This article can be reached by the link: 'Sheikh' Hamza Yusuf Exposes Himself

On the Azzam.co.uk or Qoqaz.net websites.

Azzam Publications is an independent media organization providing authentic news and information about Jihad and the Foreign Mujahideen everywhere. It has been conveying authentic news to the World about these matters.

'Sheikh' Hamza Yusuf Exposes Himself

To other Articles by Azzam.

  Islamic history has shown that times of trial and tribulation for the Muslims have exposed the hypocrites in their ranks. During the Battle of Ahzab, when the disbelieving armies gathered against the Muslims of Madinah from all sides, the hypocrites came out and said: "And when the hypocrites and those in whose hearts is a disease said: 'Allah and His Messenger (SAWS) promised us nothing but delusions.' And when a party of them said: 'O People of Yathrib (Madinah) There is no stand possible for you (against the enemy attack)! Therefore, go back!'" [Quran 33:12-13]

  One such personality amongst the Muslims that has been famous over the last few years is Hamza Yusuf. His eloquent speeches have led to a popular following amongst ignorant Muslims. However, his credibility was destroyed on 11 September 2001.

  There follows a discussion on various points made by Hamza Yusuf after the events on 11 September 2001. One can make the necessary conclusions about this individual after hearing what he himself has to say.

  There have been many other Muslim scholars who condemned the killing of the innocents in the World Trade Centre, but none crossed the limits of Al-Walaa Wal-Baraa (loyalty and hate for the sake of Allah) as Hamza Yusuf did.

Transcript of CBS's 60 Minutes Interview with Hamza Yusuf, Imam Siraj Wahaj, Farid Esack and Faisal Abdur Rauf on 30 September 2001

Bradley: While Islam forbids the killing of innocents, in this 1998 interview, Bin Laden justified the U.S. embassy bombings in Africa, saying every American man is our enemy, whether he is a soldier or a taxpayer. As for the women and children who died, he says women and children die every day in Palestine. In a statement last week, Bin Laden called for a Jihad or Holy War in the Name of Allah.

Yusuf: I would say that he has no legitimate authority, that in Islam, Jihad can only be declared by legitimate state authority. And this is accepted by consensus. There is no vigilantism in Islam. Muslims believe in state authority.

Comment: According to this, the Muslims in Palestine should not wage Jihad against the Israeli forces, because Jihad has not been declared by a legitimate state authority. Ibn Qudama, the Hanbali scholar, said in Al-Mughni 8/253, "The absence of an Imam does not postpone the Jihad because much is lost in its postponement."

Bradley: You think he's a vigilante?

Yusuf: Absolutely, absolutely. All Muslims are guided by the words of Islam's holy book, the Quran, which is believed to be the word of God, and explains how Muslims should lead their lives. It also says fighting should only be in self-defence, a fight in the Way of Allah against those who fight against you, but be not aggressive. And the Quran forbids suicide. They cannot bring any textual evidence from the Quran, from the traditions of the prophet, to prove anything that justifies what they've done.

Comment: Jihad can be defensive or offensive.
Letter from the Messenger of ALLAH (SAW) to the people of Najran (Narrated in Baihaqi):
"In the Name of the God of Ibraheem, Ishaaq, and Ya'qoob, from Muhammad Messenger of Allah to Asqaf of Najran, and the people of Najran:
Peace be upon you…
…I call you to the worship of Allah, away from the worship of the slaves (of Allah). And I call you to the governorship of Allah, away from the governorship of the slaves (of Allah). If you refuse, then the Jizyah. If you refuse (that), then I declare war upon you. Wassalam."

Offensive Jihad

Where the disbelievers are not gathering to fight the Muslims. The fighting becomes Fard Kifaya with the minimum requirement of appointing believers to guard borders, and the sending of an army at least once a year to terrorize the enemies of Allah. It is a duty of upon the Imam to assemble and send out an army unit into the land of war once or twice every year. Moreover, it is the responsibility of the Muslim population to assist him, and if he does not send an army he is in sin.

And the Ulama have mentioned that this type of jihaad is for maintaining the payment of Jizya. The scholars of the principles of religion have also said: "Jihad is Dawah with a force, and is obligatory to perform with all available capabilities, until there remains only Muslims or people who submit to Islam."

