“Shiekh al Shieukh” Usama Hassan and the Marriage Contract.
Prepare yourselves for this
Usama Hassan our so called “representative” shouts out from his podium
Too many fathers have abused their right of wilayah (guardianship) over their daughters and too many husbands have abused their right of initiating divorce for us to continue with law rooted in patriarchal societies. It is high time that Muslim women enjoy the same rights and freedoms under Islamic law as they do under present legal systems in the UK.
Ok everyone lets give this man a “standing ovation”. Now we have this heretic telling us about our religion. Supposedly we have to push forward those rights and freedoms under Islamic Law that are present in the legal systems in the UK! Well that is great Usama. It is amazing. These modernists and secularists want to tell us the Muslims about our religion? When it comes to clear cut issues like the Hijab, they bring up some exotic twisted reference and insist that we must accept the “mosaic” of Islam and its different schools of thought. Now they bring up this contract and say it represents Islam! As if it is Qati and everything else is patriarchal! Subhan Allah, yet this contract, goes against the vast majority if not all of the Islamic scholarship! Now I am not here to discuss the merits of the case here or there. My concern is with blatant double standards!
No Usama we dont need you or your friends from the arch secularist Dr Ghayasuddin Siddiqui to your heretical buddies in the Quilliam Foundation and the City Circle. Alhamidullah we have our traditions from the Salaf and those who sincerely followed them!
JIMAS wants to give a platform to this man?
Salaam aleikum (to the Muslims reading this)
Again this is not directly related to this, but I thought I would post this because there are some striking similarities between the munafiqs the UK govt. is promoting (in Quilliam, CityCircle, BMSD,) and the munafiqs promoted by neo-cons in America (variously known as “Progressive Muslims”). The pattern is so strikingly similar that I am starting to think that it simply cannot be a coincedence anymore — that there are elements of the U.S. govt working alongside the Foriegn Office to get the Muslims in the UK where the Muslims in the U.S. are already headed.
You should look at this non-issue of “marriage contract” the same way a drug dealer gets potential clients/future addicts. You start them off with “soft issues” (forced marriage) or “soft drugs” (cigarettes, marijuana, diluted forms of drugs) and then proceed over time to “harder issues” (cultural taboos — such as homosexuality, women led prayer, riba, open abandonment and contempt for the Ummah overseas and the Prophet/Sunnah) similar to getting someone onto “harder drugs” (cocaine, heroin, crystal meth, concentrated drugs). This process does take time but it eventually will produce a hardened addict who will say and do anything you want so as to continue receiving the drugs (at whatever price you set).
This statement by Usama Hassan should be thus looked at as part of a continuum of where you will eventually end up — similar to where the “Progressive Muslims” in America are leading the way now.
1. This was an article written by a “Progressive Muslim” from America in Rupert Murdoch’s paper (the WSJ):
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121797979078815073.html
2. She (Asra Nomani) is:
a. an adulteress who had a child out of wedlock and tried to bring him to the masjid. b. a media whore who brought local news agencies with cameras in tow and tried to pray alongside men i.e. no gender segregation.
c. part of a “movement” to get women to lead jum’ah prayer, give khutbahs, endorse homosexual unions as “Islamic” and “modernize Islam” into the 21st Century.
d. Was also a close colleague and friend of the murdered journalist, Daniel Pearl.
3. The manuscript for the book she wrote about above mocking and ridiculing both the Prophet (saw) as well as Ayesha (RA) has already gotten enough publicity on right wing/neo-con blogs that there is a good chance that some other publisher WILL pick it up and publish this garbage just to spite Muslims.
4. The Muslim lesbian (Irshad Manji) has nominated her for Obama’s new Muslim Outreach Coordinator here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/irshad-manji/wanted-reformist-muslims_b_117540.html
From the Democratic blogs i’ve read, there is NO opposition to her nomination. Keep in mind that the position was vacated by a Syrian Sufi close to Ikhwan circles in America who was forced to resign just a few days ago.
