اللهم بارك loved and enjoyed this would love sheikh Turkmani as a regular at this masjid with sheikh Abul Abbas Oh Allah Preserve them both in goodness ameen
25:34 Doubts of Yasir Qadhi Said he dropped “Wahabi Aqeedah” 28:09 Don’t weigh Aqeedah due to emotions/external circumstances The Aqeedah itself is stable 32:21 When you have a daee/student of knowledge 37:02 We need to understand his central doubt which he is basing his misguidance upon: He said that Muhammad Wahab brought a different concept of tawheed and shirk 38:53 Two different understanding of worship and shirk (only one is correct) 45:50 When Allah mentions ibadah and shirk in the Quran, He mentions them as verbs which symbolizes actions
Please be aware that my comments are not defending YQ but a clarification of what he says/writes: Like him or dislike him, praise him or defend him, take from him or not that is between you, him and Allah on the Day of Judgment (not me). He holds the Athari creed is correct (Salafi creed) so his leaving Salafiyyah was not a creedial issue. Which is clear he now says he follows no sect but holds the Athari creed he learnt from Salafi scholars is the most correct creed. He holds the salafis have refuted ISIS but ISIS have taken the dawah of Ibn Abdul Wahab to its logical conclusion. If Salafis hold some Muslims, commit major shirk or acts of major kufr but are excused due to their ignorance then obviously if ISIS hold this to be true but hold their excuse of ignorance is removed takfir would follow. If takfir is given these ex-Muslims lifes, wealth and honour would be halal and ISIS (YQ holds) held this as a creedial belief. Hence they justified killing what Salafis hold are Muslims but they (ISIS) hold they are kufar due to takfir being performed on them due to their major shirk or acts of major kufr and the excuse of ignorance being removed. YQ also holds the view that duaa to the dead is major shirk in all cases is incorrect. He holds it is haraam in general not major shirk and in some individual cases it could be major shirk (this view he claims is that of Ibn Taymiyyah and other classical scholars). He says this view is more conducive to unity of the Muslims. YQ views the mainstream Salafi position that some Muslims do duaa to the dead which is major shirk but are excused due to ignorance as a barrier to unity and collaborative Muslim work. YQ holds other Muslim groups do not want to work with Salafis if they hold only the excuse of ignorance separates them from Mushrikeen in the eyes of Salafis. But YQ thinks if mainstream Salafiyyah adopted his and the majority view of the ummah and classical plus contemporary scholars view this would mean more groups would wish to work with Salafis on issues effecting the ummah. Also it would make Salafis feel more comfortable working with such Muslims. He holds the Salafis exclusive use of the term Saved Sect for themselves is incorrect. YQ holds, every group that affirms all 6 pillars of Islam in general but differ over subsidiary issues connected to these pillars, as part of the saved sect. Only those who do not agree to these all of these pillars or commit clear acts of kufr/shirk but claim to be Muslim are not part of the Saved Sect like Shia or Nation of Islam. In addition he thinks many contemporary Salafis have differing and splitting leading to subsequent inter Salafi arguments/refutations confuses Muslims, divideds them and goes against Salafi principles these people claim to follow. YQ holds some Salafis are isolationist because they never wish to work with any Muslims outside of Salafiyyah on any issue. Instead all they do is refute other Muslims, call what they do haraam or bidah and hold they are all Ahlu Bidah. YQ holds if they are upon the truth then why is it all they do to benefit the ummah is give circular dawah (dawah to only Salafis) and put off others from their call due to harshness plus contradict Allahs command of unity with the ummah. However he views there to be a lot of good within Salafiyyah and openly says if a person trust Salafi scholars and feels Salafiyyah helps them to get closer to Allah they should follow Salafiyyah. He claims he has great respect for Salafi scholars past and present plus holds Salafi scholars helped lay the foundation to his Islamic knowledge and he can never thank them enough. Lastly he holds contemporary Salafis sometimes hold views that go against the Salaf but instead follow their contemporary Salafi scholars. Most Salafis he holds follow contemporary Salafi scholars and have very little to do with the books of the Salaf in their learning and life. This is his position on Salafiyyah and Salafis from what I understand and Allah knows best. He himself teaches the Salafi Creed which he calls the Athari Creed but I have never heard him mention anything to do with the Salaf manhaj which he holds is a development of ijtihadi views (Ahlu Kitab, Ahlu Sunnah, Ahlu Bidah, Mushrikeen, Muslim Rulers and Unity etc.) and not direct evidence like the Salafi aqeedah which is based on sound authentic textual evidence.
The descendants of the prophet s.a.s who lived in mecca during the time of ibn abdul wahab where deemed by ibn abdul wahab mushriks or at least involved in shirk and did not know the meaning of shirk. Can you imagine this?
Having the blood of the Prophet ﷺ doesn’t exempt you from anything. You can still be sinful and even be a Mushrik. I am a descendant of Abu Bakr As-Siddiq, but that doesn’t make me righteous, I assure you. The people of Mecca at the time of Mohammed bin Abdulwahab were undoubtedly engaging in shirk, erecting graves and literal idols, seeking intercession from the dead and the inanimate, engaging in innovation after innovation, and so on.
@alialseddiqi388 Of course being the descendant of the prophet doesn't except you from the shirk. But they have taken their religion directly from their fathers and their fathers till the Prophet a.s, and have lived in mecca all their lives , and you belive they are are engaged in shirk? Doesn't this looks far fetched to you? How can you claim people were engaged in shirk in mecca and madina, are you out of your mind?
