Now that the election is over I would like to talk about an issue that will not leave us as Muslims in America; our place within the political, social, and cultural aspects of American society.
I do not need to go over the history of Muslim thought in America; an inter-mixing of African-American Muslims with the revolutionary-left in the 1960′s and 70′s, the flirtation with and support of the Republican party and the Conservative Movement by many immigrant Muslim leaders from the 1980′s on, the hard left turn of the mainstream Muslim organizations post 9-11 and the blurring of the lines between what is Islam and what is the secular humanistic left by many of the younger generation and even some established leaders.
This election cycle I strategically supported Barack Obama for reasons I have stated before and in the vast-majority of elections I favor the Democratic candidate based on what I feel is a Party Platform that is better for my family and most of the people I know, Muslims and non-Muslims. However, my support for Obama, and my enthusiasm for his campaign, does not mean that I am “one of them”.
The world view that I have is first and foremost shaped by Quran and Sunnah and any modern ideas that I encounter, in the political, cultural or social realm, are filtered through Islamic knowledge. Therefore I take what is good from the Democratic Party, and the left in general, and I discard what is not compatible with Islam. So while I am favor of many, but not all, of the economic polices championed by the left, if I am to believe in the Quran and the Sunnah I have to be at odds with their secular relativist cultural agenda.
In search of allies, or in the need of love from peers in a society they are trying to fit into, we have seen a group of mostly second-generation immigrant Muslims lurch farther and farther to the left since 9-11. What started as solidarity over our shared opposition to the war in Iraq and erosion of civil liberties of American-Muslims (and even shared solidarity with Palestinians with some on the left), has sent many young Muslims on a slippery slope towards the creation of a Reformed Islam (whether this goal is stated or not). This is based not on the belief of and fear of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger ( S.A.S.) and the way of those who came after him, but in the consensus of non-Muslim Western sociologist, thinkers, and activists.
These young Muslims have flipped the script in that they are not filtering liberal thought through Islam; rather they are filtering Islam through the secular-left. What is in the Sunnah that is compatible with the view of their non-Muslim allies they keep, such as caring for the poor and giving rights to workers and being good stewards of the environment. What from Sunnah does not jive with the modern Western-left they discard, giving their favorite modern thinkers supremacy over the Prophet (s.a.s.) and rendering the revealed knowledge of the Quran second-class to what you can learn at Harvard.
What would make the Muslim feel strange on the college campus, coffee shop, night club, social setting with co-workers, political rallies, etc. is discarded. Islamic views on gender roles, homosexuality, marriage and divorce, dress, politics, law, warfare, family relations, cultural relativism etc. are thrown out. These ideas are not thrown out based on any Islamic rationale; but rather the Islamic ideas are seen as outdated and socially unacceptable to the non-Muslim society that the young Muslim seeks the acceptance from and therefore are simply just thrown out. The motivation is two-fold; a lack of belief in the supremacy of the revealed knowledge of Islam and that which was brought by the Messenger of Allah (s.a.s.), and the neediness of these Muslims to be accepted like a battered wife wants the love of her husband.
On the left in the Muslim community you have a wide array of Muslims. Some are traditional, shariah compliant and well meaning people, seeking a political alliance. This is fine. What I am referring to here are people who are changing the religion who will tell you they do not care what the Islamic position is on issues and that they are going the “modern way” or the “progressive route”. Many of these Muslims will readily admit to you they do not have daleels to support their positions, but will quote to you some book or article written by a non-Muslim.
In support of this leftward trend of late has been Sheikh Hamza Yususf who has recently refused to condemn homosexuality saying it is a private matter, single-handedly, as if he had the authority, told Muslims that we should give up on the ideas of an Islamic State and “hard power” (which negated thousands of hadith if you follow that), gone wobbly on issues of inter-marriage for Muslim women and other female issues, questioned the ethical aspects of eating meat ( translation: the Prophet, peace be upon him, sahaba, may Allah be pleased with them, and ulama have all been a bunch of meat eating savages not blessed with the knowledge of reading Fast Food Nation or being educated at UC-Berkeley by a bunch of counter-culture hippies). In this I see Hamza positioning himself as the Rabbi Michael Lerner of the Muslims in America. Lerner heads Tikkun, a liberal Jewish outfit that is well-meaning, but totally a social and political movement that only uses religion as a means to justify their sociopolitical goals and not as the arbitrator of right and wrong. A Muslim equivalent can be developed, one who is high on traditional Muslims tidy and ritual; but when it comes down to it religion will take a backseat to secular humanism.
