Yasir Qadhi Teaches Wahhabism Founder’s “Kitab Tawheed”, the Islam Channel, & More.

-WAHHABISM’S FOUNDER AND WAHHABISM-

The Wahhabi movement was created by Muhammad ibn Abdal-Wahhab in the 1700s. The Wahhabis are notorious for making takfir against masses of Sunnis and Shi’ah and accusing them of not understanding their religion properly — even though both Sunnis and Shi’ah existed before the Wahhabi founder was born.

Wahhabis massacred thousands of Muslims because they accused them of doing “shirk” (polytheism). Wahhabis desecrate the relics of Islam’s heritage, including the graves of noble Companions of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). Fatawa were given by numerous Sunni scholars against Wahhabis, including that of the Mufti of Mecca Ahmad ibn Zayni Dahlan. The Wahhabi founder extolled Ibn Taymiyah, considered an outcast in matters of `aqeedah (creed) and `ibadaat (worship), and was even refuted by members of his own family who were scholars.

Ibn Abdal Wahhab allowed the monarchy of al-Sa’ud to reign supreme politically, even though monarchies are unIslamic. The Wahhabis are notorious for spreading extremism worldwide, even to this day, and have influenced criminals and terrorists of all colors, including Osama bin Laden. Omar bin Laden (the son of Osama bin Laden) in his recent book (co-authored with his mother, Najwa bin Laden), “Growing up Bin Laden”, explicity said that his father was a “Wahhabi”. Whether this description is fully accurate or not is a matter of debate. What is agreed upon, however, is that Wahhabism facilitated and contributed to his terroristic outlook.

-YASIR QADHI TEACHES THE WAHHABISM FOUNDER’S  “KITAB TAWHEED”-

The al-Maghrib Institute, and specifically Yasir Qadhi, taught a class on the explanation of Muhammad ibn Abdal-Wahhab’s “Kitab Tawheed” — a book condemned by orthodox Sunni scholars and a book filled with unorthodox understandings of the Qur’an and Sunnah. It is these grossly incorrect interpretations that provide the Wahhabi justification to accuse Muslims who practice the legitimate Islamic forms of tawassul (such as istighaatha) of doing “shirk” (polytheism). 

Yasir Qadhi’s classes on the explanation of the Wahhabi Founder’s ridiculous book can be heard here:

http://www.halaltube.com/kitab-at-tawheed

Transcripts of Qadhi’s classes can be read at the al-Maghrib Institute’s forum:

http://forums.almaghrib.org/showthread.php?t=8148

No orthodox Sunni would ever teach such an unscholarly and perfidious book that was used to ostracize, condemn, and kill thousands of well meaning Muslims. Only Wahhabis promote such discredited work by unscholarly individuals like Ibn Abdal-Wahhab. 

 –YASIR QADHI’S BOOK: “A CRITICAL STUDY OF SHIRK”-

Yasir Qadhi has, in fact, published a book on explaining Muhammad ibn Abdal-Wahhab’s interpretation of shirk. The title of the book is “A Critical Study of Shirk: An Explanation of Muhammad ibn Abdal-Wahhab’s ‘Kash al-Shubuhat'”. The following are publication details and a brief description of the book by the publisher:

“This work, which is a detailed explanation of one of Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab’s most important works, deals with explaning and refuting the evidences that were used by certain Muslim groups of his time to justify acts of shirk (the act of associating partners with Allah). It is entitled Kash al-Shubuhat, which literally translates as: ‘the clearing of doubts.’ Ibn Abd al-Wahhab intended in this work to expose the falsity and speciousness of these arguments by proving that the pagans whom the Prophet (pbuh) fought utilized the exact same arguments and fell prey to the same reasoning as these modern practitioners of shirk did. It is one of the most advanced works on the subject, and over a dozen different arguments and evidences used to justify shirk are presented and then refuted.

In order to maximize the benefit of this work, introductory sections concerning other aspects of shirk not mentioned by Ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab have been added by the author. To this end, the work discusses the definitions of shirk, the importance of knowing shirk, the difference between shirk and kufr, the types and categories of shirk, the history of shirk, the evils and futility of shirk, the causes of shirk, and other related topics. In addition, a brief biography of Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab is included as a preface to the text of this book.

This work is undoubtedly the most comprehensive study in the English language of shirk, and hence an essential book for thoes who wish to understand this great evil known to man.”

