Saudi Arabia and UAE make up only 2.72% and 0.5% of the global Muslim population respectively. It is very absurd and moronic when Madakhila elevate these secular rulers of a very small piece of land to the level of sacredness and not criticizable. Even a provincial Hakim of the Islamic Khilafah in the past had control over a bigger fraction of the Muslim population. For example, Hajjaj bin Yusuf had control over a much larger fraction of the Muslim population and all the major Islamic scholars of the salaf spoke against him. Some even called him a Kafir.
@@azmolhussain وروى ابن عساكر في «تاريخه» (12/183) : من طريق ابن أبي خيثمة قال: نبأنا أبو ظفر، نبأنا جعفر بن سليمان، قال بسطام بن مسلم، عن قتادة، قال: قيل لسعيد بن جبير: خرجت على الحجاج؟ قال: أي والله! ما خرجت عليه حتى كفر. قال ابن حجر: وكفره جماعة منهم: سعيد بن جبير والنخعي ومجاهد وعاصم بن أبي النجود والشعبي وغيرهم. «تهذيب التهذيب » (2/211).
Just because he called out Saudi Arabia for celebrating Halloween and having concerts and intermingling between men and women and saying Mohamad Bin Salmans name does not mean that there’s going to be bloodshed. How did he equate that with that what in the actual heck
Madklhalis like Uthman love to make that jump, so that the average uninformed Muslim gets scared and thinks its better to not criticize Saudi for anything as criticism = saudi becoming like syria
Messenger of Allah, no doubt, we had an evil time (i. e. the days of Jahiliyya or ignorance) and God brought us a good time (i. e. Islamic period) through which we are now living Will there be a bad time after this good time? He (the Holy Prophet) said: Yes. I said: Will there be a good time after this bad time? He said: Yes. I said: Will there be a bad time after good time? He said: Yes. I said: How? Whereupon he said: There will be leaders who will not be led by my guidance and who will not adopt my ways? There will be among them men who will have the hearts of devils in the bodies of human beings. I said: What should I do. Messenger of Allah, if I (happen) to live in that time? He replied: You will listen to the Amir and carry out his orders; even if your back is flogged and your wealth is snatched, you should listen and obey. Sahīh Muslim, Book 33, Hadith 82. His calling out Sa’ūdī was harām.
I don't stand by uthman farooq as he does not abide by the way of the salaf as he claims. However, to address your point, you need to realise these are stepping stones to mass upheavals in muslim lands. These kharijis who reside in uk and usa etc are inciting the muslims to rebel against their ruler, by publically criticising them. The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم strictly forbade this in many ahādith. There have been much bloodshed in the past which began with something as simple as people criticising rulers publically from foreign lands, turning the muslims against their rulers. It starts with small steps and has a snowball effect. Many sins are like this. Allāh tells us not to follow the footsteps of shaytan. For example shaytan will not tell you to commit zina outright, rathee he will first tell you to look at a woman, then speak to her, then take her out, then touch her etc for example. Here we can see how it starts from something tiny, where you would not imagine it going into a major sin. Other sins are similar.
Nope. what you mentioned is what some deviant scholars have been brainwashing Muslims, that even valid criticism will lead to snowball effect The results are now there;Abu Dhabi builds a huge Hindu temple and not a single UAE Iman or scholar will even mention the hadith about it being forbidden to build pagan places in arab peninsula We will reach a position where people will have concerts inside the Makka Haram and people like you will say not to criticize it as it may lead to rebellion @@-.M.--
They piled on to Daniel, it wasn’t simply a clarification it was an interrogation. I say that as someone who really dislikes Daniel’s leaning into red-pill and far right crap. They still should not of attacked him like that, it was cowardly and unmanly.
What is red pill anyway.if red pill means having illicit relationships then I don't know what kind of intelligence you have to assume Daniel will even be okay with that.if red pill is understanding male female dynamics and it's just that I don't see any problem with it and Daniel even said there are truths in the red pill.doesnt mean he is okay with everything they say and it's not even a monolith.
Absolutely same opinion, really dislike the whole premise of Daniel intra communal dawah, he appeal to angry virgin teenagers, baffling he doesn’t see the offput of his approach.
3:20 wrong sheikh, I remember clearly Daniel knew what the hyatee and manatee argument was and I also remember him telling you that that argument is prevalent even in the “salafi” circles not just “dewbandi” circles.