Don’t be surprised if you see Majid, “ED”, Shiraz, et al pushing the same “hard issues” that “progressive Muslims” in America are already famous for.
YOU WILL EVENTUALLY GET ON THE SAME TRAIN AS US!
Look at this issue of the “marriage contract” to get a preview of where things are going for you guys.
Lick boots like them and you get a seat at the table, if not, you are an “extremist”
salaam aleikum,
Sameer
Sameer
August 9, 2008 at 3:51 am
We now need to urgently contact Abu Muntasir to drop Usama Hassan from the JIMAS conference.
If he is not prepared to do this, then we must do to the other speakers as related by Br. Hamza:
“…I have been bombarded with phone calls and emails trying to explain to me that if I give a talk at JIMAS it would associate me with those in the community who attempt to ’secularise’ the deen. Furthermore they added that it may effect my dawah work as the forthcoming international platforms that want me to speak may change their minds on my invitation; due to the negative perception that influential and other Muslims have concerning the current affiliations of your organisation.”
Are the other speakers aware of what Usama is doing? Are they prepared to share a platform with him? If they are, then they MUST challenge him!
Ali Abdullah
August 9, 2008 at 6:18 am
Sameer it is amazing isnt it? Allah will protect this deen from these sell outs, it is only for us to reap the rewards for our hereafter. What a wonderful opportunity! The “quietiest” “scholarly” approach can no longer stand! Inshallah their will be a million traditionalislamists, a million “Ibn Adams” to expose them and make the word of Allah and his prophet high.
May Allah provide us with the eloquent sharp tongue to expose them and give us the humility and the gratefulness with it.
Oh yeah, Sameer we have already had the “hard drugs”. See our post on Maajid and homosexuality. Even Zina is allowed! Yes I mean it, even illicit sex is allowed or shall we say there is no meaningful difference between it and marriage in the public sphere.
traditionalislamism
August 9, 2008 at 8:37 am
One thing to note – many of the supportive commentators in the press are the liberal muslim women (un covered) – bleating on about how it is great that they now have a shariah compliant nikah, no doubt which fits in well with their shariah compliant hair cuts and “modest dress”
Its no wonder – the government has identified one attack source against Islam could be some of the more naive and easily impressed of the muslim society
As for the people who put this sharia compliant pork together – as one person said they are the “Useful idiots” trying to make the community more “moderate” by ignoring the bombings of wedding in the middle east and beyond by the british and americans while focusing on some cultural practises that had no basis in islam anyway
Abu Abdullah
August 9, 2008 at 1:09 pm
I’m trying to understand their minset. If the have such a problem with the Shariah law, then why don’t they just ‘I don’t like the Shariah’, why do they have to change the Shariah?
Allah’s law came to subjugate the desire, however, it seems like these people want to subjugate Allah to their desire!
Isn’t it astonishing that these people over amplify some minor problems within the Muslims, but have nothing to say about the ills of western social system. They want us to follow the western system of marriage, where vows are taken one day and the very next day either the husband or the wife is sleeping with another person. How can we trust the Kuffar when Allah himself doesn’t trust them – doesn’t the word kuffar means concealing the truth?
As I alluded to before, I think we need like minded people to start a movement to take on these evil people. We should not become complacent – definitly Allah will expose them, but we should remember that the current state the Ummah is, is because of our complacency, disunity and allowing the seculraists, liberalists and all the heretics to dominate the discussion with their filth.
p.s. is there anyone who used to follow these fake scholars and now don’t us a result of their betrayal?
