1. Yasir Qadhi’s Futile Tirade Against an Imām of the Sunnah
In a recent video, Yasir Qadhi, spoke whilst waving his hands as if excited over a new discovery, about the differences between Ibn Taymiyyah (died 728H) and Ibn Abdul-Wahhāb (died 1206H). This first section highlights his fabrications and clear untruthful claims against Shaikh Muhammad bin Abdul-Wahhāb (rahimahullāh).
Yasir Qadhi asserted, “There are profound differences between the two of them. The most important one is Ibn Taymiyyah did not make takfīr of his opponents that did the same things that the opponents of Ibn Abdul-Wahhāb did, and he made takfīr of them and made permissible the spilling of their blood (halāl ad-damm).”
Qadhi said, less than a minute later, that Ibn Abdul-Wahhāb considered himself, “To be the only Muslim in the world… this is a level of fanaticism and takfīr, is a level of neo-khārijism that I simply cannot tolerate. To consider the entire Ummah to be kāfir and mushrik other than yourself is not mainstream Islam…”
Then, after thoroughly reviling this scholar, he goes on to proclaim his love and respect for Ahlul-Bid’ah. Qadhi stated: “My heart has nothing negative and evil now against somebody who’s an Ash’ari or a Māturudi, or a Tablighi, or a Deobandi, or a Jamāti, or an Ikhwāni. All of these groups have good in them, all of them. And they might have some bad as well….” (Recorded webinar with Yasir Qadhi)
Takfīr of a Muslim is to declare him to be an unbeliever, outside the fold of Islam. This is a deliberate and orchestrated attempt by Yasir Qadhi to peddle his falsehood and ascribe to Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhāb that which he is innocent of.
2. Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhāb Concerning the Takfīr of Muslims
From the accusations levelled by the enemies of Tawhīd and Sunnah against the noble scholar, the reviver of the Religion in his era, Shaikhul-Islam Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhāb (may Allah’s mercy be upon him) is that he made unjustified takfīr of Muslims and declared the ummah to be unbelievers and that there are no Muslims other than him and those with him. This accusation has now been regurgitated by this deceitful misguided innovator, Yasir Qadhi. After years of drinking from the cesspool of a narrow-minded orientalist interpretation of Islam that seeks to malign its purity and aggrandise views that cast doubts at the methodology of the Prophets and the people of Hadīth, he now spouts the same rhetoric as the enemies of Islam and fights in their corner against Ahlut-Tawhīd was-Sunnah. Qadhi claims that Shaikhul-Islam Ibn Abdul-Wahhāb made takfīr upon the whole ummah, leaving no one! Read now the words of Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhāb and judge for yourselves. Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhāb stated:
1. “So, if we do not make takfīr upon the one who worships the shrine over the grave of Abdul-Qādir [Al-Jilāni], or the shrine over the grave of Ahmad Al-Badawi and their likes due to their ignorance, and in the absence of someone who can inform them [of their error], then how could we possibly make takfīr upon the one who does not associate partners in worship with Allah or upon the one who does not migrate to us… How free you are, O Allah, from all imperfections, the Most Perfect. Indeed this is a great slander.” 
2. Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhāb (may Allah’s mercy be upon him) said in reply to Sulaymān Ibn Suhaym who accused the Shaykh of takfīr: “Indeed Allah knows that this man has fabricated lies against me by ascribing to me what I never said, and most of which have never even occurred to me! From them is his claim that I invalidate the books of the Four Madhhabs, and that I say that the people (i.e. the ummah) has been upon nothing (i.e. no Islam) for 600 years! And that I make takfīr of the one who makes Tawassul (seeks nearness to Allah) through the righteous ones [who have passed away]. He claims that I made takfīr of Al-Busayri… and that I said that whoever swears by other than Allah is an unbeliever… My answer to all of this is: ‘How free you are, O Allah, from all imperfections, the Most Perfect. Indeed this is a great slander.’ And before this, there were those who slandered the Messenger Muhammad (ﷺ) claiming that he had reviled Jesus the son of Mary (may Allah’s peace be upon them) and that he reviles the righteous. So their hearts resemble one another in their fabrication of lies and bearing false witness.” 
So these are the clear words of Shaykhul-Islām Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhāb (may Allah’s mercy be upon him). Compare them to the lies and fabrications of this pseudo-academic, Yasir Qadhi who is merely a utensil for the enemies of Tawhīd and the Sunnah.
Shaykh Al-Islām, Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhāb (may Allah’s mercy be upon him) also stated:
“And I do not testify for anyone from the Muslims [by name] that he is [definitely] in Paradise or in the Fire except for whoever Allah’s Messenger (salallāhu ‘alaihi wasallam) testified. However, I have hope for the doer of good and I fear for the sinner. And I do not accuse ANYONE from the Muslims of being an UNBELIEVER due to a sin, and NOR DO I EXPEL HIM FROM THE FOLD OF ISLAM.“ 
3. Qadhi’s Praise of Ahlul-Bid’ah and his reviling and insulting Ahlus-Sunnah (As-Salafiyyūn) and accusing them of being a “Madkhali Cult”
Qadhi states in his adoration of Ahlul-Bid;ah: “My heart has nothing negative and evil now against somebody who’s an Ash’ari or a Māturīdi, or a Tablighi, or a Deobandi, or a Jamāti, or an Ikhwāni. All of these groups have good in them, all of them. And they might have some bad as well….”
In a very recent interview (June 2020), Yasir Qadhi reviles and accuses the Salafis of the following:
―Being a “Madkhali cult”, followers of Shaikh Rabee’ Al-Madkhali.
―That Shaikh Muhammad Amān Al-Jāmi and then “his student” Shaikh Rabee’, as he claims, spearheaded a new movement.
―To be a member of the Madkhali cult, one must blindly follow the king (of Saudi Arabia).
―The Salafis are not upon “mainstream Islam”.
―Shaikh ‘Ubaid Al-Jābiri is a scholar of this Madkhali cult.
―”How can anyone who studies the biography of Ibn Taymiyyah end up a Madkhali?!”
