Tag Archives: Musa Millington

Musa Millington – Hamza Yusuf in a nutshell and racism

Link to original post by Musa Millington – Hamza Yusuf in a nutshell and racism

Well in a nutshell in case we forgot:

Hamza Yusuf is a Sufi, Ashari, promoter of Shirk (Qaseedah Burdah) and Bid’ah in the West who said that the most sacred place on earth is the grave of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم). He is also an extreme Muqallid of the Maliki madhab and associates with the likes of Habeeb Jifri; who calls to the worship of graves and shrines and the likes of them. That should be enough for us to be outraged, to distance ourselves from him and to warn others from his misguidance.

His comments regarding the struggles of African Americans also shows his extreme ignorance regarding the political, social and economic history of the United States as it relates to African descendants. Making foolhardy and rash statements that satisfy the white political oligarchy as well as many Muslim American immigrants who wish not to associate with the lower echelons of American society is not from the Sunnah. Rather the Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم) addressed it head on without any room for interpretation.

For the record the Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم) said: “Upon you is to hear and obey even if it is an Ethiopian slave as if his head is (dark) like a raisin.”

Some foolish orientalists have interpreted this statement as one of racism. However, this is how he chose to address the Arabs as they disliked those of African descent. So he demonstrated that one’s skin colour was not a deficiency.

He also said to Abu Dharr when he called Bilaal the son of a black woman: “Did you find deficiency in him because of his mother. Verily you are a man who has Jaahileeyah (pre-islamic ignorance).”

He also said as narrated in Adab Al Mufrad by Imam Al Bukhari: “Whoever takes pride in his ancestry then let him bite unto the private part of his father.”

He also said: “There is no preference of an Arab over a non Arab or a white over a black…”

Hence, unlike the soft and tamed responses of many Muslims toward Hamza’s remarks (and racism in general) the Prophetic methodology was to take this matter head on in the face of those who have racism within their hearts. He also said as narrated in Saheeh Muslim:

“Three things from Jaahileeyah (pre-islamic ignorance) would remain in my Ummah. Taking pride in one’s lineage, cursing those of others and Niyahah (screaming and ripping off clothes at the death of someone).”

Hence, the one who is racist is not only ignorant but has an aspect of pre-islamic ignorance. The phrase Jahileeyah affected the companions so much that the great Sahabee, Abu Dharr, upon hearing the statement of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم) went to Bilaal, put his head to Bilaal’s feet, apologized and asked Bilaal to stamp on his head.

But to Hamza racism is just another sign of ignorance which in itself proves the extent of his ignorance regarding Islam’s stance on racism.

And for the information of those out there who don’t know there were many Africans (yes black people) who played a very important role in early Islam. Just to name a few:

Bilaal Al Habashi, the first Mu’addhin.

Summayah the first matyr of Islaam

Najashi, the king of Ethiopia and his priests.

Mahajja the first matyr of Badr.

Bareerah who was freed by ‘Aisha.

Umm Barakah the first one who nursed the Messenger (صلى الله عليه و سلم) after his mother died.

Aslam the servant of ‘Umar Ibn Khattab.

Zaid Ibn Aslam who was one of the narrators of Muwatta’

Sa’eed Ibn Jubair who was seen as the most knowledgeable of the Tabi’een.

‘Ataa Ibn Rabaah who was a scholar of Tafseer.

Usama Ibn Zaid who led Muslim armies at 17 years old after the death of the Prophet.

Wahshi who killed Musailamah Al Kaddhab.

Naafi’ the servant of Ibn ‘Umar who brought to us the two recitations of Qaaloon and Warsh.

And there are many more who I didn’t mention and are found in a book called the raising of the status of Africans (Arabs used to refer to all Africans as Ethiopians) by Imam As Suyooti.

The Sahabah didn’t see race as an issue. Africans, as is observed by the list I wrote here, were prominent in the intellectual, political and social development of the early Islam. The likes of this took place with Malcolm X in the 1960s who by Allah’s will made Islam a household name and even presented it as a solution to America’s racial problems!

It is disturbing to see that in 2016, almost 50 years after the assassination of brother Malcolm that immigrant Muslim Americans have compressed themselves into a bubble wherein they boisterously applaud their ambivalence and nonchalance regarding the struggles of those who were pivotal in the development and existence of Islam in the U.S.

Sadly enough, amidst this ambivalence and nonchalance all and sundry cry foul when Trump is selected!

SMH!

#RIS2016

YASIR QADHI’S DANGEROUS VIEWS – MUSA MILLINGTON

By brother Ustad Musa Millington Hafidahullah

Yasir Qadhi, please bat in your crease
الحمد لله رب العالمين و العاقبة للمتقين و لا عدوان الا على الظالمين و اصلى و اسلم على عبده و رسوله محمد و على اله و صحبه و سلم

Upon seeing the issues that Yasir Qadhi has regarding the Qur’an initially I thought that I had woken up from an unreal nightmare. But when I saw the posts one by one regarding this individual and verified it I saw it was indeed reality that hit me straight in my face.

