Open Letter to brother Usama Hasan
May 10, 2008
Here is the letter again and here is the link to his talk at the launch of the British Muslims for Secular Democracy to contextualize it.
http://www.rsa.org.uk/audio/rsathursday010508.mp3
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
الحمد لله الذي كرم هذه الأمة بالشريعة السمحة الطاهرة وأيدها بالحجج الباهرة القاهرة ووطدها بالقواعد المتظاهرة المتناثرة ونورها بالأوضاع المتناسبة المتازرة
أحمده على نعمه الباطنة والظاهرة وأصلي على رسوله محمد وسائر النبيين والصالحين وأسلم صلاة وتسليما متواصلي الصلات في الدنيا والآخرة آمين
Dear Brother Usama,
We pray that this message arrives with you under the Shade of Allah’s Rahma, and we ask Allah to accept from us our good deeds, to overlook the evil we have done and will do, to strengthen us in the face of the enmity against Islam and the Muslims today, and to keep our hearts fixed upon the deen of Islam.
Your recent comments have compelled us to write this short letter of advice to you, as our Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم mentioned that our deen is naseeha. We have made this letter open, since your opinions and comments have been made openly, and are available via various media. Even though you have sullied your own reputation by aligning yourself as public advisor to various unsavoury people (claiming that you were, in your own words, “very happy to be associated with the Quilliam Foundation”), and have even gone as far as promoting them publicly, and have rejected classical law in issues such as apostasy and hijab openly, even after all this there may still be one or two from amongst the sincere people of this umma who listen to what you have to say, perhaps out of respect for your father or for your own background. And for these reasons we have decided to give you this naseeha publicly for the sake of Allah and the protection of this umma, as far as we are able and May Allah forgive us our shortcomings and mistakes.
At the opening of this dishonourable foundation – which is well known to be run by people of ill-repute and questionable motives – you mentioned in a brief address that you had read ‘ibn Khuldoon’s muqaddima previously, and you interpreted his comments as supporting what you called “Islamic secularism”. You mentioned the narration of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم “you are more knowledgeable in your worldly affairs”, and explained how the scholars had said that the Prophets had not come to “to teach us medicine and agriculture and the crafts” and so on, and were sent for spiritual enlightenment. You then further repeated your assertion that the Prophets had not come to instruct us in the matters of the world, within which you included “government, administration, how we organise our schools” and so on, since these are “secular” or “worldly” matters.
This narration you quoted was mentioned by ‘ibn Khuldoon in the 26th section of the second volume of his muqaddima, entitled Knowledge of Medicine or Medical Science, which came after some sections on logic, engineering etc., and just before a section regarding farming.
In fact the whole discussion of ‘ibn Khuldoon here was around the issue of tib al-nabawwi (Prophetic medicine) – since the Arabs of the time had much knowledge of medical issues, and so he argues that any medical issues narrated in the “shar’iyyaat”, meaning in this context the sunna and athaar, were from this angle, and he states that they are not from the revelation. Rather, they were narrated as part of the heritage and culture of the Arabs and were said in that context. (Please note – the issue of Prophetic medicine is one which is disputed between ulama, and it is not our intention to support any particular point of view within this discussion)
He then argues that RasoolAllah صلى الله عليه وسلم was sent only to teach the shara’i, and was not sent to teach medicine or any other issue from the ’aadiyaat (customary actions), and it is this context he mentioned the narration regarding the pollination of date trees that was mentioned.
“أنتم أعلم بامر دنياكم”
You are more knowledgable in your worldly affairs.
As can be recognised from the context, ibn Khuldoon was talking about issues such as the methods used in medicine, engineering, agriculture and so on, but does “government” fall under these categories? (And this is aside from the issue that in Islaam there is a difference between the hukm of an issue, and the wasaa’il used for the issue, and that Islaam came to explain the ahkaam and left open the wasaa’il).
The answer to anyone who has a small taste of Islamic knowledge is that they would reject such a position as you have articulated, that government is left completely open for man to decide as he please. And anyone who has read ibn Khuldoon’s muqaddima, would immediately recognise that this is a clear perversion and misrepresentation of his views.
