a liability for salafis then anything else. They should realize now before he gets another thumping as he got in Birmingham that can be found here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGx3czRnz8E

Wasalaam