46:00- How do you explain the prostration of the angels to Adam & The prostration of Ans bin Malik to the Prophet. Both done to other than Allah but not deemed shirk! This shows that actions must have intention!
@@bilalsunnah what? That was a prostration of respect not worship and it was ordered by Allah. . Also Yusuf (AS) parents and brothers did a prostration of repect. It was alowed in that shariah at that time but in the final shariah Prophet Muhammad (SAW) came with, prosration for anyone other than Allah prohibited. So what are you asking about ‘intentions’ ?
This is like saying that killing is ok if your intention is ok because Al Khidr killed the boy in Surah Al Kahf. Prostration as a sign of greeting/ respect was present in some previous generations (eg Yusuf doing so for his parents) but was outlawed by the prophet ﷺ as evidenced when Muadh Ibn jabal prostrated before him after coming back from Syria. The Hadith is very clear Ibn Katheer said: This was allowed in their laws and teachings: when they greeted an elder, they would prostrate to him. This remained permissible from the time of Adam until the teachings of ‘Eesa (peace be upon him), but this is prohibited for this ummah, and prostration is only for the Lord, may He be glorified and exalted. End quote from Tafseer al-Qur’an al-‘Azeem (4/412)
@@Quantum-1157 The prostartion of Anas in Malik was not legislated! And the Prophet (SAW) did not deem it shirk! If it were shirk in itself the Prophet would have informed him that he comiited shirk as it is an obligation for A Prophet to do so. Fact that the Prophet only forbade him tells us that its Haram but not shirk.
@@iMark256 Yes outlawed meaning Haram not Shirk! If it was shirk It is an obligation upon the Prophet to convey All shirk, kufr and innovation as in dozens of text! A Prophet can not be quiet to shirk! Second there is consensus that their is no abrogation in aqeedah! Also Killing is divided into division, that which is without intention is different from that with intention (Basic Fiqh in the Hadood). These argument are found I the fiqh book of apostation (ridah) . If people return to classical text they will learn properly! Stop saying the text are clear without referring to classical arguments, even if you disaree!
Seems like they want to call out yasir qahdi to gain clout rather than genuinely having concerns about yasir qahdi position. If they are sincere then it would be more beneficial to have this discussion behind closed doors
1st 30 minutes destroys in a respectful manner. This video shows the difference between a scholar and a student of knowledge. It’s not too late for this clarification. Jzkl
Which scholar before ibn taymiyyah claimed that invoking the prophet is shirk or was he the first one to do so, and what the scholars of his time thought about ibn taymiyyah.The same goes for ibn Abdulwahab. Ever contemporary scholar of ibn Abdulwahab thought he was wrong and did not agree with him. That means they all exept him were mushriks, because they can not excussed with ignorance. So everyone was mushrik except ibn Abdulwahab.
Im going to explain something, if you accept الحمد لله،. If you dont then Ill leave 1. Its everywhere in the Qur'an And Islam It was well known But Ibn Tamiyyah just Clarified it because people were falling into it If Muhammed صلى الله عليه وسلم didnt do it The Sahabah didnt do it The Tabieen didnt do it The Tab' atabieen didnt do it The question is not who said it is haram The question is is it legislated din Islam As this is 'Ibadah which is Tawqeefi Ibn Abbas reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “If people were given in accordance with their claims, men would claim the wealth and lives of other people. Rather, the burden of proof is on the accuser and an oath is a duty upon the defendant.” 📚 Source: al-Sunan al-Kubrá lil-Bayhaqī 21201 📚 Grade: Hasan (fair) according to Al-Nawawi عن ابن عباس قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ لَوْ يُعْطَى النَّاسُ بِدَعْوَاهُمْ لَادَّعَى رِجَالٌ أَمْوَالَ قَوْمٍ وَدِمَاءَهُمْ وَلَكِنَّ الْبَيِّنَةَ عَلَى الْمُدَّعِي وَالْيَمِينَ عَلَى مَنْ أَنْكَرَ 21201 السنن الكبرى للبيهقي كتاب الدعوى والبينات باب البينة على المدعي واليمين على المدعى عليه 33 المحدث النووي خلاصة حكم المحدث حسن في الأربعون النووية And Hadith عَنْ أُمِّ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ أُمِّ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ عَائِشَةَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهَا، قَالَتْ: قَالَ: رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه و سلم"مَنْ أَحْدَثَ فِي أَمْرِنَا هَذَا مَا لَيْسَ مِنْهُ فَهُوَ رَدٌّ [رَوَاهُ الْبُخَارِيُّ] ،[وَمُسْلِمٌ] وَفِي رِوَايَةٍ لِمُسْلِمٍ: مَنْ عَمِلَ عَمَلًا لَيْسَ عَلَيْهِ أَمْرُنَا فَهُوَ رَدٌّ". On the authority of the mother of the faithful, Aisha (ra), who said: The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said, “He who innovates something in this matter of ours (i.e., Islam) that is not of it will have it rejected (by Allah).” [Bukhari & Muslim] In another version in Muslim it reads: “He who does an act which we have not commanded, will have it rejected (by Allah).” 📚 Hadith 5, 40 Hadith an-Nawawi 📚 So Muhammed صلى الله عليه وسلم generalised that everything that wasnt a part of Islam, isnt So you have to prove it is a part of Islam to make dua to Muhammed صلى الله عليه وسلم But Allah refute every claim you will make Fatir 35:14 إِن تَدْعُوهُمْ لَا يَسْمَعُوا۟ دُعَآءَكُمْ وَلَوْ سَمِعُوا۟ مَا ٱسْتَجَابُوا۟ لَكُمْۖ وَيَوْمَ ٱلْقِيَٰمَةِ يَكْفُرُونَ بِشِرْكِكُمْۚ وَلَا يُنَبِّئُكَ مِثْلُ خَبِيرٍ If you invoke them, they do not hear your supplication; and if they heard, they would not respond to you. And on the Day of Resurrection they will deny your association.[of them with Allah - Shirk] And none can inform you like [one] Aware [of all matters]. Al-Ahqaf 46:5 وَمَنْ أَضَلُّ مِمَّن يَدْعُوا۟ مِن دُونِ ٱللَّهِ مَن لَّا يَسْتَجِيبُ لَهُۥٓ إِلَىٰ يَوْمِ ٱلْقِيَٰمَةِ وَهُمْ عَن دُعَآئِهِمْ غَٰفِلُونَ And who is more astray than he who invokes besides Allāh those who will not respond to him until the Day of Resurrection [i.e., never], and they, of their invocation, are unaware. Al-Jinn 72:21 قُلْ إِنِّى لَآ أَمْلِكُ لَكُمْ ضَرًّا وَلَا رَشَدًا Say [O Muhammed صلى الله عليه وسلم[ , "Indeed, I do not possess for you [the power of] harm or right direction." And many more ayah