In the 26th section of the first volume of the book, entitled “the differences of the umma regarding the ruling of this position (the Khilafa or Imaama) and its criteria”, ‘ibn Khuldoon makes his position regarding ruling and government very clear.
ثم إن نصب اللإمام واجب قد عرف وجوبه في الشرع بإجماع الصحابة و التابعين — و استقر ذالك إجماعا دالا علي وجوب نصب الإمام
The appointment of the Imaam is obligatory, its obligation known in the shar’ by the ‘ijmaa (consensus) of the companions and the taabi’een … and the settling of that consensually/ upon consensus indicates the obligation of appointing the Imaam
What about the opinion that you alluded to, brother, that the government is open and left to the people to decide its form according to what they think is best, and Islam has nothing to say about it since it is from the “worldly” affairs? ‘ibn Khuldoon mentions those who fell into this – and they were some of the khawaarij and one of the mu’tazila scholars, who claimed that appointing an Imaam was not obligatory. And suffice it to say that ‘ibn Khuldoon rejects their views outright since they contradict the well known consensus. And even they did not deny that Islam demands the imposition of its rules and laws, in what you have called “worldly” or “secular” affairs, as Islam has rules regarding the mu’aamalaat and this is well known. Rather, in spite of their deviancies, they claimed that the obligation in their opinion was not the appointment of a leader, but rather the ensuring that the Islamic laws were implemented in whichever way.
What have other scholars said regarding this narration of our beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم ? Suffice it for us to mention to you the words of Imaam Nawawi in his explanation of Muslim
The first issue to notice is the title of the section –
باب وجوب امتثال ما قاله شرعا دون ما ذكره صلى الله عليه وسلم من معايش الدنيا على سبيل الرأي
the obligation to follow whatever the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم has said shar’an as opposed to what he has mentioned as his opinion regarding the livelihood/ living within the dunya.
And the first narration which is mentioned, the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said
انما ظننت ظنا فلا تؤاخذوني بالظن ولكن اذا حدثتكم عن الله شيئا فخذوا به
“Rather it was only an idea that I had thought, so do not take from me in doubt but if I speak to you from Allah about an issue then take it from me”
The second narration
اذا امرتكم بشئ من دينكم فخذوا به واذا امرتكم بشئ من رأى فانما انا بشر
“If I ordered you by something from your deen then accept it, and if I ordered you by something from my opinion then I am only a man”
And the final narration mentioned
أنتم أعلم بامر دنياكم
“You are more knowledgeable in the issue of your dunya”
So what have the scholars said regarding this narration according to Nawawi?
قال العلماء قوله صلى الله عليه وسلم من رأيي اي في امر الدنيا ومعايشها لا على التشريع فأما ما قاله باجتهاده صلى الله عليه وسلم ورآه شرعا يجب العمل به وليس آبار النخل من هذا النوع
The ulama have said that the words of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم “from my opinion” means in the issue of the dunya and livelihood in it, and not regarding tashree’ – legislation. Rather in issues of legislation and what he صلى الله عليه وسلم has said from his ijtihaad and his shar’i opinion, it is obligatory to take from him, and pollination of date trees is not from this category. And I hope it is not necessary here to mention the opinion of Imaam Nawawi regarding Islamic governance, the obligation of the Caliphate, and so on, since it is well known that there is a consensus on these obligations according to the opinions of all the scholars of ahlul-sunna.
(*Side note – dear brother – haven’t your companions from the foundation you support previously claimed that the word tashree’ meaning legislation is a modern innovation ‘invented’ by Islamists? What do you say regarding our great Imaam Nawawi and the opinions of the scholars he has related?)
So if the use of the narration of our blessed Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم was not used in the way you have claimed by ‘ibn Khuldoon, nor by Imaam Nawawi nor others from the classical ulama, is there no-one from the ulama of the past to back up the claim of you and the foundation you support that this narration does in fact mean that we as Muslims are free to liberate themselves from the obligation of the Caliphate, and can rule themselves as they please, by any laws they please?