―He claims the Salafis are “polar issues apart” from the teachings of Shaikhul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah.
Qadhi, again in usual style, praises the so-called “Sahwah Scholars” and rebellious Qutubist innovators, Safar Al-Hawali and Salman Al-Awdah and justifies their revolutionary speech against the Muslim Rulers.
This whole interview is filled with lies, fabrications, name-calling, insults and rebukes. Then he (ironically) advises the Muslims to keep away from refutations and attacking other Muslims!
He ends this interview with lavish praise of Ahlul-Bid’ah and advises the Muslims to acquire knowledge from the “various strands” of Islamic thought ― Sufi, Deobandi, Ikhwāni, etc ― except the Salafis of-course since he spent much of the interview reviling and refuting them!
(Ref: Interview entitled “In the Hot Seat: Muḥammad Hijāb Interviews Dr. Yasir Qadhi”, June 2020)
4. A Response to Qadhi’s Praise of Ahlul-Bid’ah and Revilement of Ahlus-Sunnah (As-Salafiyyūn)
Al-Imām ‘Abdul-‘Azīz Ibn Bāz ( رحمه الله) was asked:
الذي يثني على أهل البدع ومدحهم هل يلحق بهم؟
“May Allah grant you goodness O Shaikh. The one who compliments Ahlul-Bid’ah and praises them, is he counted among them?”
نعم، لا شك، أن من أثنى عليهم ومدحهم هو داع لهم، يدعو لهم هذا من دعاتهم، نسأل الله العافية
“Yes. No doubt. The one who compliments them and praises them is a caller to them. He invites to them. This one is from their callers — and we ask Allah for well-being.”
(Ref: Ta’līq Samāhatish-Shaikh Al-Imām Abdul-Azīz Ibn Bāz ‘alā Kitāb Fadl Al-Islām li Shaikhil-Islām Muhammad Ibn Abdil-Wahhāb p. 29)
Al-‘Allāmah Sālih al-Fawzān stated: “If you see a man praising the people of evil and the scholars of misguidance, such as these offshoots of the Jahmiyyah, then know that he is a sinner (fāsiq), a corrupt and misguided person. This is because he would not praise such people except due to his love of them and his approving and tolerating their path. And if you see a man praising Ahlus-Sunnah such as Imaam Ahmad (d. 241H), Ibnul-Mubārak (d. 181H) – and likewise praising the Scholars of the Tābi’een and those who came after them; then know that he is a person of goodness. This is because he would not praise Ahlus-Sunnah except due to his love of the Sunnah and holding fast to it.
So this is a lesson for us, in that some brothers or students of knowledge praise some of the innovators or people of desires and those who have deviated ideologies. So this [student] fails to look towards their ideologies and orientations, and thus falls into attacking the people of goodness, and belittling them. This is because he listens to them (ahlul-bid’ah) criticising the people of good and he believes them.
This is a great danger that he belittles the people of goodness, belittles the scholars and Ahlus-Sunnah whilst he praises the deviated ideologies and orientations – this is a great danger! And this is even if he does not sit with the innovators himself. So this is what Al-Barbahāri warns us from – this affair into which many of the people of our times have fallen into.” (It-hāf al-Qāri 2/236)
The Messenger (salallāhu ‘alaihi wasallam) warned against the People of Innovation, from befriending, supporting or taking from them: “Whoever innovates or accommodates an innovator then upon him is the curse of Allah, His Angels and the whole of mankind.” Reported by Bukhāri (12/41) and Muslim (9/140)
Yahyā ibn Kathīr said, “Sulaimān ibn Dāwūd (‘alaihis-salām) said: Do not pass judgement over anyone with anything until you see whom he befriends.” Al-Ibānah (2/464)
Allāh’s Messenger (salallāhu ‘alaihi wasallam) said:
وَمَنْ دَعَا إِلَى ضَلاَلَةٍ كَانَ عَلَيْهِ مِنَ الإِثْمِ مِثْلُ آثَامِ مَنْ تَبِعَهُ لاَ يَنْقُصُ ذَلِكَ مِنْ آثَامِهِمْ شَيْئًا
“…and whoever invites people to misguidance shall have to carry the burden of its sin just like those who perpetrated it without their sins being diminished in any respect.” (Muslim, no. 2674)
Allāh, the Most High, stated:
وَإِذَا رَأَيْتَ الَّذِينَ يَخُوضُونَ فِي آيَاتِنَا فَأَعْرِضْ عَنْهُمْ
“And when you see those who engage in a false conversation regarding Our verses by mocking at them, stay away from them…” (Al-An’ām: 68)
Imām at-Tabarī (rahimahullāh) said in his Tafsīr (5/330): “This verse is a clear proof showing the forbiddance of sitting with the people of falsehood (Ahlul-Bātil) of every persuasion regardless of whether it be the innovators (mubtadi’ah) or the open sinners, whilst they continue to speak with their falsehood.”
Ibn ‘Abbās (radiyallāhu ‘anhumā) said: “Do not sit with the people of desires (Ahlul-Ahwā) for their gatherings are the cause of sickness in the hearts.”
So the manhaj of Ahlus-Sunnah in its origin forbids from sitting with, accommodating and mixing with ahlul-bid’ah, and sharing platforms with them. Even worse is praising them and aiding them whilst opposing ahlus-Sunnah and their scholars. Allegiance to the truth necessitates allegiance to its people – to aid them and support them. Abu ‘Uthmān Ismā’īl as-Sābūnī (rahimahullāh d.449H) said: “One of the distinguishing signs of Ahlus-Sunnah is their love of the Imāms of the Sunnah, its Scholars, its helpers and its allies – and likewise their hatred for the imāms of bid’ah, those who invite to the Hellfire.”
Also, Al-‘Allamah Ibn ‘Uthaymeen stated in his Sharh Al-‘Aqeedah Al-Wāsitiyyah: “Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamā’ah they are the Salaf in their belief. Even the one who comes later until the Day of Resurrection; if he is upon the Path of the Prophet (salallāhu ‘alaihi wassallam) and his Companions, then he is Salafi.”