Did you watch the whole video? If you did, did you notice that Ustadh Uthman himself said that this issue also exists between Salafi circles? So what's your point?
@@fullsendit292 Dear sectarian desperado, The op says "I also remember him telling you that argument is prevalent even in the "Salafi" circles not just "dewbandi" circles" to which I had replied - alluding to the fact that Ustadh Uthman did himself said that this does exist in Salafi circles. However, I do understand that your desperate sectarian self is trying hard to clutch on to straws and knit pick anything even remotely possible to criticise. Regards.
my point is Daniel clearly knew the argument so idk why this Sheikh is stating here that Daniel did NOT know the argument! either seems like mistake or seems like a deflection@@SJ-yd6zi
@@mianatwood You made two "points": 1. Daniel knew the difference 2. This is also prevalent in Salafi circles, and it was point 2. to which I had responded. So either concede that point 2. was addressed by Ustadh Uthman or present an argument on how it wasn't. Don't just brush it off aside when you have released that making this "point" was baseless.
Tbh i was getting Spanish Inquisition vibes about ‘that incident’ ……the cherry on top was Sh Kareem making Daniel re-take his shahada again ! It was embarrassing & cringey to watch 🤦🏾♂️ - I absolutely love Sh Uthman but something about this seems off
I am really puzzled where does Uthman Ibn Farooq derive the notion that you cannot name an oppressive ruler by name. Pretty sure the salaf named Hajaj and other unjust provincial and even caliphates they disagreed with by name. I have nothing against this Uthman Ibn Farooq or similar individuals like Sajid Lipman but its clear to me the are not that far off from madkhaliya (Madkhali lite).
Do you not know that after the rebellion against Al-Hajjaj the Salaf established ikhtilaf on this? Besides that some of the Salaf takfired Al-Hajjaj which changes the situation. You can talk bad about a kafir ruler
@@firavv the majority of the actual salaf were in favour of uprising against oppressive muslim rulers. Yes, some did takfeer AL-Hajjaj but many who rose against him did not.Most uprisings of the Salaf did NOT have a takfeer element such as uprisings of ahlbayt in Karbala and Sahabah in Madinah against Yazeed
They have an obsession with trying to force a narrative of complete and utter prohibition of criticising a ruler in public no matter what. It’s a recent innovation they have come up with but it’s not a position supported by the Sunni schools nor even by the Saudi scholars they cite all the time: look what shaykh Muqbil and Uthaymeen respectively said about this issue: As for rebuking them [openly], then this is fine, along with announcing to the Muslims that you aren’t inciting to rebellion or a coup. You are calling to change the wrong, and that instead of standing against the ruler, to stand against these decadent matters which are corrupting the society. This is an obligation. As for defaming them, then this is as has preceded. If the point is to incite people to rebel against them, then no! If the aim is to motivate people to rebuke the [evil and the] people of evil, that’s a good thing.’12 Uthaymeen: Likewise is the case of advising the rulers. Of the people are those that take one side of the texts, which is to publically denounce those in authority, no matter if it results in more harm. And of them are those who say that it isn’t right to publically [rebuke them] categorically and that it is a duty to advise them privately, as occurs in the text the questioner cited. We say: the texts do not belie each other, nor clash with each other. So when is the criticism [to be] done publically? When there is benefit. The benefit being that evil is eliminated and replaced by good. It is done privately when public criticism does not serve a benefit; neither in eradicating the evil, nor in replacing it with good.’13
@@firavv ummm what? There is no such thing as ijmaah if the Sahabah and tabieen are in disagreement with the supposed "ijmaah". Ijmaah first and foremost includes the salaf. Otherwise you are basically saying the later ulama understood Islam better than the salaf. This is exactly what modernist reformists believe
Until this group shamsi, hammadi, wajdi Akkari, Sheikh Karim, sheikh usman etc doesn't stop calling deobandis, ppl of brotherhood etc as deviants, It's the responsibility of every Muslim to counter these fringe elements. They are not helping ummah but creating hatred and rift. For any clarification contact darululoom Deoband, but U just can't demean and defame an institution, it's scholars.
