I count myself a friend of Adam Deen. I have tried to defend him against some of the disgusting and obscene abuse he routinely receives from Muslims (yes Muslims).
His joining Quilliam was incredibly controversial in the Muslim community and I privately expressed my concerns to him.
Recently he has made public his rejection of the hudud punishments mandated in the Quran for certain crimes. He feels that in today’s world they are just not applicable.
I disagree with Adam. I don’t feel that as a ‘lay Muslim’ he is qualified or competent to make rulings about the applicability of the shariah in the 21st century. It is a complex question that requires much scholarly thought and consideration rather than utterances on popular Sunday morning TV programmes.
I have privately expressed to him my concerns that he is straying into kufr territory. I feel that the logic of his arguments could potentially lead to some other conclusions. I asked him to consider this:
Imagine this scenario: A Muslim comes to realise one day that he is gay. He falls in love with a guy at the mosque who also turns out to be gay. They have a relationship – sex and everything. They conclude that though the Islamic tradition has in the past condemned same-sex acts, in today’s world in 2016 in the UK, we live in a different ‘reality’ and a very different world.
Why would Adam have a problem with that? My concern is that using his methodology and reasoning he would have to concede there could be no objection, regardless of the clear prohibition in the Quran.
Unfortunately Adam has repeatedly refused to address my question in email or Whatsapp. My suspicion is that he does not want to put anything in writing that may further incriminate himself with Muslims.
I feel that he is now in a dangerous place and has strayed into kufr territory, and the trajectory of his thoughts and beliefs seemingly lie increasingly in the direction of his friend and mentor Maajid Nawaz.
I hope and pray Adam turns back to the Ahl as-Sunnah wa’l-Jamā’ah.
Categories: Islam, Life in the West
Blogging Theology 
Ameen.
Spoken like a true friend sir.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s a damn shame, Adam was a really great guy, but joining Quilliam just to fight Wahabism is bad idea, It’s like joining Assad to fight daesh, it’s almost Machiavellian. I still remember his early days when he produced great articles about Islam and Atheism, I still remember listening to his lecture “The Purpose of life”, It was really good, and it helped me get out of a space of doubt that I was in at the time. I still credit Adam as one of the people who helped me escape the period of time were I was skeptical about Islam, I understand the need to criticize Wahabism and fanaticism from within, but this is too much, I mean look at his twitter account, half the people praising him are fanatical secularists who are against any form of government other than the one they want to enforce on people. It is one thing to criticize Wahabis who want to implement a harsh interpretation of Islam on everyone, but to go against the whole shariah and it’s diverse and multiple interpretations is something else.
May god guide him to the truth, and give us all the patience and strength to do the same.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ameen..
I asked him this too..
No answer is often an answer & a loud one
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, I think you are right. I guess silence is a defense mechanism. Sad really.
LikeLike
I understand your view, being formerly close to him. However it is a bit of a stretch to say his conversion caused controversy (let alone a ‘great’ one) since he is and always has been largely a nobody. Maybe the mainstream, grass-roots Muslim orgs and institutes are partly to blame for his attention-seeking by ignoring him so studiously over the years.
LikeLike
This is a really sad affair.I watched the BBC’s Big Questions and I saw a man who looked visibly deflated and exhausted.
I hope you keep in communication with and be a helpful guiding hand as I feel there is a lot of bridge burning going on and Adam may be feeling like he is being forced further into Qulliam’s clutches. From what I know of Adam, he has left a few groups in the past, I am hopeful he will see the errors in QF and leave them. There has to be bridges between normative Muslims so I hope you and Nazam can help. I know Nazam has been an important influence on me in terms of keeping my vids less personal and more focussed on QF rather than Adam.
Adam, if you’re reading, QF are using you. You’re better than that organisation. Come on home brother. We will all welcome you with open arms. May Allah make things better and easier for you.
Peace
LikeLiked by 1 person
Adam’s position is the same as Shaykh Hamza Yusaf’s on Hadud. On the 4th CD of Qurrat al Absar he is asked about Apostasy in Islam and mentions the following.
‘All pre modern religions had apostasy laws. They Jews have them and Jesus came from within that tradition so would follow that tradition. All the early madhabs agreed on the punishment for apostasy. Modern interpretation has equated it to treason.
However, the ‘I am not and proponent of re introducing Hadud punishment ….those laws have long gone’. The Sharia is about mercy, people’s conditions were very different then. The Sahaba understood the spirit which the Hadud punishments came, for example;
Umar (ra) once saw a man stealing and said did you steal that? SAY NO!
The man said no and he let him go.
Modern day people who want to reintroduce these punishments live in a fantasy world. I don’t think it’s going to work. The Prophet (pbuh) mentioned the sign of jahiliya is that Hadud punishment is only implemented on the poor. Now we live in consumer societies where we are sold all these products and you want to cut off the hands of people who steal?
Now I believe in Hadud punishments don’t get me wrong. If we can create a society of brotherhood, ethics and in that kind of society someone breaches the law than fine.’
Good luck with that.
Islam does not remain static. In the Hanafi school we also place emphasis on Urf/Culture of people. One of the principles of Sharia is preservation of religion. If these laws are becoming a barrier to people entering Islam we have to look at the bigger picture.
LikeLike
“Now I believe in the Hadud punishments don’t get me wrong…”
Clarify, please do, but does not that violate the principles of the Quilliam foundation which imply that any modern application, under any conditions, is a violation of necessary moral values(How would they then bridge the Quranic injunctions in the past and necessary moral objections to them?)
Also, scratched my head when watching the Big Question. Adam Deen claims that all four schools of thought agree with this apostasy law. Now don’t get me wrong, one can disagree with this. Still would it be fair to claim this was an issue of collective “puritanical” and “extremist” mind sets from Spain to Central Asia in the scholarly Islamic tradition? Surely historical precedent had to do with it. We would would be then dealing with a bizarre historical cut off point between the founders of the fours schools(and I assume their teachers) and the Prophet himself.
Wouldnt Hamza Yusuf be rejected then as an extremist?
LikeLiked by 1 person