Shaikh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (rahimahullāh), he was asked: “What is your advice for the person who forbids others from listening to the tapes of Shaikh Rabee’ Ibn Hādi claiming that he spreads fitnah and that in those tapes he praises the rulers of the Kingdom?” So, Shaikh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen answered: “Our opinion is that this person is wrong and greatly mistaken. Shaikh Rabee’ is from the Scholars of the Sunnah and from the people of goodness. His ‘Aqeedah is sound and correct, and his Manhaj is straight and proper. However, when he speaks against some of the figureheads of some of the people from those who have appeared lately, they try to discredit him with these accusations.” (Source: Kashf Al-Lithām ‘an Mukhālafāt Ahmad Salām)
5. Yasir Qadhi’s Rebellious Ikhwāni-Khārijite Polemics against the Muslim Rulers
Yasir Qadhi has gathered numerous innovations over the last several years. In this Facebook post, he unjustly reviles the Muslim rulers of Saudi in the most acidic and vile manner — and in doing so, he contradicts the Sunnah and the ‘Aqīdah of Ahlus-Sunnah. Qadhi states:
“The recent arrest of Sh. Safar al-Hawalī – and before him Sh. Salmān al-Oada, amongst others scholars – by the new prince in KSA is an age-old tactic taken from the standard Machiavellian practices of despots and tyrants. It was none other than Machiavelli, who is generally considered the philosopher of tyranny and political deceit, who wrote that it is better for a ruler to be feared than loved. And this appears to be the desire of the current boy-prince…”
Yasir Qadhi also stated in opposition to the Qur’an, Sunnah and the ijmā’, and in contradiction of the fatāwa the major scholars of Hadīth and Sunnah:
“I say this loud and clear: as Allah is my witness, my heart jumped for joy as I heard news of these protests, and saw the masses of Egyptians pour out onto the streets, wanting positive change, tired of the puppet-regime that had ruled them for three decades, confronting tanks with their bodies, prostrating to Allah in front of the troops even as they are doused with water guns. How can the heart of ANY believer not be overjoyed seeing the courage that the average Muslim has in opposing the tyrannical regimes that they are living under?”
(Published January 31, 2011, by muslimmatters.org/2011/01/31/yasir-qadhi-a-brief-statement-regarding-the-situation-in-egypt/)
6. Response to Qadhi’s Revilement of Muslim Rulers and Governments
The Prophet (salallāhu ‘alaihi wasallam) prohibited reviling, incitement and rebellion in clear and decisive narrations ―narrations that cannot possibly be opposed by desires, opinion and reason or by the erroneous judgements of men, regardless of their station in the sight of the people. The Messenger (salallāhu ‘alaihi wasallam) spoke from revelation and those after him did not. For this reason, when the ijmā’ (consensus) was settled upon, no one disagreed with it except the Khawārij, the Shi’ah, the Mu’tazilah and their offshoots until this time of ours such as Yasir Qadhi and his ilk.
Muslim reported in his Sahīh (1847) from Wā’il Ibn Hujr that: Salamah Ibn Yazeed Al-Ju’fee asked Allah’s Messenger (salallāhu ‘alaihi wasallam): “O Prophet of Allah, what do we do if we have rulers over us who demand their rights yet they withhold our rights?” He replied: “Listen to them and obey them [regardless]. Upon them is their burden and on you will be your burden.”
Shaikh Al-Islām Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah’s mercy be upon him) said: “Being patient with the tyranny of the rulers is a fundamental principle (asl) from the fundamentals of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamā’ah.” (Majmoo’ Al-Fatāwa 28/179) And this saying of Ibn Taymiyyah is in accordance and harmony with the ahādeeth of the Messenger (salallāhu ‘alaihi wasallam).
Ibn Abī ‘Āsim reported in As-Sunnah (2/508) from ‘Adiyy Ibn Hātim (may Allah be pleased with him) that we said: “O Messenger of Allah, we do not ask you regarding obedience to the ruler who has taqwā (who is pious and who fears Allah), and is good and rectifies. Rather, we are asking about the ruler who does such-and-such and such-and-such?“ And he mentioned their evil traits. So the Prophet (salallāhu ‘alaihi wasallam) answered: “Fear Allah! Listen to the ruler and obey him.” (Also reported by At-Tabarāni in Al-Kabīr, 17/101, and authenticated by Al-Albāni in Dhilāl Al-Jannah)
And Imām An-Nawawi (died 676H) cited an ijmā’ (consensus) concerning this matter: “As for rebellion (khurooj) against them and fighting them, then that is harām (prohibited) by ijmā’ (consensus) of the Muslims, even if the rulers are sinners and oppressors. The ahādeeth I have already mentioned that carry that meaning are apparent and manifest — and Ahlus-Sunnah have agreed (ijmā’) that a ruler is not to be removed due to his sin. As for the position stated in the books of fiqh that some of our colleagues hold, that he is to be removed; and what is cited from Mu’tazilah then the one who says it is wrong and he is an opposer of the ijmā’. And the Scholars have stated: ‘The reason why it is forbidden to remove the ruler and it is prohibited to rebel against him is because of the fact that it leads to fitan (tribulations), the spilling of blood, discord and corruption between the people. And the corruption that arrises in removing him is greater than him remaining in place.” (See Sharhun-Nawawi ‘ala Sahīh Muslim, 12/317)
Imām Al-Ājurri (may Allah’s mercy be upon him) explained this narration in his Ash-Sharī’ah (1/162): “So it is possible that the ruler may command you to kill the one who does not deserve to be killed, or to cut the limb of someone who does not deserve it, or to beat someone it is not permissible to beat, or to take the wealth from someone whose wealth does not deserve to be taken, or to be unjust to one whom it is not permitted for you to be unjust towards — so in these matters do not obey him. And if he says to you: ‘If you do not do as I have commanded, I will kill you or punish you!’ Respond by saying: ‘My blood but not my religion.’” So here ‘Umar commanded him not to obey the ruler if he commands with sin and disobedience to Allah, and at the same time not to rebel against him or leave the body of Muslims under his rule. In this Al-Ājurri makes clear the Manhaj of Ahlus-Sunnah in the affair of obedience to the ruler.
