- They have raised $18 mil in Ramadan alone for Gaza.
- HCI USA has raised $2 mil USD since January.
- Islamic Relief USA raised $246 million USD last year.
- IR Canada is likely above $50 mil this year already.
One humanitarian truck going into Gaza costs roughly around $80,000 to $100,000 for 20-25 tons.
There's literally hundreds of millions of dollars sitting there, not being used.
Some Muslim charities are going to start following charities like Save the Children by putting small font disclaimers saying they will use the funds for wherever they want - even though they'll use Gaza orphans pics, so donors are led to believe they're donating for that.
Other charities have privately said they'll simply use the amounts destined for Gaza for other purposes.
BTW, HCI got 3 trucks through this entire time; 2 with food, 1 with medical supplies.
Jesus Christ ! You guys took me all around just to make a comment. So much for encouraging Free Speech.
Why do you mix your baggage of traditions in the name of Islam which allows Free speech and demands EQUALITY FOR ALL. Let Qaidiani beleive in Mirza Ahmed, let them think Tichu Tichu is their Gabriel. What is it to Muslims ?? Were we not told by Him “ Lakum Dinukum Waliyyadeen ? And La Ikraha Fiddeeen ?” ( to you your faith to me mine ? And There is no Force in faith ?)
Such petty acts are encouraged in UNIslamic Republics or those who hypocritically write Kalema on their flags.
You are not going to support Biden because he believes whose son is who ? Or for not being just to Palestinians and Pakistanis ?
Will you rate Kamala Harris on her doing her job or who she beleives in.
Get out of these Petty way of thinking which maligns Islam and gives others reasons to think we Muslims are Petty!
Think before you Ink, Sirs!
Did not the prophet consult Jews in running his government ?
#1, Ahmed is a good interviewer. I look forward to listening to more episodes.
The interview touched on a wide variety of topics. There's a lot to discuss, but let's focus on a few things:
A. The "we're not doing takfir" but we won't act like you're a Muslim is disingenous. And we're talking politics. And this statement is not just about the candidate Qasim Rashid, it's about people who may choose to support him. This is harmful.
B. His discussion on the "Navigating Differences" statement, the current statement and the potential for future statements confirmed to me that the main opponent of this group is Muslims with higher education/faculty positions in North American universitiy liberal arts programs who promote different interpretations of Islam and who have been influential among college-educated, North American-born Muslims. As Shaikh Hamza described, I grew up in a community without an "Imam." I heard all the time that Islam, unlike Christianity, doesn't have clergy. I heard that Islam encourages each Muslim to use reason to discover truth. While there are flaws in this, the harms that result from blind obedience to people with a superficial understanding of Islam who mesmerize & bully lay Muslims with their "qaal Allahu wa rasuulu" are much worse.
C) Regarding Qadiyaniyya, and I've mentioned this to the interviewer before, the tactics of dealing with a sect/innovators evolve, according to Imam al-Ghazali in Ihya Ulum al-Din. Basically, when an innovation becomes widespread and impossible to contain or uproot, persecution is no longer a good option. The vast majority of people who identify with an innovation will have no more of an understanding of it than most "sunni" Muslims today have of what the scholars discussed who came up with the label "ahl al-sunna wa al-jamaa3a" a thousand years ago. So, if Shaikh Hamza asks me if an individual Qadiyani is a disbeliever and the only evidence is that he calls himself an Ahamadi, than I'd have to say, based on the fact that he also says "la ilaha illa Allah Muhammad rasuul Allah," "No." And, if his family asked to bury him with the graves of the Muslims, I wouldn't object either. So does Shaikh Hamza now believe I'm a disbeliever?