I will grant Hamza that he is still in the Sharia-compliant wing. His is a soft and gradual reformation, and is not as obscene as that which can be found by the so-called “progressive Muslims” and others, who are in complete bondage to the thinkers of this time and in complete and open rebellion with the Quran and Sunnah. Again, to use a Jewish analogy, these Muslims are like the rarely Reformed Jews, who decided they did not really believe in God, or if they did they did not in the way that their fathers did, so they created a new religion based on disbelief, and the Progressive Muslims seek to do the same.
What the Progressive Muslims get wrong is this; Judaism is an ethic as well as a religious affiliation and anyone born to a Jewish mother is a Jew even if that person is an atheist. Islam is based on belief in la ilaha ilullah Muhammadur Rasulullah and it does not matter what your parents believed or your ethnic background. You can be a kafir named Muhammad from Mecca and a Muslim named John from Ohio. Being a Muslim is not about pleasing your parents, being from Pakistan, or liking Muslim festivals, it is about belief, and if you change the religion you have left the religion.
On the right the problems in some ways are not that different and in other ways maybe not as bad in this day and age. The movement towards political conservatism, outside of some small Desi circles, is so weak in the Muslim community right now it is hardly a threat. I will say this though; there are many Muslims who in the long run and in the post-Bush era are going to gravitate towards conservatism. The bulk of Muslim immigrants are in suburbia, professional, entrepreneurial, and from class-conscious societies and all of this makes them natural fits for the Republican Party and the Conservative Movement. This is where a divide comes in between indigenous American Muslims and immigrant Muslims and their offspring; the American-Muslim community that I come from, as an example, is largely urban, working-class or poor, and from a culture of unionism and agitation of the upper-class not its deification. The exact reasons many immigrant Muslims will continue to be swayed by the right are many of the reasons many Muslims like me will never be swayed.
The strongest argument for the right in the American-Muslims is a shared love of traditional values and displeasure with the state indoctrinating our children with a secular social agenda. The biggest argument against the right, and one that in the post-Bush era I don’t see any of the Muslims in the Conservative Movement being able to win, is that the right in America is fundamentally about tradition, race and religion. As American-Muslims we do not share a traditional bond with them, nor a racial or religious one, and therefore no matter how nice we play, and no matter how bad some want to be loved and accepted, they will never accept us until we become one of them.
Where does that lave us? Now, I will defer to the hadith. We are to be strangers and if we follow this deen we will be strange. We approach all of those outside of Islam though the knowledge of Islam. Our goal is not acceptance and the fear of rejection, rather it is the pleasure of Allah.
Searching Islaam.com I found a commentary on this hadith from Sheikh Salman al-Awdah, he stated:
Prophet Muhammad, sallallahu alayhe wa sallam, was sent with the message of Islam to a world full of darkness and corruption. People at that time believed in idols and were following their desires. Prophet Muhammad wanted to bring the people back to the worship of Allah. Alone, he was like a stranger in a corrupt society. He believed however that Allah will strengthen him in conveying the message of Islam to the world. So he worked with his companions to spread Islam. Although they were at first weak in their own country and strangers among their own people, the Prophet and his companions strived hard till they established the first Muslim state in Medinah, and later on included the whole Arabian peninsula.
Muslims today experience the strangeness of Islam and need to learn from the life and seerah of the Prophet the means to repell the strangeness of Islam and to revive strength in the body of the Muslim Ummah.
Abu Huraira narrated that the Messenger of Allah, sallallahu alayhe wa sallam, said: “Islam initiated as something strange, and it would revert to its old position of being strange, so good tidings for the strangers.” (Recorded by Muslim, Attirmidthi, Ibn Majah, and Ahmad) This hadith shows that Islam started weak and strange, then became strong and will then, at certain times and places, go through a second state of weakness. Muslims who then stick firmly to their religion will have many dissenters and only few supporters. The believers at that time become like strangers or aliens even if they are in their own country. In this series, we will follow Shaikh Salman al-Awdah’s exposition of the types, symptoms and causes of this strangeness, the qualities of the ‘strangers’ and their ways of overcoming the strangeness of Islam.
There are two types of strangership that Muslims are going through today:
1 – The first is the alienation of Muslims from the followers of other religions.