Shaikh Al-Islām Ibn Taymiyyah (died 728H) stated: “The best and most excellent of the Muslims forbade from rebellion (khurooj) and fighting in times of fitnah as was the stance of Abdullah Ibn ‘Umar, Sa’eed Ibn Musayyib, Ali Ibn Al-Husayn, and other than them. They prohibited the people [of Madinah] in the year of Harrah to rebel against Yazeed Ibn Mu’āwiyah just as Al-Hasan Al-Basri, Mujāhid and others prohibited revolt during the fitnah of Ibn Al-Ash’ath (who rose against Al-Hajjāj). So based upon this, the affair of Ahlus-Sunnah was established and settled upon abandonment of fighting in times of fitnah due to the authentic and firmly-established ahādīth reported from the Prophet (salallāhu ‘alaihi wasallam). So Ahlus-Sunnah started to mention these narrations in their ‘Aqeedah (Creed) and they commanded with patience in the face of the tyranny of the rulers, and not to fight them. This came about even though a large number of the people of knowledge and religion [before this] had fought during fitnah.” (Minhāj As-Sunnah An-Nabawiyyah, 4/529-530)
Shaikh Al-Islām Al-Mujaddid, Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhāb (may Allah’s mercy be upon him, died 1206) stated: “The Imāms of all the Madhhabs are agreed upon the fact that whoever conquers a land or lands, he takes the role of rulership in all matters. And the greatest of these matters is that it is a must to withhold from rebellion against him. And if this was not the case, then the worldly affairs would not be settled. And the people for a very long time right up until this day have not united behind one leader. And it is not known that any of the scholars stated that the Sharī’ah laws are not valid except with a single ruler ruling over the Muslims.” (See Ad-Durar As-Saniyyah, 59/5, Al-Fatāwa wal-Masā’il, 3/67)
Al-‘Allāmah Ibn Al-‘Uthaymeen (may Allah’s mercy be upon him, died 1420H) stated: “The Salaf were united upon the belief that it is forbidden to revolt against the rulers regardless of whether they are righteous or wicked.” (Sharh As-Siyāsah Ash-Shar’iyyah, p. 92)
The great scholar, Al-Imām Ibn Bāz (died 1420AH) was asked, “Is it from the methodology of the Salaf to criticize the rulers from the pulpits? And what is the methodology of the Salaf in advising the rulers?” So he answered:
“It is not from the methodology of the Salaf to criticize the rulers from the pulpits, because that would incite chaos, and it would involve not listening and obeying in that which is good. And this would mean becoming engrossed in that which harms and does not benefit. However, the way of advising that the Salaf followed was to write to the ruler or to convey the advice to the Scholars who would then convey it to him, until he has been directed towards good. So opposing the evil can be done without mentioning the doer. So adultery, intoxicants and interest can be opposed without mentioning the one who is involved in them. And it is enough of an opposition to sins that they are warned against without mentioning that so and so is involved in them, whether it is the ruler or other than the ruler.
And when the fitnah (trial, discord) occurred in the time of ʿUthmān, some people said to Usāmah bin Zayd, ‘Will you not speak to ʿUthmān?’ So he said, ‘Do you think that I have not spoken to him, just because you have not heard it from me? Verily I will speak to him concerning what is between him and me, without opening an affair which I would not like to be the first to open.’ So when they (the Khārijites) opened it, evil took place in the time of ʿUthmān . They opposed ʿUthmān openly, thus completing the tribulations, fighting and corruption, which has not ceased to affect the people to this day, was brought about. And this caused the tribulation to occur between ʿAlī and Muʿāwiyah, and ʿUthmān was killed for these reasons…
Furthermore, a large number of Companions and others besides them were killed due to this open rebellion and the open proclamation of the faults of the ruler, until the people began to hate the one charged with authority over them and killed him. We ask Allāh for success.” (Refer to Al-Maʿloom min Wājibil-’Ilāqah baynal-Hākim wal-Mahkoom, pp. 22-33.)
7. Yasir Qadhi’s Innovations, Doubts about Islam and his attacks upon Ahlus-Sunnah and the Salafi ‘Aqeedah―and his belittlement of the Sunnah.
ONE: His doubts about Islam after studying theology with non-Muslims.
Yasir Qadhi stated: “I’ll be honest with you, you are all tullāb al-‘ilm and have studied the Islamic sciences. Wallāhi, I’ll be honest with you, the shubuhāt (doubts about Islam) I was exposed to at Yale, some of them I still don’t have answers for.”
This is the premise we must proceed upon throughout our discussion of Yasir Qadhi ―he fell into a great amount of confusion that caused him to doubt Islam and the Islamic ‘Aqeedah, to doubt the Qur’an and the Shariah Law. So, instead of turning to Allah and reassessing his understanding, he deflects these terrible doubts and internal turmoil upon the people of Sunnah and directs his venom and hatred towards them ―even fabricating lies against them. We praise Allah who has saved us from the afflictions of this misguided soul.
TWO: The ‘Aqeedah of Ahlus-Sunnah manmade?
Yasir Qadhi stated: “These creeds that we are wed to, also have elements of human products in them. But frankly, the Sunni theological schools are very much akin to these legal school. And we need to understand that they are human attempts to get at the truth… and every [Sunni] school is incorrect in this regard because ‘Aqeedah is a development and you see for yourself that it is an actual internal development…”
The ‘Aqeedah of Salafiyyah is established by the Qur’an and Sunnah, every tenet of creed is proven by text, none of it is innovated by men – it is the same creed as the Companions of Allah’s Messenger. To claim that “every [Sunni] school” is incorrect in its ‘Aqeedah necessitates that there is no Jamā’ah upon the creed of the Prophet and his Companions today. This is a clear contradiction of several Quranic verses and authentic ahādeeth of the Prophet (salallāhu ‘alaihi wasallam).