D) Regarding Qasim Rashid's candidacy, it does seem important to lay out the different options before treating Muslims who support it to be disbelievers. The Muslim Accountability Caucus letter makes clear that the other Democratic Party contestent for the district's nomination is worse on Palestine. Does Illinois have an open primary system where Greens and Libertarians could vote in the Democratic Primary without penalty? Do the Greens and Libertarians have their own primaries? These are not insignificant details, and neither the interview nor the statement clarifies a poltiical alternative. Might it be possible for Muslims to talk to Qasim Rashid and get him to renounce some previous positions he may have taken regarding Palestine and "Muslim extremism?"
I found the caucus's letter much more solid than the statement from the imams. The imams are trying to expand their religious authority into areas in which it is not suited.
1. On things like the Navigating differences and this Chicago business, assume Imams are organized and actively speaking out on things Muslim academics have a different view on, where do you think most college-educated but Masjid going Muslims will end up? Say the issue is what is aqidah and fahisah.
2. This conflict you are telling me about, US amd Canadian academics vs Imams, does it seem weird that it is academics that may be a bit reductive in seemingly advocating that concepts sin and specific things to believe in don’t matter in religion? I realize not all academics are like this, but there are definitely some. What am I missing here?
3. Is your view different on non-ordinary folks that fully understand the differences between their creed and what Muslims believe and engages in public advocacy that Muslim Imams amd shuyukh think is deceptive and harmful?
4. I did miss the question about how Rashad’s opponent was anti-ceasefire. But leaving aside this race, say there was a pro-ceasefire candidate that had a history of engaging in fraud and deception and was proven to be an opponent of your community in other contexts, but he supports a ceasefire. Won’t his record weigh against anything he says?
Re (1), I am not sure. One is always biased towards one's own social circle, which is of course influenced by one's beliefs and habits. So I'm can't say for sure.
I've always believed that leadership among Muslims in the USA lies in the hands of organizing bodies, be they masjids or social service or education or advocacy or political. Those organizing bodies should consult with scholars of different backgrounds, including the religious sciences and social sciences.
Anathemizing (takfiir) is the nuclear weapon of the religious sciences. Its closest analogy in academia is "canceling" or "blacklisting." And it's one thing to say that Muslims who allow a Qadiyani to lead them in salaat are sinning/apostasizing. It's completely another to say those who support a political candidate is sinning/apostasizing. Politics is inherently ijtihadi and doesn't lend itself to the qat3i standard for such severe judgments, IMO.
Re 2), there may have been a typo in your comment. I understand you believe there are some academics who believe that sin & specific beliefs don't matter in religion. Not speaking on behalf of "academics," I think the typical conflict that is occurring takes one of the following forms:
2a) "Academics" believe a belief or practice upon which Muslims have formed a consensus is not a necessary part of religion or should be changed due to a secular circumstance. For example, Muslims by consensus believed slavery was permissible, but academics (and I hope most of our imams) would say it is no longer permissible to buy slaves (and I assure you that people are unfortunately being bought and sold today) because of the treaties that states have signed or maybe even that we now have better ways of dealing with prisoners.
2b) "Academics" privelege/appreciate/are attracted to an esoteric understanding of religion and find some commonalities with Muslims who historically have done the same and who had a less formal understanding of religious affiliation and adherence to law.
I have a lot of views like 2a) and have sympathy for 2b). Of course, any individual instance can be subject to error or self-deception.
3. In theory, yes. Has Qasim Rashid taken up a seat as a Muslim in one of these Democratic Party-affiliated photo-op "big tent" operations? Probably. Is he the only one doing so? Is the harm of this more that he's not a "true Muslim?"
Is Qasim telling Muslims that they should vote for him because he's a good Muslim? Is he telling other people that he knows Islam well and that they should ask him about Islam?
I followed him on Twitter for a while, and I don't recall such statements.
Aside from Qasim Rashid, aren't people like Tarik Ramadan and Nouman Ali Khan more germane to question (3)? Far more dangerous to Islam are people who talk a good game but whose actions harm others.
Re 4) Yes, but again this is a matter of ijtihad and not subject to takfir and anathema.