@LazerPengWIN You cited some ayats and hadeeth, who from the scholars except ibn taymiyyah and later ibn Abdulwahab interpreted in the way you present them, meaning that invoking the prophet a.s is shirk? No one, that's why you timejumped from ibn Taymiyyah to the salaf which is 300 years gap. In these 300 years who thought the same as ibn taymiyyah? It's not possible for all the muslim scholars and ummah to fall into shirk. If this is the thruth that invoking the prophet is shirk, how is possible that all the scholars to fall into this, its inconceivable(By not declaring it shirk they fall into kufr). Even so the descendants of the prophet who lived in mecca. If this is shirk how can all muslim scholars not agree on shirk? Or even fall into it? From Ibn Taymiyyah to ibn Abdulwahab, in these 400 years than again none of the scholars viewed as shirk.
@@salahuddindurres3677your reasoning skills are lacking. Dua is worship. Worship directed to other than Allah is what? And where did the Prophet sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam say invoke me after my death?
@@عيسىبنمرقسFirstly if this is so simple how is possible all of these ulema can not see it? DOES'NT this croos your mind? Secondly is Sujud worship? If yes , if somebody prostrates to somebody else is he worshiping that person and is he directing the worship to someone other than Allah? Is he declared mushrik on the spot? Or is he asked about his intention? As you know all deeds depend on the intention. So if prostration is not shirk on the spot, why is dua shirk on the spot without clarifying his intention? Thirdly, if the prophet does not say it does not mean it is shirk, it could be haram. This takfir on the spot, it could get even Imam Ahmad kafir because is well known he invoked the angels for help when he was lost in the desert. Why did not imam Ahmad asked from Allah but asked help from the angels. If this issue is so clear why nobody told him :" Imam Ahmad what are you doing, you can fall in shirk, how can you do this?"
@@salahuddindurres3677 You mentioned so many points and I will try to break it down for you 1. I dont know what kind of ulema fall into shirk but There is a reason why Allah warns against shirk so much in the quran and it is because people can easily fall into it through the traps of shaytaan 2. Yes, when sujood is done in the *form* of shirk then it is classed as worship, for example in some cultures it is considered respect to kiss your parents feet, so if i do that and the form of my action is similar to me in sujood am i doing an act of worship? ofc not, and thats the difference, however if i prostrate to an idol and my action is in the form of worship then this is shirk without a doubt. 3. Deeds dont depend on intention in that sense, intentions are a condition for good deeds to be accepted, and thats what the famous hadith about intention refers to, not that bad deeds are corrected by good intentions. 4. Making dua to other than Allah is shirk if the thing you are asking about is something only Allah can grant you, hence why this doesnt apply to imam ahmad And to address your previous point, Shirk is something which is known from the religion out of necessity, and the issue of shirk and tawheed is the core purpose of islaam to begin with, thats why in the early books of aqeedah you dont see scholars talk much about forms of shirk in detail etc, simply because it wasnt an issue and people didnt fall into it until the shia and the sufis started to bring shirk into the ummah and that is when ibn taymiyyah and his likes refuted them
With all due respect to the Sheikh, may Allah preserve him, what is the gain of ascribing this guy to the Shia, or ex-Shia ? As if the disbelievers would say: "Oh wait, Shia, no no no they have creedal differences, they are a sect, they branched their way out of Islam, or entered severe deviance."
It’s not for the disbelievers comfort rather it is for us, that the murtad has not come from our ranks. Rather as bidda (shisim)is the road that leads to kufr and shirk . And majority of the so called ‘apostates’ are usually Shia from Iran/ Lebanon/ Iraq who leave their religion due to the clear nonsense it is.
@Themessageislam1234 I agree with your statement, that their path is one of innovation and subsequent confusion which is a path to apostacy. However that is not my point.
@ if the Muslims left their deen in large numbers, or even if we heard of a case of a Muslim leaving their deen this would no doubt upset us and may discourage those who are week in Imaan (may Allah not make us of them Ameen). Therefore the shaahid is that you mentioned the disbelievers reaction, where as it is for our own comfort. May Allah give us understanding Ameen Barakallahu feek
Ibn Abdul Wahab did invent a new Aqidah. He claimed the pagan Arabs had tawhid in Rabubbiyah and that their shirk was restricted to Uluhiyah. This is false, shirk doesn't occur in Uluhiyah without Rabubbiyah.