Abdullah Bin Massud narrated: “While we were in the company of the Prophet in a tent, he said: ‘Would it please you to be one fourth of the people of paradise?’ We said: ‘Yes’. He said: ‘Would it please you to be one third of the people of paradise?’ We said: ‘Yes’. He said: ‘Would it please you to be one half of the people of paradise?’ We said: ‘Yes’. Thereupon he said: ‘I hope that you will be one half of the people of paradise, for none will enter paradise but a Muslim soul, and you people, in comparison to the people who associate others in worship with Allah, are like a white hair on the skin of a black ox, or a black hair on the skin of a red ox.’ (Related by al-Bukhari)
This hadith shows that the conflict between the Muslims and the disbelievers never stops and that this conflict did not prevent the Prophet and his companions from spreading Islam.
2 – Second type of alienation is the alienation of the followers of the Sunnah from the other sects of Muslims.
This type is harder than the first. When a Muslim adheres to Sunnah, his strangeness increases. He gets many opponents and fewer supporters. He is a traveler on a long path with few companions. When he reaches a higher stage, some of his companions withdraw from him until a very limited number of them remain to continue the journey.
The followers of the Sunnah should spread the right creed, the correct methodology for the interpretation of the Qur’an and Sunnah; and the right Islamic manners. They should call non-Muslims to Islam so that they do not fall prey to the innovations and the prejudices.
The strangeness of Islam might be a strangeness of principles, place or time. The strangeness of principles means that some principles like Jihad and enjoining good and forbidding evil become strange. The strangeness of place is when Islam becomes alienated in one place but strong in another place. The strangeness of time is when Islam becomes strange everywhere at a certain period of time. However, there always exists a group of victorious followers of the Sunnah who are not influenced by those who oppose them.
Jazakallah for this very informative and fresh post.
Masha’Allah. I was feeling the same way…
(Thought you was a little harsh on Sh. Hamza though.)
The motivation is two-fold; a lack of belief in the supremacy of the revealed knowledge of Islam and that which was brought by the Messenger of Allah (s.a.s.), and the neediness of these Muslims to be accepted like a battered wife wants the love of her husband.
wow, strong analogy
Idk about Hamza Yusuf, but maybe he meant this:
“Muslims were living in Abyssinia even after the Islamic State was fully established in Madinah. The Prophet (saas) did not tell them to come back. Establishing an Islamic state is not a pragmatic or realistic goal. It’s actually un-Islamic. (MR’s mouth is wide open)”
that was from MR’s blog, notes from a lecture by Sheikh Yasir Qadhi
and with the meat, perhaps it is unethical to eat meat that has come from a source where animals have been mistreated and harmed (and this problem does exist in the states, I’m not sure to what extent in regards to Halal meat)
I’m just throwing it out there, cause I’m not sure myself.
I think you’re way of based on or misunderstood Shaykh Hamza Yusuf’s positions. I do not know Shaykh Hamza but I know many things he says and from my knowledge he has never condoned homosexuality. In fact he has stated the opposite. In 2002 on a pro-gay website (http://www.alternet.org/story/12817) he is quoting as saying:
“If one considers it acceptable in Islam [to be gay], then he or she is not considered to be a Muslim by consensus of the scholars,” Yusuf said. “On this I know no debate whatsoever.”
As far as I know he has NOT changed his stance. However,I can’t say, but he may have stated that being homosexuality is private matter which it is. Just like drinking alcohol is a private matter. Muslims are against this type of behavior BUT we don’t follow people around and make sure they obey Islamic teachings. I believe that was what Shaykh Hamza was saying. We condemn bad behavior but we don’t go out searching for those who engage it nor support those who call people to it.
The Islamic state
I believe what Shyakh hamza said was we have deal with practical reality. To start a “islamic state” is dream. How can millions of people form different parts of world speaking different languages be apart of one state? It’s feasible impossible as well as impractical. I,not Shaykh Hamza, say calling for reinstatement of the Khalifah is nothing more than a call for Arab supremacy. I have never heard anyone calling for a Khalifah who didn’t support non-arab as Khalifah or believe an arab is superior to ajami. The two go to together in my experience. So I believe Shaykh Hamza is right to reject such blatant racism.
“hard power” I don’t know what you’re referring to with that phrase.But I will say as one reads history one will find no to many have obtained and held power by use if force for long periods of time unless they will willing to create a perpetuate us vs them mentality.