Defensive Jihad

This is expelling the disbelievers from our land, and it is Fard Ayn, a compulsory duty upon all. It is the most important of the compulsory duties and arises in the following conditions:

A) If the disbelievers enter a land of the Muslims.
B) If the rows meet in battle and they begin to approach each other.
C) If the Imaam calls a person or a people to march forward then they must march.
D) If the Kuffaar capture and imprison a group of Muslims.
(Defence of the Muslim Lands - Dr. Abdullah Azzam)

See the article on The Islamic Ruling on the Permissibility of Martyrdom Operations.

Bradley: Correct me if i'm wrong, but isn't it the responsibility... Does not Islam, does not Allah require that Muslims police their own religion and rid theelves of extremists?

Yusuf: Yes, absolutely. It's an obligation for Muslims to root them out. And I think it is a Jihad now for the Muslims in the Muslim country to rid themselves of this element.

Comment: An apparent contradiction. Earlier in this interview, he says:

"I would say that he (i.e. Osama bin Laden) has no legitimate authority, that in Islam Jihad can only be declared by legitimate state authority. And this is accepted by consensus. There is no vigilantism in Islam. Muslims believe in state authority."

Now he himself (who is also not a state authority) is calling the Muslims to fight Jihad to "rid themselves of this element." ?!

Transcript of Interview with Shaykh Hamza Yusuf Hanson by Michael Enright on the September 11 Tragedy
Aired on September 23, 2001 Transcribed by Raneem Azzam

Shaykh Hamza: Yes, and he (President Bush) said that. I think he mentioned that going to New York was a very profound experience for him, being there. And he said that he was making serious efforts to keep himself contained. So he, I think, did express that in very real human terms of what he was experiencing emotionally. I mean I think none of us can really fully comprehend what happened. I think we're all still in a bit of a shock, and I think that the fact that the American people… the World Trade Center towers there are really a symbol of American economic prowess and really of the capitalist world, so for them to literally be destroyed in a Shiva-like manifestation there, of just utter destruction, not just before the eyes of onlookers in New York but really of the entire world because of the film footage. And people watch this thing over and over again and I think it expresses just the profound impact that just those images have had on all of us.

Michael: And ditto his use of the word crusade.

Shaykh Hamza: He actually expressed his own regret at using that word but he did say that the Pentagon doesn't have theologians and they're the ones that name these things. And he said that they wanted to get it changed for that reason. I felt that there was a definite sincere response there.

Comment: According to this statement, he considers Bush to be sincere, and makes excuses for him. On the other hand, he does not make any excuses for his Muslim brothers, and is calling for a Jihad against them (See above).

Michael: Well we know now it was more plunder than religion.

Shaykh Hamza: Well, that's true. And unfortunately a lot of religious wars tend to be for other than religion. But the word Jihad is probably one of the highest concepts that the Arabs and the Muslims have. It represents really the best of humankind. In the Quran it is never once used to express a military meaning. Not once.

Comment: This is an extremely serious mistake. His claim that: "In the Quran it (Jihad) is never once used to express a military meaning. Not once." is contrary to the understanding of the scholars of the mainstream Ahlus-Sunnah wal Jama'ah:

The four Fuqaha' of the four schools of thought have agreed that al-Jihad is al-Qitaal (fight) and to help in it (i.e. in Qitaal). Below are given four definitions of Jihad from the different madhaahib.

1. Al-Hanafiyah:

It has come in Fath al-Qadeer by Ibn Humaam 5/187: "Al-Jihad: calling the disbelievers to the religion of truth and to fight them if they do not accept." Al-Kaasaani said in al-Badaa'i', 9/4299 "To sacrifice ones strength and energy in Fighting in the way of Allah 'Azza wa-Jal with ones life, property and the tongue and whatever besides."

2. Al-Maalikiyah:

"For a Muslim to fight against a disbeliever who is not under oath, to raise the word of Allah, or if he (disbeliever) is in his (Muslim's) presence (in order to attack him), or upon his (disbeliever) entering his (Muslim's) land." (Haashiya al-'Adawi/as-Sa'eedi 2/2 and ash-Sharh as-Sagheer/Aqrab al-Masaalik by ad-Dardeer 2/267)

3. Ash-Shaafi'iyah:

Al-Baajawari said, "Al-Jihad means: al-Qitaal (fighting) in the way of Allah", Al-Baajawari / Ibnul-Qaasim 2/261. Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani said in Al-Fath 6/2, "…and legally Jihad means sacrificial striving in fighting the disbelievers."