@skhan3855 So you are saying the pagan Arabs didn't believe Allaah was the Creator of the Heavens & Earth? When Allaah says: وَلَئِن سَأَلْتَهُم مَّنْ خَلَقَ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضَ لَيَقُولُنَّ اللَّهُ And if you asked them, "Who created the heavens and earth?" they would surely say, " Allaah . (Al-Qu'ran 31:25) And the Imaam al-Mufassireen ibn Jareer Tabaree commented on this Ayah يقول تعالى ذكره: ولئن سألت يا محمد هؤلاء المشركين بالله من قومك ﴿مَنْ خَلَقَ السَّمَوَاتِ والأرْضَ لَيَقُولُنَّ اللهُ قُلِ الحَمْدُ لله﴾ meaning, "if you O Muhammad (sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam) were to ask these Mushrikeen with Allaah from YOUR PEOPLE: "Who created the heavens and earth?" they would surely say 'Allaah""
The Quran states different What was the reason for the prophets dawah he came to call people to worship Allah alone The Arabs pagan affirmed rububiyyah yet they still didn’t direct there worship to Allah alone and that is tawheed uluhiyyah وَلَىِٕن سَأَلۡتَهُم مَّنۡ خَلَقَ ٱلسَّمَـٰوَ ٰتِ وَٱلۡأَرۡضَ لَیَقُولُنَّ ٱللَّهُۚ قُلِ ٱلۡحَمۡدُ لِلَّهِۚ بَلۡ أَكۡثَرُهُمۡ لَا یَعۡلَمُونَ﴿ ٢٥ ﴾ And if you (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) ask them: Who has created the heavens and the earth, they will certainly say: Allâh. Say: All the praises and thanks be to Allâh! But most of them know not. Luqmān, Ayah 25 فَإِذَا رَكِبُوا۟ فِی ٱلۡفُلۡكِ دَعَوُا۟ ٱللَّهَ مُخۡلِصِینَ لَهُ ٱلدِّینَ فَلَمَّا نَجَّىٰهُمۡ إِلَى ٱلۡبَرِّ إِذَا هُمۡ یُشۡرِكُونَ﴿ ٦٥ ﴾ • Muhsin Khan and Taqi-ud-Din Hilali: And when they embark on a ship, they invoke Allâh, making their Faith pure for Him only: but when He brings them safely to land, behold, they give a share of their worship to others[1]. Al-ʿAnkabūt, Ayah 65
It seems these Salafis can't get over Yasir Qadi leaving their ranks. The ordinary Muslim doesn't have time for these esoteric issues but rather is struggling with current affairs of the Umah.
“Esoteric issues” the issues being “doubting the Quran’s presentation, shirk and kufr” If you’re more taken by politics than Tawheed, then it’s time to rethink your Islam.
Esoteric issues? There is not a page in the Mushaf except you find Tawheed. The establishment of Tawheed and the removal of Shirk is the most important issue!
The issue is important and of the greatest importance Tawheed. However what is the truth majority of laymen Muslims probably do not care deeply about this issue. To a layman the issue is simple YQ holds the same aqeedah on Tawheed and Shirk as Salafis since he learnt it from them. He teaches the exact same thing as them on this issue. They only differ in one issue - duaa to the dead at their graves - Salafis hold it is always major Shirk and YQ holds it is always haraam (a major sin) and in some circumstances could lead to major shirk. Both hold the dead can not hear so both hold making duaa to them is completely pointless. The above to many laymen seems simple, just do not make duaa to the dead at their graves as its a major sin or major shirk. Plus the dead can not hear the duaas of the living so it's completely pointless - this how I am sure many laymen look at the issue. They would say this issue can be wrapped up in a 15 minute talk and then onto how are we going to become a strong ummah again and how should we understand Syria, Palestine, Hezbollah etc. I understand this view although it is incorrect but obviously they would have that view as it comes from a lack of knowledge to the importance of the topic. Plus it lacks understanding that major shirk like duaa to the dead weakens the ummah. Even if you hold it is a major sin practice by millions of Muslims but could lead to major shirk this equal is dangerous for the ummah and weakens it. Have mercy upon each other in the comments brothers inshallah.
Man misses the Yassir Qadhi who used to say Allah said, and the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم said not the Yassir Qadhi who now says, "My opinion is this, and my opinion is that"
To the people that watch this in sha Allah in 10 years that time wont matter to them. They will only want an answer. And if this video does that for them then alhamdulillah. If not then the videos made before will stand right beside it anyway.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Kindly upload part 2 inshaAllah
Looking forward it
Jazaakumu Allah ghayran. I can't wait for the 2nd part, when is it being released?
جزاك الله خيرا
اللهم بارك
loved and enjoyed this
would love sheikh Turkmani as a regular at this masjid with sheikh Abul Abbas
Oh Allah Preserve them both in goodness ameen
Would they have the *God Logic* podcast share in an interview?
