Mufti Abu Layth refutes the concepts of "dayooth" and "gheerah". Salafis and Incel/Redpill/MGTOW "Muslims" EXPOSED!

Don't be fooled by Daniel Haqiqatjou's debate with the Apostate Prophet

Islamophobes and rabid troll Muslims are the opposite sides of the same coin. They both like to trigger Muslims, they both like to take Quran verses and hadiths out of context for a "shock" effect, and in general they like seeing other Muslims lose faith.

I have spoken several times about the psychotic fitnah of Daniel Haqiqatjou on here. He's an idiot. He has no training in Islam. He has no degree, no diploma, no certificate, nor any kind of ijaza in Islamic studies. He has a degree in western philosophy, from an American university!

Recently, he debated a noted Islamophobe "Apostate Prophet". Apostate Prophet is very well know in the Muslim and non-Muslim community, because he insults and degrades Islam. Now, why would Daniel debate such a person?

Daniel's main focus has always been criticizing "feminism" (i.e. Muslim women who choose not to be burka covered housewives). If you look on Daniel's twitter or Facebook, 90% of his content is dedicated to "defending" orthodox Islam by attacking and insulting Muslim women, in the name of Islam. Most of the other 10% is dedicated to attacking noted orthodox Islamic scholars like Yasir Qadhi, Omar Sulaimaan, Sheikh Hamza Yusuf, Abu Amina Ilyas, Jonathan Brown, Mufti Menk (!), and so forth. According to Daniel, these scholars have become "feminized" or "cucked" because they don't talk about masculinity. If these scholars don't join the movements he gave birth to (Muslim Red Pill, Incel Muslims, and Muslim MGTOW), then they are are "modernized", and have a "colonized" mentality. Yes, this guy who has given birth to munafiq men's rights movements, this guy who has absolutely nothing in Islamic studies, wants to lecture actual scholars of Islam!

You see what Daniel is trying to do? This debate was a PUBLICITY stunt. He doesn't give a damn about defending Islam from Islamophobes. If he did give a damn, then he wouldn't be finding random articles and random comments about "feminism" on a regular basis. He would instead take on Islamophobes.

Daniel did the same when he debated Imam Tawhidi. He knows Tawhidi is a well known controversial speaker. Now how many times has Daniel actually speak about Tawhidi on his twitter of Facebook? Hardly. As I said above, 90% of his content is dedicated to attacking and insulting women in the name of Islam. He has a very strange obsession in constantly picking on women. Case an point, one example was he linked to an article about Johnny Depp's ex-wife lying about being abused. What was the purpose of this? Even his most dedicated followers (you can see from the comments once in a while) get a little uneasy.

Daniel posts all of his content on Facebook, Twitter, Telegram, YouTube, his website (Muslim Skeptic) and his organization (Al Asna). It is literally all the same bullshit he just recycles over and over. If you pay attention to Daniel, you will see he gets triggered very easily when his followers don't agree with him. He will attack and block anyone who criticizes him. His SIX social media outlets all have the exact same content. Why does he do this on so many social media accounts? He wants to be popular, he wants fame. He knows he can get a quick boost when he goes after Tawhidi or Apostate Prophet.

Here's another example. Haqiqatjou has made a Pakistani scientist/political analyst (Pervez Hoodbhoy) his new target. No one outside of Pakistan knows who Hoodbhoy is. And within Pakistan, Hoodbhoy gets a lot of hate from extremists and radical islamists. Haqiqatjou realized he can get some popularity from Pakistani's. If he goes after Hoodbhoy, Pakistani's will flock to Daniel's social media accounts. This is what Haqiqatjou wants. He see's an opportunity here. He knows Pakistan is a hellhole for women. He see's a market for his popularity here. So it's not surprising so many hyper masculine Pakistani men have now flooded his page and share all of his anti-feminist rhetoric. Haqiqatjou doesn't give a damn about Hoodbhoy. He knows this is a way to get people on to his "Muslim women are westernized!" band wagon. I have mentioned before in my video that I did how so many of these toxic masculine Pakistani men have been banned from popular Pakistani social media pages. It was not a surprise to see so many of them in love with Haqiqatjou's degenerate mentality. It was not surprising to see them share his content about women.

Mark my words, go on his social media accounts and see how he will resort to attacking Muslim women, and "cuckold" Muslim men in a few days. That is all he does. He shitposts, he trolls. He realizes his numbers can grow if he can pull off a few strings. *EDIT* Guess what happened? Go look on Haqiqatjou's Facebook and Twitter since his debate. Out of the dozens of posts he has done since his debate with the Apostate Prophet, the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of them are attacking feminism, and the rest of his posts have been dedicated to attacking "misguided" scholars. See that? Who called it? Yes, it was me.