Abu Ridwan
August 9, 2008 at 8:45 pm
A Jihad for Love:
http://www.laindependent.com/default.asp?sourceid=&smenu=84&twindow=Default&mad=No&sdetail=4006&wpage=1&skeyword=&sidate=&ccat=&ccatm=&restate=&restatus=&reoption=&retype=&repmin=&repmax=&rebed=&rebath=&subname=&pform=&sc=1014&hn=laindependent&he=.com
from the same link above:
“There are a couple of gay women who are described as Sufis, a sect within Islam that’s seen as the most mystical and also the most permissive. While authentically Muslim, Sufi Muslims are allowed to drink alcoholic beverages and they place a great deal of weight on achieving an evolved consciousness, as witnessed by its famous whirling dervishes. Homosexual love is also an ancient part of this sect’s traditions.”
speaks for itself.
salaam aleikum,
sameer
Sameer
August 9, 2008 at 11:02 pm
Out of interest, here is a Sufi critique of this ‘marriage contract’. He says it is potentially invalid under all 4 Sunni mazhabs. Contrast this with so-called Salafi – or Sufi-Salafi – Usama Hassan who was a part of this criminal enterprise!! How can JIMAS possibly invite him to speak, how can Abu Muntasir share the same room as him!?
signs-on-the-horizon.blogspot.com/2008/08/muslim-marriage-contract-is-potentially.html
Ali Abdullah
August 10, 2008 at 1:22 am
This contract is here:
muslimparliament.org.uk/Documentation/Muslim%20Marriage%20Contract.pdf
Ali Abdullah
August 10, 2008 at 2:03 pm
Someone needs to ask Sheikh Suhaib Hassan why he does not either stand by his son or denounce him? I have a great respect for Sheikh Suhaib as he conducted my own Nikah – but what i cannot understand is how he can remain silent about his own son going around dismantling the institutions of islamic marriage in this manner.
There is a saying in urdu that from the womb of a wali (of Allah), shaitaan can be born and from the womb of shaitaan, a wali can be born. I am afraid to say that this seems to be illustrated very well here.
Sigh
August 10, 2008 at 4:56 pm
And br. Sameer,
the links between the “progressive” muslims of north america and the UK are long and deep. they are all part of an extensive front to dismantle and distort islam from within. There are many common intersections inc. “Sheikh” Hisham Kabbani, Ziauddin Sardar and many others….
A friend of mine began work on a lengthy essay/ book on this phenomenom but unfortunately never went through with it.
Sigh
August 10, 2008 at 4:58 pm
As-salaam alaikum
as someone though not a Salafi who admired Usama Hasan Im genuinely shocked by this document. The implication of this document is the acceptance of the claim of Islamophobes -that it is Islamic law that has opressed Muslim women not as every reasonably knowledgeable Muslim knows , cultural practices. This contract implies that the orthodox ulema, the Imams of the Salaf, of the past 1400 years (which include many women) have deliberatly distorted the deen (despite knowing the punishment for this) and deprived women of their rights.
The document is laughable. Its like a feminist charter not something that comes from Islamic fiqh.
Brother
August 10, 2008 at 5:22 pm
Allah will keep the truth alive. The British decided to use the American Progressive Muslim model to dismantle the Muslims in the UK – which has established a strong network (due to largely the small land-mass). Once the Brits realised that the old strategy of using MCB and ‘working together’ wasn’t working. They decided to look abroad. Europe had radical moves of marginalising the Muslims (France, Italy etc) – so that won’t work. But the US was destroying the fabric of the Muslim community by pushing on the liberal values and marginalising the true representatives. The British know too well that this is the strongest weapon against the British Muslim Ummah and they will do their best to make sure those solo secularists (Zia Sardar) and those fully funded (Ed Hussain) get as much exposure and air-time as possible.
They want to put doubt and fear into the Muslim community, they want everyone to conform to the liberalised version of Islam. This isn’t new. Muslims have come against this throughout history, from the time of the Prophet. The people have protected the faith through sincere devotion to Allah and the huffaz of ilm and quran.
They do not want Muslims to mix religion and politics. In fact, a Muslim cannot be political in any way! Sufistic Islam (their skewed version of it) is what they want everyone to take up.
Just like the Church, Islam must be reined in and made to compromise in every way possible. Recently the church decided to reconsider the Gay marriages of clergy/priests etc – just like they liberalised everything else. Nobody in this day and age respects the Church anymore, all the values it has stood for has vanished. And day by day it is losing church-goers and churches are being turned into nightclubs (unless ofcourse it is maintained as a house of worship, by turning it into a Mosque).