Very much needed
25:34 Doubts of Yasir Qadhi
Said he dropped “Wahabi Aqeedah”
28:09 Don’t weigh Aqeedah due to emotions/external circumstances
The Aqeedah itself is stable
32:21 When you have a daee/student of knowledge
37:02 We need to understand his central doubt which he is basing his misguidance upon:
He said that Muhammad Wahab brought a different concept of tawheed and shirk
38:53 Two different understanding of worship and shirk (only one is correct)
45:50 When Allah mentions ibadah and shirk in the Quran, He mentions them as verbs which symbolizes actions
Kindly upload the second part please , Allah Azzawaal reward you. And save us all muslims from shirk
Very important topic alhamdulillah
Please be aware that my comments are not defending YQ but a clarification of what he says/writes:
Like him or dislike him, praise him or defend him, take from him or not that is between you, him and Allah on the Day of Judgment (not me).
He holds the Athari creed is correct (Salafi creed) so his leaving Salafiyyah was not a creedial issue. Which is clear he now says he follows no sect but holds the Athari creed he learnt from Salafi scholars is the most correct creed.
He holds the salafis have refuted ISIS but ISIS have taken the dawah of Ibn Abdul Wahab to its logical conclusion. If Salafis hold some Muslims, commit major shirk or acts of major kufr but are excused due to their ignorance then obviously if ISIS hold this to be true but hold their excuse of ignorance is removed takfir would follow. If takfir is given these ex-Muslims lifes, wealth and honour would be halal and ISIS (YQ holds) held this as a creedial belief. Hence they justified killing what Salafis hold are Muslims but they (ISIS) hold they are kufar due to takfir being performed on them due to their major shirk or acts of major kufr and the excuse of ignorance being removed.
YQ also holds the view that duaa to the dead is major shirk in all cases is incorrect. He holds it is haraam in general not major shirk and in some individual cases it could be major shirk (this view he claims is that of Ibn Taymiyyah and other classical scholars). He says this view is more conducive to unity of the Muslims. YQ views the mainstream Salafi position that some Muslims do duaa to the dead which is major shirk but are excused due to ignorance as a barrier to unity and collaborative Muslim work. YQ holds other Muslim groups do not want to work with Salafis if they hold only the excuse of ignorance separates them from Mushrikeen in the eyes of Salafis. But YQ thinks if mainstream Salafiyyah adopted his and the majority view of the ummah and classical plus contemporary scholars view this would mean more groups would wish to work with Salafis on issues effecting the ummah. Also it would make Salafis feel more comfortable working with such Muslims.
He holds the Salafis exclusive use of the term Saved Sect for themselves is incorrect. YQ holds, every group that affirms all 6 pillars of Islam in general but differ over subsidiary issues connected to these pillars, as part of the saved sect. Only those who do not agree to these all of these pillars or commit clear acts of kufr/shirk but claim to be Muslim are not part of the Saved Sect like Shia or Nation of Islam.
In addition he thinks many contemporary Salafis have differing and splitting leading to subsequent inter Salafi arguments/refutations confuses Muslims, divideds them and goes against Salafi principles these people claim to follow.
YQ holds some Salafis are isolationist because they never wish to work with any Muslims outside of Salafiyyah on any issue. Instead all they do is refute other Muslims, call what they do haraam or bidah and hold they are all Ahlu Bidah. YQ holds if they are upon the truth then why is it all they do to benefit the ummah is give circular dawah (dawah to only Salafis) and put off others from their call due to harshness plus contradict Allahs command of unity with the ummah.
However he views there to be a lot of good within Salafiyyah and openly says if a person trust Salafi scholars and feels Salafiyyah helps them to get closer to Allah they should follow Salafiyyah. He claims he has great respect for Salafi scholars past and present plus holds Salafi scholars helped lay the foundation to his Islamic knowledge and he can never thank them enough.
Lastly he holds contemporary Salafis sometimes hold views that go against the Salaf but instead follow their contemporary Salafi scholars. Most Salafis he holds follow contemporary Salafi scholars and have very little to do with the books of the Salaf in their learning and life.
This is his position on Salafiyyah and Salafis from what I understand and Allah knows best.
He himself teaches the Salafi Creed which he calls the Athari Creed but I have never heard him mention anything to do with the Salaf manhaj which he holds is a development of ijtihadi views (Ahlu Kitab, Ahlu Sunnah, Ahlu Bidah, Mushrikeen, Muslim Rulers and Unity etc.) and not direct evidence like the Salafi aqeedah which is based on sound authentic textual evidence.
Why hasn't part 2 been uploaded?
The descendants of the prophet s.a.s who lived in mecca during the time of ibn abdul wahab where deemed by ibn abdul wahab mushriks or at least involved in shirk and did not know the meaning of shirk. Can you imagine this?
Having the blood of the Prophet ﷺ doesn’t exempt you from anything. You can still be sinful and even be a Mushrik. I am a descendant of Abu Bakr As-Siddiq, but that doesn’t make me righteous, I assure you. The people of Mecca at the time of Mohammed bin Abdulwahab were undoubtedly engaging in shirk, erecting graves and literal idols, seeking intercession from the dead and the inanimate, engaging in innovation after innovation, and so on.
@alialseddiqi388 Of course being the descendant of the prophet doesn't except you from the shirk. But they have taken their religion directly from their fathers and their fathers till the Prophet a.s, and have lived in mecca all their lives , and you belive they are are engaged in shirk? Doesn't this looks far fetched to you? How can you claim people were engaged in shirk in mecca and madina, are you out of your mind?
46:00- How do you explain the prostration of the angels to Adam & The prostration of Ans bin Malik to the Prophet. Both done to other than Allah but not deemed shirk! This shows that actions must have intention!
@@bilalsunnah what? That was a prostration of respect not worship and it was ordered by Allah. . Also Yusuf (AS) parents and brothers did a prostration of repect. It was alowed in that shariah at that time but in the final shariah Prophet Muhammad (SAW) came with, prosration for anyone other than Allah prohibited. So what are you asking about ‘intentions’ ?
