i think some of the readers are trippin or getting tooo hype bout this article. the article has nothing to do with the quotations or showing off his knowlegde, etc etc. but honestly, even if the quotators do chenge their minds bout the issue if they were alive or if the article looses its importance then who cares cuz the was written for the present– not for the past or future civilizations. they will have their own struggles wit lessons to learn from. Also, history repeats itself so if he did quote non-muslim peoples statements then its not really a bad thing cuz we are suppose to learn from mistakes of the past by recalling it.

I think he mentioned less divine quotes or passages cuz that way this article can be of value to people with all sorts of backgrounds– and every widom seeker can have his own insights based on his own life experience. The quran is not THAT specific in its passages– it has random passages and thats why every reader can relate to it. the same way this article is to allow all readers to see a open door and choose how to lt this affect their life

first, i appreciate the concern over the status of my soul. walhamdulillah i sleep very well. i got one of those air mattresses.

second, my post was not a bashing of hamza yusuf, but just a verbalization of a concern with this article. in fact, if you read my posts, you will notice i really have no problem with the paper, but would like to see our religion added to it. that’s all. “represent” the muslims.

and the argument is simple. man changes morally every ten years or so. (for example, in europe, about eighty years ago, women were considered soul-less). however, our divine sources have remained unchanged.

his article would lose all of its strength ten years from now if the people he quoted changed their views on the issue (assuming that they are alive, i read the article a while ago).

[disclaimer: the above statement was not an attack on hamza yusuf. read carefully. it is a criticism of his sources] — i fee like these are the in-thing right now on the blogosphere.

third, i know my place, and i definitely have done nothing compared to hamza yusuf when it comes to the deen. and i want to reiterate that i did not critisize hamza yusuf himself. i did not call him names or make fun of him. i simply expressed my concern with one of his writings. is that not allowed anymore?

salam.

p.s: look up “red herring” on wikipedia.

people like aamer khan can’t sleep at night. may allah s.w.t. guide this brother towards the straight path insha’allah. amiin. amiin. i feel sorry for you brother. our ummah is disunited because of negative people like yourself. nowhere in our tradition, namely, within the sunnah, is there room for unnecessary criticism like yours (just look into it). it’s not about whether or not you are correct (and you’re not, ask any scholar with an ounce of sense), but rather your audacity to speak negatively about a scholar far more learned than you will ever be let alone most of the people you probably keep in company. i don’t hate you, nor dislike you, for that matter, but i have immense pity for you. if you don’t understand this, you will definitely understand this when you get older. i’ve noticed you on google taking pictures of various functions such as the gaza rally in D.C…well, while you’re merely capturing images of lost citizens screaming and protesting in the streets, there are scholars such as shaykh hamza building schools and influencing millions of people around the world, preserving the deen, translating priceless texts and building diverse non-biased, non racist communities around the country. you ought to be ashamed of yourself. i recommend you do some nafl and retract your comments. may allah forgive us all for our sins, most especially those with negative comments about scholars of aLLLLLLLL backgrounds.

shirin
texas

Jazakullah khayran for the post and link, brother!

Imam Zaid recently translated a book “Treatise for the Seekers of Guidance” by Imam Muhasibi. This Imam used “current” terms, ideas, etc, at his time to explain things. His biggest critic was Imam Ahmad (who believed the Quran & hadith were the only sources to present a topic). Imam Zaid clearly explains how this was done, both are scholars, and both respected each other (Imam Ahmad attended one of his classes, and could not stop crying and eventually passed out).

Shaykh Hamza obviously did not write this “only” for a Muslim crowd, as you can clearly see here: http://www.winst.org/family_marriage_and_democracy/social_costs_of_pornography/consultation2008.php

May Allah help us to seek knowledge b/f we give an opinion.

and Allah knows best.

i am assuming they asked him to write the paper to get an islamic perspective. he is a muslim intellectual, right?

i have no problem with the secular sources. but what about our sources?

how can we take our morality from man-made source, that changes numerous times each year? how can we judge what is good or bad without a divine source as a reference point?

if i were to write an academic paper in school on an issue as a representative of Islam, I would make sure I represented the Islamic view, from its divine sources.

Its good for HY to raise the issue no doubt.

I think HY is well read and this is definately a good thing. I’m familiar with Adler and have read a little bit about, his book on the great ideas and a few of the authors he mentions.

Not withstanding all of that, we can make value judgements and observations regarding HY since he is a public person, we’re not apt to meet the guy anytime soon and he’s not my “homie” so I dont see how this constitutes backbiting. I can’t know whats in anyones heart but I can judge by what is aparent which is what we always do in daily life.

In any case, to me its not that he didnt quote enough religious scripture as opposed to secular authors. I’ve been known to quote and use a big words myself from time to time.

Its just that its so interesting when a person so obviously misses the point.

If you look at the paper, he tackles the subject for may be 5%. Its the most circuitous way of going about it in the world if your objective is to address a subject.

However, if you’re just showing others that you know beautiful books and sayings, then it makes alot of sense. Moreover I doubt he didnt look up some of the passages etc. as though it all came from instant recall. Not even a humanities professor would be that good. The truth is that HY wove a intricate tapestry because he likes to. I don’t condemn the man for it, hardly would it be right for me to do so. (Not a big fan of condemnations in general)…but its can’t be denied that its at least somewhat amusing to see this, to take notice of it.