(SOURCE: http://www.islamicbookstore.com/b7632.html)

The book attempts to portray certain Islamic acts as acts of polytheism. What it doesn’t explain is that the Islamic acts — tawassul, istighaatha, tabarruk — that they condemn as polytheistic acts have always been orthodox Sunni (and Shi’ah) practices accepted by the four Sunni schools of jurisprudence (Hanafi, Shafi’i, Maliki, Hanafi) and the Shi’ah Jaafariyya school for the past 1,000+ years.  

This is what makes Wahhabis and Wahhabism a takfiri splinter sect unrepresentative of Sunni Islam.

-YASIR QADHI DEFENDS WAHHABISM-

 

 

Yasir Qadhi on the notorious Islam Channel (above at 2:12) spoke about a program called “Dispatchers” in which Wahhabi ‘scholars’ were secretly videotaped and exposed by a journalist. Qadhi lashed out against the program and defended the extremists who were exposed:

They are labeling this group of people with a label. And they are telling as if the other Muslims oh you must disassociate yourself from this group of people. And they have chosen this label – they call it ‘Wahhabi’, or they call it ‘Salafi’ – and they say, ‘This is what the Wahhabis teach…this is what the Salafis teach’. Now if you look at what they are teaching and what they are saying, much of it is something which is general to Islam.” 

Qadhi also foolishly says that the word ‘Wahhabi’ is an “invented label” used by non-Muslims to divide Muslims. On the contrary, Sunni and Shi’ah Muslims, starting with their eminent scholars (`ulema), condemned Wahhabis for their heretical understanding of belief and worship that contradicted the orthodox Sunni understanding. You may listen to Qadhi’s defense of Wahhabism here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcOKzcPQkGY

-YASIR QADHI & THE SALAFI “ISLAM CHANNEL”-

Mohamed Ali Harrath
(SOURCE:  http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article5342730.ece)

For those who are wondering, yes, this is the same Islam Channel whose CEO, Mohamed Ali Harrath, was recently arrested in South Africa for terrorism related charges. Surely Yasir Qadhi can tell us more about this. A January 2010 article from the Guardian states:

The head of the UK-based Islam Channel has been arrested in South Africa and faces deportation to Tunisia over terrorism charges.

Mohamed Ali Harrath, who has advised Scotland Yard on Islamic extremism, had been sought by Interpol and authorities in Tunisia over claims that he was linked to an alleged terror organisation in his homeland…. He was convicted in absentia of numerous criminal and terrorism-related offences by Tunisian courts and sentenced to 56 years in prison.”

(SOURCE: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/jan/26/mohamed-ali-harrath)

Apparently Mohamed Ali Harrath was recently “vindicated” according to the Islam Channel website. However, his Wahhabi-Salafi propagation and support still prevail through the Islam Channel. A recent interview on BBC’s Hardtalk exposes the extremist nature of the Islam Channel which can be seen and heard here:

–BBC Hardtalk (Part-1): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6iSgs7GmIg

–BBC Hardtalk (Part-2): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2vFbWpoVAw&NR=1

–BBC Hardtalk (Part-3): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4SZyBAFzlc&feature=related

Yasir Qadhi was also a guest speaker at the Global Unity Conference (April 3-4, 2005) in the ExCel arena in London, alongside Mohamed Ali Harrath who was also invited to speak, as were other Salafi-Wahhabis, including journalist Yvonne Ridley and Yusuf Estes.

One can see that Yasir Qadhi has/had associated himself with very controversial individuals. As the main page of this blog states, the al-Maghrib Institute as an organization has had links, in one way or another, with:

-SALMAN AL-OUDAH: a Saudi Shaykh loved by Osama bin Laden.

IBN JIBREEN: the late Saudi Shaykh who loved Osama bin Laden.

-ALI AL-TIMIMI:
currently serving a life sentence in a US prison for a plethora of anti-American charges.

-ANWAR AL-AWLAKI:
an al-Qa’eda member in hiding who tells Muslims to kill Americans, and who is suspected of being NIDAL MALIK HASSAN’S mentor. 

NIDAL MALIK HASSAN was the murderer of the Fort Hood soldiers. Recently Yasir Qadhi wrote an article on Muslim Matters on why it is right NOT to target Anwar al-Awlaki.

-UMAR FAROUK ABDULMUTALLAB:
the “UNDERWEAR BOMBER” who tried to blow up a US-bound plane in December 2009.

-And many more: MOHAMED ALI HARRATH, YVONNE RIDLEY, YUSUF ESTES, etc.