P.S to be fair, about a dozen posts from April to June, Haqiqatjou went on long rants against lockdowns. He was quoting articles by conspiracy theorists and "academics" who appear on Fox News. He was losing his head about this! He was having a fit about lockdowns! And guess what? Ever since US states opened, there was a SURGE in coronavirus cases. So far, he has been silent about this topic. He was proven wrong and he won't even correct himself.

Great video by Mufti Abu Layth on hijab not being mandatory for Muslim women

The amount of scholars who say hijab is not mandatory continues to rise. Mufti Abu Layth here, is another one who perfectly explains how hijab is merely Arab culture, because no where in the Quran or in any authentic hadith is there a ruling for women to cover their heads.

The Mufti also goes into detail about insecure men who obsess about hijab. They feel guilty about their own sins, so they try to impose "Islam" on others. He also explains the "burka or bikini" argument used by these insecure men (and the self hating, holier than thou, self righteous females).

Sure, he himself doesn't look like a traditional mufti, but he is one, and his looks shouldn't negate his views.

Anyways, here is the video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRR4o2JZIZc

Why the ijma is unreliable

Ijma is an arabic word in Islamic philosophy which refers to the consensus of scholars. So in other words, when the majority of Islamic scholars agree on a certain matter, according to traditional Islamic jurisprudence, that matter needs to be followed by Muslims. Ijma usually comes into play when a clear answer isn't available from the Quran or Hadith.

Hardline/Salafi/Wahhabi Muslims ALWAYS talk about the ijma to try and prove that there is only one Islam, and that everyone throughout Islamic history has always agreed on every subject (not even close to being true. Islamic scholarship is riddled with differing and contradicting views). I talk about this quite a bit in my article about not having to be a liberal or conservative Muslim:
http://mymuslimthoughts.blogspot.com/2019/02/do-you-have-to-be-liberal-muslim-or.html

Those hardline/Salafi/Wahhabi Muslims throw the "ijma card" when they believe they are right and everyone else is misguided and wrong. I myself personally never questioned the ijma, I mean if the majority of Islamic scholars agreed on something, who am I to go against it?

But then I started to think about silly rulings from scholars, like in Saudi Arabia, where they banned women from driving, or passed rulings that all women need to wear hijab. Like seriously, why? Why is it only in Saudi that these scholars have such absurd rulings? What about orthodox Islamic scholars in Pakistan, why haven't they passed the same rulings? How can orthodox Islamic scholars differ? Keep that train of thought going, why is it conservative scholars in European/Eurasian Muslim countries (Bosnia, Kosovo, Albania, Turkey, Kazakhstan) didn't have the same rulings as other conservative Islamic scholars in different parts of the world?

Here is an article that I did about culture heavily influencing how we view Islam that you might want to take a look at:
http://mymuslimthoughts.blogspot.com/search?q=culture

Anyways, back to the topic of ijma. Here is something interesting that I found. Medieval Muslim scholars had a consensus that the earth was flat:
https://theislamissue.wordpress.com/2019/03/22/scholarly-consensus-of-a-round-earth/

Yes, it is a website critical of Islam. However they prove (with quotes) how early and medieval Muslim scholars literally held the view that the earth is flat. They literally believed that the Quran says the earth is flat! Obviously, we know through modern scholars (and grade 2 science) that the earth is round. Yet there was an ijma on this! The article actually helps Islam because it is a slap in the face to the annoying right wing/Salafi/Wahhabi/hardline Muslims who come at you aggressively.

Similarly, Ibn Taymiyyah, a medieval Muslim scholar, was considered by most scholars at his time to be misguided, a deviant, or even a kaffir. Yet today, conservative Muslims celebrate his work. Right here the ijma ideology is proven wrong again, and conservative muslims did it themselves.

Here is an article by an Islamic scholar that talks about the emotional blackmail right wing/ultraorthodox Muslims use to try and force their beliefs on others:
http://www.khalidzaheer.com/questioning-the-basis-of-ijma/

So, what does this prove? It proves that scholars, even the majority, can be wrong. Scholars are human, they are not divine. The religion of Islam is also not reserved for scholars, Islam is for everyone to understand and practice. Many times, scholars are unable to understand underlying social issues. This doesn't allow them to think critically, but instead just give blind answers.

So next time a right wingWahabi/Salafi      Muslim comes at you saying so and so is agreed upon by scholars as being "haraam" or "halaal", tell them about this flat earth example. What is haraam and halaal are clearly mentioned in the Quran and Sunnah, but there is a lot of grey area on a LOT of matters. Unfortunately, hardline right wing Muslims will automatically label them as "haraam" or "halaal" because of what their desires say.