Islam will not be turned into a ‘Christianity’ like of today. We must, much like Orthodox Jews, stick to our deen, steadfast, uncompromising and relentless.
Ahmadi
August 11, 2008 at 3:00 pm
Look at these conditions in the contract
• abuse his wife/child(ren) verbally, emotionally, physically, or sexually
• desert/be absent from the marital home for more than 60 days unless by mutual agreement
• withhold economic contribution towards his wife/family
• sexually transmit disease or other transmissible diseases
• misuse /interfere with the wife’s property
Specifically the one about the disease……
What are these people on????
What kind of accusations are these to level at a whole community???
What i can’t believe is that one or two over at places like deenport.com seem to think this may be an acceptable contract – have they read these conditions?
Does anyone else sign up to such “conditions” when they get married?????? What are they trying to say about the Muslims?
Without talking about the Islamic irregularities of the contract – it is obviously an attack on the Muslim community and our values, and slandering us to boot
Abu Abdullah
August 13, 2008 at 4:34 pm
He can be confronted about this at the JIMAS conference if they are still determined to have him!
Ali Abdullah
August 14, 2008 at 7:03 am
Please have a look at this marriage document which have been produced by the ‘giants’ of this Ummah after thorough research and deliberations.
Article 1. A married Muslim man or a Woman should have the right to have affairs with others without the fear of being condemned by religious edicts, as this contradict European human rights law
Article 2. A Muslim man or woman has the right to same sex relationships, including forming a marriage contract, as guaranteed by the ECHR (European Convention for Human Rights)
Article 3. A Muslim man or woman has the right to practice ‘bed em before you wed em’ as this is the cultural norm of the west, and Islam alows the adoption of customs, and it has been shown that many ‘arranged marriage’ doesn’t work
Article 4. A Muslim woman has the right to run off with the ‘best man’, brother in-laws and father-laws if she desired, as it is part of wester customs
Article 5. The Muslim father has the right to imprison his daughters for the sake of satifying his sexual pleasure and producing further offsprings (This was recently decided by the landmark case in Austria)
Article 6. A Muslim married man has the right to seek affection and gratification from prostitutes.
Article 7. A muslim man or woman has the right to view pornographic material as this will ’spice up’ their sex life – Islam encourages a good sex life
Article 8. A Muslim married couple have the right to practice ‘threesome, foursome, or even orgies’ as this encourages a feeling of brotherhood and promotes community cohesion
Articel 9. A Muslim man should provide the necessary clothing such as, mini skirts, leotards, whipps etc. for his wife and including the misstress
Article 10. Muslims should encourage their fellow Muslims to first form a relationship, have kids and wait 20 years before they committ themselves to marriage – in this way they will save a lot of money on wedding expences (Islam discourages wasting)
Article 11. NO MARITAL LAWS SHOULD CONTRADIT WESTERN LAW AS THIS WILL LEAD TO US BEING LABELLED ‘BACKWARD’, AND WILL MEAN OUR FUNDING WILL BE STOPPED (CAN’T ALLOW THAT I GOT A FAMILY TO FEED, IT’S AN ISLAMIC OBLIGATION TO LOOK AFTER MY FAMILY)
Article 12. NO ONE SHOULD QUESTION THIS DOCUMENT. THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN PRODUCED AFTER SEVERAL YEARS OF CONSPIRACY AND SOME GOVERMENT BRIBES
Article 13. EVERYONE SHOULD TRUST US, THE FOUNDERS OF THIS HISTORICAL DOCUMENT, AS WE ARE REALLY SINCERE
Article 14. THIS DOCUMENT IS THE GREATEST THING EVER PRODUCED. IT WILL BRING US TO ENLIGHTENMENT.
Abu Ridwan
August 14, 2008 at 1:33 pm
Sh Haytham on the marriage contract- in several parts- please spread!
