Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
Guest Mushu

Exposing Yassir Al-Habib

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Guest Zahratul_Islam

It's not because he talks about Umar. It's because he slanders pretty much every good scholar we've had for the past 50 years.

Man, khaliy waliy. Ish indek wiyeh? Wahid athwal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Mushu

Man, khaliy waliy. Ish indek wiyeh? Wahid athwal.

I actually don't care much about him anymore. It's only because this is my topic that I feel I should carry on responding lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Zahratul_Islam

I actually don't care much about him anymore. It's only because this is my topic that I feel I should carry on responding lol.

Fair enough. I understand the concept of thread loyalty. Carry on, ibni.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact of the matter still remains that none of you will/ will ever be as knowledgeable as Yassir al-Habib. Anyone who criticizes him and knows Arabic (guess that eliminates most of you), I ask you to go to his arabic site and listen to the fiqhi/aqa'id lessons that the Sheikh has.

Never watched Yassir al-Habib until I saw this lecture on hijab, which was cited in this thread.

For a topic of such modern pertinence like the hijab, and something which is such a symbol of Islam, this lecture should have been easy and informative. Instead, Yassir al-Habib not only wound up conveying false knowledge of fiqh and history, but even misquotes in the Qur'an--in Arabic.

And yet, in the end, he has the audacity to call out the entire female Shia community (who, by and large maintain very good hijab) by saying: "Unfortunately, the widespread understanding among our women is wrong." (9:49)

We will now see whose understanding is wrong.

A few very clear examples among many:

1. At 1:58 he claims that the khimar (from Surah 24, Verse 31), is an item of clothing that also covers the face. "It was a cover that would cover the head, including the face. The khimar would cover the face as well." Unfactual, and untrue. The khimar is today what we know as the "hijab." For instance, women are told when they make wudhu to keep their khimar on--you can't do wudhu if your face is covered:

‎æÃÎÈÑäí ÇáÔíÎ ÃíÏå Çááå ÊÚÇáì Úä ÃÈí ÇáÞÇÓã ÌÚÝÑ Èä ãÍãÏ Úä ãÍãÏ Èä íÚÞæÈ Úä Úáí Èä ÇÈÑÇåíã Úä ÃÈíå Úä ÍãÇÏ Úä ÍÑíÒ Úä ÒÑÇÑÉ ÞÇá ÞÇá ÃÈæ ÌÚÝÑ Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã ÇáãÑÃÉ íÌÒíåÇ ãä ãÓÍ ÇáÑÃÓ Ãä ÊãÓÍ ãÞÏãå ÞÏÑ ËáÇË ÃÕÇÈÚ æáÇ ÊáÞí ÚäåÇ ÎãÇÑåÇ

From Zuraarah: Abu Ja'far Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã said, "It is permissible for the woman in the wiping of the head (in wudhu) that she wipe the front part of it, the size of three fingers, and shes does not remove her khimaar."

And there are numerous examples like this. For instance, women have been told to pray in a khimar, but we know it is makrooh for them to pray with their faces covered. Linguistically, and in fiqh, the khimar does not cover the face.

2. From 10:34 to 12:04, Yassir al-Habib goes on a lengthy discussion about verse 33:59 (most of which is erroneous, if you read the asbab al-nuzul of the verse). However, at 12:04 he erroneously adds a word into the ayah, which supports his interpretation of it. Open your Qur'an, and listen to what he says...they are not the same.

Yes, these are only two points. But, should there be a single error? No, there shouldn't be.

There are many more erroneous statements (about fiqh, or otherwise, as anyone who watches the clip can tell), but these should suffice for now. How can someone who misunderstands basic Arabic words, cannot quote the Qur'an, and makes so many fiqh errors (on such an elementary and important topic, and in only a 15-minute time span), and who cannot relate useful information to an audience, be trusted to impart factual information about larger issues, or anything?

For those who are interested, here is a good thread about the fiqh of the hijab.

And, finally, never trust anyone (either the quality of their knowledge, or their true nature) who has ever earned a penny from religion, or who is famous for talking about religion.

(salam)

Edited by avjar7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/15/2012 at 0:05 PM, cc_30 said:

Watch all the way through...