4. Al-Hanbaliyah:

"To Fight the disbelievers" see Mataalib Ulin-Nuha 2/497. "Al-Jihad is al-Qitaal (fighting) and to sacrifice all strength in it to raise the Word of Allah", see 'Umdatul-Fiqh p.166, and Muntahal-Iraadaat 1/302.

Ibn Rushd said in his Muqadamaat 1/369: "…and Jihad of the Sword: to fight the Mushrikeen for the Deen. So whoever tires himself for the sake of Allah, he strove in the way of Allah. Except that when Jihad Feesabeelillah is spoken, then it cannot be applied (to everything) in general except striving against the disbelievers with the sword until they enter Islam, or pay the Jizya with willing submission and they are under humiliation".

Ibn Hajr said in his explanation of Sahih Al-Bukhari, Fath Al-Bari 6/29: "…and by the phrase Feesabeelillah, Jihad is implied"

Michael: It means… does it not mean to go to war with yourself?

Shaykh Hamza: Well, that's one of the meanings. It literally means - if you look at the word, the root word is "jahada" which means to struggle, and juhd in the Arabic language means a struggle literally. So Jihad is the act of struggling. And the Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him, said that the greatest Jihad is to struggle with your own soul's insidious suggestions.

The saying, "We have returned from the lesser Jihad (battle) to the greater Jihad," which people quote on the basis that it is a hadith, is in fact a false, fabricated hadith which has no basis. It is only a saying of Ibrahim bin Abi Ablah, one of the Successors, and it contradicts textual evidence and reality.

Ibn Taymiyyah said in Al-Furqan PP. 44-45: "This hadith has no source and nobody whomsoever in the field of Islamic knowledge has narrated it. Jihad against the disbelievers is the most noble of actions and moreover it is the most important action for the sake of mankind." Al-Khateeb Al-Baghdadi reports it as daeef (weak) due to the narrator Khalaf bin Muhammad bin Ismail Al-Khiyam.

Al-Haakim says, "His hadiths are unreliable." Abu Ya'la Al-Khalili says, "He often adulterates, is very weak and narrates unknown hadith," (Mashari-ul-Ashwaq, Ibn Nuhas 1/31). There is also the narrator Yahya bin Al-Ula who is a known liar and forgerer of hadith (Ahmad). Amru bin Ali, An-Nasai and Ad-Daraqutni state, "His hadith are renounced." Ibn Adi states, "His hadith are false," (Tahzeeb-ut-Tahzeeb 11/261-262). Ibn Hajar said, "He was accused of forging hadith," (At-Taghrib). Adh-Dhahabi said, "Abu Hatim said that he is not a strong narrator, Ibn Ma'een classified him as weak and Ad-Daraqutni said that he is to be neglected."

Shaykh Hamza: And I think that really clarifies to the Muslims. Building a hospital in the Arab world - and I've lived in the Arab world, I speak Arabic very well - building a hospital, the Arabs will literally say what a great Jihad that was when it was completed. The idea of spending money for anything good… those firefighters who were pulling people out of the World Trade Towers, they would be considered, that's an act of Jihad. They would be considered mujahideen if they were described in Arabic. And I'm not exaggerating at all. That really is at the essence of this word.

Shaykh Hamza: Linguistically, the word Jihad is taken from Juhud - Yajhad - Jahdan. So initially al-Juhud is with Dhamm or Fath which is al-was' (strength) or at-Taaqah (power), and it is said: al-Juhud (with Dham) is al-was' (strength) or at-Taaqah (power), and al-Jahad (with Fath) is al-Mushaqqah (hardship). Al-Jahd (with Fath) is used as al-Ghaayah (i.e. taking to limits): "They swore by Allah their strongest (Jahda) oaths (i.e. took it to limits)" [Quran 5:53] Which means to complete and to end their promise. So al-Juhud and al-Jihad linguistically is to sacrifice to ones utmost according to a person's ability with strength, in order to obtain the beloved or to avert the hated / see Lisaan-ul-'Arab and al-Qaamoos al-Muheet.

Comment: Could we then say, that linguistically, Shaytaan is also a mujahid, because of his utmost effort in misguiding the people ? We could also say that the Serbs in Bosnia, Hindus in Kashmir, Russians in Chechnya, and Israelis are also Mujahideen because they struggled/are struggling their utmost in trying to achieve their objectives.