Intermarriage
As far as I know Shaykh Hamza has never stated that Muslim women can marry non-muslim men however he has explained that asking a newly converted Muslim women who married to a non-muslim man to automatically divorce her husband is cruel and unjust. Especially when the husband has never discouraged or prevented his wife from her Islamic duties. How many Muslimahs are Muslimahs because they had an “muslim boyfriend”? I just read about a sister around my area when became Muslim because of her boyfriend in my local paper during Ramadaan. No one knows what the future may behold. Perhaps because the husband doesn’t have any ill will towards Islam and loves his wife he may become Muslim too. Nobody knows why not wait and see and if it doesn’t work out she then can marry a proper Muslim man. So I believe Shaykh Hamza was talking about practical reality vs a hard fast Islamic principle without consideration of context and reality.
As far as eating meat I have Shaykh Hamza speak on this issue and he has been for years and he usually says something along the line that because of the harmful way that livestock is treated and prepared for slaughter it may be good idea to eat less meat or at least Halal meat. I have never heard say eating meat, Muslim or otherwise, is haraam or those who do are committing a sin.I think you’re misunderstanding the Shaykh.
Your comments on Hamza Yusuf remind me of the diatribe erroneously attributed Yusef Estes on the hate filled Salafi site allaahuakbar. Where a coward makes allegations and then use another person’s name to bring more validity to his allegations. It kind of funny reading how the person didn’t understand aromatherapy which is what Shaykh Hamza was talking when he mentioned the properties of fragrance .
Shyakh Hamza being a de facto leader of Muslims I would say is off based as well. He does have a large following but that’s due to his exceptional ability to convey Islamic knowledge in easy,straight forward way that Muslims, especially western-based Muslims can easily relate to. I don’t believe there’s a conspiracy to agenda to create some sort of Islamic version of Tikkun. I really don’t see that at all. As Tikkun teaches Jews to be more humanistic and less religious Zaytuna & Shaykh Hamza teaches the opposite. In fact I know many who have become more religious observant due to the shaykh’s many lectures.
Anyway I agree with you on the objectives of “Progressive Muslims” but I think with people like Shuyukh Hamza Yusuf & Zaid Shakir and others the proggies reach is and always will be negligible. I don’t fear for the future but i do worry abut the recent resurgence of salafism amongst second generation Pakistanis especially with regards to Maghrib Institute. I don’t trust Saudis.. Also that hadith it’s not form al Buhari it’s from Muslim,Ahmad,Ibn Majah and Ad Darimi
my mistake Umar, my apologies, I misread it. I thought you attributed the strangers hadith to Bukhari. You attributed correctly I am wrong.
Assalamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh
I have thought about writing about this very topic. There is definitelly a “Clash of Progressivisms.” On one hand that are those Muslim who derive at progressive position through the Quran and Sunnah. Then there are those who claim to be Muslim and are progressive, but abhor the Quran and Sunnah. Many of the second type, you see always wanting to “fit in” and “assimilate.” May Allah guide thise second type who are far away from Islam, Amin.
Khalil Al-Puerto Rilkani
Salaam Alaikum,
It is simplistic just to say that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) ate meat, therefore meat is a Sunnah, end of story
In the time of our beloved Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), they did not eat meat everyday (or even every week), the animals they ate were fed on pure pasture and kept in clean conditions. Good animal husbandry was a source of pride. This meat was good healthy food that nourished the body.
Much of the meat we eat comes from animals pumped full of hormones and chemicals, forced to lie in their own excrement, often turning to cannibalism due to cramped living conditions. Not only do we eat this meat, but we eat it in large amounts. That’s the sort of meat eating that Shaykh Hamza is criticising and as poor nutrition is maiming and killing millions of Americans (and people elsewhere), it is a valid issue.
Assalamu alaikum, could you provide proof for the below? “daleel” if you will?
“In support of this leftward trend of late has been Sheikh Hamza Yususf”
It seems you’ve got some kinda issue with Shaykh Hamza and by extention Zaytuna, since you seem to find an excuse to condemn them at every turn.
“who has recently refused to condemn homosexuality saying it is a private matter,”
Really? Where? I’m not aware of this. Again, could you provide proof of this?
“single-handedly, as if he had the authority, told Muslims that we should give up on the ideas of an Islamic State and “hard power” (which negated thousands of hadith if you follow that),”
As another commentor pointed out, this may not have been Shaykh Hamza, and if it was Shaykh Yaser Qadhi instead, as the commentor alludes, would you be so quick to call him wobbly on certain issues, and devote as much time to calling him out as you do to others you don’t happen to agree with?
“gone wobbly on issues of inter-marriage for Muslim women and other female issues,”
Again, really? Where? In what article?