Anon
August 14, 2008 at 10:12 pm
May Allah reward Shiekh Haddad
traditionalislamism
August 14, 2008 at 11:28 pm
All 6 parts can be accessed more easily from here:
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=muslim+marriage+contract&search_type=
Ali Abdullah
August 15, 2008 at 1:22 am
Ghayassudin Siddiqui and his partners in crime (those at City Circle like Usama Hassan) lied about the support they had from other groups! See this thread at Islamic Awakening:
http://forums.islamicawakening.com/showthread.php?t=15089&page=2
Part VI Summary:
- Nobody has the right to legislate in the religion like this. Anybody who makes two divorced people permissible for eachother has made the haram halal, no Muslim who fears Allah will permit this.
- Sh Haytham talked to MCB and AbdulBary (the head) said: ‘I never endorsed this!’ He said that MCB as a body never endorsed it, but only one member did! So City Circle used MCB’s name to add credibilty to it! This is pure deception.
- They say they have the support of the most important national Muslim organisations- this is a pure LIE! The Islamic Shari’ah Council *never* endorsed it. In fact, when the draft contract was brought to them they rejected it immediately. Don’t believe them, the people who wrote it refer to important bodies to present an illusion of authenticity, they are liars.
- Spread this condemnation, convey it!
SHAYKH HAYTHAM SAYS THAT WHOEVER GETS MARRIED BY THIS CONTRACT IS ABOUT TO COMMIT ZINAH OR VERY CLOSE TO IT.
Ali Abdullah
August 15, 2008 at 1:33 am
Actually, this is a better link:
http://www.youtube.com/user/MRDFUK
Ali Abdullah
August 15, 2008 at 2:46 am
http://forums.islamicawakening.com/showthread.php?t=15089
Summary of the critique
Anon
August 15, 2008 at 10:32 am
May Allah give Shk Haddad strength and courage to stand firm when we need people like him to represent and guide us.
The very fact that the writers, at the beginning of the contract, lied about the concensus of the ulema on the contract – is enough for me to declare these people as untrustworthy and un-Islamic in their intentions/approach.
Ahmadi
August 15, 2008 at 6:20 pm
Maybe Shk Haddad would be a catalyst for other ’scholars’ to have the backbone to stand up and defend Islam.
Abu Ridwan
August 15, 2008 at 7:06 pm
inshallah Sk Suhaib Hasan will stand up to this as this has gone too far. And he finds it unacceptable. This contract was never presented to the Islamic Shariah Council for debate.
musab
August 16, 2008 at 8:52 pm
Abu Ridwan
(your post of Aug 14 1.33pm)
where did you get the article 1 to 14? This is not in the marriage contract produced by Mufti Barkatullah and his corrupt team – and it seems more like a joke.
musab
August 16, 2008 at 8:59 pm
The above post of 14 Aug by me is not real, but just trying to show how pathetic and silly thing this whole thing is, and to show that what these guys have started, there’s no limit to sillyness.
Who knows? maybe one day will get some deviants come up with more silly things.
Abu Ridwan
August 17, 2008 at 9:35 am
“This contract was never presented to the Islamic Shariah Council for debate.”
Ironically, it actually was! As Sh Haytham noted, they rejected it immediately! So not only can we not trust these people with our religion, we can’t trust them not to deceive us.
Anon
August 17, 2008 at 8:05 pm
So if the Islamic shariah council and MCB were used by these people, why are they not openly condemning these people for giving false information. Most of these organisations say diferent things to diferent people. Are they waiting to see which way the wind is blowing?
Abu Ridwan
August 17, 2008 at 9:00 pm
Read what Maajid Nawaz says about Usama Hassan in his reply to a right-wing website!!:-
http://www. security-alert.nl/forums/counterterrorism/8197-quilliam-responds.html
“Moving on, another question raised has been that of our gratitude for having Dr. Usama Hassan as one of our official advisors. Dr. Usama Hassan has also travelled the same path of extremism in his youth, only to mature into a progressive and enlightened voice for moderation today. He recently participated alongside Ed Hussain in an official Foreign Office delegation to Egypt to represent a more British understanding of our faith, and is now one of the leading theological voices for British Islam.