Shaikh Sālih Al-Fawzān (hafidhahullāh) explained: “The Messenger (salallāhu ‘alaihi wasallam) said: “My ummah will divide into 73 sects, all of them will be in the Fire except for one, and that is the Jamā’ah.” It was said, “And who are they O Allah’s Messenger?” He responded, “That which I and my Companions are upon today.” So this is the correct path: whoever is upon that which the Messenger and his Companions were upon, he is the Jamā’ah.
And Allah (the Most High) has commanded us with unity upon the truth, as He stated:
وَاعْتَصِمُوا بِحَبْلِ اللَّهِ جَمِيعًا وَلَا تَفَرَّقُوا ۚ
“And hold fast to the Rope of Allah, altogether and be not divided.” (Āli ‘Imrān: 103) He also said:
إِنَّ الَّذِينَ فَرَّقُوا دِينَهُمْ وَكَانُوا شِيَعًا لَّسْتَ مِنْهُمْ فِي شَيْءٍ ۚ إِنَّمَا أَمْرُهُمْ إِلَى اللَّهِ ثُمَّ يُنَبِّئُهُم بِمَا كَانُوا يَفْعَلُونَ
“Indeed, those who have divided their religion and become sects, you O Prophet, are not associated with them in anything. Their affair is left only to Allah and He will inform them about what they used to do.” (Al-An’ām: 159) And He, the Most High, stated:
وَلَا تَكُونُوا كَالَّذِينَ تَفَرَّقُوا وَاخْتَلَفُوا مِن بَعْدِ مَا جَاءَهُمُ الْبَيِّنَاتُ ۚ وَأُولَٰئِكَ لَهُمْ عَذَابٌ عَظِيمٌ
“And do not be like the ones who became divided and differed after the clear proofs had come to them. And those will have a great punishment.” (Āli Imrān: 105) So Allah prohibited us from division and commanded us with unity and holding fast to the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger, as He said:
وَأَنَّ هَٰذَا صِرَاطِي مُسْتَقِيمًا فَاتَّبِعُوهُ ۖ وَلَا تَتَّبِعُوا السُّبُلَ فَتَفَرَّقَ بِكُمْ عَن سَبِيلِهِ ۚ ذَٰلِكُمْ وَصَّاكُم بِهِ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَتَّقُونَ
“And this is My path, which is straight, so follow it; and do not follow the other paths, for you will be separated from His Path. This has He instructed you that you may become righteous.” (Al-An’ām: 153) So differing and splitting by following one’s desires is not allowed, and likewise the blind following of one’s father and forefathers, or to blindly follow the Jews and Christians. Differing is not permissible in the affairs of belief and in the foundations of the Religion; it is obligatory to have agreement and unity upon these matters… The point is that differing in matters pertaining to belief (‘aqeedah) is not permitted because the ‘aqeedah is established by textual proofs alone and not open to juristic interpretation or opinion.” (See: It-hāf al-Qārī, Shaikh Al-Fawzān’s explanation of Sharhus-Sunnah of Imām al-Barbahārī, vol.1 pp. 419-423.)
The Muslims of the first era, the era of the Companions, and those who came after them from the most virtuous of generations believed in whatever was revealed in the Qur’an and Sunnah without any uncertainty or doubt. This was because they believed in Allah and His Messenger (salallāhu ‘alaihi wasallam) with a true and strong belief.
They would not be hesitant or uncertain in that which was established in the Book of Allah and in the Sunnah of His Messenger (salallāhu ‘alaihi wasallam) regardless of the subject matter. They would not doubt the information contained therein, regardless of whether it was related to the past or future events. They would not excuse themselves from anything that was in the Book or Sunnah, rather they would believe in it with a binding and necessary Iman, not afflicted by any doubts.
So when the earliest virtuous generations came to an end and there entered into the lands of the Muslims, foreign cultures (doctrines) such as the Byzantine and Persian cultures there occurred something of disorder and chaos. The callers to misguidance became energetic in circulating these deviated ideologies. In the face of this, the people of knowledge also became energetic in clarifying the correct ‘aqeedah of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamā’ah, that which the Companions of Allah’s Messenger (salallāhu ‘alaihi wasallam) were upon, and likewise the two generations that followed in their footsteps. They precisely penned down and recorded the creed in books that were named with various titles such as: “Al-Imān”, “Ash-Sharee’ah”, “Al-I’tiqād”, “As-Sunnah”, “At-Tawheed” and so on. In these books, they would refute the misguided opposers. And this was from the kindness of Allah for this Ummah, so that their Religion would remain safe from innovations and continue.
THREE: Disbeliever in the authentic narrations concerning Ya’jooj and Ma’jooj (Gog and Magog).
Yasir Qadhi stated: “Those medieval scholars believed in this type of stuff. Obviously, dare I say, anyone who knows science and geography and modern civilisation, you cannot believe that there is a tribe for 4,000 years that is trapped behind a wall – I mean if you believe this, then that’s your position, I cannot believe in it, I’m just being honest, I find this very difficult to believe.”
Response: This denial and mockery are dangerous and Yasir Qadhi should fear Allah in what he utters as he will have to stand before His Lord one day. The narrations concerning Ya’jooj and Ma’jooj (Gog and Magog) are established in the authentic Sunnah and only a deviated innovator would reject them. The Prophet (salallāhu ‘alaihi wasallam) said, “Allah has made an opening in the wall of the Gog and Magog tribes like this – and he made a circle with his fingers.” (Bukhāri, no. 3347, 7136, Muslim, no. 2881) The Prophet (salallāhu ‘alaihi wasallam) said, “The people will continue performing the Hajj and ‘Umrah to the Ka’bah even after the appearance of Gog and Magog.” (Bukhari, no. 1593) Allah stated in the Qur’an regarding Ya’jooj and Ma’jooj: “They said: O Dhul-Qarnain! Verily Ya’jooj and Ma’jooj (Gog and Magog) are doing great mischief in the land. Shall we then pay you a tribute in order that you might erect a barrier between us and them?” (Al-Kahf: 94)
So, Yasir Qadhi rejects and denies narrations agreed upon by Bukhari and Muslim, the highest level of authenticity of hadeeth!