“questioned the ethical aspects of eating meat ( translation: the Prophet, peace be upon him, sahaba, may Allah be pleased with them, and ulama have all been a bunch of meat eating savages not blessed with the knowledge of reading Fast Food Nation or being educated at UC-Berkeley by a bunch of counter-culture hippies).”
I’d thought that he didn’t say we *shouldn’t* eat meat, but perhaps we should limit our meat intake as Americans tend to eat too much meat anyway. And many times, the Prophet and his companions (peace be upon them), didn’t have meat to eat. They barely had anything to eat at all in many cases. Meat, in many cases, is a luxury, which is one of the benefits of the Eidul Adha holiday, that meat can be distributed to the poor, and thereby giving people the chance to eat meat who otherwise wouldn’t have been able to.
Anyway, it’s one thing to speak the truth as you see it, but quite another to take gibes at certain Muslims and Muslim organizations that you personally don’t happen to like or agree with, even possibly going so far as to atributing quotes to people they didn’t make without providing proof of what they said or did.
If we’re talking so much about following the Qur’an and Sunnah, perhaps we might be careful about slandering or backbiting our Muslim brothers and sisters, or perhaps contacting our leaders privately if they say or do things we find to be troubling or seem to go against Islam, as we know it.
Because following the Sunnah isn’t just about relations between men and women, about how much meat we eat or don’t eat, what kinda clothes we wear, etc. It’s also about perfecting our character, purifying our hearts, and many other “inward”, less tangible things that it’s not as comfortable or easy to talk about. It’s much easier to write and speak publicly about how “others” aren’t following the Sunnah, how “so-and-so” isn’t “Muslim enough” instead of looking inward on ourselves.
But I guess perfecting character, etc., is just a bunch of liberal, hippie, mumbo jumbo, who needs that when we can focus on things like the length of someone’s pants.
I thought meat was a luxury during the time of the Prophet (saas)? According to the seerah books the Prophet (saas) would live off of a few days for a few days.
As Salaam Alaykum Ginny
I agree with your message but not the way your stated it and this was uncalled for:
But I guess perfecting character, etc., is just a bunch of liberal, hippie, mumbo jumbo, who needs that when we can focus on things like the length of someone’s pants.
Umar , although he follows the Salafi Minhaj, isn’t like that. I don’t take what he said about Shaykh Hamza as slander or backbiting as more a misunderstanding AND a differing perspective based upon cultural and principle differences. Umar,like myself ,are working class while Shaykh Hamza is an upperclass suburban person. So naturally I think Umar & Shaykh Hamza would disagree on issues. Many of Umar’s critique of liberal minded Islam are valid especially his take on the white masjid of the future. I don’t neccessary think all he states in that piece is bad but everything isn’t good either.
http://umarlee.com/2006/06/21/the-white-masjid-of-the-future/
This article was originally posted on a website that advocated ditching halaal meat completely in favour of a vegan diet. It specifically targetted muslims and wanted to do away with Halal consumption. I searched everywhere for that site, but couldn’t find it. I did, however, find a link for the article which ironically is posted on a site advocating organic halal meat (nothing wrong with that).
http://www.organic-halal-meat.com/article/hamza-yusuf.php
Found it!
http://www.islamveg.com/fatwas.asp
As-salamu Alaikum,
On the subject of Sheikh Hamza Yusuf and his opinion on homosexuality, I have not researched it. I was at a talk at Zaytuna Institute about two years ago where someone asked him his opinion on homosexuality. He did not have much time to respond, but did say that it is a “tribulation”. You can deduce yourself what he may have meant.
I don’t necessarily agree with everything Hamza Yusuf teaches, however, it was because of him and books I bought from Alhambra Productions, that I came back to Islam after floundering around for years.
I find these articles very interesting and enjoy everyone’s well thought-out responses.
Jazakum Allah Khair
As salaamu alaikum,
Umar thank you for this article, it is greatly needed and a firm reminder to us on a number of points
It is disheartening to see one term brought out and the rest of this holistic article discarded. We as Muslims that follow the Sunna and view our actions and our interactions in the world through Allah’s book and His messenger require these reminders – back to center. Its like playing a game of tag, and base is the tree. The “tree” here is our deen. The progressives, liberalist, conservatives (not religious), political types, Black Nationalist types, cultural fanatic types, feminists, etc. have all gone off base, and we see them clearly that they are being tagged with whatever new ideology and thus lose sight of that timeless tree.