@@shoaibhaq8680 that's fact, there is a difference ofopinion on many things. And these differences are on furooyi masails. With due respect to barelvis, they are engaged in shirk, bid'aat and their scholars don't stop them from these. As far as salafi group is concerned, there understanding of Islam is very recent, they follow just sheikh ibn timiya, ibn qayyem etc of the past, and then contemporary Arab scholars like sheik albani, uthaimeen, fawzan, bun baz, ibn abdul wahhab etc. They taje literal meaning of Qur'an and Hadith, and their understanding has always been different from the majority of salaf of the past. But still today our fight is against ilhaad, feminism, non muslims etc, and there shd be unity among ummah. But ppl above named, they keep on targetting the group, the institution directly which can't be tolerated. NOT 5% MUSLIMS ON EARTH ARE SALAFIS ( pseudo). The majority of ummah can't go in wrong direction ever.
@MS-Hussain We don't just follow recent scholars. We follow the salaf (first three generations) and the aqeedah of early Ulama even: 1. Saeed ibn Amir Al-Dabi (died 210 hijri) 2. Ishaq Ibn Rahuya (d. 238 hijri) 3. Qutaybah ibn Saeed (d. 240h) 4. Uthman Ibn Saeed Al-Darimi (d. 280 A.H.) 5. M. Ibn Ishaq Ibn Khuzaymah (d. 311 A.H.) 6. Abu Uthman Al-Saboni (d. 449 A.H.) And more.... They lied to you, bro. Sadly. Even Imam Al-Bukhari's Aqeedah (no wonder since he studied under Ahmed Ibn Hanbal RA) is the same as ours. Your deobandi scholars probably never told you about any of this!
I kinda get what he’s saying and it make sense, but it’s strange to ask someone for a clarification based on one little thing. Especially a statement that can’t even be interpreted negatively. Like the example with being a fan of Madinah graduates. If you have _husn adh-dhan,_ then there is nothing in that statement that requires any clarification. Just think about the best of people who have come out of the university and just move on.
The brother said we shouldn't do it on camera, 2 seconds later proceeds to open up the issue on camera :\ May Allah protect us and give us the wisdom to act upon, and not say things then do the opposite a second later.
Very desperate attempt to criticise Uthman ibn Farooq from your end. He didn't open the topic, dilly did it via a direct question. If you are really so desperate about criticising him, at least bring some valid argument.
@@SJ-yd6zi I criticized the action. He could've demonstrated his saying by telling the interviewer, " I'm not going to discuss this matter on public as I said". Thanks for letting me know how desperate I am. Nice argument.
@@iMANTlS You literally said "2 seconds later proceeds to open up the issue on camera". Had you not been desperate to pick out anything to criticise Uthman, you would have 1. not made your initial senseless comment 2. conceded the fact that you were wrong to say that he opened up the issue when it was dilly who asked him directly. But I would only expect you to double down, despite the baseless criticism, seeing the fact how desperate you are - which might even be sectarian motivated.
@@SJ-yd6zi Oh wow. I will take the back the word "open up" don't worry. My apologies. But my point stand still he proceeded to talk about the issue. Sorry for my wrong choice of words. But my point stands, he says it shouldn't be on public, then rather than stopping the interviewer, he further elevates what the interviewer provided. :) Sectarian motivated xD. أعوذ بالله من الشيطان الرجيم أشققت عن قلبي ؟ Did you check my intention for me ? So rather than accepting the brother's doing the opposite of what he says, you'd put responsibility upon yourself in front of Allah that you know my intention :\. Salam brother, I will do good for you and stop here.
@@iMANTlS "he further elevates what the interviewer provided" bluder yet again. Do you understand what "elevates" mean? Did he go on to bad mouth brother Daniel? Did he delve deep into the topic that he disagreed with Daniel with? Or did he just clarify that his stance of taking it offline and what happened with Daniel has no contradiction as it was Daniel who wanted the panel to be public? Where and how exactly did he "elevate" the issue? "He proceeds to talk about the issue" does he? He spoke about the circumstances surrounding the issue, the validity of his questions and the fact that there is no contradiction between his current stance on taking it offline and what happened during the panel with Daniel. If he had brushed off clarifying the situation surrounding the event, like you suggested, you would be the first one to attack him, saying he is evading the question. Like I said, you couldn't find anything to attach Uthman ibn Farooq in the video, so you had to resort to such baseless "arguments". Just because Uthman ibn Farooq spoke against the innovated doctrines of ashaaira/maturidia which some of the people who associate themselves with madarstul deoband follow (notice *some* , not *all* ) , doesn't mean you have to be so desperate in attacking him. Come up with something better.