Happily for you – the answer is yes. Sadly for you – the ‘scholar’ who did so was not ‘ibn Khuldoon, but rather Ali Abdul Raziq, who made the same claim that you and your companions made in his book “Islam and the Fundamentals of Ruling” back in 1925. For his troubles, his ijaaza was removed, he was thrown out of the circle of scholarship, and his book was deemed heretical by ulama all over the world.
Indeed, when the Council of Grand ulama of al-Alzhar, composed of 24 shuyukh, summarised their judgement against Abdul Raziq, they paid particular attention to the misuse of the narration, and stated unequivocally –
(The hadith was) “narrated regarding pollination of date trees, and is applied in those situations which are similar from matters of agriculture and others which are in matters that the shari’a did not come to teach, rather it (shari’a) came to explain its rules from the permitted and prohibited, the valid and invalid, and such things, which is known to the one who has a connection with the Book of Allah and the sunna of His Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم ” (In other words, the shari’a came to explain the ahkaam not the various wasaa’il which can change according to technology, place etc.)
Many ulama also authored detailed refutations of Abdul Raziq, and mentioned the misuse of this narration, amongst them Sheikh ‘ibn ‘Aashoor, Sheikh-al-Azhar Muhammad Khidr Husain and Sheikh-al-Azhar Muhammad Bakhit al-Mutee’i.
Usama- Is it not enough for you, that ulama of all schools of thought, from the Muhaddith Ahmed Shaker, to Sheikh-ul-Islam Mustafa Sabri, to Imaam Kawthari, to Imaam Qaradawi, to Sheikh Shinqeeti, have all claimed that this secularism that you are alluding to, whatever name you call it, is nothing less than clear heresy? This claim of “Islamic Secularism” is nothing short of an “Islamic Judaism” or an “Islamic Christianity” or other such nonsensical statements.
What are the “worldy” issues that Islam does not deal with? According to ‘ibn Khuldoon, the Islamic law, courts, punishments, jihad, are all linked to Islamic governance under the Imaam. And he makes the difference between “rational politics” based upon legislation coming from the mind of the thinkers of society, and “siyyassa deeniyya”, the politics of the deen where the legislation is based upon what Allah has confirmed and legislated.
It can only be, that perhaps you read only part of the book, or left reading it for so long that you had forgotten what was in the earlier section, , or perhaps your tongue has overcome your head in these public events you are attending, or maybe you are unable to clearly articulate your true opinions. And there are many other excuses we will give you, dear brother, as is necessitated by the sunna of our beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم .
This deen is advice, and enjoining the good, and forbidding the wrong, so please permit us to mention some recommendations as to your next steps after you read this
- Return from your newly adopted “reformist” ideas that you have displayed openly recently, reject secularism and the bid’a of rejecting the obligation of the Caliphate, and return back from the opinions which are beyond that of even the khawarij to the opinions of ahlul-Sunna
- Disassociate yourself completely and openly from the companions of the foundation you support, and remove yourself from your position of advisor with them, since it is well known that they are deviants who are comfortable in places of ill-repute and partake in many haraam activities openly, and who attack the deen of our beloved Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم through their words.
- Remove yourself from public activity for a period of time, dear brother, and seek solace with Allah, revise what you know from the Qur’an and sunna with a deeper look, and answer to yourself very clearly - exactly what is your purpose in this life, and where your loyalties should lie.
And forgive us if what we have said causes you distress or discomfort, and know that we have done so in the best of intentions, and these issues are from amongst those which confront and challenge the whole of our umma and so we could not remain silent on them for fear of greater harm that it may cause.
Wasalaam,
Your brother in Islam,
’abdulAllah bin ’abdulAllah
My own notes on this letter
1-This is a letter that has excellent content but I may think that it is a tad too harsh (giving Usama the benefit of the doubt)
2-Personally I am of the view, at the moment, that Usama is not a secularist but is playing with words in a very liberal manner. I certainly need clarification from him on the issue of apostasy and much more importantly on the issue of the Khimar in the Quran. It would be very worrying indeed if really believed that the Hijab was not an obligation
3-Since Usama has gone public with many confusing matters we will be forced to expose the inaccurate references and misrepresentations of Islam that he is making in public.