The plight of the stranger is just that, to maintain sight, touch and connectivity with our deen while forging ahead. I feel no shame to tell people the truth of this deen, and we have a real opportunity to live our lives as an example. By constantly wavering in our positions and our comfort level of identifying what is ethical, moral, religious and cultural we will be rejected.
I’m with you on the points you’ve made, we have to represent ourselves and not allow these other groups represent us.
There is a good book I think you might find very relevant to this post called Tribes….
Check it out IA
Tribes..by Joel Kotkin? I heard about that book years ago and saw an interview with him on cspan once.
http://wjcohen.home.mindspring.com/otherclips/tribes.htm
Assalamu alaikum @ Hamza 21.
“I agree with your message but not the way your stated it and this was uncalled for:”
Perhaps, but so is the insinuation that Muslims from anything other than “working-class” backgrounds are somehow “not real enough” “not Muslim enough” or that all of those, who come from “liberal” “upper-class” or any other backgrounds that Umar’s always turning his nose up at, are all just a bunch of progressive hippies who are trying to water down Islam and who don’t want to live by the Qur’an and Sunnah. I find many of the statements in this article to be either wrong, taken out of context, or just another attempt to get in a jab at someone he doesn’t like and who he’s deemed, by virtue of his statements to be “off the manhajj”.
Things such as women marrying non-Muslims, homosexuality and by extention gay marriage, and drinking alcohol, any orthodox Muslim worth their salt would say those things are wrong, and if Shaykh Hamza actually said that these things were OK, or even tacitly approved of them, than I for one, would be extremely disappointed and would not be in agreement with that. However, he’s provided no proof that he’s said such a thing.
Not only this, what would Umar, et al, have us do? We can’t as minorities living in this country, actually physically stop people from engaging in things that we as Muslims find objectionable. You have to do whatever it is is in your power to do, whether it’s lobbying, writing letters, speaking out, whatever. As far as whether or not Zaytuna or Shaykh Hamza spoke out on Proposition 8, or lobbied for it, etc., that I don’t know, and I don’t know enough about the issue to say whether or not they should have taken that approach. However, based on previous posts, unless you come from a certain background, follow the same scholars, and thereby “follow the Qur’an and Sunnah” the way Umar thinks you should, then you’re just not a “real Muslim” in his book. Or you’re just a liberal, progressive Muslim hippie. Can someone tell me how that’s not being like “those other Salafis”. How is that not being severely judgmental toward other people that you don’t even know?
I’m sure that someone’s going to say “well stop reading his blog then”. But I won’t because I agree with what he has to say on other issues. His constant jabs at Zaytuna and Shaykh Hamza for a perceived “progressivism” or “liberalism” that may not even necessarily exist, and his penchant for generalizing and stereotyping people from different backgrounds, most notably socioeconomic ones, is what bothers me. However, perhaps as I’ve perceived a pattern, I should have just remained silent.
It’s just that I, coming from a middle-class, college-educated background, don’t look down on any of my Muslim brothers and sisters, no matter where they come from or what methodology or scholar they follow, and I’d think that as someone who’s always talking about following the Qur’an and Sunnah, that I, as well as other Muslims, would get the same respect in return.
“But I guess perfecting character, etc., is just a bunch of liberal, hippie, mumbo jumbo, who needs that when we can focus on things like the length of someone’s pants.”
Perhaps that was a bit harsh, my snarkiness again got the better of me unfortunately.
“Umar , although he follows the Salafi Minhaj, isn’t like that. I don’t take what he said about Shaykh Hamza as slander or backbiting as more a misunderstanding”
No, I don’t think so, this is something that Umar could have researched and gotten the correct information on his own, however, I don’t even know where he got the idea that Shaykh Hamza was telling people to eat meat (a misunderstanding perhaps), or the idea that he was some sort of a “progressive liberal Muslim”, perhaps if I had the time, I’d do the research myself. However, it’s one thing to disagree with someone, it’s quite another to post things about them that may not even be true, and that’s something beyond a misunderstanding…
“AND a differing perspective based upon cultural and principle differences. Umar,like myself ,are working class while Shaykh Hamza is an upperclass suburban person. So naturally I think Umar & Shaykh Hamza would disagree on issues.”
Why? Islam is Islam isn’t it? The Sunnah is the Sunnah, whether you’re working class or wealthy. I didn’t know there was a working class understanding, a wealthy, upper-class understanding. That is a new one for me. Again, it’s one thing to have disagreements, however, what if those disagreements are either based on wrong, untrue, or misunderstood information?