-MUSLIM SCHOLARS REFUTE WAHHABISM-

The following is a list of some Muslim scholars who have refuted Wahhabism. This is by no means a comprehensive list, but sufficiently long to make the point.

It is interesting that Yasir Qadhi has not mentioned any of these scholarly refutations against Wahhabism even once in all of his lectures, classes, and presentations. He has the audacity of saying that Wahhabism is a non-Muslim invention to divide Muslims, whereas Muslim scholars have always been at the forefront of opposing Wahhabism in historical and contemporary times. Al-Maghrib Institute students, ask Yasir Qadhi about these Islamic refutations against Wahhabism — each and every one of them:

–Al-Ahsa’i Al-Misri, Ahmad (1753-1826): Unpublished manuscript of a refutation of the Wahhabi sect. His son Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn `Abd al-Latif al-Ahsa’i also wrote a book refuting them.

–Al-Ahsa’i, Al-Sayyid `Abd al-Rahman: wrote a sixty-seven verse poem which begins with the verse:

Badat fitnatun kal layli qad ghattatil aafaaqa
wa sha“at fa kadat tublighul gharba wash sharaqa

 [A confusion came about like nightfall covering the skies
and became widespread almost reaching the whole world]

–Al-`Amrawi, `Abd al-Hayy, and `Abd al-Hakim Murad (Qarawiyyin University, Morocco): Al-tahdhir min al-ightirar bi ma ja’a fi kitab al-hiwar [“Warning Against Being Fooled By the Contents of the Book (by Ibn Mani`) A Debate With al-Maliki (an attack on Ibn `Alawi al-Maliki by a Wahhabi writer)”] (Fes: Qarawiyyin, 1984).

–`Ata’ Allah al-Makki: al-sarim al-hindi fil `unuq al-najdi [“The Indian Scimitar on the Najdi’s Neck”].

–Al-Azhari, `Abd Rabbih ibn Sulayman al-Shafi`i (The author of Sharh Jami’ al-Usul li ahadith al-Rasul, a basic book of Usul al-Fiqh: Fayd al-Wahhab fi Bayan Ahl al-Haqq wa man dalla `an al-sawab, 4 vols. [“Allah’s Outpouring in Differentiating the True Muslims From Those Who Deviated From the Truth”].

–Al-`Azzami, `Allama al-shaykh Salama (d. 1379H): Al-Barahin al-sati`at [“The Radiant Proofs…”].

–Al-Barakat al-Shafi`i al-Ahmadi al-Makki, `Abd al-Wahhab ibn Ahmad: unpublished manuscript of a refutation of the Wahhabi sect.

–al-Bulaqi, Mustafa al-Masri wrote a refutation to San`a’i’s poem in which the latter had praised Ibn `Abd al-Wahhab. It is in Samnudi’s “Sa`adat al-Darayn” and consists in 126 verses beginning thus:

Bi hamdi wali al-hamdi la al-dhammi astabdi
Wa bil haqqi la bil khalqi lil haqqi astahdi

[By the glory of the Owner of glory, not baseness, do I overcome;
And by Allah, not by creatures, do I seek guidance to Allah]

–Al-Buti, Dr. Muhammad Sa`id Ramadan (University of Damascus): Al-Salafiyyatu marhalatun zamaniyyatun mubarakatun la madhhabun islami [“The Salafiyya is a blessed historical period not an Islamic school of law”] (Damascus: Dar al-fikr, 1988); Al-lamadhhabiyya akhtaru bid`atin tuhaddidu al-shari`a al-islamiyya [“Non-madhhabism is the most dangerous innovation presently menacing Islamic law”] (Damascus: Maktabat al-Farabi, n.d.).

–Al-Dahesh ibn `Abd Allah, Dr. (Arab University of Morocco), ed. Munazara `ilmiyya bayna `Ali ibn Muhammad al-Sharif wa al-Imam Ahmad ibn Idris fi al-radd `ala Wahhabiyyat Najd, Tihama, wa `Asir [“Scholarly Debate Between the Sharif and Ahmad ibn Idris Against the Wahhabis of Najd, Tihama, and `Asir”].

–Dahlan, al-Sayyid Ahmad ibn Zayni (d. 1304/1886). Mufti of Mecca and Shaykh al-Islam (highest religious authority in the Ottoman jurisdiction) for the Hijaz region: al-Durar al-saniyyah fi al-radd ala al-Wahhabiyyah [“The Pure Pearls in Answering the Wahhabis”] pub. Egypt 1319 & 1347 H; Fitnat al-Wahhabiyyah [“The Wahhabi Fitna”]; Khulasat al-Kalam fi bayan Umara’ al-Balad al-Haram [“The Summation Concerning the Leaders of the Sacrosanct Country”], a history of the Wahhabi fitna in Najd and the Hijaz.