4-Just for you Usama, I may even have an article on souls and robots. I make no claim here of course though I am sure you will find it fascinating.
Taken From: http://traditionalislamism.wordpress.com/2008/05/10/open-letter-to-usama-hassan-2/
May 10, 2008 at 10:44 pm
jazzakAllah brothers,
May Allah Ta’ala bless you and reward you immensely for this weighty work. We pray that brother Usama will respond accordingly and retract from the absurd statements.
Wassalamu Alaikum
May 12, 2008 at 4:50 am
Patrick Sookhdeo calls Br. Usama a ‘moderate Muslim’ which is worrying!
http://www.christiantoday.com/article/barnabas.fund.welcomes.media.spotlight.on.apostasy/18242.htm
May 12, 2008 at 1:54 pm
Patrick Sookhdeo praises Br. Usama! Getting praise from him proves there is a problem!
http://www.christiantoday.com/article/barnabas.fund.welcomes.media.spotlight.on.apostasy/18242.htm
“He praised moderate Muslims like Dr Usama Hassan, imam of the Al-Tawhid Mosque in London, who have publicly denounced the death penalty for apostasy.
Dr Hassan previously stated, “I believe that the classical law of apostasy in Islam is wrong and based on a misunderstanding.”
Dr Sookhdeo said: “It is good to hear imams like Usama Hassan stating clearly that he believes the classical law of apostasy in Islam is wrong and denouncing those who advocate the death penalty.”
May 12, 2008 at 7:16 pm
So the Pillars (Scholars) of this ummah had got it wrong all this time. SubhanAllah!
May 12, 2008 at 10:33 pm
Seems like the “Pillars” of some people’s Ummah got it wrong before….
————————————–
Fatwa authorizing U.S. invasion of Iraq (signatories contained in 5th paragraph):
http://www.muslimedia.com/archives/special98/trechery.htm
May 13, 2008 at 10:20 am
Forwarded Message from Usama Hasan
:
Dear brothers,
as-salamu ‘alaykum.
One of the brothers forwarded to me some emails about me from the Sabeel list. Below is a reply that I’ve written to the anonymous author of that “open letter” to me. I also attach some points in general, in response to stuff on the Sabeel list.
was-salam,
Usama
—
Dear [...]
wa ‘alaykum as-salam. Who are you? Are you the same person who writes an open letter to me and circulates it in public yet does not have the courage to sign his real name?
If you are, you are guilty of serious bad adab (especially in writing anonymous nonsense), su’ al-zann and misquotation, may Allah forgive me and you. If you are sincere, let’s meet up after mid-June (I have urgent work deadlines until then) and discuss these matters in person.
I never saw your original letter, until an ill-mannered young man thrust it in my face at a public meeting on Sunday. Did you bother to request a read receipt to any email that you might have sent? I have hundreds of unread email in my inbox, so you can’t just assume things.
On secularism: My view is based on Ibn Khaldun, my own grandfather’s commentary on the cross-pollination, and the statement of Dr. Mustafa Ceric at the Lancaster House conference in 2007, “Muslims have no problem with political secularism. But we reject a metaphysical secularism that says or pretends that God does not exist.” It is an Islamic *political* secularism that I’m talking about.
And I, of course, support a just Caliphate based on the Prophetic model, and I mentioned that in my BBC Hard Talk interview - please watch that, if you haven’t done so already, before wasting your time and my time and that of potentially thousands of others in negative nonsense and fitnah. Therefore, your charge that I reject the Caliphate is a lie and slander, may Allah preserve us.
If you have a sense of justice, please post this note at the websites and blogs where you put your “Open Letter.”
And your actions are only strengthening the extremists such as HT and al-Muhajiroun, if only you’d understand.
May Allah bless us all with understanding and wisdom, was-salam.
—
Dear brothers on the Sabeel list,
as-salamu ‘alaykum. One brother forwarded to me some emails about me from your list. I’m responding with a number of points:
1) Why haven’t any of you addressed these issues with me? Many of you know me personally. It is cowardice to indulge in backbiting yet not approach your brother directly. And those of you who have benefited from my khutbahs, talks, advice and company over the years (as I have from you): your silence is shocking and hurtful - may Allah save us from complicity in haram matters.