“Many of Umar’s critique of liberal minded Islam are valid especially his take on the white masjid of the future.”
I’ll have to re-read that post. However, what of this idea that “white Muslims” are somehow by design less Muslim, or are trying to push a more liberal, progressive Islam on us? Last I checked Irshad Manji, Amina Wadud, and the like, aren’t all white are they?
At any rate, Umar seems to have a bias toward white, upper-middle class people and by extention Muslims, (and throw in “soofees” too), so I don’t think any of them, including Shaykh Hamza could do anything right in his book. Even if he came out and gave a whole speech urging Muslims to vote for Proposition 8, for example, Umar’d still find something wrong with it. However, as I said before, it’s his blog, he has the right to say what he wants, and this is just the sort of thing I’ve come to expect, even though there are many things that I agree with him on. It’s kinda like, the Conservatives can do nothing right where the LIberals are concerned, and vice versa.
“I don’t neccessary think all he states in that piece is bad but everything isn’t good either.”
Wow, sounds like a fence-sitting statement if I ever read one.
Anyway, I seem to be the lone dissident on here. So I’m hoping this will be my last comment on this issue.
Assalam-alaikam,
I can’t comment on the argument about Shaykh Hamza Yusuf, because I don’t know enough about his opinions and what he teaches, but the issue of Muslim liberals becoming almost anti-Muslim is emerging here (UK) too. If you are “practising” (i.e. hijab, niqab, no TV, avoiding non-Muslim celebrations etc) then other Muslims will consider you extreme. If you call yourself Muslim, but don’t actually follow any of the tenets of Islam – you are “moderate” and by definition acceptable and to be “tolerated”. The terms that are being bandied about by the media and commentators are so loaded.
We are also unfortunately coming up with our own version of reformist groups and think-tanks who argue that the laws of Islam were appropriate for that historical context, they are no longer acceptable or workable now and need to be changed (Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, Ziauddin Sardar and Taj Hargey and his Muslim Educational Centre of Oxford). Islam may be a faith for all people, through all times but, relevant in every situation, but these people don’t think so. If you are Muslim you beleive that the Quran and Sunnah are divinely inspired, if you cannot believe this then why not go your own way? Why try to change a faith you don’t agree with in the first place? No-one is forcing you to be Muslim, so maybe it’s better for such people to just go off and be what they would rather be? But then where would their books, TV interviews and all the attached money and attention go I suppose. My biggest concern is how much airtime these poeple get and how much influence.
I first heard the hadith about strangers from Shaikh Khalid Yassin and it has stayed with me ever since.
Looks like you are getting your writing-groove back Brother Umar!! make the most of it, when your baby comes you’ll be too busy changing nappies insh’Allah.
As Salaam Alaykum Ginny
I wasn’t “fence sitting” but since this post wasn’t about that piece on the white masjid of the future I didn’t elaborate but if you want I will.
Many things which I’m sure many upperclass suburban people find perfectly acceptable would be considered by working class people like myself as unbecoming of a man and an attempt to feminize males. Such as when Umar referenced the future Imam giving friday khutbah Umar writes:
“In his khutbah he often references things such as butterflies, rainbows and waterfalls and kind of sounds like Garrison Keeler.”
Many working class people would find that too fruity and too feminine like. A man who’s too emotional and doesn’t have the qualities of a real man. As well as:
“Low-fat and low-calorie Ramadan iftar dinners will be served. You will be able to sign up for an Atkins compliant, South Beach compliant, and veggie compliant dish.”
Gimme a break, can you imagine that? Many suburban people wouldn’t see a problem with that. For working class people food is food it’s either good or aint. No special or trendy diets. If man told me they were on the Atkins diet I would suspect that they were gay. No real man around my way would be on a special trendy diet unless ordered by doctor.
I’m sure many upperclass people would endorse this kind of behavior:
“The masjid will have sports teams for the youth but they will all be non-contact and low-risk sports and helmets and padding will be required for bike riding on masjid premises”
While many working class would consider children engaging in rough sport as a part of life and if they couldn’t take it they were weak people. Strength and courage are highly valued and EXPECTED qualities amongst working class people. In my experience not so much among upperclass suburbanites. Many suburbanites,I’m speaking of the men, in my experience are too emotional and feminine like.They always want to talk about emotions and/or things women are very interested in. This new phenomenon of so called “helicopter parents” where one’s parents schedules job interviews for twenty somethings college graduates if proof of he feminization of males by suburban parents.