–al-Dajwi, Hamd Allah: al-Basa’ir li Munkiri al-tawassul ka amthal Muhd. Ibn `Abdul Wahhab [“The Evident Proofs Against Those Who Deny the Seeking of Intercession Like Muhammad Ibn `Abdul Wahhab”].

–Shaykh al-Islam Dawud ibn Sulayman al-Baghdadi al-Hanafi (1815-1881 CE): al-Minha al-Wahbiyya fi radd al-Wahhabiyya [“The Divine Dispensation Concerning the Wahhabi Deviation”]; Ashadd al-Jihad fi Ibtal Da`wa al-Ijtihad [“The Most Violent Jihad in Proving False Those Who Falsely Claim Ijtihad”].

–Al-Falani al-Maghribi, al-Muhaddith Salih: authored a large volume collating the answers of scholars of the Four Schools to Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Wahhab.

–Al-Habibi, Muhammad `Ashiq al-Rahman: `Adhab Allah al-Mujdi li Junun al-Munkir al-Najdi [“Allah’s Terrible Punishment for the Mad Rejector From Najd”].

–Al-Haddad, al-Sayyid al-`Alawi ibn Ahmad ibn Hasan ibn al-Qutb

–Sayyidi `Abd Allah ibn `Alawi al-Haddad al-Shafi`i: al-Sayf al-batir li `unq al-munkir `ala al-akabir [“The Sharp Sword for the Neck of the Assailant of Great Scholars”]. Unpublished manuscript of about 100 folios; Misbah al-anam wa jala’ al-zalam fi radd shubah al-bid`i al-najdi al-lati adalla biha al-`awamm [“The Lamp of Mankind and the Illumination of Darkness Concerning the Refutation of the Errors of the Innovator From Najd by Which He Had Misled the Common People”]. Published 1325H.

–Al-Hamami al-Misri, Shaykh Mustafa: Ghawth al-`ibad bi bayan al-rashad [“The Helper of Allah’s Servants According to the Affirmation of Guidance”].

–Al-Hilmi al-Qadiri al-Iskandari, Shaykh Ibrahim: Jalal al-haqq fi kashf ahwal ashrar al-khalq [“The Splendor of Truth in Exposing the Worst of People] (pub. 1355H).

–Al-Husayni, `Amili, Muhsin (1865-1952). Kashf al-irtiyab fi atba` Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Wahhab [“The Dispelling of Doubt Concerning the Followers of Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Wahhab”]. [Yemen?]: Maktabat al-Yaman al-Kubra, 198?.

–Al-Kabbani, Muhammad Hisham, Encyclopedia of Islamic Doctrine, vol. 1-7, As-Sunnah Foundation of America, 1998.

_____, Islamic Beliefs and Doctrine According to Ahl as-Sunna – A Repudiation of “Salafi” Innovations,  ASFA, 1996.

_____, Innovation and True Belief: the Celebration of Mawlid According to the Qur’an and Sunna and the Scholars of Islam, ASFA, 1995.

_____, Salafi Movement Unveiled, ASFA, 1997.

–Ibn `Abd al-Latif al-Shafi`i, `Abd Allah: Tajrid sayf al-jihad `ala mudda`i al-ijtihad [“The drawing of the sword of jihad against the false claimants to ijtihad”].

–The family of Ibn `Abd al-Razzaq al-Hanbali in Zubara and Bahrayn possess both manuscript and printed refutations by scholars of the Four Schools from Mecca, Madina, al-Ahsa’, al-Basra, Baghdad, Aleppo, Yemen and other Islamic regions.

–Ibn `Abd al-Wahhab al-Najdi, `Allama al-Shaykh Sulayman, elder brother of Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Wahhab: al-Sawa’iq al-Ilahiyya fi al-radd ‘ala al-Wahhabiyya [“Divine Lightnings in Answering the Wahhabis”]. Ed. Ibrahim Muhammad al-Batawi. Cairo: Dar al-insan, 1987. Offset reprint by Waqf Ikhlas, Istanbul: Hakikat Kitabevi, 1994. Prefaces by Shaykh Muhammad ibn Sulayman al-Kurdi al-Shafi`i and Shaykh Muhammad Hayyan al-Sindi (Muhammad Ibn `Abd al-Wahhab’s shaykh) to the effect that Ibn `Abd al-Wahhab is “dall mudill” (“misguided and misguiding”).