2) To the brother(s) who said that I was unqualified in Islam, “without ijaza” and unqualified to speak to the media: this is a lie and slander, may Allah forgive me and you. Furthermore, one of you said that I was “merely” a hafiz of Qur’an and schooled in Arabic. This statement alone is utterly disrespectful to the Qur’an and its true people, but the sad truth today is that many people have no real reverence for the Qur’an and its people, and just simply love arguing, backbiting and spreading rumours.
3) By the grace of Allah, I have ijaza in hadith via my grandfather rahimahullah, which is a rare and high (’aali) isnad, and via my father. I have ijaza in Qur’an (Hafs ‘an ‘Asim) from my paternal uncle, Suhail Hasan, younger brother of my father. I also have permission to recite in Warsh from Sheikh Ahmad Dahduh of MCHC mosque, and have led tarawih in Warsh twice, and in Hafs about twenty times. I don’t publicise these things, since that is not the way of the people of knowledge, unless necessary, as it is obviously here, because people are making unfounded accusations.
4) On apostasy: In my Washington Post article, I was referring to the fatwa of the European Council for Fatwa and Research (of which my father is a member), and signed by the likes of Sheikhs Yusuf al-Qaradawi, Abdallah bin Bayyah and Abdullah al-Judai, that says that apostasy only carries the death penalty when it is accompanied by treason and rebellion. Even classically or in the medieval period, there was no ijma’ that apostasy automatically carried the death penalty - many ‘ulama said that this was a hadd, whilst others said this was ta’zeer only. I’m told that Ibn Taymiyyah took the latter view, but haven’t verified this. If it’s ta’zeer, it’s discretionary and not a hadd, and the ruler can drop it. The evidence supports the ECFR fatwa. Allah says, “There is no compulsion in religion.” There was a Companion who became a Christian in Abyssinia, and the Prophet (SAWS) took no action against him. The hadith that mentions killing an apostate adds the condition that “he leaves the jama’ah,” i.e. is guilty of treason. Ahadith must be understood within Qur’anic terms, as Imam Shafi’i said, and this conclusion is supported by the ayah that prescribes a possible death penalty for treason and armed rebellion (haraba or muharaba).
To those who support the death penalty for apostasy: do you also support the Shafi’i view of killing converts between Judaism and Christianity? That was their view, based on the other hadith, “Whoever changes his religion, kill him.” Of all these views, which is closest to the spirit of Islam, the fitrah, common sense, and the principles of mercy and freedom? Which is likely to help us win over hearts and minds to Islam, and which ones to utterly repel people and make them abhor Islam?
5) To the brother who wishes to “expose” me or thinks that I should be “exposed.” Allah took me inside the Ka’bah (literally), 25 years ago. He took me inside the caves of the Mujahideen in Afghanistan, 17 years ago. Where were you at these times? Please reflect on that before you wish to “expose” anyone!
6) On music: my view is that of Sheikh Abdullah al-Judai, whose book on the subject is the best one around. It is close to the view of Sh. Qaradawi, and classically that of Ibn Khaldun, al-Jahiz, Isbahani and others. “Music is haram” is a statement that is neither accurate nor authentic nor helpful in a music-infested society, especially since the Prophet (SAWS) commanded the use of music at certain occasions. Feel free to disagree on this matter, but it is not a matter of wala’ and bara’, and we have to learn some basic adab al-khilaf with people who have different ijtihad.