On 6/15/2012 at 6:07 PM, Replicant said:

That is one of the most peculiar lectures I've ever seen.

As for this, no where did Yassir al-Habib state that these were his opinions. He said, "The narrations..."

All religious reports he cited are from Shia books, authenticity aside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never watched Yassir al-Habib until I saw this lecture on hijab, which was cited in this thread.

For a topic of such modern pertinence like the hijab, and something which is such a symbol of Islam, this lecture should have been easy and informative. Instead, Yassir al-Habib not only wound up conveying false knowledge of fiqh and history, but even misquotes in the Qur'an--in Arabic.

And yet, in the end, he has the audacity to call out the entire female Shia community (who, by and large maintain very good hijab) by saying: "Unfortunately, the widespread understanding among our women is wrong." (9:49)

We will now see whose understanding is wrong.

A few very clear examples among many:

1. At 1:58 he claims that the khimar (from Surah 24, Verse 31), is an item of clothing that also covers the face. "It was a cover that would cover the head, including the face. The khimar would cover the face as well." Unfactual, and untrue. The khimar is today what we know as the "hijab." For instance, women are told when they make wudhu to keep their khimar on--you can't do wudhu if your face is covered:

‎æÃÎÈÑäí ÇáÔíÎ ÃíÏå Çááå ÊÚÇáì Úä ÃÈí ÇáÞÇÓã ÌÚÝÑ Èä ãÍãÏ Úä ãÍãÏ Èä íÚÞæÈ Úä Úáí Èä ÇÈÑÇåíã Úä ÃÈíå Úä ÍãÇÏ Úä ÍÑíÒ Úä ÒÑÇÑÉ ÞÇá ÞÇá ÃÈæ ÌÚÝÑ Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã ÇáãÑÃÉ íÌÒíåÇ ãä ãÓÍ ÇáÑÃÓ Ãä ÊãÓÍ ãÞÏãå ÞÏÑ ËáÇË ÃÕÇÈÚ æáÇ ÊáÞí ÚäåÇ ÎãÇÑåÇ

From Zuraarah: Abu Ja'far Úáíå ÇáÓáÇã said, "It is permissible for the woman in the wiping of the head (in wudhu) that she wipe the front part of it, the size of three fingers, and shes does not remove her khimaar."

And there are numerous examples like this. For instance, women have been told to pray in a khimar, but we know it is makrooh for them to pray with their faces covered. Linguistically, and in fiqh, the khimar does not cover the face.

2. From 10:34 to 12:04, Yassir al-Habib goes on a lengthy discussion about verse 33:59 (most of which is erroneous, if you read the asbab al-nuzul of the verse). However, at 12:04 he erroneously adds a word into the ayah, which supports his interpretation of it. Open your Qur'an, and listen to what he says...they are not the same.

Yes, these are only two points. But, should there be a single error? No, there shouldn't be.

There are many more erroneous statements (about fiqh, or otherwise, as anyone who watches the clip can tell), but these should suffice for now. How can someone who misunderstands basic Arabic words, cannot quote the Qur'an, and makes so many fiqh errors (on such an elementary and important topic, and in only a 15-minute time span), and who cannot relate useful information to an audience, be trusted to impart factual information about larger issues, or anything?

For those who are interested, here is a good thread about the fiqh of the hijab.

And, finally, never trust anyone (either the quality of their knowledge, or their true nature) who has ever earned a penny from religion, or who is famous for talking about religion.

(salam)

Your whole argument is on the premise that the hijab doesn`t include the face. Many of our Ulema have put precautions, some obligatory, that a woman must wear niqab. Examples being Syed al-Khoei and Muhammad Ridha Gulpaygani (ra) . This isn`t really limited to Yassir al-Habib.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your whole argument is on the premise that the hijab doesn`t include the face. Many of our Ulema have put precautions, some obligatory, that a woman must wear niqab. Examples being Syed al-Khoei and Muhammad Ridha Gulpaygani (ra) . This isn`t really limited to Yassir al-Habib.

You didn't actually addressed any of the avjar points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for this, no where did Yassir al-Habib state that these were his opinions. He said, "The narrations..."

All religious reports he cited are from Shia books, authenticity aside.

