Hamza Yusuf: On Sam Harris; Science, Religion; Human Nature
January 24, 2007 by Saifuddin
9 Responses
Leave a Reply
RSS/Sub/Email
-
-
Top 5 Posts
-
Recent Comments
syed saboor on Heba Kotb: On Sex and Mus… adian on Muslims cameron ashkar on About Mohammed Shakeel on Why Do Women Convert to I… yahya on Proper Greetings in Islam Sumaila Abdullahi on Havard Scholarships and Free… Mirza Ekramullah Bai… on We Are Ottomans -
Osmanli Traveller
More Photos Categories
We Are Ottomans
Podcasts
Naks-i’bendi TV- An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
-
Hot Topics
- Muslim Blog Posts
- Plane bomb suspect 'radicalised after leaving UK' Martin Sullivan
- New York Assembly member calls for racial profiling Martin Sullivan
- Hoping For A New Beginning Marina Montanaro
- New Year Resolution 2010 darvish
- The Burda- A New Translation chaiwala
-
Blog Stats
- 277,777 visits
Really interesting video. A different take from the more direct arguments with Dawkins and Harris.
Indeed, I wouldn’t mind listening to Shaykh Hamza’s thoughts on Intelligent Design and Creation discussions in the classroom as well. Although I know that he like myself and many Muslims believe in homeschooling children it would still be interesting to hear his position with respect to public schooling.
An interesting answer by Hamza Yusuf. However, it is hilarious to see him miss the point when talking about humans compared to animals!
For instance, when someone says: You’re eating like a pig…What is NOT meant is that you are like a pig that follows its true nature…What IS meant is that you are guzzling down your food and making a right mess of yourself.
The comparison to animals is not made to show that badly-behaved humans are like animals which are innocent and true to their nature; it is made to show that humans are committing SIMILAR actions to those committed by animals.
This is what is meant in the Holy Qur’an when it says of people who remain deaf and unresponsive to the message of God, that THEY ARE LIKE CATTLE, OR EVEN WORSE.
That does not mean that God is degrading cattle. He is only saying that just like cattle who look at you when you talk to them but who do not grasp a single word you speak, there are some people who remain unresponsive to God’s message as it’s beyond them to understand it.
Perhaps the shaykh has been looking into the Prophet’s (s.a.w.s.) hadith about being kind to animals and it somehow oddly made its way into this discourse. I guess it was pretty funny… good call.
As’Salamu Aleikum,
Could some one elaborate, what he meant by; “Religion has also its downfall”? It’s very interesting remark, but he fails to explain why.
Thank You.
wa ‘alaikum as-salaam
Sis, you said:
I cannot assume that I know what the Shaykh meant, but perhaps he means more along the lines of what I feel, in that the misunderstanding of religious message which becomes a static ‘ism’ and overall detrimental to the safety and security of humanity.
But what I did find interesting was the mention of gm foods and the elimination of natural agricultural systems like crop-rotation that are easy on the ecology. This is a very important issue. Because the method of crop rotation allows for a natural defense against disease.
What ends up happening is the artificial reproduction of these protective conditions not only erodes the topsoil of the earth as Shaykh Hamza stated but it causes additional use of pesticides to control microorganisms and other pests that would ordinarily be exterminated inbetween the crop rotation.
Reza Aslan also made some great points that are similar to Sheikh Hamza Yusef in his dialouge with Sam Harris on Cspan. YOu can find it at http://www.CSpan.org. Wars are always fought over Socio/political/economic reasons. I agree with the points made about topsoil loss and pesticides. CONGRESS is in the process of hearing comments about whether or not to ALLOW CHICKEN and Animal CLONING FOR CONSUMPTION!!!! WRITE YOUR SENATOR/Rep.!!! to Say NO to CLONING!!!!
It is disingenuous to claim that Dawkins merely takes the “best” of science and compares it to the “worst” of religion. Dawkins, as does Harris, takes on religion at its core disputing its intellectual foundations and its utility. Yusuf launches no such attack on rational thought, he simply points out that each can be perverted. No argument with anyone there. What Yusf, as a proponent of religiosity, does not do as all advocates must do, is to provide a persuasive argument that religion has a basis in truth or that it is probable. That is a logical hole one can drive a camel through.
mespo,
Thank you for commenting, you wrote:
There are several proofs that Muslims make to support our belief, number one is the Qur’an but often athiests and skeptics say in is not valid to find proof from the very source of that which is to be proven. OK, thats fine, Imam Hamza has this (00:22) to say of those claims.