7) Ditto on the headscarf (khimar, not hijab, a much-misused term) and niqab, etc. Whether you like it or not, millions of devout Muslim women who are pious, do their salat, siyam, charity and much else, follow what I call the “rational” view based on holistic maqasid that the Qur’an tells them to dress modestly. Eg the ayah mentioning the headscarf tells them to cover their bosoms, not their heads. Sir Sayyid Ahmad Khan popularised this view in pre-partition India, and it is followed by millions of devout, intelligent Muslims in Pakistan, where I lived for a year and saw it first hand. It is also followed by Javed Iqbal, son of Allama Iqbal, who has the ajr insha’Allah of the establishment of Pakistan and Bangladesh and all the good that’s come from it. This view is also that of Zaki Badawi and many other Azhari ‘ulama, including I’m told Sh. Muhammad al-Ghazzali and Sh. Sha’rawi, although I have not been able to verify the last two. Whether you like it or not, you have to acknowledge it, especially when explaining it to a non-Muslim audience, as I was doing on BBC HardTalk, since they can easily see that many Muslim women don’t wear a khimar or niqab. Again, it’s a difference of ijtihad. Even classically, there was a tiny minority of fuqaha who said that a woman’s head was not ‘awrah - this is mentioned by Ibn Bayyah and also occurs in the Tafsir of Ibn ‘Ashur. The point is again, it is not a wala’ and bara’ issue.
Please don’t waste your time in backbiting and slander. Gain some real knowledge and engage in constant dhikr with your heart and tongue, study and recite the Qur’an constantly. A degree from Madinah or any other university in Islamic studies only qualifies a person to become a beginner, perhaps, in seeking knowledge. Don’t let a little knowledge get to your head. I’ve been studying the Qur’an and Hadith, Tafsir, Arabic and Fiqh etc. with my father for over 30 years, alhamdulillah, and continue to do so. We all need to work together for the sake of Allah in this country.
9) Re: the City Circle and Quilliam. I hope to be a good influence there, not a negative one. That, surely, is the most that anyone can do. But it is very easy to criticise, isn’t it? Like all organisations, CC and QF have strengths as well as weaknesses. CC in particular has a track record, almost 10 years of good work. My teacher Abu Muntasir has been involved with CC right from the beginning as an advisor and a regular speaker.
10) Ed Husain and Maajid Nawaz are *not* “enemies of Islam and Muslims,” as one brother alleged, another lie and slander. Even Ed’s critics admit that he does a good job of defending Islam and Muslims on the media. Listen to his debate online with the vicious ex-Muslim Ayaan Hirsi Ali, where he defends Islam against her ridiculous attacks. This debate was chaired by the neo-con Douglas Murray, attended by 200 people. Do you think Allah helped Ed, or not, to win that debate? Maajid spent four years in prison in Egypt, including being tortured. He knows what he’s doing. But it’s easy being an armchair critic, isn’t it?
was-salam,
Usama
May 13, 2008 at 11:51 am
gotta love that bro^^
May 13, 2008 at 12:30 pm
Frankly - it does not look like he read the letter. Rather than responding - its seems like a knee jerk reaction.
Far from following the opinion of ibn Khuldun, as far as I can see he has completely misread it. He did not address any of the points in the letter, rather just reiterated his (wrong) opinion
Regarding his sabeel reply - I am sad to see that pleasing the non-Muslim has become one of the dawabit of tarjeeh for him.
As far as Ed and Maajid goes - they have insulted the practice of the Prophet, and said things that most scholars deem as kufr.
I only feel sadness that he has reacted in such a poor way, and it is indicative of the heart that rather than engage in a discussion it has become an issue of how many ijaza in qur’an recitation one has (!)
May 13, 2008 at 12:38 pm
yes akhi you are right. I was expecting a more respectable response from brother Usama [i mean respectable in the academic sense!. Many have Ijaza’s in the shariah who are clear innovators. We dont necessarily judge a person’s knowledge based on his age and how many times he has led tarawih, we judge his knowledge on what he says and does, and clearly brother Usama is going against the consensus on some issues. Those scholars he cited, for instance, on the issue of hijab, if they are true, are not correct and they have gone against the consensus. I’m sure the brothers who wrote the letter will clarify Insha’Allah.
Wassalam
May 13, 2008 at 12:48 pm
No matter what he says, he still has a credibility problem all the time he is an ‘advisor’ to the Quilliam Foundation!
May 13, 2008 at 1:45 pm
Even if he wasn’t an advisor, his reply confirms his position is similar if not the same as theirs.
May 13, 2008 at 1:50 pm
You are correct brother Abu Abdullah - it will not matter now if he takes his name off. I’m sure Ed is making efforts to make usama a martyr now!! However, I have to say I dont think Usama is fully like the Qulillam lot. He is misguided in some of his views but not a heretic Insha’Allah.