I heard what he said and my opinion remains unchanged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaaam

Well Sheikh Yasir Al Habib wow. What to say, i listen to his lectures but never watch them because when i see his face, i see all these posts trying to prove him fake. And why i listen because so far i have not read any single proper reply or answer from other marjas about what he has to say about Sunni idols. The content of his lectures is not proven fake so far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaaam

Well Sheikh Yasir Al Habib wow. What to say, i listen to his lectures but never watch them because when i see his face, i see all these posts trying to prove him fake. And why i listen because so far i have not read any single proper reply or answer from other marjas about what he has to say about Sunni idols. The content of his lectures is not proven fake so far.

For a start he is not a Marja so saying other Marjas is not correct. Secondly his cursing of Ayatullah Khameni should have alerted you to the damgers that this man poses.

When notable Shia Marje and personalities have warned people against this guy and said he an American agent. You should worry. As a doctor would you go ask a medical student or a consultant for a medical opinion and whose verdict would carry more weight for you. But as always people apply one set of rules to their 'dunya' world and one set of rules to their 'deeni' world.

A simple review of all the things he talks about could do easily be adressed by asking an Alim at your local Imambargah. Most things he talks about are deemed 'fringe narrations' narrations that carry no weight and by and large are dismissed my mainstream Marje and scholars.

Why should any Marje engage him in debate. To recognise him as anything other then an agent would elevate him. Marje should not have to lower themselves to debate with scum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When did

This is hate thread towards a respect sheikh with a silly base. I don't know why it came down to this. And why the thread isn't not deleted.

When did he become a 'respect sheikh'? He's known to be a deviant guy posing as a scholar and obsessed with provoking Wahabis with weak hadeeth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When did

When did he become a 'respect sheikh'? He's known to be a deviant guy posing as a scholar and obsessed with provoking Wahabis with weak hadeeth.

If people have a problem with him why don't they discuss issues with him? KMO have called on many times for discussion but those people don't want to & so its their problem, not his. Infact he's much more learned than some of the other 'scholars' in the UK.

He's the only one in the UK (along with few others) who is actually defending the Shia faith against the lies of the nawaasib...be thankful.

Edited by Labbayk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If people have a problem with him why don't they discuss issues with him? KMO have called on many times for discussion but those people don't want to & so its their problem, not his. Infact he's much more learned than some of the other 'scholars' in the UK.

He's the only one in the UK (along with few others) who is actually defending the Shia faith against the lies of the nawaasib...be thankful.

Yasser Habib wants people to come debate and the reason is that 'average joe' knows so little about their religion that he would run rings around them. Real respected scholars wont debate him because he curses respected Marje (Ahga Khameni) and he stands accused of being an American agent.

Those 2 facts alone should make anyone run a mile.

Yasser Habib is the master of the half lie . Half lies are far more dangerous then full lies. I have to say that this sites does not countenance disrespect towards Marje. That alone should be sufficent to ban this fitna monger videos from this site

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yasser Habib wants people to come debate and the reason is that 'average joe' knows so little about their religion that he would run rings around them. Real respected scholars wont debate him because he curses respected Marje (Ahga Khameni) and he stands accused of being an American agent.

Those 2 facts alone should make anyone run a mile.

Yasser Habib is the master of the half lie . Half lies are far more dangerous then full lies. I have to say that this sites does not countenance disrespect towards Marje. That alone should be sufficent to ban this fitna monger videos from this site

:squeez:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you give us a synopsis in English

The main discussion is regarding Taqiyya. The Sheikh states how Taqiyya is Wajib, and a cornerstone of our Fiqh. He says that anyone who doesn't use Taqiyya is not from our school of thought, and does not follow the Imams (as). He quotes a narration from Imam al-Sadiq (as) - "Taqiyya is my religion, and the religion of my ancestors. He who doesn't practice Taqiyya, doesn't practice his religion."

The Sheikh says that we have been afflicted with people like him in the past, and we will continue to be afflicted with them in the future. He says that the best action is to announce that he is not from our school of thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main discussion is regarding Taqiyya. The Sheikh states how Taqiyya is Wajib, and a cornerstone of our Fiqh. He says that anyone who doesn't use Taqiyya is not from our school of thought, and does not follow the Imams (as). He quotes a narration from Imam al-Sadiq (as) - "Taqiyya is my religion, and the religion of my ancestors. He who doesn't practice Taqiyya, doesn't practice his religion."