(http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/employment/2007-04-23-helicopter-parents-usat_N.htm)
Where I come from men are men and women are women. Men do not in any shape or fashion behave like women. They do not talk about emotions all the time, they are not pacifists, they do not back away form confrontation, they do no allow themselves to be seen as weak in any shape or fashion.
The fact of matter many, I would even say most, men from suburbs are female-dominated, spineless, wimps. A kind of person many people from where I’m from would consider unworthy of being called a man.
I’m sure you disagree with me but many from where I’m from think as I do.
Where are you from, Hamza?
Umm Salihah
A female wearing hijab or niqab in the UK is hardly considered extreme by other muslims, you are exaggerating. Maybe you consider TV to be haram, but i dont know any muslims who do not watch TV. Practising should be about fulfilling the pillars of islam, being a good person with manners etc.
California…Southern California…Inland Empire…The barrio.
http://www.streetgangs.com/topics/2008/062908sanbernandinos.html
That’s my neighborhood and I knew most of the people involved in the “Dead Presidents” case. You can’t be weak being raised in that environment and survive.
As-Salaamu ‘alaikum,
Leila: I live in the UK as well and what she says about attitudes to women in hijab, and especially niqab, is true of a certain type of Muslim liberal. The two she mentions, in particular, get a lot of media space but neither of them are the slightest bit representative of what Muslims think or how they behave; they get airtime because they seem to be an “inside voice” confirming others’ prejudices. Starting from around late 2006 there was A LOT of public hostility to niqab which erupted when Jack Straw told the media that he had asked women to remove theirs while in “surgery” with him (surgery is when an MP meets the people in his constituency, which is like a congressional district, in private) and nobody had refused (which was untrue), which caused some newspapers to run front-page anti-niqab campaigns and there is evidence that it led to niqabis being attacked. The upshot is that fewer women wear it now, outside a few safety zones like the Whitechapel-Bow area. As for TV, a lot of British Muslims don’t watch TV, particularly in the “salafi” and Deobandi communities.
@Hamza21: OK, I haven’t come across you before so I was wondering if you were Afro-American or maybe an Arab, and hadn’t thought Latino. Anyway, I’ve not met any middle-class white Muslim who’s anything like what Umar described his “white masjid of the future” post. While there are a few hippy types among them, they are more likely to prefer a “Moroccan” theme to their lives (minus the hashish of course). I used to know quite a few like this in and around London, but if there’s a serious problem with their attitude, it’s not that they’re any less masculine than the average male of their class, but that they have disdain for Muslims from an immigrant background (mostly Pakistanis and Indians in the case of the UK).
You seem to be making a lot of assumptions about Ginny – not everyone with a college education is upper class or given to the attitudes you describe. I think only a tiny percentage of middle-class males are like that anyway. Most are pretty reserved and don’t show emotions easily. Unlike, say, Arabs (some of them anyway), they don’t often show affection to each other. You might say that the women in your neighbourhood are women and the men are men, but in most places where men are tough, women are as well. I’m not too familiar with Mexican-American women, but much as a girl from a council estate (project) in south London might find a middle-class male from New Malden (my neighbourhood) to be a bit weedy for their liking, I might well find her mouthy and coarse, i.e. unfeminine.
By the way, low fat is healthier for most people, and the Atkins diet is plain bad for you anyway; it’s a “nafs-feeding” diet which tells you you can eat satisfying protein-rich foods like meat and cut out “boring” foods like carboydrates, i.e. bread, rice and pasta.
As-salamu Alaikum Hamza 21. I’m from Sacramento but do alot of work in Riverside area. Can you tell me where there is a masjid there for salat when I’m in the area.
Thanks,
Walaykum As Salaam Erich
Masjid Of Riverside is at 1038 W Linden St., Riverside (951) 684-5466
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&view=text&hl=en&q=+1038+linden+st+riverside&btnG=Search+Maps
@ Yusuf Smith
I am both African-American & Latino but I was raised around my Latino family more. As well as raised in a predominantly Latino neighborhood.
I think things may be different in the UK than the US. In the US men, and it’s not just me saying many men’s groups say this as well, many men have become more feminize than previous generations. Also I think the phenomenon we have in the US called “Helicopter Parents” doesn’t exist in the UK.
Pingback: American Jihadist Umar Lee calls for Sharia law « LGF II: Charles and Killgore Free Footballs
Pingback: A Response to My Critics Reagrding the RIMS Article and Hamza Yusuf « Umar Lee « Ginny’s Thoughts & Things