This is like saying that killing is ok if your intention is ok because Al Khidr killed the boy in Surah Al Kahf.
Prostration as a sign of greeting/ respect was present in some previous generations (eg Yusuf doing so for his parents) but was outlawed by the prophet ﷺ as evidenced when Muadh Ibn jabal prostrated before him after coming back from Syria. The Hadith is very clear
Ibn Katheer said:
This was allowed in their laws and teachings: when they greeted an elder, they would prostrate to him. This remained permissible from the time of Adam until the teachings of ‘Eesa (peace be upon him), but this is prohibited for this ummah, and prostration is only for the Lord, may He be glorified and exalted.
End quote from Tafseer al-Qur’an al-‘Azeem (4/412)
Sad! Please go get some knowledge. So sad.
@@Quantum-1157 The prostartion of Anas in Malik was not legislated! And the Prophet (SAW) did not deem it shirk! If it were shirk in itself the Prophet would have informed him that he comiited shirk as it is an obligation for A Prophet to do so. Fact that the Prophet only forbade him tells us that its Haram but not shirk.
@@iMark256 Yes outlawed meaning Haram not Shirk! If it was shirk It is an obligation upon the Prophet to convey All shirk, kufr and innovation as in dozens of text! A Prophet can not be quiet to shirk! Second there is consensus that their is no abrogation in aqeedah! Also Killing is divided into division, that which is without intention is different from that with intention (Basic Fiqh in the Hadood). These argument are found I the fiqh book of apostation (ridah) . If people return to classical text they will learn properly! Stop saying the text are clear without referring to classical arguments, even if you disaree!
Seems like they want to call out yasir qahdi to gain clout rather than genuinely having concerns about yasir qahdi position. If they are sincere then it would be more beneficial to have this discussion behind closed doors
1st 30 minutes destroys in a respectful manner. This video shows the difference between a scholar and a student of knowledge. It’s not too late for this clarification. Jzkl
Baarakallah fikum
he had it coming for him
he's an example happy?
Which scholar before ibn taymiyyah claimed that invoking the prophet is shirk or was he the first one to do so, and what the scholars of his time thought about ibn taymiyyah.The same goes for ibn Abdulwahab. Ever contemporary scholar of ibn Abdulwahab thought he was wrong and did not agree with him. That means they all exept him were mushriks, because they can not excussed with ignorance. So everyone was mushrik except ibn Abdulwahab.
Im going to explain something, if you accept الحمد لله،. If you dont then Ill leave
1. Its everywhere in the Qur'an
And Islam
It was well known
But Ibn Tamiyyah just Clarified it because people were falling into it
If Muhammed صلى الله عليه وسلم didnt do it
The Sahabah didnt do it
The Tabieen didnt do it
The Tab' atabieen didnt do it
The question is not who said it is haram
The question is is it legislated din Islam
As this is 'Ibadah which is Tawqeefi
Ibn Abbas reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “If people were given in accordance with their claims, men would claim the wealth and lives of other people. Rather, the burden of proof is on the accuser and an oath is a duty upon the defendant.”
📚 Source: al-Sunan al-Kubrá lil-Bayhaqī 21201 📚
Grade: Hasan (fair) according to Al-Nawawi
عن ابن عباس قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ لَوْ يُعْطَى النَّاسُ بِدَعْوَاهُمْ لَادَّعَى رِجَالٌ أَمْوَالَ قَوْمٍ وَدِمَاءَهُمْ وَلَكِنَّ الْبَيِّنَةَ عَلَى الْمُدَّعِي وَالْيَمِينَ عَلَى مَنْ أَنْكَرَ
21201 السنن الكبرى للبيهقي كتاب الدعوى والبينات باب البينة على المدعي واليمين على المدعى عليه
33 المحدث النووي خلاصة حكم المحدث حسن في الأربعون النووية
And
Hadith
عَنْ أُمِّ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ أُمِّ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ عَائِشَةَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهَا، قَالَتْ: قَالَ: رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه و سلم"مَنْ أَحْدَثَ فِي أَمْرِنَا هَذَا مَا لَيْسَ مِنْهُ فَهُوَ رَدٌّ [رَوَاهُ الْبُخَارِيُّ] ،[وَمُسْلِمٌ] وَفِي رِوَايَةٍ لِمُسْلِمٍ: مَنْ عَمِلَ عَمَلًا لَيْسَ عَلَيْهِ أَمْرُنَا فَهُوَ رَدٌّ".
On the authority of the mother of the faithful, Aisha (ra), who said:
The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said, “He who innovates something in this matter of ours (i.e., Islam) that is not of it will have it rejected (by Allah).” [Bukhari & Muslim] In another version in Muslim it reads: “He who does an act which we have not commanded, will have it rejected (by Allah).”
📚 Hadith 5, 40 Hadith an-Nawawi 📚
So Muhammed صلى الله عليه وسلم generalised that everything that wasnt a part of Islam, isnt
So you have to prove it is a part of Islam to make dua to Muhammed صلى الله عليه وسلم
But Allah refute every claim you will make
Fatir 35:14
إِن تَدْعُوهُمْ لَا يَسْمَعُوا۟ دُعَآءَكُمْ وَلَوْ سَمِعُوا۟ مَا ٱسْتَجَابُوا۟ لَكُمْۖ وَيَوْمَ ٱلْقِيَٰمَةِ يَكْفُرُونَ بِشِرْكِكُمْۚ وَلَا يُنَبِّئُكَ مِثْلُ خَبِيرٍ
If you invoke them, they do not hear your supplication; and if they heard, they would not respond to you. And on the Day of Resurrection they will deny your association.[of them with Allah - Shirk] And none can inform you like [one] Aware [of all matters].