May 13, 2008 at 2:29 pm
Saw this on a public forum - I took off the last sentance because I found it to be to be inappropriate, but have left the rest as the author wrote it.
“Subhan-allah,
This guy is completely off the rail. His good friends ‘The defenders of the faith’ on newsnight clearly accused Dr. Mustafa Ceric of being an extremist for recognising the caliphate. They have labelled the vast majority of muslims as extremists or extremist sympathisers who are susceptible to the ‘conveyor belt’ syndrome. Why? because they encourage their children to wear the hijab and they wear islamic garments, they grew a beard, they segregrate, they believe in the unity of the ummah, they abide by the islamic traditions. His hip hopping defenders of the faith have been promoted by almost every neo-con including douglas murray and probably have backing from the likes of ayan al hirsi. In time you will probably see irsha maanjit share platforms with these heretics for a common cause.
Usama hassan attempts to exonerate himself by alluding to his heritage, experiences and knowledge. In his naivety he believes the muslims must accept him because of this”
May 13, 2008 at 2:58 pm
Quilliam website
“The contribution of our advisors was vital in ensuring that we had an impactful start and we would like to thank all of our advisors for their immense support. In the meantime, we have decided to respect our advisors’ wishes that they continue to advise us in private so as to save them the indignity of constant Islamist-Wahhabite harrassment.”
So - rather than face the indignity of having all their advisors pull out - they pull a fast one.
Anyway - it is clear that whether or not Usama Hasan left his name on the list, he agrees with them.
As for Babikr, according to several sources he wants nothing to do with them anyway.
Finally - this also shows the importance the Quilliam put on the advisors being up on the site initially, and why they were so reluctant to take them down. Personally, i feel brothers like Usama Hasan will look back on these days with shame in the future, at least i hope they do.
Wasalam
May 13, 2008 at 3:11 pm
Salam,
I knew that was coming! Just a small advise to the brothers. If the accusation of brother Usama is true that some brothers are backbiting him - I would vehemently advise brothers to refrain from attacking him and throwing innuendos at his character or personality and stick to the ideas and comments he is advocating. We do not need to go down that level Insha’Allah. Wallahu ‘Alam
Wassalam
Abdullah al-Hasan
May 13, 2008 at 3:15 pm
This is a correction that a brother wrote regarding an earlier post on another forum - since I had posted his comment here it is correct that I also post his clarification.
This is to do with the last two lines of message 13
“”I am also on the Sabeel list, and the brothers here who are not– do not know the context of his response. Its unfair to say the above quote, because he only mentioned his qualifications because there were some brother/s who were saying that he had no qualifications. It was a response to that. Also some other things that were said were, in my opinion, very harsh and ill mannered..
He is, in opinion a very humble brother.”
Fair enough, I retract this part of the statement. However his reply which he wants to share with everyone really does him no good and nor will his humbleness. He has become a reference point for the neo-cons and enemies of islam”
Wasalam
May 13, 2008 at 3:19 pm
Brother - you are correct we should and inshahAllah will not go down an ill advised route of backbiting etc.
I only wish that he had provided a reasonable response to what i thought, and Allah knows best, was quite a measured letter, rather than just lashing out
May 13, 2008 at 3:41 pm
Salam,
JazzakAllah khair brother. I too was quite disappointed at the response brother Usama presented. It would have been proper from his part - as he clarified that he is qualified in Shariah - to respond to what I would deem as a balanced and accurate letter, in a academic manner! We wait to see what will happen Insha’Allah.
Wassalam
Abdullah al-Hasan
May 13, 2008 at 8:18 pm
This open letter to brother Usama Hasan is really good because it has a link to talks about the launch of the British Muslims for Secular Democracy to contextualize it.
May 14, 2008 at 1:00 am
I think that there are two reasons why QF removed the list of advisors: firstly, to hide the fact that some advisors do not wish to be associated with QF and “Ed”, and have asked for their names to be removed; secondly, some advisors do not want anyone to know that they are in fact advisors! I suspect that Br. Usama falls into the second category. I hope he can enlighten us on which one is the case for him!