Whoever claims that Yasir Qadhi has not deviated from the Straight Path of Allah, the Sunnah and Hadeeth, then either he is ignorant or a misguided deviant just like Yasir Qadhi himself ― and a rejector of the Sunnah of our Prophet (salallāhu ‘alaihi wasallam) and a rejector of the narrations of the Sahābah (radiyallāhu ‘anhum).
So we ask Yasir Qadhi: “So, was the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) untruthful when narrating these ahādeeth? Was he not speaking with Revelation? Or were the Sahābah untruthful in what they narrated from him? Or were the Imams of Hadeeth: Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawūd, Ibn Mājah and many dozens of others untruthful or unqualified in authenticating these texts with their chains of narration (asāneed)? Which of these is it?”
Here are a few more ahādeeth on the topic: In a narration, the Messenger (salallāhu ‘alaihi wasallam) said: “Gog and Magog will walk until they reach the mountain of al-Khamar and it is a mountain in Jerusalem and they will say: ‘We have killed those who are upon the earth. Let us now kill those who are in the sky and they will throw their arrows towards the sky and the arrows shall return to them covered with blood.’” (Muslim, no. 2937)
Imām Al-Bukhari (no. 7059) reported from Zainab bint Jahsh: The Prophet (salallāhu ‘alaihi wasallam) got up from his sleep with a flushed red face and said, ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah. Woe to the Arabs, from the great evil that is approaching them. Today a gap has been made in the wall of Gog and Magog like this – (forming a circle with his fingers).’” Someone asked, “Shall we be destroyed though there are righteous people among us?” The Prophet (salallāhu ‘alaihi wasallam) said, “Yes, if evil increases.”
Abu Sa’īd Al-Khudrī said that Messenger of Allah (salallāhu ‘alaihi wasallam) said, “The tribes of Gog and Magog will be set free and they will emerge as Allah says,
وَهُمْ مِنْ كُلِّ حَدَبٍ يَنْسِلُونَ
‘And they will come swooping down from every mound.’ [21:96] They will spread throughout the earth, and the Muslims will flee from them until the remainder of the Muslims seek refuge in their cities and fortresses, taking their flocks with them. Ya’jooj and Ma’jooj will pass by a river and drink from it until they leave nothing behind, and the last of them will follow in their footsteps and one of them will say, ‘There was once water in this place.’ They will prevail over the earth, then their leader will say, ‘These are the people of the earth, and we have finished them off. Now, let us fight the people of heaven!’ Then one of them will throw his spear towards the sky, and it will come back down smeared with blood. And they will say, ‘We have now killed the people of heaven.’ While they are like that, Allah will send a worm, like the worm that is found in the noses of sheep, which will penetrate their necks and they will die like locusts, one on top of the other. In the morning the Muslims will not hear any sound from them and they will say, ‘Who will sell his soul for the sake of Allah and see what they are doing?’ A man will go down, having prepared himself to be killed by them and he will find them dead, so he will call out to his people, ‘Glad tidings to you all, for your enemy is dead!’ Then the people will come out and let their flocks loose, but they will not have anything to graze on except their flesh, and they will become very fat as if they were grazing on the best vegetation they ever found.” (Ibn Mājah 4079)
In a narration, the Messenger Muhammad (salallāhu ‘alaihi wasallam) said he met Jesus on the Night Journey and Ascension through the Heavens. Jesus said, “The people will supplicate to Allah (to save them from Ya’jooj and Ma’jooj) and I will pray to Allah to kill them. The earth will be filled with their stench and the people will supplicate to Allah and I will pray to Allah, then the sky will send down rain that will carry them and throw them in the sea. Then the mountains will turn to dust and the earth will be stretched out like a hide. I have been promised that when that happens, the Hour will come upon the people, just like a pregnant woman whose family does not know when she will suddenly give birth.” (Ibn Mājah 4081)
FOUR: Yasir Qadhi holds the permissibility celebrating the Birthday of the Prophet (salallāhu ‘alaihi wasallam) ―The Eid Milād An-Nabiyy.
Yasir Qadhi stated: “The issue of the Mawlid, for example, Al-Hafidh Ibn Hajr is very frank. A very beautiful fatwa of Ibn Hajr. He goes, look, in the technical sense, of course, it’s a bid’ah. He says this, Ibn Hajr. The Prophet (salallāhu ‘alaihi wasallam) didn’t do it, the Sahābah didn’t do it. But, if on that day people come together, give some charity, recite the fadā’il (deeds) of the Prophet (salallāhu ‘alaihi wasallam), they do dhikr, then it is bid’ah hasanah (a good innovation). What’s wrong with that?”
Brief response: This is another deviation of Yasir Qadhi. The ritual of commemorating the birthday of the Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) was invented by the latecomers, centuries after the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) and his Companions (رضي الله عنهم). They introduced this celebration without any proofs at all, then the people made taqleed (blind following) of them, and it became widespread until this time of ours. Yet not a single one of them can bring for its practice any evidence from the Revelation, or from the early generations, or from the Four Imāms.
The first people to innovate this celebration of the birthday of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) were the tribe of Bani ‘Ubaid al-Qaddāh, those who called themselves the Fātimids. They were Bātini, Rāfidi, Ismā’eeli Shi’ah as Imām Adh-Dhahabi stated in As-Siyar (15/141). Its origins have no connection to the Sunnah or to Islam. They also celebrated the birthdays of ‘Ali ibn Abi Tālib, Fātimah, Hasan and Husayn (may Allah be pleased with them) – they even celebrated Christmas. They appeared in the era of Banul-‘Abbās and ruled over Egypt from 360 AH onwards. They used to believe that Allah is in-dwelling in His creation, in the concept that the Revelation has hidden esoteric meanings that are only known to their own scholars and ‘saints’, leading them to be considered as unbelievers by the great Scholars of ahlus-Sunnah of that time. Before them, there was no celebration of the Mawlid (birthday) of Allah’s Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم).