Michael: When you read the coverage in some of the more fulminating columnists and commentators, it comes up time and time again, this business about the Quran promising the martyrs or the suicide bombers that if they die in the course of their mission they will go immediately to heaven where they will be greeted by ten or fifteen or sixty-eight or something or other, virgins. You must have seen that. What is that?

Shaykh Hamza: You know, again this is the problem with religious language for the modern mind. The Quran, just to give you an example, says that there is nothing like God and immediately after that - it's in a chapter called Shura (The Council) - and immediately after that it says and He is the All-Seeing, the All-Hearing. So here's a verse that says there's nothing like Him and then it's immediately followed by saying He hears everything and He sees everything. Well, how do we know what seeing and hearing is if we don't have a likeness in this world of it. So on the one hand there's pure transcendence and on the other hand there's the imminent aspect of God's manifestations, his attributes in the world. If you look in the Quran about the pleasures of paradise, the definitive verse in the Quran is that the pleasures of paradise are those which no eye has seen, no ear has heard of, and has never occurred to the heart of a human being. So that is the definitive verse about the pleasures of paradise. Now, there are some hadiths, it's not in the Quran, there is mention of beautiful youths as well as beautiful women, and that's more metonymy in rhetoric.

Michael: It's an allegory.

Shaykh Hamza: Exactly, it's an allegory, exactly. And the thing about it is that our scholars say that the highest sensual experience in the world is orgasm and it's quite literal. I mean this is a traditional opinion; Imam al-Ghazali, one of the early theologians said that the orgasm that a human being experiences in sexual intercourse is the closest sensual experience that one can taste of what the delights of paradise are like. The Muslims traditionally saw it as almost - and the Hindus have this concept as well - that there's almost a mystical experience. Now, the vast majority of human beings do not have profound mystical experiences. The mystic has experiences that transcend sexuality and in fact, it's well known that a lot of mystics lose their appetite for those types of things because of their own internal experiences.

Comment: Saheeh-al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 53:

Narrated Anas: The Prophet said, "A single endeavor (of fighting) in Allah's Cause in the afternoon or in the forenoon is better than all the world and whatever is in it. A place in Paradise as small as the bow or lash of one of you is better than all the world and whatever is in it. And if a houri from Paradise appeared to the people of the earth, she would fill the space between Heaven and the Earth with light and pleasant scent and her head cover is better than the world and whatever is in it."

From this hadith, will any rational individual understand the maid of Paradise as an allegorical concept ?

Michael: Let me ask you this: people have been saying in the last few days that if the mullahs, or the imams, or the leaders, leadership of Islam, however you define that, came out and condemned in a loud voice or in a united voice, the terrorism, if there was some mechanism for excommunicating Osama bin Laden somehow. Is there…

Shaykh Hamza: Did somebody talk to you about that? It's an excellent point because I'm working on that right now. Terrorism, interestingly enough, this is not a new thing, what is new is weapons of mass destruction. Terrorism is as old as the world. If we take the Biblical, as well as the Quranic idea of Cain and Abel, you know Cain is really terrorizing his brother. So terror I think is an ancient phenomenon. The Muslims were tried with a group called the Assassins, the Hashashin, which was a very bizarre sect from the Isma'ilis. It was, even within Isma'ilism, it was a radical sect, and what they would do was they would put sleepers, plant sleepers among Muslim rulers, and one day they would be told to kill them, and then they would kill them and then kill themselves. And these were a real, just a plague, on the Islamic world for a period of time. So there's always been a condemnation of this.

Will he also condemn US terrorism against the children of Iraq (see article), and the civilians of Afghanistan ? Will he also condemn the US for terrorising the Palestinians by providing full support to Israel ?

Expert says Islam prohibits violence against innocents. Muslim scholar: Terrorists are mass murderers, not martyrs by Richard Scheinin, Mercury News

Richard Scheinin: Why would anyone do what the hijackers did?

Hamza Yusuf: Religious zealots of any creed are defeated people who lash out in desperation, and they often do horrific things. And if these people indeed are Arabs, Muslims, they're obviously very sick people and I can't even look at it in religious terms. It's politics, tragic politics. There's no Islamic justification for any of it. It's like some misguided Irish using Catholicism as an excuse for blowing up English people. They're not martyrs, it's as simple as that.

Richard Scheinin: Because?

Hamza Yusuf: You can't kill innocent people. There's no Islamic declaration of war against the United States. I think every Muslim country except Afghanistan has an embassy in this country. And in Islam, a country where you have embassies is not considered a belligerent country.