May 14, 2008 at 1:16 pm
Dear brothers,
I am really saddened by Usama’s response. I know him to be a truly good Muslim brother, humble, polite, well-mannered and a constant source of inspiration in terms of how Muslims should always fight their nafs.
I spoke to him about the Quilliam Foundation. I was shocked to hear from him that he actually only knew one of the founders about 6 months prior to the launch. That was a shock to me particularly as it then meant that he knew nothing of the background of its two directors. How Usama, the intelligent and sincere person I know did this I do not know.
I certainly would never doubt his intentions and he is truly someone who will inshallah be rewarded for much of the good work he has done. However upon listening to his speech at the QF launch, I was shocked to hear him say things similar to the things the directors were saying. He also likened his Grandfathers bad experience in JI Pakistan to the same discourse the directors used when talking about HT. Having a bad experience in an Islamic movement does not make that movement extreme…furthermore the bad experiences people have in stupid and vile movements like HT are not transferable to other Islamic organisations and movements.
I can only hope that Usama will think again about associating himself with the QF. Does he not realising that they are benefiting from his association with them whilst eroding his own reputation?
Only for the sake of holding on to key Islamic values are people staying quiet about Maajid and ED…surely Usama must see this?
May 14, 2008 at 1:21 pm
I also wonder how Br. Usama can possibly keep company with some of these other ‘advisors’! For example (from Martin Bright’s New Statesman blog!):
http://www.newstatesman.com/200804230006
“…except to record my astonishment at the reception given to Timothy Garton Ash, Guardian columnist and Professor of European Studies at Oxford University.
The sage professor began by saying that he didn’t know a great deal about the Quran, the traditions of the Prophet (”hadith”
or Islamic law (”fiqh”). He even made a made a joke that he ‘didn’t give a fig for fiqh’ to which the audience chortled politely.
He told the gathered Muslims that the respect of the West had to be earned and (wait for it) ‘the central tenets of religions demand less respect than the proposition two plus two equals four’. Everybody clapped.”
May 14, 2008 at 1:24 pm
I dont know brother Usama personally, I met him twice very briefly. Masha’Allah he seems a very nice and polite brother apart from some erroneous comments he made. It is shocking that such intelligent and charismatic individual has blackened his name by associating himself with the QF. He could have made valubale contributions in giving da’wa to Muslims and non-Muslims if he only refrained from these erroneous opinions.
Wassalam
May 14, 2008 at 2:21 pm
What further shocked me was how an intelligent person could fall for the terribly unacademic spiel of the QF! When I looked at their manifesto I didn’t know where to begin to highlight the mistakes and contradictory arguments…as if that wasn’t all, their website was full of mistakes too. I particularly was struck by the reference to the noble tribe of the Ansar…It seems someone hasn’t read up very well on their Islamic history.
May 14, 2008 at 5:42 pm
السلام عليكم
May Allah heal this divided ummah and grant us all mercy and respite on the Day of Reckoning. May he keep all of us who claim to follow His command upon the truth. And may he instill within our hearts fear for Him and love for His Messenger, our beloved Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم). Ameen.
في أمان الله
May 14, 2008 at 6:08 pm
السلام عليك
May Allah heal this divided ummah and grant us all mercy and respite on the Day of Reckoning. May he keep all of us who claim to follow His command upon the truth. And may he instill within our hearts fear for Him and love for His Messenger, our beloved Prophet (صلى الله عليه و سلم). Ameen.
في أمان الله
May 15, 2008 at 5:50 pm
The reality is brothers, that people like Usama have to toe the line, maybe out of some persuasion? I think some people are being threatened with exposure - since they may have Islamist backgrounds and if they dont support the new agenda, they too will be in the cross-hairs of Ed.
May 17, 2008 at 7:50 pm
The Ed v Hirsi debate that br. Usama alludes to can be found on youtube and I was shocked beyond words to see how he endorses Ed’s ‘defence’ of Islam. I had to sit through the 10 parts of utter lies and distortions on part of Ed.
And only Allaah’s Help is sought.