Therefore, the person who is guided is the one who submits and yields to what the Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) came with. And it is not permissible for anyone to introduce anything into the Sharee’ah and the Religion which Allah did not legislate. Bukhāri (2697) and Muslim (1718) reported that A’ishah said that Allah’s Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) said:
مَنْ أَحْدَثَ فِي أَمْرِنَا هَذَا مَا لَيْسَ مِنْهُ فَهُوَ رَدٌّ
“Whoever introduces something into this affair of ours (i.e. Islam) that which is not from it will have it rejected.” And Muslim reported in his Saheeh (1718) from her that Allah’s Messenger said:
مَنْ عَمِلَ عَمَلًا لَيْسَ عَلَيْهِ أَمْرُنَا فَهُوَ رَدٌّ
“Whoever performs a deed that is not from this Religion of ours will have it rejected.”
FIVE: Attacks on the Salafi ‘Aqeedah and Da’wah and belittlement of ‘Umar bin Al-Khattāb (radiyallāhu ‘anhu).
Yasir Qadhi stated: “Salafism also has some negatives as well and that is, in my humble opinion, that one of its greatest negatives is that it has taken issues of theology, abstract issues of theology (‘aqeedah) and made them the ultimate goal, over and above actual religiosity. So it is more important to many Salafis to affirm Allah’s Attributes than it is to worship Allah through those Attributes.”
“And Salafis need to realise, and I’ll be very blunt here – that if ‘Umar bin Al-Khattāb (radiyallāhu ‘anhu) was here, amongst us right now, and they gave him a quiz of ‘Aqeedah, the fact of the matter is that test that you put in front of him, he would fail it.”
“Salafism is a type of Protestant Islam and that is why Salafism does not like icons…” (then Qadhi ascribes the terrorist groups to Salafiyyah)… “Most Wahhābis are very apolitical, very pacifist. Most Wahhābis, you can consider them to be somewhat like the Amish (Christians) or the ultra-orthodox Jews… this is the theology of Wahhābism.”
It is not befitting at all that the Sahābah be spoken about in such terms — and then to imply that the Salafi creed is so far removed from the ‘Aqeedah of the Sahābah that the best of them would not recognise it today! This is a terrible slander against Ahlus-Sunnah that implies heresy against the Salafis. Then, to compound matters further, Qadhi goes on to compare the Salafis to ultra-orthodox Jews and Amish Christians.
Read now what the Scholars say about the Salafis: Ibn Uthaymeen (rahimahullāh) was asked: “What is the intent of the term Salaf?”
He responded: “The Salaf: Its meaning is those who preceded. Whoever precedes another, then he is a Salaf to him. However, when the term ‘Salaf’ is applied unrestrictedly, then it refers to the three virtuous generations: The Sahābah, the Tābi’een, and those who followed them. They are the Salaf As-Sālih (the Righteous Predecessors). And whoever comes after them and follows their Methodology (Manhaj), then he is like them, upon the Path of the Salaf, even if he comes later after them in time. That is because the term Salafiyyah refers to the Methodology (Minhāj) that the Salaf As-Sālih traversed upon, may Allah be pleased with them just as the Prophet (salallāhu ‘alaihi wasallam) said: ‘Indeed my Ummah will divide into 73 sects, all of them will be in the Fire except for one and that is the Jamā’ah.’ And in a narration, he stated about the Saved Sect: ‘Whoever is upon that which I and my Companions are upon.’ Built upon this, therefore, is the fact that the term Salafiyyah has a restricted meaning. So, whoever is upon the Minhāj of the Sahābah, the Tābi’een and those who followed them precisely, then he is a Salafi, even if he lives our times. And this is now the fourteenth Century after the Hijrah.” (Fatawa Noor ‘Alad-Darb 4/2 upon the numbering of Shamela.)
Also, Al-‘Allamah Ibn ‘Uthaymeen stated in his Sharh Al-‘Aqeedah Al-Wāsitiyyah: “Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamā’ah they are the Salaf in their belief. Even the one who comes later until the Day of Resurrection; if he is upon the Path of the Prophet (salallāhu ‘alaihi wassallam) and his Companions, then he is Salafi.”
Furthermore, Shaikh Al-Fawzān was asked: “Does the labelling of oneself as Salafi necessitate partisanship (tahazzub)?”
The Shaikh answered: “The labelling of oneself with Salafiyyah, if it is true, is not a problem. But if it is merely a claim, then it is not permissible for a person to label himself with Salafiyyah when he is upon other than the Manhaj of the Salaf. The Ash’aris, for example, say ‘we are Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamā’ah.’ And this is not true because what they are upon is not the Manhaj of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamā’ah, and likewise is the case with the Mu’tazilah who label themselves as Muwahhideen (people of Tawheed).
As the poem states: ‘Everyone claims to be the love of Laylā, but Laylā herself accepts none of them.’
So, the one who claims that he is upon the Madhhab of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamā’ah, then he follows the Path of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamā’ah, and he abandons the opposers (mukhālifeen). As for the person who wishes to unite the lizard and the fish, as they say – meaning, that he seeks to unite the animals of the land with animals of the sea, altogether, then this is not possible; or that he wants to gather fire and water in the same pan.
It is not possible to unite Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamā’ah with the madhhabs of those who oppose them, such as the Khawārij, the Mu’tazilah, the Hizbies from those who they call themselves ‘Contemporary Muslims’. So, he wishes to unite the misguided ones of this age with the Methodology of the Salaf, but [we say to him], ‘The latter part of this Ummah will not be rectified except by that which rectified its early part.’ So, it is important to distinguish matters and clarify them.” (Al-Ajwibah Al-Mufeedah ‘an As’ilah Al-Manāhij Al-Jadeedah, p. 35-39.)