Why Muslims should not support the Brunei Sultan

The Brunei Sultan recently passed laws on homosexuality being punishable by stoning, and conservative Muslims all over social media showed their joy. Even the idiot Daniel Haqiqatjou, who's article on this basically tells Muslims to get a bag of popcorn and go watch some stonings. And then on some right wing Pakistani pages, the Brunei sultan is being hailed a "Amir Al Mu'mineen". Now let's see how stupid everyone is on this.

Firstly, the Sultan of Brunei is a SEXUAL DEVIENT. He has NUMEROUS mistresses, in addition to several wives. He is FILTHY rich, with hotels all over the world, which sell alcohol. His residence, the Istana Nurul Iman, is the world's largest private residence! He throws lavish parties (he spent $27 million for his 50th birthday- https://stylecaster.com/throwback-thursday-the-sultan-of-brunei-spent-27-million-on-his-50th-birthday-party/). His country, while rich, has half of it's citizens living in poverty:
https://borgenproject.org/poverty-in-brunei/

Secondly, the Sultan of Brunei was not selected or elected to lead the state. He was born into royalty and wealth, and gets to be the leader of a country. Just like many other Muslim countries that have royal rulers, this is a closed club. You can't be a part of it. If you are born into royalty and wealth, you keep it all of your life, and then your children get it after you. You will live a life of riches, women, expensive luxury cars, luxury palaces, special treatment everywhere, and so on. You will also be immune from any laws. Just like other Muslim countries that have royal rulers, the laws that they create and pass do NOT apply to them. The royal families can do whatever they want to, while the citizens of the country cannot. Now go read the biographies of the first four Caliphs. Were they anything like this? No, they were the exact opposite. The reason I brought up these rightly guided caliphs is because conservative, right wing, and orthodox Muslims always praise Caliphates. They praise early Islamic governance and scholarship. They want a caliphate. Yet, they show their two faced nature when it comes to the Sultan of Brunei. Refer back to my article about liberal and conservative Muslims, where I showed the hypocrisy of conservative/right wing Muslims.

Brunei is already a socially conservative country. There is no homosexuality around, anywhere. This law is a TACTIC. It is about using Islam and a political tool to keep the Sultan in power. It is about showing off and making everyone think you are a great Muslim leader. And unsurprisingly, Muslims are buying into this game. Just goes to show how weak, ineffective, and stupid this ummah is.

NONE of the above is permissible for a Muslim ruler. He/she has to be humble and show humility. So all of these Muslims who support the Sultan of Brunei, you are supporting someone who doesn't give a damn about religion.

Islam does NOT allow you to judge others

The following are two videos by conservative Muslim scholars: Mufti Menk and Noman Ali Khan. Of course, many don't agree with what they say, but they are on point here about judging being haram:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9b9TkO6T6vM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAr2FIsfBho

Now we know people in certain cultures (ESPECIALLY Pakistani) love judging and gossiping about others. Just like many things in Muslim cultures, they don't arise from Islam, but through ignorant cultural practices. We see from the Quran (49:12) how it is haram to negatively assume about others. We see in many places in the Quran that Allah is the only judge and the only one who knows who is guided and misguided. So clearly, the cultures are wrong.

However, what has happened recently it that right wing backwards Muslims have attacked back saying it is their Islamic right to "guide" others. You're finding this everywhere on every conservative, orthodox, right wing Muslim social platform. And of course, Muslims from cultures where judgmental degeneracy is the norm, have now been Islamically inspired to continue to act like idiots. That is why strange Muslims are messaging our sisters and daughters on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram and telling them to have "sharam" and "haya". That is why random idiots at the masjid are yelling across the street and criticizing our dress or appearance. These people are now inspired in the name of Islam to aggressively judge. They think they will stand next to Allah on judgement day and help him cast people to hell.

Let me tell you a story. In my criminology class at university, we learned a lot about youths who live in the streets. They ran away from abusive and broken homes, and now have to survive through prostitution and theft. We also had speakers from the police department come in and talk about this issue. Something that they mentioned (which was also mentioned in our textbooks) was that there were a large amount of young girls from south Asia and the Middle East who made up street youth. This isn't that much of a surprise to me. My city is full of new immigrants from Muslim countries. Those of us who know how Muslims can be from Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Arab countries will realize it is much better to be on the streets than live in such homes. Now, think about how these young Muslim girls are viewed by other Muslims. "She's a whore", "She's a bitch", "she's a kaffir", and so on. They jump to these words without knowing WHY they are on the streets in the first place.

Similarly, we can think of Karima El Mahroug, the mistress of the Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi. When news broke out that it was a Muslim mistress, I read comments on YouTube and news outlets to see what Muslims would say. Well, you guessed it. Nothing but horrible comments. But have a look at WHY Karima does what she does:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-12473645

Yep, that's right. She came from a sexually abusive household. That is why she ran on to the street. Do Muslims care? Nope. They will still attack her for dress, appearance, and actions.