Hamza Yusuf: In Islam, the only wars that are permitted are between armies and they should engage on battlefields and engage nobly. The Prophet Muhammad said, ``Do not kill women or children or non-combatants and do not kill old people or religious people,'' and he mentioned priests, nuns and rabbis. And he said, ``Do not cut down fruit-bearing trees and do not poison the wells of your enemies.'' The Hadith, the sayings of the Prophet, say that no one can punish with fire except the lord of fire. It's prohibited to burn anyone in Islam as a punishment. No one can grant these attackers any legitimacy. It was evil.

Comment: What about bombing of Muslim civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan, Sudan by US ? (see Children of Iraq article) Is this also evil ?

Can we say that Israel (in Palestine), India (in Kashmir), Russia (in Chechnya) are not belligerent because they have embassies in Muslim countries.

Richard Scheinin: What is the Arabic word for martyr?

Hamza Yusuf: Shaheed. It means witness. The martyr is the one who witnesses the truth and gives his life for it. There are people in this country like Martin Luther King who would be considered a martyr for his cause. Also, if your home, your family, your property or your land or religion is threatened, then you may defend it with your life. That person is a martyr. But so is anybody who dies of terminal illness; it's a martyr's death. Because it's such a purification that whatever wrongs they once did, they're now in a state of purity.

Comment: Are we saying that Reverend Martin Luther King Jr., a Christian, was a shaheed ?

"This morning I would like to submit to you that we who are followers of Jesus Christ, and we who must keep his church going and keep it alive, also have certain basic guidelines to follow. Somewhere behind the dim mist of eternity, God set forth his guidelines. And through his prophets, and above all through his son Jesus Christ…" ( A Knock at Midnight: Inspiration from the Great Sermons of Reverend Martin Luther King Jr.: "Guidelines for a Constructive Church" Delivered at Ebenezer Baptist Church, Atlanta, Georgia, on 5 June 1966)

This is a complete contradiction with the Islamic doctrine, i.e. that a non-Muslim can die a Shaheed !! Imam Nawawi has narrated seven different views in association with the Shaheed from the commentary of Sahih Muslim:

1. He is called Shaheed because he is alive, and his soul is present in Darus-Salam and his soul will be present in Jannah on the Day of Judgement. So the meaning of Shaheed is 'present'.
2. Allah and His angels bear witness to him for Jannah. So Shaheed is in the meaning of 'witness'.
3. When the Shaheed's soul comes out, he sees those grades and gifts that Allah has made ready for him. So Shaheed is in the meaning of 'observing Allah's gifts'.
4. The Angels of Blessings come down to place his soul at its rank. So Shaheed is in the meaning of 'the presence of angels.'
5. His obvious state has testified his Iman and a good death. So Shaheed is in the meaning of 'testifying his death on Iman'.
6. The evidence to his Shahadah is the presence of blood and this is why he is given the rank of Shaheed.
7. He will be appointed as a testifier for the Prophets that they conveyed their messages to their nations. So Shaheed is in the meaning of 'testifier'.

Richard Scheinin: What is a martyr's reward?

Hamza Yusuf: The Prophet said that a martyr who dies doesn't have a reckoning on the Day of Judgment. It's an act through which he is forgiven. But the Prophet also said that there are people who kill in the name of Islam and go to hell. And when he was asked why, he said, "Because they weren't fighting truly for the sake of God.''

Hamza Yusuf: If there are any martyrs in this affair it would certainly be those brave firefighters and police that went in there to save human lives and in that process lost their own.

Comment: So the non-Muslim firefighters and police in New York who lost their lives are shuhadaa' who will not have a reckoning on the Day of Judgement ?

This article can be found at: 'Sheikh' Hamza Yusuf Exposes Himself

On the Azzam.co.uk or Qoqaz.net websites.

Azzam Publications is an independent media organization providing authentic news and information about Jihad and the Foreign Mujahideen everywhere. It has been conveying authentic news to the World about these matters.

 

Our comments on some recent interview given after September 11th

Our comments on some of Hamza Yusuf's Lectures - audio tapes

Why now?

Who are we?

What other American Imams are saying about Hamza Yusuf's teachings What other people have to say about Hamza Yusuf's teachings.
Zaytuna Institute -coming soon  Hamza Yusuf ? -coming soon
Email: enjoining_good@hotmail.com

Home