Al-Ahqaf 46:5
وَمَنْ أَضَلُّ مِمَّن يَدْعُوا۟ مِن دُونِ ٱللَّهِ مَن لَّا يَسْتَجِيبُ لَهُۥٓ إِلَىٰ يَوْمِ ٱلْقِيَٰمَةِ وَهُمْ عَن دُعَآئِهِمْ غَٰفِلُونَ
And who is more astray than he who invokes besides Allāh those who will not respond to him until the Day of Resurrection [i.e., never], and they, of their invocation, are unaware.
Al-Jinn 72:21
قُلْ إِنِّى لَآ أَمْلِكُ لَكُمْ ضَرًّا وَلَا رَشَدًا
Say [O Muhammed صلى الله عليه وسلم[ , "Indeed, I do not possess for you [the power of] harm or right direction."
And many more ayah
@LazerPengWIN You cited some ayats and hadeeth, who from the scholars except ibn taymiyyah and later ibn Abdulwahab interpreted in the way you present them, meaning that invoking the prophet a.s is shirk? No one, that's why you timejumped from ibn Taymiyyah to the salaf which is 300 years gap. In these 300 years who thought the same as ibn taymiyyah? It's not possible for all the muslim scholars and ummah to fall into shirk. If this is the thruth that invoking the prophet is shirk, how is possible that all the scholars to fall into this, its inconceivable(By not declaring it shirk they fall into kufr). Even so the descendants of the prophet who lived in mecca. If this is shirk how can all muslim scholars not agree on shirk? Or even fall into it?
From Ibn Taymiyyah to ibn Abdulwahab, in these 400 years than again none of the scholars viewed as shirk.
@@salahuddindurres3677your reasoning skills are lacking. Dua is worship. Worship directed to other than Allah is what? And where did the Prophet sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam say invoke me after my death?
@@عيسىبنمرقسFirstly if this is so simple how is possible all of these ulema can not see it? DOES'NT this croos your mind? Secondly is Sujud worship? If yes , if somebody prostrates to somebody else is he worshiping that person and is he directing the worship to someone other than Allah? Is he declared mushrik on the spot? Or is he asked about his intention? As you know all deeds depend on the intention. So if prostration is not shirk on the spot, why is dua shirk on the spot without clarifying his intention?
Thirdly, if the prophet does not say it does not mean it is shirk, it could be haram. This takfir on the spot, it could get even Imam Ahmad kafir because is well known he invoked the angels for help when he was lost in the desert. Why did not imam Ahmad asked from Allah but asked help from the angels. If this issue is so clear why nobody told him :" Imam Ahmad what are you doing, you can fall in shirk, how can you do this?"
@@salahuddindurres3677 You mentioned so many points and I will try to break it down for you
1. I dont know what kind of ulema fall into shirk but There is a reason why Allah warns against shirk so much in the quran and it is because people can easily fall into it through the traps of shaytaan
2. Yes, when sujood is done in the *form* of shirk then it is classed as worship, for example in some cultures it is considered respect to kiss your parents feet, so if i do that and the form of my action is similar to me in sujood am i doing an act of worship? ofc not, and thats the difference, however if i prostrate to an idol and my action is in the form of worship then this is shirk without a doubt.
3. Deeds dont depend on intention in that sense, intentions are a condition for good deeds to be accepted, and thats what the famous hadith about intention refers to, not that bad deeds are corrected by good intentions.
4. Making dua to other than Allah is shirk if the thing you are asking about is something only Allah can grant you, hence why this doesnt apply to imam ahmad
And to address your previous point, Shirk is something which is known from the religion out of necessity, and the issue of shirk and tawheed is the core purpose of islaam to begin with, thats why in the early books of aqeedah you dont see scholars talk much about forms of shirk in detail etc, simply because it wasnt an issue and people didnt fall into it until the shia and the sufis started to bring shirk into the ummah and that is when ibn taymiyyah and his likes refuted them
With all due respect to the Sheikh, may Allah preserve him, what is the gain of ascribing this guy to the Shia, or ex-Shia ?
As if the disbelievers would say:
"Oh wait, Shia, no no no they have creedal differences, they are a sect, they branched their way out of Islam, or entered severe deviance."
It’s not for the disbelievers comfort rather it is for us, that the murtad has not come from our ranks. Rather as bidda (shisim)is the road that leads to kufr and shirk .
And majority of the so called ‘apostates’ are usually Shia from Iran/ Lebanon/ Iraq who leave their religion due to the clear nonsense it is.
@Themessageislam1234
I agree with your statement, that their path is one of innovation and subsequent confusion which is a path to apostacy.
However that is not my point.
@ if the Muslims left their deen in large numbers, or even if we heard of a case of a Muslim leaving their deen this would no doubt upset us and may discourage those who are week in Imaan (may Allah not make us of them Ameen).
Therefore the shaahid is that you mentioned the disbelievers reaction, where as it is for our own comfort.
May Allah give us understanding Ameen Barakallahu feek
Ibn Abdul Wahab did invent a new Aqidah. He claimed the pagan Arabs had tawhid in Rabubbiyah and that their shirk was restricted to Uluhiyah. This is false, shirk doesn't occur in Uluhiyah without Rabubbiyah.