Concerns have been raised about Dr Usama’s father, Shaikh Shu’aib Hassan, who is a very conservative voice amongst Britain’s Muslim communities. Suffice to say that Dr Usama is not his father, and Shaikh Shu’aib is not Dr Usama. Dr Usama respectfully disagrees with his father on many of the problematic issues of our day. On the Caliphate, Dr Usama Hassan has stated clearly, and without reservation, in his Quilliam Foundation launch speech – only 10 minutes long and on our website – that he believes in Secularism, and that secularism was indeed always a part of traditional Islam.
Consequently, Dr Usama believes in using the name Caliphate to reclaim Muslim secularism through it, as he believes that past Caliphates always were secular in nature. The Quilliam Foundation is concerned with substantively challenging those who wish to adopt Shari’ah as state law, not with those who merely use the word Caliphate to mean a secular state; for that would be an exercise in semantics. On this note, it is perhaps pertinent to state that the Quilliam Foundation has time and time again criticised and challenged those who call for ‘Islamist Supremacism’, or the belief that the Shari’ah must be dominant as state law. “
Ali Abdullah
August 18, 2008 at 10:29 am
Read what Maajid Nawaz says about Usama Hassan in his reply to a right-wing website!!:-
security-alert.nl/forums/counterterrorism/8197-quilliam-responds.html
“Moving on, another question raised has been that of our gratitude for having Dr. Usama Hassan as one of our official advisors. Dr. Usama Hassan has also travelled the same path of extremism in his youth, only to mature into a progressive and enlightened voice for moderation today. He recently participated alongside Ed Hussain in an official Foreign Office delegation to Egypt to represent a more British understanding of our faith, and is now one of the leading theological voices for British Islam.
Concerns have been raised about Dr Usama’s father, Shaikh Shu’aib Hassan, who is a very conservative voice amongst Britain’s Muslim communities. Suffice to say that Dr Usama is not his father, and Shaikh Shu’aib is not Dr Usama. Dr Usama respectfully disagrees with his father on many of the problematic issues of our day. On the Caliphate, Dr Usama Hassan has stated clearly, and without reservation, in his Quilliam Foundation launch speech – only 10 minutes long and on our website – that he believes in Secularism, and that secularism was indeed always a part of traditional Islam.
Consequently, Dr Usama believes in using the name Caliphate to reclaim Muslim secularism through it, as he believes that past Caliphates always were secular in nature. The Quilliam Foundation is concerned with substantively challenging those who wish to adopt Shari’ah as state law, not with those who merely use the word Caliphate to mean a secular state; for that would be an exercise in semantics. On this note, it is perhaps pertinent to state that the Quilliam Foundation has time and time again criticised and challenged those who call for ‘Islamist Supremacism’, or the belief that the Shari’ah must be dominant as state law. “
Ali Abdullah
August 18, 2008 at 10:33 am
http://www.mcb.org.uk/article_detail.php?article=announcement-734
Hasan et al have been well and truly exposed.
Leibniz
August 18, 2008 at 5:52 pm
This clearly proves that Usama Hassan does support secularism over shariah for a Muslim community.
His silence and lack of response and constant support for these secular ideals have proven to me and many others that they seek to disfigure Islam to suit their slave masters.
If you think that secular law can, or has to be allowed to, override Allah’s law, then you are surely beyond the realm of the Muslims and Islam, no?
Ahmadi
August 18, 2008 at 10:34 pm
http://www.mcb.org.uk/article_detail.php?article=announcement-734
Just saw this. Seems like they took Shaykh Haitham’s advice.
http://muslimmatters.org/2008/08/16/uks-marriage-contract-if-not-zina-it-is-close-to-zina-adultery/
Wassalaamu Alaykum wa Rahmatullah
Tariq
August 19, 2008 at 1:25 am
A fitting logo for the “Islamic” marriage contract…
The so-called Islamic marriage contract recently proposed by the Muslim Institute has attracted a lot of attention in the Muslim blogosphere lately, much of it negative, for reasons anyone who has read it will understand. It contains brazenly anti-Isla…
Indigo Jo Blogs
August 21, 2008 at 1:39 am