The evil of Qaradawi is spreading

Seems like everyone hates Yusuf al Qaradawi these days!  Just the other day, I came across a post which generated unusually intense and detailed discussion and criticism, at the end of which Qaradawi came away looking pretty bad in the eyes of the readers.  Here's how it started, with the initial post: 

The evil of Qaradawi is becoming widespread....  Qaradawi is spreading his dangerous corrupt doctrine everywhere which destroys the religion..  He publicly proclaims that every Muslim can renounce Islam, and has the freedom of religion or of choice and that Islam guarantees to him the freedom of apostacy.  O group, this deviant mocks religion and destroys religion, and where is the one who will respond to that?  Why are you sleeping?  When will you awake?  Why do many of you find satisfaction in his words and open the door to apostacy and renunciation of religion?

Oh, did I forget to mention that the post was on the jihadist chat room al Qala'a?  Yeah, they don't like him either. 

Qaradawi did find some defenders among the jihadists.  The first commenter politely asked Qaradawi's critic, "Abu Al Isbat",  if he could provide a link to the full and complete text of the article in which Qaradawi allegedly said this, and warns him not to believe everything that he hears - greater attention to rigor than on many English language blog discussions of Qaradawi, I must say.

Abu al Isbat responds with some excerpts from episodes of Sharia and Life, which he claim prove his allegation.  Judging by the passages he highlights, Abu al Isbat is particularly outraged by certain remarks by Qaradawi to the effect that Islam guarantees freedom of choice to everyone, including people of other religions, that every individual must choose his religion with great care and thought, and that Islam requires political pluralism.   

A long (and to me pretty tedious) argument ensues over how to interpret Qaradawi's remarks, with people on both sides invoking Quranic interpretations, links to various commentaries and to other things Qaradawi had said or written, all leavened with some petty partisan and personal sniping.

But by the end, even Qaradawi's defenders seem a bit overwhelmed by the wealth of evidence produced by his critics.  The claim that Qaradawi is advancing a dangerous, corrupt doctrine which promotes freedom, individual choice, and tolerance more or less carries the day.

Just because jihadists don't like him doesn't mean that we have to.  But given the ease with which people label Qaradawi a "radical Islamist",  it's worth keeping in mind that radical Islamists don't see him as one of their own.  They see him as a corrupt deviant.  And heck, if they don't like him, and they fear him, that's got to mean something. 

Comments

[Bob]

I see that MEMRI has recently published an article, "Accusing Muslim Intellectuals of Apostasy" by Aluma Dankowitz, which accuses Qaradawi of advocating the killing of apostates.

See here.

Is this just another of MEMRI's distortions?

[the aardvark]

I don't know. On general principles, I'd assume that Dankowitz is full of bullpoopie, that he has taken some quotes out of context and strung them together to make a dishonest case. But to know whether or not that's true, I'd first have to read his article, and then track down his references, and frankly it's just not worth it. I'm too busy, and based on prior experience with these things it would be a wasted effort. Sorry....