@skhan3855 So you are saying the pagan Arabs didn't believe Allaah was the Creator of the Heavens & Earth? When Allaah says:
وَلَئِن سَأَلْتَهُم مَّنْ خَلَقَ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضَ لَيَقُولُنَّ اللَّهُ
And if you asked them, "Who created the heavens and earth?" they would surely say, " Allaah . (Al-Qu'ran 31:25)
And the Imaam al-Mufassireen ibn Jareer Tabaree commented on this Ayah
يقول تعالى ذكره: ولئن سألت يا محمد هؤلاء المشركين بالله من قومك ﴿مَنْ خَلَقَ السَّمَوَاتِ والأرْضَ لَيَقُولُنَّ اللهُ قُلِ الحَمْدُ لله﴾
meaning, "if you O Muhammad (sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam) were to ask these Mushrikeen with Allaah from YOUR PEOPLE: "Who created the heavens and earth?" they would surely say 'Allaah""
The Quran states different
What was the reason for the prophets dawah he came to call people to worship Allah alone
The Arabs pagan affirmed rububiyyah yet they still didn’t direct there worship to Allah alone and that is tawheed uluhiyyah
وَلَىِٕن سَأَلۡتَهُم مَّنۡ خَلَقَ ٱلسَّمَـٰوَ ٰتِ وَٱلۡأَرۡضَ لَیَقُولُنَّ ٱللَّهُۚ قُلِ ٱلۡحَمۡدُ لِلَّهِۚ بَلۡ أَكۡثَرُهُمۡ لَا یَعۡلَمُونَ﴿ ٢٥ ﴾
And if you (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) ask them: Who has created the heavens and the earth, they will certainly say: Allâh. Say: All the praises and thanks be to Allâh! But most of them know not.
Luqmān, Ayah 25
فَإِذَا رَكِبُوا۟ فِی ٱلۡفُلۡكِ دَعَوُا۟ ٱللَّهَ مُخۡلِصِینَ لَهُ ٱلدِّینَ فَلَمَّا نَجَّىٰهُمۡ إِلَى ٱلۡبَرِّ إِذَا هُمۡ یُشۡرِكُونَ﴿ ٦٥ ﴾
• Muhsin Khan and Taqi-ud-Din Hilali:
And when they embark on a ship, they invoke Allâh, making their Faith pure for Him only: but when He brings them safely to land, behold, they give a share of their worship to others[1].
Al-ʿAnkabūt, Ayah 65
Jazak'Allah u khayran ❤❤❤. Yasir Qadhi is on a big misguidance
It seems these Salafis can't get over Yasir Qadi leaving their ranks. The ordinary Muslim doesn't have time for these esoteric issues but rather is struggling with current affairs of the Umah.
I never knew of him to be in the ranks of salafis except when studying in madeenah university, maybe he felt he had to .
“Esoteric issues” the issues being “doubting the Quran’s presentation, shirk and kufr”
If you’re more taken by politics than Tawheed, then it’s time to rethink your Islam.
Esoteric issues? There is not a page in the Mushaf except you find Tawheed. The establishment of Tawheed and the removal of Shirk is the most important issue!
The issue is important and of the greatest importance Tawheed.
However what is the truth majority of laymen Muslims probably do not care deeply about this issue.
To a layman the issue is simple YQ holds the same aqeedah on Tawheed and Shirk as Salafis since he learnt it from them. He teaches the exact same thing as them on this issue.
They only differ in one issue - duaa to the dead at their graves - Salafis hold it is always major Shirk and YQ holds it is always haraam (a major sin) and in some circumstances could lead to major shirk. Both hold the dead can not hear so both hold making duaa to them is completely pointless.
The above to many laymen seems simple, just do not make duaa to the dead at their graves as its a major sin or major shirk. Plus the dead can not hear the duaas of the living so it's completely pointless - this how I am sure many laymen look at the issue.
They would say this issue can be wrapped up in a 15 minute talk and then onto how are we going to become a strong ummah again and how should we understand Syria, Palestine, Hezbollah etc.
I understand this view although it is incorrect but obviously they would have that view as it comes from a lack of knowledge to the importance of the topic. Plus it lacks understanding that major shirk like duaa to the dead weakens the ummah. Even if you hold it is a major sin practice by millions of Muslims but could lead to major shirk this equal is dangerous for the ummah and weakens it.
Have mercy upon each other in the comments brothers inshallah.
Did he not speak the truth
Troublemaking, fitnah. Examine yourself, look to your Lord; you cannot succeed by trashing other people.
Tell that to YQ for what he said about Shaykh Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab
YQ is out of your league! Move on
Yasir Qadhi lives rent free in your guys' minds.
Grow up
No it's the love for Islam which does so. Only few will understand.
Man misses the Yassir Qadhi who used to say Allah said, and the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم said
not the Yassir Qadhi who now says, "My opinion is this, and my opinion is that"
analysis payback
imagine you can talk about it so much in response. deep
You’re like 3 years late. Useless video to make at this point.
These type of videos are always needed, as the doubts continue to spread, hence requiring continual reminders/refutations
@ not really considering others have already made videos on this
Just the fact that a person would make a comment like this saying that this video is not needed clearly shows a lack of Knowledge.
To the people that watch this in sha Allah in 10 years that time wont matter to them.
They will only want an answer.
And if this video does that for them then alhamdulillah.
If not then the videos made before will stand right beside it anyway.
So he should remain silent? Let him speak the truth, don't discourage that brother.
جزاك الله خيرا