The Qadianis are disbelievers due to theo-logical (the operative article here being 'logical') reasons, and not due to practicality or some effort to stamp them out. They cannot be believers any more than 2 + 2 can = 5.
And yes, anybody that considers them believers will also be disbelievers, identical to how anybody that considers Christians, Jews, or Hindus to be believers will be disbelievers. To negate this leads to theo-logical absurdity.
Hamza Maqbul wants to treat Muslims who support an individual Qadiani for a public political office (not Mufti al-diyaar al-amriikiyya or Shaykh ash-shuyuukh or some religious function) as disbelievers. What's next? If my mechanic is a Qadiyani, Hamza won't allow my corpse to be buried with the Muslims?
هذا رابط إلى كتاب آفات اللسان من إحياء علوم الدين للإمام أبي حامد الغزالي
والصفات المقتضية للعن ثلاثة: الكفر، والبدعة، والفسق. وللعن في كل واحد ثلاث مراتب.
الأولى: اللعن بالوصف الأعم كقولك لعنة الله الكافرين والمبتدعين والفسقة.
الثانية: اللعن بأوصاف أخص منه كقولك لعنة الله على اليهود والنصارى والمجوس وعلى القدرية والخوارج والروافض، أو على الزناة والظلمة وآكلي الربا، وكل ذلك جائز. ولكن في لعن أوصاف المبتدعة خطر لأن معرفة البدعة غامضة ولم يرد لفظ مأثور، فينبغي أن يمنع منه العوام لأن ذلك يستدعي المعارضة بمثله ويثير نزاعاً بين الناس وفساداً.
الثالثة: اللعن للشخص المعين وهذا فيه خطر كقولك: زيد لعنه الله، وهو كافر أو فاسق أو مبتدع
- HCI Canada raised $36 million in 2023.
- They have raised $18 mil in Ramadan alone for Gaza.
- HCI USA has raised $2 mil USD since January.
- Islamic Relief USA raised $246 million USD last year.
- IR Canada is likely above $50 mil this year already.
One humanitarian truck going into Gaza costs roughly around $80,000 to $100,000 for 20-25 tons.
There's literally hundreds of millions of dollars sitting there, not being used.
Some Muslim charities are going to start following charities like Save the Children by putting small font disclaimers saying they will use the funds for wherever they want - even though they'll use Gaza orphans pics, so donors are led to believe they're donating for that.
Other charities have privately said they'll simply use the amounts destined for Gaza for other purposes.
BTW, HCI got 3 trucks through this entire time; 2 with food, 1 with medical supplies.
Jesus Christ ! You guys took me all around just to make a comment. So much for encouraging Free Speech.
Why do you mix your baggage of traditions in the name of Islam which allows Free speech and demands EQUALITY FOR ALL. Let Qaidiani beleive in Mirza Ahmed, let them think Tichu Tichu is their Gabriel. What is it to Muslims ?? Were we not told by Him “ Lakum Dinukum Waliyyadeen ? And La Ikraha Fiddeeen ?” ( to you your faith to me mine ? And There is no Force in faith ?)
Such petty acts are encouraged in UNIslamic Republics or those who hypocritically write Kalema on their flags.
You are not going to support Biden because he believes whose son is who ? Or for not being just to Palestinians and Pakistanis ?
Will you rate Kamala Harris on her doing her job or who she beleives in.
Get out of these Petty way of thinking which maligns Islam and gives others reasons to think we Muslims are Petty!
Think before you Ink, Sirs!
Did not the prophet consult Jews in running his government ?
Islam does not allow Free speech in the western sense. And the prophet did not consult Jews in running his government.
#1, Ahmed is a good interviewer. I look forward to listening to more episodes.
The interview touched on a wide variety of topics. There's a lot to discuss, but let's focus on a few things:
A. The "we're not doing takfir" but we won't act like you're a Muslim is disingenous. And we're talking politics. And this statement is not just about the candidate Qasim Rashid, it's about people who may choose to support him. This is harmful.