Shaykh Uthman is actually very knowledgeable, especially in Hadith science. He studied for over a decade, and with many scholars in India and Saudi…leagues above these lightweights who attack Mohammed Hijab. No comparison.
@@enghazi1 He isn't knowledgeable in hadith because he can't read Arabic to the level of a scholar, which is what the title of Sheikh is meant to underpin.
What an ignorant claim. Man has masters in science of hadith, hadiths are all in Arabic. He teaches Arabic and knows it very well. I don’t know if u are talking about Ali Dawah here or Sheikh Uthman, the pride of Ummah.
It makes sense that he has issues in reading arabic since he turned to islam later in life. Knowledge is what matters, and he's studied islam I believe. You've shown that your ignorant as ur condemning taking knowledge from him (which is backbiting or slandering unless you have a valid reason) just cuz he can't read Arabic well. What's next, I can't comment on an islamic channel cuz I have a video gamish username lol
This was the pinnacle of the confrontation, it was very frustrating and annoying to watch them do this. Br. Daniel has done great work in his field, deserves respect and recognition for this.
It was heartbreaking Felt sorry for br danail It would've been a lot better if shieke uthman and danail pulled each other to one side. Kareeem messed up the whole thing up. He makes all of us Muslims look very bad!
What they did to brother Daniel Haqiqatjou was totally wrong. I like Sheikh Uthman only for his Dawah work and nothing else. I hate anyone who turns sectarian and turns on his own fellow Muslim. Sectarianism has destroyed this Ummah. There was absolutely no need for asking anyone to clarify things that are trivial. The only scenario that calls for such an 'inquisition' when a Muslim makes or takes an explicitly unislamic or anti-Islamic stance. For instance brother Daniel Haqiqatjou calling out Yasir Qadhi for his stance on allying with Qaum Lut.
This brother is not in any position to ask for clarification from anyone. Something just doesn't sit well me about this brother. May Allah ta'ala guide us all. The manner in which they treated Daniel was disgusting and completely against all etiquette and enough proof of cemented bias that sits in their opinions. If they had true love and respect for Br. Daniel they would never have had such an aggressive approach towards him.
Is this based on you’re emotion and you’re opinion, or Quran wa sunnah. We need to know who are deviant! Like ali dawah saying interviewing woman and filming them is not against the sunnah!
Why is the comment section so hostile to Uthman ibn Farooq? I understand there may be disagreement but you can't call him out for his adab and then proceed to insult him.
Because they are sheeps blind following whatever they're told. Daniel is a friend of muhammad hijab so because uthman had an argument with him that means they must insult him now
This guy does a lot of good, but I doubt his qualifications.. His quranic recitation is terrible for someone who is supposed to have a masters.. No way any Islamic institution would pass him. I hope I am wrong, but the evidence seems clear
You are right. He is not qualified to be an alim, and should not refer to himself as a shaykh. Hes only good at giving dawah to non muslims and ought to stick with doing that.
@@ninaaden8338 I attended his lecture the day before yesterday at a Masjid and he said he isn't a "Shaykh" and the reason it is there on RU-vid is because he isn't the one managing the RU-vid channels.
@@SJ-yd6zi, it is his channel, I've heard him say its run by his student. Obviously he is giving the content to the channel. If he wanted he could get the title amended. Please don't play semantic games. I've seen him on so many videos where he is addressed as shaikh, and he never corrected it
@@kaz4845 "It is his channel" bring proof. The channel was started by his colleague(s) in dawah, and is now managed by them or his sons. My Shaykh also doesn't call himself Shaykh, but whenever we upload his video on the channel that is managed by us, we always refer to him as "Shaykh". Also, if these students of knowledge start correcting everyone who calls them "Shaykh", then they would be spending the whole day doing this without the conversation moving any further. I personally don't refer to him as "Shaykh", rather I call him Ustadh Uthman ibn Farooq. If you are so offended by people calling him Shaykh, then you should first call out Mufti Tariq Masood (teacher and member of iftah at Jamia Ar-Rasheed and Binori town (both associated with madarstul deoband)) who praised Ustadh Uthman and gave him so many honorary titles during the podcast. I'll be waiting.
He said he clarified their stance against yasir qadi and others, these are people everyone speaks against. Why didn’t he speak out against and clarify his stance with the extremist madakhila?
Sarbakaf sarbuland Deoband Deoband!! I feel after joining the group of salafis( including some madkhalis), Sheikh Usman is going astray. He shd come to our darul uloom of Deoband for clarifications/ discussions /debates. My own nephews are studying there alhamdulillah.