After Yasir’s speech about Salafiyah, his blatant lies on Salafiyah and its scholars (Sh. Ibn ‘Uthaimeen & Sh. Al Albani and others) and his statements regarding ‘Umar Ibn Khattab I was still in utter shock regarding his statements about the Qur’an which are tantamount to clear Zandaqah (heresy). As a brother who studied in Madeenah while Yasir was there I would have never imagined that 15 years later he would have such an atrocious understanding regarding the preservation of the Qur’an.

Now, to further clarify as to why Yasir’s speech is clear heresy we must look at what Ahlus Sunnah say, what the deviants have said and what Yasir says, then from that standpoint one would find that Yasir’s speech is completely reprehensible.

As for the belief of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama’ah; we believe that the Qur’an is the words of Allah sent by him and is not created. From him it originates and to him it returns and that it is Allah’s true speech in reality and it is not the speech of anyone else. If it is read, written or memorized it is still the speech of Allah in terms of its letters, its words and its meanings.(Summary of Ibn Taymeeyah’s speech in Waasiteeyah)

The Mu’tazilah, who Imam Ahmad and many of the Imams of that time have classified as disbelievers, believe that the Qur’an is the speech of Allah but created. Their principle regarding this is that the attributes of Allah are created and this led them to clear heresy since if one says that Allah’s descriptions are created he is in fact saying that Allah himself is created which is disbelief.

The Asharis (the Kulabeeyah) believe that the Qur’an is an expression of Allah’s eternal speech as they believe that Allah speaks without letters and voice and doesn’t speak whenever he wants at whatever time he wants hence nullifying Allah’s will and ability from his actions and speech. This is also clear falsehood since Allah spoke to Musa saying: “Verily I am Allah there is nothing worthy of worship but me…”, and it is impossible that the fire or an Angel said this to Musa (غليه السلام)

Now, the rhetoric of these groups DOES NOT contest the issue of the word by word preservation of the Qur’an. Rather, their intention through this rhetoric was to distance Allah from having the qualities of the creation. And although these intentions were good they still ended up in misguidance since they deviated from the Prophetic methodology.

Now, Yasir Qadhi said:

“In conclusion; the Qur’an cannot be then a letter for letter, tashkeel for tashkeel narrative that the later scholars verbalize and the Muslim Ummah is taught. Therefore the preservation must be interpreted in another manner.”

He also said:

“Problem: How can we then understand the Qur’an as being Kalaam Allah (the speech of Allah) when clearly there are human aspects to it.”

He also said that the issue of the Qur’an being the speech of Allah has to be rethought.

Now, look at that speech and compare it to the Mu’tazilah and the ‘Asharis (who Yasir does not care about being classified with) and we would see that the deviants from the Mu’tazilah and the ‘Asharis still believe in the divine nature Qur’an (i.e being the speech of Allah). As for Yasir, he questions the very preservation of the Qur’an and its divinity.

Yasir Qadhi’s methodology is reminiscent of that of Jahm Ibn Safwan’s. Instead of acceptance and submission he resorted to dispute, rhetoric and argumentation. Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, the Imam who was famous for his knowledge and his fortitude, said in his book; “Refutation of the Heretics” about Jahm:

“And from that which that has reached us is that Jahm, the enemy of Allah, was from those of Khurasan, from Tirmidh, and he was a person of argumentation and rhetoric” (Refutation of the Heretics: 7)

Now although there are many verses in the Qur’an which refute Yasir’s speech and which clearly state that it is the speech of Allah sent to Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه و سلم) the following two verses are those which I think would render Yasir’s arguments null and void.

Allah has said about the Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه و سلم):

“And he does not speak from his desires. It is only a revelation unto him.” Surah Najm {53:3-4}

Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal said regarding this verse:

“He (Allah) says that verily Muhammad didn’t speak of this Qur’an from himself. He therefore said “It is”- meaning the Qur’an- “only a revelation unto him.” Therefore Allah has negated that the Qur’an be other than revelation” (Refutation of the Heretics: 11)

Likewise Allah has said in Surah Haaqah (69 :43-47)

” This is the Revelation sent down from the Lord of the Worlds. And if he (Muhammad) had forged a false saying concerning us. We surely would have seized him with the right hand. And we certainly would have cut off his life artery. And none of you could have witheld us from (punishing him).”

Therefore, if it is a revelation sent by Allah and didn’t come from Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه و سلم) and even he; the greatest man to ever walk on this earth, could not invent any statement regarding Allah’s revelation then what evidence of human interference (human element as he calls it) is Yasir speaking about exactly?

In conclusion, my advice to Yasir is to take some time and read the Qur’an and avoid fruitless debate and rhetoric which would put one into clear disbelief. Additionally, after he has fed the Western Masses the perception that the real scholars are unable to deal with contemporary matters I think that since he has doubts about the Qur’an (although he claims to be a theologian) it is about time that he bat in his crease, humble himself and sit under the scholars of Islam rather than Tony Blair.

و صلى الله على نبينا محمد و على اله و صحبه و سلم