Let me tell you this, when it comes to social issues or issues within the Muslim community, don't expect help from Muslims. Muslims have the WORST responses and thoughts. This is why so many young Muslims choose western and secular resources, because they actually do something to help. I have said this before, the problems you find in the Muslim community are problems you will ONLY ever find in the Muslim community. Moreover, the responses to these problems are response you will ONLY ever find in Muslim communities. Muslim institutions and organizations (except secular and liberal ones) are NEVER there for you.

Youssef Soussi: Another weak and hypocrite preacher of Islam?

All Muslims, whether you are liberal, conservative, or extremist will admit this ummah has strange preachers of Islam. Every single Islamic scholar receives criticism and hate from other Muslims, there is no doubt about this. Even Salafi scholars receive hate and insults from other Salafi's; this is just the chain that exists. I mentioned in my previous post how conservative Muslims always try and show they are on the true path, and they try and show how united they are with their orthodox interpretations of Islam, though they fail to prove this when they themselves are always criticizing their own conservative scholars. 

All kinds of scholars exist in Islam. They may be liberal, they may be conservative, they might be liberal on some things while conservative on others, and there's extremist/incredibly retarded ones. Like the Council of Islamic Ideology in Pakistan refuses to accept anti-honor killing laws, domestic violence laws, and wants to have little girls married off. Then there's the Saudi scholars who say it is haram for women to drive. Then there's the Afghan scholar Nazir Ahmad Hanafi who opposes women's shelters. The list goes on and on. This post will be talking about the conservative and lesser known scholar, Youssef Soussi.

I talked about in my last post why conservative Muslims are problematic (while also criticizing liberal Muslims, but the point of focus here is on conservative Muslims). They are judgmental, have very rigid mentalities, have very aggressive attitudes towards other Muslims, and always use the excuse of "colonialism" for everything. They also heavily target "modern" Muslims. Youssef Soussi is the latest edition to this horrible camp.

A few days ago I had never heard of this guy. I found his Facebook page through some people, and it is on there where he posts his ideas/sermons. Scrolling through it, I found several posts about hijab. He was arguing how Muslims today see hijab as Arab culture. Before I go on, let me link to the several posts on hijab that I have done that show scholarly and historical evidence for it not being mandatory, or just not in Islam at all:

https://mymuslimthoughts.blogspot.com/2015/05/trying-to-understand-womans-dress-in.html

https://mymuslimthoughts.blogspot.com/2017/04/no-hijab-is-not-islamic-requirement.html

https://mymuslimthoughts.blogspot.com/2017/09/some-more-islamic-scholars-who-say.html

https://mymuslimthoughts.blogspot.com/2017/04/dear-muslim-women-you-are-not-sinning.html

https://mymuslimthoughts.blogspot.com/2017/12/the-awrah-of-man-is-not-from-naval-to.html

https://mymuslimthoughts.blogspot.com/2018/06/hijab-is-not-in-quran-whether-you-like.html

The thing about weak and insecure preachers of Islam, they don't like any criticism of their work. They tend to have superiority complexes. When this happens, they will automatically block/ban anyone who has an alternate view. And that is what happened to me when I went against Soussi's post about hijab. On these posts, you had horrible men making disgusting assumptions about hijabless women, and Soussi was right there liking these comments. I objected to them while telling Soussi he wasn't correct about hijab. He was making the argument that hijab has always been agreed upon by all scholars and cultures. Not true (i.e. the women in the Mughal empire hardly wore hijab except for prayer). So he blocked me.

Something I noticed before he booted me off his page, was that he had NUMEROUS female friends. His list showed countless Muslim women in hijabs caked with makeup. Also, there are pictures of Soussi standing next to Muslim women, all of them smiling at the camera. Umm, so how can he be so hypocritical? As someone who belongs in the Muslim community (especially the Pakistani/Indian Muslim community), I see how most women who descend from the Indian subcontinent are without hijab (and this is nothing new). I see Muslim women from other cultures who also don't wear hijab. Yet I always see them ONLY interacting with females. I NEVER see them having numerous male friends and posing with them. I never see them sharing the same space with men. So compare the two types of people: Muslim women in hijab and makeup who are married and send (or receive) friend requests to (or from) Youssef Soussi, and then Muslim women who aren't in hijab yet only interact with females. Even if you are a die-hard conservative Muslim who believes in hijab, you be the judge and tell me who is doing it better Islamically?

We see Soussi is not only wrong about hijab, but he is a hypocrite. I mentioned in my previous article how conservative Muslims tend to be hypocrites. Soussi is just proving my point.