@@Y_Huss😊😊I follow ahlussunnah haq prast ulama. I find this entire group haq prast, that's sufficient for me. I don't see the label of deobandi to support anyone but his afkaars and khayalaat( beliefs and aqaid). These brothers are asha'ris, I hv no issues whatsoever with them. All the four madhabs are haq. ( deobandis are hanafis, rest all shafiees, hambalis, malikis) are haq)
@@amarnahad2835 they r still studying, they would love to but won't ask them to engage in these at the moment. They hv their own very vast syllabus to complete. Those who seek clarification on any aqeedah of Deoband, can visit/ contact darululoom. Deoband doesn't believe in debates. There are passouts of Deoband who can agree on these discussions surely. Mufti uthman Farooq sb can contact Dr Mufti Yasir Nadeem alwajidi Sb for all these clarifications. Both resides in US.
they should stick to dawah and not get involved in political issues as they always forget the verse And you did not kill them, but it was Allah who killed them. And you threw not, [O Muhammad], when you threw, but it was Allah who threw that He might test the believers with a good test. Indeed, Allah is Hearing and Knowing. or the verse Those who said about their brothers while sitting [at home], "If they had obeyed us, they would not have been killed." Say, "Then prevent death from yourselves, if you should be truthful."
@@iMANTlS i never said those verses are "not about getting into politics", it was in response to when they use the fake bloodshed argument and get involved in politics themselves
I like this sheikh amd his dawah but in this podcast only in this video many of the statements he made are wrong. If you watch his interrogation of Daniel you can clearly see he clarified everything.
Anas reported: The Messenger of Alah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “ Whoever speaks with a forked-tongue in the world, Allah will make two tongues of fire for him on the Day of Resurrection. ” Source: Musnad Abī Ya’lá 2746
solution for unity among muslims is not by bashing each other to prove thier islamness, but it should be by appointing an ameer for themsleves and by giving him bay'a of loyalty, this can be done even without political athourity as like muslims did when tbey were in makka before hijra
Lame excuses. He was called out by al-Islam publications but ran off. He is a snake. Also literally less one 1% of deobandis are mamatis who have been refuted. He making out its like 50/50.
Exactly this mamati thing, even amongst people who have Darul Uloom Deoband leaning scholars amongst them, don’t know what this is. They don’t teach it, don’t believe it and don’t discuss this. It’s a extremely minor fringe view and has been refuted multiple times.
resorting to name-calling is a sign of a bad attitude and narrow-mindedness. You can argue your case without insulting someone who did a tremendous dawah to non-Muslims. What is wrong with you?
Br Uthman needs to concede br Daniel's skill set which is superb articulation on current issues. Whereas br Uthman has his accomplishments. Best to not nitpick but to back each other up. Refrain from clarifications that would need more clarifications.
I am only saying the following because we are speaking about deen and it is necessary to know who we take it from. The fact is, this brother is not a scholar and needs to stop portraying himself as such. That is an insult to real scholars. Watch the videos AllIslamProduction made on his Arabic/Quran mistakes. And no I am not Deobandi/Ashari but the truth is the truth and the blunders Uthman made are indicative of a severe lack of knowledge in basic Arabic and Quran.
@@aaquib2010 he spoke to mufti masood before he interrogated daniel, after that he got called out by numerous deobandis and he still has not responded.
talk your differences offline..dont get the public involved in your dispute. Let opinions personal. differences of opinions as much as within the perimeter of Quran n Sunnah hence allow agree to disagree personally and it should not be aggravated.
I love sheikh Uthman. But i love him for the sake of Allah. So this love is not blind. I must say that what sheikh Uthman is calling a "clarification" was clearly an "interrogation". No one who said "i'm a fanboy of madina graduates" was ever made to clarify ev-er and no one will be. shiekh Uthman and his folks did this to daniel because they have sectarianism within them to some extent. Since Ahl-e-hadith is a firqa (sect) like deobandism,, and barelvism.
I think they contacted each other offline, and if that's true I think it's a good move on Sh. Uthman's side. But the bad news is that eventually, he'll say something worth calling out by Al Islam production channel again 🙂
I don't understand how there's so much controversy. Brother Daniel & Sheilh Uthman had a disagreement but as far as I know nothing concerning aqeedah so it's not a major problem imo
Honestly speaking most of these preachers are just out looking for a argument to win rather then teaching people about true Islam,when I read the Quran I want to become a better Muslim ,when I listen to these guys bickering over the smallest of disagreements and always trying to prove their way is the only right way I almost give up on it.