The Sheikh says that we have been afflicted with people like him in the past, and we will continue to be afflicted with them in the future. He says that the best action is to announce that he is not from our school of thought.

Sheikh Yassir has refuted those claims quite thoroughly brother.

Edited by Labbayk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sheikh Yassir has refuted those claims quite thoroughly brother.

Wish you wouldnt use the term 'Sheikh' its an affront to all the Marje he has insulted. As to discussion of Taqiya. One aspect of Taqiya is when the truth is known and you are hiding that truth.

It has not been established that the effluent that issues from YBs mouth contains any truth so the issue of Taquiya can only be discussed if the truth is first determined.

Since no reputable scholar is prepared to entertain him because of this effluent we are in a situation of choosing who you believe more.

Marjes or a highly disreputable individual

As I said he is clever in as much he claims that others do not say the same because they are doing Taqiya and only he has the courage to throw of the ties of Taqiya.

So those who dont do say it are damned if they do and damned if they dont.

YB agent of America without doubt. Know the satan you follow

Edited by A true Sunni

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main discussion is regarding Taqiyya. The Sheikh states how Taqiyya is Wajib, and a cornerstone of our Fiqh. He says that anyone who doesn't use Taqiyya is not from our school of thought, and does not follow the Imams (as). He quotes a narration from Imam al-Sadiq (as) - "Taqiyya is my religion, and the religion of my ancestors. He who doesn't practice Taqiyya, doesn't practice his religion."

The Sheikh says that we have been afflicted with people like him in the past, and we will continue to be afflicted with them in the future. He says that the best action is to announce that he is not from our school of thought.

The action that this scholar is promoting could actually backfire.

The non Shias would think all the Shias not only like Yassir Habib but they also agree with everything he has to say; all they are doing is putting a taqiyya show displaying their dislike towards Yassir Habib but secretly loving him.

I don't know why we need to go to that extent; claiming things that are simply untrue. Yassir Habib not only admit to being a follower of ahl al bayt, but he also promotes their teaching. And in fact a lot of Shias identify themselves with him. Those who dislikes him, dislikes him for one reason only. His harsh critism towards the enemies of ahl al bayt. This is hardly the stuff of Usool-a-deen or even furoo-e-deen that would make someone non-Shia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

Yasir Habib's 5th video on his reply to Aa'isha's supporters lays out his view regarding taqiyya in this matter. He puts forth a pretty great defense; you should watch it to understand why he is doing what he does, even if we all do not believe in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

Yasir Habib's 5th video on his reply to Aa'isha's supporters lays out his view regarding taqiyya in this matter. He puts forth a pretty great defense; you should watch it to understand why he is doing what he does, even if we all do not believe in it.

(salam)

Is it better than the 'defence' he launched against Syed Mohammad al-Musawi? Because his justification for his lack of Taqiyya in that 'debate' was dreadful.

(wasalam)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

Is it better than the 'defence' he launched against Syed Mohammad al-Musawi? Because his justification for his lack of Taqiyya in that 'debate' was dreadful.

(wasalam)

Perhaps, but Sayyid Musawi, as is his habit, actually made his opponent look good through his totally inept style of debating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps, but Sayyid Musawi, as is his habit, actually made his opponent look good through his totally inept style of debating.

Yeahhh, it's a real shame; the Syed has a good mind. It just shows you that being knowledgable doesn't automatically give you the ability to debate and refute; it's a different skill altogether.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that YH has a following however small or that people will listen to him show you how far some people have fallen from the path of the Ahlul Bait. Truth, Scholarship, Iqhlaq mean nothing to them. Reminds me of a poster on another thread who asked a question, Is it OK to make up stories about Karbala to make people cry ?. The thought that crying was the important thing not the message of Karbala.

So the same thing with YH and his folowers. Is it OK to take fringe narrations, creatively interpret narrations, lie and abuse people , to make people hate ?. Hate being the important thing not truth.

Strange that a lot of the people in the first category fall into the second category as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...