B. His discussion on the "Navigating Differences" statement, the current statement and the potential for future statements confirmed to me that the main opponent of this group is Muslims with higher education/faculty positions in North American universitiy liberal arts programs who promote different interpretations of Islam and who have been influential among college-educated, North American-born Muslims. As Shaikh Hamza described, I grew up in a community without an "Imam." I heard all the time that Islam, unlike Christianity, doesn't have clergy. I heard that Islam encourages each Muslim to use reason to discover truth. While there are flaws in this, the harms that result from blind obedience to people with a superficial understanding of Islam who mesmerize & bully lay Muslims with their "qaal Allahu wa rasuulu" are much worse.
C) Regarding Qadiyaniyya, and I've mentioned this to the interviewer before, the tactics of dealing with a sect/innovators evolve, according to Imam al-Ghazali in Ihya Ulum al-Din. Basically, when an innovation becomes widespread and impossible to contain or uproot, persecution is no longer a good option. The vast majority of people who identify with an innovation will have no more of an understanding of it than most "sunni" Muslims today have of what the scholars discussed who came up with the label "ahl al-sunna wa al-jamaa3a" a thousand years ago. So, if Shaikh Hamza asks me if an individual Qadiyani is a disbeliever and the only evidence is that he calls himself an Ahamadi, than I'd have to say, based on the fact that he also says "la ilaha illa Allah Muhammad rasuul Allah," "No." And, if his family asked to bury him with the graves of the Muslims, I wouldn't object either. So does Shaikh Hamza now believe I'm a disbeliever?
D) Regarding Qasim Rashid's candidacy, it does seem important to lay out the different options before treating Muslims who support it to be disbelievers. The Muslim Accountability Caucus letter makes clear that the other Democratic Party contestent for the district's nomination is worse on Palestine. Does Illinois have an open primary system where Greens and Libertarians could vote in the Democratic Primary without penalty? Do the Greens and Libertarians have their own primaries? These are not insignificant details, and neither the interview nor the statement clarifies a poltiical alternative. Might it be possible for Muslims to talk to Qasim Rashid and get him to renounce some previous positions he may have taken regarding Palestine and "Muslim extremism?"
I found the caucus's letter much more solid than the statement from the imams. The imams are trying to expand their religious authority into areas in which it is not suited.
Thanks for your comment Ayman.
If you don’t mind, can I ask you some questions:
1. On things like the Navigating differences and this Chicago business, assume Imams are organized and actively speaking out on things Muslim academics have a different view on, where do you think most college-educated but Masjid going Muslims will end up? Say the issue is what is aqidah and fahisah.
2. This conflict you are telling me about, US amd Canadian academics vs Imams, does it seem weird that it is academics that may be a bit reductive in seemingly advocating that concepts sin and specific things to believe in don’t matter in religion? I realize not all academics are like this, but there are definitely some. What am I missing here?
3. Is your view different on non-ordinary folks that fully understand the differences between their creed and what Muslims believe and engages in public advocacy that Muslim Imams amd shuyukh think is deceptive and harmful?
4. I did miss the question about how Rashad’s opponent was anti-ceasefire. But leaving aside this race, say there was a pro-ceasefire candidate that had a history of engaging in fraud and deception and was proven to be an opponent of your community in other contexts, but he supports a ceasefire. Won’t his record weigh against anything he says?
Re (1), I am not sure. One is always biased towards one's own social circle, which is of course influenced by one's beliefs and habits. So I'm can't say for sure.
I've always believed that leadership among Muslims in the USA lies in the hands of organizing bodies, be they masjids or social service or education or advocacy or political. Those organizing bodies should consult with scholars of different backgrounds, including the religious sciences and social sciences.
Anathemizing (takfiir) is the nuclear weapon of the religious sciences. Its closest analogy in academia is "canceling" or "blacklisting." And it's one thing to say that Muslims who allow a Qadiyani to lead them in salaat are sinning/apostasizing. It's completely another to say those who support a political candidate is sinning/apostasizing. Politics is inherently ijtihadi and doesn't lend itself to the qat3i standard for such severe judgments, IMO.