He is trying to paint his mistakes I do not understand why can't accept it because that incident was absolutely sudden for Brother Daniel, it was an interrogation and so far as the Deoband is concerned it is a well know Madrsa in the subcontinent undoubtedly famous and reputable prestigious institution having a great role in protecting and preserving Islam in the subcontinent and has also played a great role in freedom struggle from Britishers in India and they strictly adhere to Hanafi school and their Aqeeda's are similar to Salaf the Ahle Sunnah wal Jamah since few of their students or Akbreen has some views which is apparently kufr or due to ambiguous nature many people misunderstand things so I would request people like Uthman bin Farooq to clarify them personally with them having such opinion or views and try to understand their evidence for backing their claim or any opinion and views instead of throwing lies and false story without any investigation and clue just based on rumours and propaganda yes I do agree that there is differences and yes if the differences explicitly contradicts or against Quran and Sunnah and Ijmah then reject it as Shekh ul Islam Ibn Taymiyah R.A said it is a bidah.
Why is the video titled like this? Clearly you don't know the Sheik, this man is so knowledgeable, just calling him by name is actually disrespectful. This is not a average Muslim you find on the street, please change the title to Sheik Uthman. I am sure he personally doesn't find it disrespectful because of his humbleness, but that just shows that we should give this even more importance, because it shows that he is a real Sheik and a righteous man. We should show respect to these people who have spent their life studying Islam to benefit the ummah for the sake of Allah
people like uthman who are active in soft and safe daawah (invite followers of other religions, promote good manners amoung the community, reminders about the deen..salah...etc) these people have no right to criticize those who do the risky and dangerous daawh (calling out the tyrants, promoting khilafa concept, fighting the opression, defending the oppressed..). There is always jalousy from the soft/safe zone actors towards the risky/hard zone actors. They feel inferior and rightly feel so.
That was no doubt a humiliating thing they did to Daniel when they could've done something similar with some individuals that actual deserve it( deviants like mufti menk, omar suleiman, yaser qadhi, etc.).
@zeeshan-pk9qx so by saying only grave worshippors do it yr implying that criticizing the rulers is bad a big No do u have any evidence for that ? and how come u say no u dont support saudi rulers when youre againt criticizing them? cant u just men up and answer?..and for u to assume that everyone who does it is a grave worshippor is another thing you are making takfeer on all of us
This shouldn’t be on SP files because: 1) Shaykh Uthman Farooq is not a madkhali and is not associated with SPUBS and their likes (which is the focus of this channel) and 2) Daniel respects these mshayyikh, and considers them his teachers. This is not a madkhali case where they abused him/boycotted him/separated him from his wife, etc. rather there was discussion and clarification that’s it.
None of these Madakhilis can ever become “Sheikhs” go and study who can even carry this title of “Sheikh” before you loot that title and cover it onto these Madkhalis, I mean Randkhalis. Brother Daniel is way more knowledgeable than these Tawagheeth charlatans
Funny how this channel started off with "dealing with disunity spread by spubs", but has now turned into a sectarian channel in of itself. Brother Hijab and Ali don't seem to run the channel and I have good assumptions with them, but the person running the channel definitely seems to have personal grudges.
What type of aqeedah you are talking about does you want to say if we not follow your opinion then we are wrong and you are 100% right. I don't know why salafis are against deobandi and most of salafis don't know about deobandi and don't want to clearify what point they are wrong. If you have problem directly start debating with deobandi ulemas. I see you with Mufti Tariq Mosood in podcast there you don't point out what are they teaching they are wrong. I see you 2 face person.
With all due respect this man cannot even read the Qur’an. I am very disappointed as a student of knowledge when these people are called Mashayikh and scholars and have been given platform to come and talk about deen and the way of salaf. I am 100% sure this guy cannot explain most of the terms he is using.
Uthman is a big liar. Nowhere did Daniel say anything that would lead to "bloodshed" ....If criticizing MBS for allowing mixed gender dancing in Jeddah is wrong to Uthman then he is someone who sold his desi soul for a few riyals. And I say this as someone who believes Daniel goes overboard with criticizing women .
