A lot of controversies have emerged lately around Yasir Qadhi, the most people who are above their thirties and have followed Yasir Qadhi for the last decade, will have noticed these controversies. To make it simple Yasir Qadhi is a changed man, change doesn’t have to be good or bad perse. It depends on the reasons for the change, some changes can be for the better and some for the worse. When it comes to changes in I’tiqaad (religious conviction) the situation becomes even more serious, because now also ones Âkhirah (the hereafter) is on the line.
For Allâh and then for Historicity
Answering the doubts of the New Yasir Qadhi
on the da’wah of Muhammed ibn Abd al-Wahhaab
A lot of controversies have emerged lately around Yasir Qadhi, the most people who are above their thirties and have followed Yasir Qadhi for the last decade, will have noticed these controversies. To make it simple, Yasir Qadhi is a changed man, change doesn’t have to be good or bad perse. It depends on the reasons for the change, some changes can be for the better and some for the worse. When it comes to changes in I’tiqaad (religious conviction) the situation becomes even more serious, because now also ones Âkhirah (the hereafter) is on the line.
The most important thing in any Muslim’s life is the religion of Islam, believing in Islam is based on ones ‘Aqidah. Every act of worship is based on this ‘Aqidah so it needs to be correctly founded on the Qur’ân and the Sunnah and the Ijmaa’. This also means that changes in the ‘Aqidah need to be founded on these same sources. The only change that is for the better is if the Muslim finds out that his ‘Aqidah, or parts of it, weren’t based on these sources. It’s even obligatory to make this change once you come to this discovery.
Yasir Qadhi also believes this, and he repeatedly emphasized that he changed his opinions and convictions based on knowledge and academic research. In the following articles, we will hold him to his claim.
On several occasions, Yasir Qadhi has spoken critically about the Da’wah of Muhammed ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhaab – rahimahullâh. Critique when based on solid arguments is never a problem, but Yasir’s critique is totally opposite to what he has written in the past. So the question is; What has changed? What knowledge has come to him to explain this U-Turn in ‘Aqidah? After researching each of his claims we have found no academic grounds for his critiques, and change of opinion on this topic. In order to proof and demonstrate this, we will answer each of the claims he made during the podcast with the Mad Mamluks. But before we go into this we found it to be of great importance to write a brief explanation regarding the da’wah of Muhammed ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhaab, to layout some important historical knowledge about the start of his da’wah and the creation of the three Saudi states, the political situation, events and developments during that time period.
After this basic historical introduction, we will deal with Yasir Qadhi’s allegations. We are perfectly aware of the many other controversies surrounding Yasir Qadhi and his current da’wah. Like his defence on some prominent members of the Yaqeen Institute, who have been spreading outrageous standpoints that oppose all strands of Sunni Islam. Concerning the LGBT community, the evolution theory, and participating in activities which involve shirk and sins. Unfortunately, we see Yasir hurling to the defence of his comrades of the Yaqeen Institute, a level of defence we didn’t see him make for Shaykh Muhammed ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab, who he used to defend in his former writings and lessons, wa Allaahu al-Musta’aan! Eventhough alle these controversies deserves some attention we will limit ourselves to his claims about the da’wah of Shaykh Muhammed ibn Abd al-Wahhaab and the Saudi states.
In his former writings, he used to build al-walaa and al-baraa on these issues as can be seen in his works like:
In these books, he used textual- and intellectual evidence which showed the deviations from the early orginal creed of Ahl as-Sunnah wa l- Jamâ’ah of groups like the Ashâ’irah, the Mâturidiyyah, and the extreme Soofiyyah. When it comes to their beliefs regarding the Attributes of Allaah, Tawhid al-Uluhiyyah, giving precedence to the ‘Aql (ratio) over the Naql (revelation) and many other issues.
The arguments Yasir used then were strong and sound and he seemed totally convinced that people who deviate on these issues are greatly mistaken. All this is important to know before delving into the subject.1 After our extensive research in order to answer all of Yasir Qadhi’s claims, we couldn’t find any rational explanation but that the problem seems to be that Yasir changed his methodology to be accepted by a greater audience. Maybe financial gains also play a role? So he left his former sound creed for a small worldly gain. We can’t make anything else out of it. We know Yasir Qadhi is a smart fellow and a great researcher, his former works have proven this fact, he rarely left an issue unanswered. Now we see him leave out key historical information, which shines a crucial light on events and developments regarding the da’wah of Muhammed ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab and the three Saudi states. We see him use derogatory names like “Najdis” and “Madkhalis” without any nuance, but at the same time he (suddenly) seems to have no problems at all with the Ashâ’irah, Shi’ah, and the liberal stances of some celebrity-imams on LGBT-issues, evolution theory. Even the fanatic Soofi Muhammed ‘Alawi al-Maliki, who opposes all the fundamentals the old Yasir Qadhi used to believe in, has become an object of praise in Yasir’s new worldview.
Why does Yasir tries to find all these excuses for these people but not for the Mujaddid (reviver) of the religion? Claiming that he academically studied issues and therefore changed his opinion is a mere claim that he didn’t substantiate with any proofs. His new way of so called ‘looking at the religion from an academic standpoint’ with no clear walaa and baraa is unheard of in all Sunni strands of Islam. Even his new friends of the Ashâ’irah, Sûfiyyah and Shî’ah build there walaa and baraa on their ‘Aqidah standpoints. Also, his comrades at the Yaqeen Institute have some walaa and baraa for their liberal standpoints. We see this when they attack those who advised them sincerely, while at the same time being cosy with pagan priestesses, Jews- and Christians and participating in their evil practices! This shows that there is a fundamental problem here! And it shows that the methodology of Yasir is flawed, to say the least.
Our methodology in answering Yasir Qadhi will be as follows:
· We will start with small introductory chapters which give a historic overview of the blessed da’wah of Imaam Muhammed bin ‘Abd al-Wahhaab. This will explain important issues which are hidden for many people.
· We will cite some claims made by Yasir recently and place them under chapter headings to show which issue is discussed;
· In some instances we will compare these claims with what Yasir wrote before;
· We will comment on these claims by returning to sources which Yasir refers to and other sources;
· We will mention arguments and proofs which Yasir leaves out;
· We will show that Yasir hasn’t studied the issue as deeply as he claims he has and that his self-promotion is something which is of no use because it is only proof against him.
· We will use some resources of others who have already responded to some of the shubuhaat (misconceptions) of Qadhi. To this, we will add extra information which will show the depth of Yasir’s deceptions and his double and unfair standards.
We ask Allaah to guide us and to show us what is right and we ask Allaah to reward the Mujadid and the Imaams of the da’wah. Ameen.
1: What’s also important to know is that Yasir was already heavily influenced by Dr Salmân al-‘Awda, who in the past fell into extreme forms of takfeer and was heavily involved with Islamist revolutionary groups (harakiyyin). This is important for the reader to know when reading the recent criticism of Yasir Qadhi regarding the Najdi da’wah. Because he raises his criticism to the Najdi da’wah and scholars of Salafiyyah but not towards these Haraki mashaykh he used to follow and who he still praises!?