SIX: Celebrating Christmas and belittlement of the scholars in order to justify his innovations.
Yasir Qadhi stated: “She (i.e. the questioner) goes to this website and says, this scholar, who is sitting 5,000 miles away in a land very far away from Finland, has said that it is sinful for a convert to go to his or her family on the day of Christmas because it is a pagan festival. Those fatawa that you’re referencing and those websites, with the respect that they deserve, they don’t understand what a family gathering at Christmas is.
They have never interacted with a Christian civilisation. They are living in a very different world than the one we inhabit, and so their understanding is skewed. We all know that a family gathering together on the day of Christmas or the night of Christmas, Christmas Eve, and they come together – is more of a family event – generally speaking, there is zero religion. Your participation in the family festival does not constitute worshipping other than Allah and there is no hint of servitude to other than Allah in a generic festival of this nature. Somebody 5,000 miles away says, ‘O it is harām for you to go.’ No, it is not harām for you to go, not at all. You are not celebrating Christmas.”
This “fatwa” of Yasir Qadhi contradicts the Book, Sunnah and the Sahābah.
The scholars of Sunnah state that a Muslim should stay away from the celebrations of the non-Muslims, and explain to them that Islam is the Religion of Allah with its own unique heritage and distinct identity that does not allow us to indulge in un-Islamic practices and celebrations that are not explicitly mentioned in the Qur’an and Sunnah. If a person asks where is specifically disallowed to participate in the Religious festivals of the non-Muslims? We say: Anas (may Allah be pleased with him) narrated that when the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) migrated to Madinah, he saw that the people celebrated two specific festivals annually. Some scholars have stated that they were the holidays of the Persians. So the Prophet asked, “What are these two days?” They informed him that these were days of celebration of festivals from before the advent of Islam (i.e. from the era of jāhiliyyah). So he said,
إِنَّ اللَّهَ قَدْ أَبْدَلَكُمْ بِهِمَا خَيْرًا مِنْهُمَا يَوْمَ الأَضْحَى وَيَوْمَ الْفِطْرِ
“Indeed Allah has replaced these days with days better than them: the Day of Adhā and the Day of Fitr.” (Abu Dāwūd, no. 1134)
As for joining the festivals in the lands of the non-Muslims: The Prophet’s Companion, Abdullah Ibn ‘Amr (may Allah be pleased with him) said, “Whoever settles in the lands of the non-Muslims, then he celebrates their festivals of Nayrūz and Mahrajān (of the Persians), and he imitates them and then he dies whilst in that state, he will be gathered with them on the Day of Resurrection.” (Sunan Al-Kubrā of Al-Bayhaqī, 9/234, Ibn Taymiyyah stated that its chain of narration is authentic in Iqtidā As-Sirāt Al-Mustaqīm, 1/457)
Ibn Taymiyyah stated, “So if the anger of God descends upon them on the day of their festival due to their practices, then whoever joins them in their practices or in some of their practices, then is he not also subject to the same punishment?” (Al-Iqtidā, 1/458) He proceeds to explain that the texts prove that the greater one’s participation in the religious celebrations of the non-Muslims, the more he exposes himself to Allah’s anger.
Celebrating the so-called birthday of Jesus the son of Mary carries alongside it huge amounts of doctrine that contradict the core message of Islam such as their claim that “Jesus Christ, the only begotten son of God was born on this day.” Allah stated, “They have disbelieved who say: God is the Messiah son of Mary.” (Quran 5:72). The Christians worship him as a God and count him in the Trinity about which Allah said, “They have disbelieved who say: God is the third of three [in a Trinity].” (Quran 5:73). These affairs run contrary to Islamic teachings. So Muslims must avoid the celebrations of the non-Muslims and instead, be pleased with the blessings and bounties that Allah has granted them in Islam.
Ibn Nahās said, “And know that from the ugliest of innovations and the worst of them is the agreement of the Muslims with the Christians in their annual celebrations, in imitating them in their foods, actions, giving them gifts, and receiving gifts from them of food during their festivities. And this innovation is something experienced, and practiced by the people of Egypt—and in this, there is a weakness in one’s Religious adherence.” (See Tanbeeh al-Ghāfileen of Ibn Nahās, pp. 307-310)
SEVEN: “Return to the Qur’an and Sunnah” is a useless slogan! And following the Salaf does not offer the solutions for today’s problems.
“Differentiate between slogans and solutions. All too often, we fall prey to beautiful slogans and many times they are legitimate and true but they are useless in providing actual solutions. So for example, we have all heard many of these slogans, ‘Islam is the answer’, ‘we must return to the Quran and Sunnah’, or there are groups who say, ‘we must return to the example of the Salaf or the Righteous Predecessors’. And again, it’s a good slogan and it has an element of truth that we follow the Sahabah or respect the Sahabah or we respect the students of the Sahabah. But tell me, how did those early generations mobilise against the Islamaphobic media? How did they challenge their politicians and parliaments when their parliament was going to pass anti-terrorism legislation that would actually ban and criminalise religiosity? You’re not going to find anything like that because it didn’t happen to them. So when you tell me to go back to the past – ok, I agree, we should respect them. But it does not give me a solution.”
For a refutation of this futile and baseless argument, please read here.
Also, read: The State of the Ummah: Causes that led to its Weakness and the Means of Rectification (eBook)
The quotes in these seven points are from a compiled video highlighting the deviations of Yasir Qadhi: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHmUc0SM5Ag&feature=youtu.be
1. Rawdat Al-Afkār, p. 479, verified by Dr, Nāsir ad-Dīn Al-Asad.
2. Sharhu Aqīdat Al-Imām Al-Mujaddid Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhāb, by Shaikh, Dr. Sālih Al-Fawzān, pp. 142-156. Published by Maktabah Dār Al-Minhāj, Riyadh, 1426AH.
3. ibid. p. 116. And this was from a letter that the Shaykh wrote to the people of Qasīm in Najd entitled, Ar-Risālah ilā Ahlil-Qasīm. (From verified manuscripts).