Daniel Haqiqatjou is not an imam nor a scholar and still the best the US has to offer in regards to opinions, relevance and futher content. Though I would differ with imam Abu Zayd on topics, I would place him second. The rest... well... It is not that others do not provide content of certain benefit, yet inbetween so much harmfull stuff.
I would highly disagree with you on Daniel being the best the US offers in regards to “relevant” content. There are plenty of people more qualified in both Islamic and western sciences that simply don’t have the popularity that he does. He is not the best by far. He’s only famous because he spends his entire time trying to build his brand. Bro doesn’t have an actual job.
@@sbasha7 Perfectly fine. Sure those you are referring to are out there, somewhere. I wouldn't deny and I don't doubt it. But whether Daniel has an "actual job" or some type of other occupation that he is supposed to attend to according to your wishes/demands/standards, is completely irrelevant. It rather gives impression you might have a dislike for the flavour of his "brand". As far as a "brand" is concerned; Considering the fact that he is able to reproduce the "brand" in active discussions either requires a high degree of improvising and quick thinking, or he is reffering back to genuinly held opinions (concepts). Opinions which he understands well enough to explain and defend, either way it's quite consistent. And since youtube's algorithm for some reason floods us with "American Dawah". If I have to choose anywhere in between the Hamza Yusufs (who is certainly qualified), the Yasirs, that Sulaiman and all his garbage. The likes of these who are promoting and injecting all those secular liberal concepts and advocating participation. These on one hand and on the other hand the likes of Uthman, Imam abu Zayd, who don't promote yet defend and even glorify secular (political and intellectual) nationstate leadership in the Muslim world at every turn, while using the word unity as some slogan.... bro ? If these are the choices presented, then give me that Danny Boy "Brand" any day, from amongst what the US has to offer. And if I where to include Canada, then sheikh Abdullah Quick would be my second pick after Haqiqatjou. And then Imam abu Zayd who, despite my strong criticism, deserves respect and thus 3rd pick. But, you are welcome to share the names of those you consider more relevant. Hidden gems are always welcome.
Are you kidding me? He hasn't said anything he's just trying to change the topics. That's not LIVE online recorded RU-vid videos....say coming your mouth..... Why is Uthman afraid of addressing What happened? Why is he still moving the goal of Post changing the topic? Why is he insisting to do the things he accuses Kaffir people of doing? 6:08
May الله سبحانه وتعالى Bless Sheikh Uthman Ibn Farooq. He made it clear that it was Daniel who wanted this to be public. Publicity and fanbase is a hidden disease amongst few duwat.
Didnt Uthman state in that video before speaking with Daniel about deobandi that he didnt know this will be public like this? If that's the case then how can he turn around and say that Daniel wanted this in public?
Just start talking about condemning the evils and fahaashi going on in Saudi under their so called khalifa 😂 and then start seeing the nifaaq of these salafi sect coming to the fore!
The amount of sheep mentality in these comments is insane, trying to attack uthman and insult him just because daniel is a friend of hijab is disgusting, it's true that interview didn't go as it meant to be but the intention was to clear the doubts and daniel wanted to do it on public for the same reason. Leave your bias for people and focus more about the truth
Ibn Farooq should stop pretend being an arab first off, and secondly he needs to go learn about the importance of injecting nuance when it comes to these topics of discord. Dude is a completely charlatan, a larper if you will.
@@MD-zf9dp Sunnah means the practice of the last prophet, the emulation of religious practice by the last prophet (pbuh) based on the foundation of the Quran. Following the sunnah means following the religious practice that the last prophet followed using the Quran as an example. Even the Quran affirmed that the last prophet is an exemplar messenger for us. Hadith in general is a collection of chains of narrations, the one we follow are authenticated hadith that have chains of narration. The are many positive hadith including one that emphasize memorizing and reciting Quran imperatively. I don't know if you are a Muslim or not, but your lack of knowledge in the science of hadith and the Quran speaks volume. Especially when you are not aware of category of hadith based on graded authentication level. Quran is the only book that is perfect and makes Islam the only true religion over the rest. Sunnah is a necessity for unification and consistency of religious practice like congregation, fasting, cleanliness, proper method of praying, and so on.
Oh really does this speak volumes? lol Narrated Um Sharik: Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) ordered that the salamander should be killed and said, "It (i.e. the salamander) blew (the fire) on Abraham." Reference : Sahih al-Bukhari 3359 @@ShinSekaiAnimationz