Re 2), there may have been a typo in your comment. I understand you believe there are some academics who believe that sin & specific beliefs don't matter in religion. Not speaking on behalf of "academics," I think the typical conflict that is occurring takes one of the following forms:
2a) "Academics" believe a belief or practice upon which Muslims have formed a consensus is not a necessary part of religion or should be changed due to a secular circumstance. For example, Muslims by consensus believed slavery was permissible, but academics (and I hope most of our imams) would say it is no longer permissible to buy slaves (and I assure you that people are unfortunately being bought and sold today) because of the treaties that states have signed or maybe even that we now have better ways of dealing with prisoners.
2b) "Academics" privelege/appreciate/are attracted to an esoteric understanding of religion and find some commonalities with Muslims who historically have done the same and who had a less formal understanding of religious affiliation and adherence to law.
I have a lot of views like 2a) and have sympathy for 2b). Of course, any individual instance can be subject to error or self-deception.
3. In theory, yes. Has Qasim Rashid taken up a seat as a Muslim in one of these Democratic Party-affiliated photo-op "big tent" operations? Probably. Is he the only one doing so? Is the harm of this more that he's not a "true Muslim?"
Is Qasim telling Muslims that they should vote for him because he's a good Muslim? Is he telling other people that he knows Islam well and that they should ask him about Islam?
I followed him on Twitter for a while, and I don't recall such statements.
Aside from Qasim Rashid, aren't people like Tarik Ramadan and Nouman Ali Khan more germane to question (3)? Far more dangerous to Islam are people who talk a good game but whose actions harm others.
Re 4) Yes, but again this is a matter of ijtihad and not subject to takfir and anathema.
The Qadianis are disbelievers due to theo-logical (the operative article here being 'logical') reasons, and not due to practicality or some effort to stamp them out. They cannot be believers any more than 2 + 2 can = 5.
And yes, anybody that considers them believers will also be disbelievers, identical to how anybody that considers Christians, Jews, or Hindus to be believers will be disbelievers. To negate this leads to theo-logical absurdity.
Hamza Maqbul wants to treat Muslims who support an individual Qadiani for a public political office (not Mufti al-diyaar al-amriikiyya or Shaykh ash-shuyuukh or some religious function) as disbelievers. What's next? If my mechanic is a Qadiyani, Hamza won't allow my corpse to be buried with the Muslims?
هذا رابط إلى كتاب آفات اللسان من إحياء علوم الدين للإمام أبي حامد الغزالي
https://ar.wikisource.org/wiki/%D8%A5%D8%AD%D9%8A%D8%A7%D8%A1_%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%88%D9%85_%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AF%D9%8A%D9%86/%D9%83%D8%AA%D8%A7%D8%A8_%D8%A2%D9%81%D8%A7%D8%AA_%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%84%D8%B3%D8%A7%D9%86
اقرأ من قوله
والصفات المقتضية للعن ثلاثة: الكفر، والبدعة، والفسق. وللعن في كل واحد ثلاث مراتب.
الأولى: اللعن بالوصف الأعم كقولك لعنة الله الكافرين والمبتدعين والفسقة.
الثانية: اللعن بأوصاف أخص منه كقولك لعنة الله على اليهود والنصارى والمجوس وعلى القدرية والخوارج والروافض، أو على الزناة والظلمة وآكلي الربا، وكل ذلك جائز. ولكن في لعن أوصاف المبتدعة خطر لأن معرفة البدعة غامضة ولم يرد لفظ مأثور، فينبغي أن يمنع منه العوام لأن ذلك يستدعي المعارضة بمثله ويثير نزاعاً بين الناس وفساداً.
الثالثة: اللعن للشخص المعين وهذا فيه خطر كقولك: زيد لعنه الله، وهو كافر أو فاسق أو مبتدع