–Ibn `Abidin al-Hanafi, al-Sayyid Muhammad Amin: Radd al-muhtar `ala al-durr al-mukhtar, Vol. 3, Kitab al-Iman, Bab al-bughat [“Answer to the Perplexed: A Commentary on “The Chosen Pearl,”” Book of Belief, Chapter on Rebels]. Cairo: Dar al-Tiba`a al-Misriyya, 1272 H.

–Ibn `Afaliq al-Hanbali, Muhammad Ibn `Abdul Rahman: Tahakkum al-muqallidin bi man idda`a tajdid al-din [Sarcasm of the muqallids against the false claimants to the Renewal of Religion]. A very comprehensive book refuting the Wahhabi heresy and posting questions which Ibn `Abdul Wahhab and his followers were unable to answer for the most part.

–Ibn Dawud al-Hanbali, `Afif al-Din `Abd Allah: as-sawa`iq wa al-ru`ud [“Lightnings and thunder”], a very important book in 20 chapters. According to the Mufti of Yemen Shaykh al-`Alawi ibn Ahmad al-Haddad, the mufti of Yemen, “This book has received the approval of the `ulama of Basra, Baghdad, Aleppo, and Ahsa’ [Arabian peninsula]. It was summarized by Muhammad ibn Bashir the qadi of Ra’s al-Khayma in Oman.”

–Ibn Ghalbun al-Libi also wrote a refutation in forty verses of al-San`ani’s poem in which the latter had praised Ibn `Abd al-Wahhab. It is in Samnudi’s Sa`adat al-darayn and begins thus:

Salami `ala ahlil isabati wal-rushdi
Wa laysa `ala najdi wa man halla fi najdi

[My salutation is upon the people of truth and guidance
And not upon Najd nor the one who settled in Najd]

–Ibn Khalifa `Ulyawi al-Azhari: Hadhihi `aqidatu al-salaf wa al-khalaf fi dhat Allahi ta`ala wa sifatihi wa af`alihi wa al-jawab al-sahih li ma waqa`a fihi al-khilaf min al-furu` bayna al-da`in li al-Salafiyya wa atba` al-madhahib al-arba`a al-islamiyya [“This is the doctrine of the Predecessors and the Descendants concerning the divergences in the branches between those who call to al-Salafiyya and the followers of the Four Islamic Schools of Law”] (Damascus: Matba`at Zayd ibn Thabit, 1398/1977.

–Kawthari al-Hanafi, Muhammad Zahid. Maqalat al-Kawthari. (Cairo: al-Maktabah al-Azhariyah li al-Turath, 1994).

–Al-Kawwash al-Tunisi, `Allama Al-Shaykh Salih: his refutation of the Wahhabi sect is contained in Samnudi’s volume: “Sa`adat al-darayn fi al-radd `ala al-firqatayn.”

–Khazbek, Shaykh Hasan: Al-maqalat al-wafiyyat fi al-radd `ala al-wahhabiyyah [“Complete Treatise in Refuting the Wahhabis”].

–Makhluf, Muhammad Hasanayn: Risalat fi hukm al-tawassul bil-anbiya wal-awliya [“Treatise on the Ruling Concerning the Use of Prophets and Saints as Intermediaries”].

–Al-Maliki al-Husayni, Al-muhaddith Muhammad al-Hasan ibn `Alawi: Mafahimu yajibu an tusahhah [“Notions that should be corrected”] 4th ed. (Dubai: Hashr ibn Muhammad Dalmuk, 1986); Muhammad al-insanu al-kamil [“Muhammad, the Perfect Human Being”] 3rd ed. (Jeddah: Dar al-Shuruq, 1404/1984).

–Al-Mashrifi al-Maliki al-Jaza’iri: Izhar al-`uquq mimman mana`a al-tawassul bil nabi wa al-wali al-saduq [“The Exposure of the Disobedience of Those Who Forbid Using the Intermediary of the Prophets and the Truthful Saints].

–Al-Mirghani al-Ta’ifi, `Allama `Abd Allah ibn Ibrahim (d. 1793): Tahrid al-aghbiya’ `ala al-Istighatha bil-anbiya’ wal-awliya [“The Provocations of the Ignorant Against Seeking the Help of Prophets and Saints”] (Cairo: al-Halabi, 1939).

–Mu’in al-Haqq al-Dehlawi (d. 1289): Sayf al-Jabbar al-maslul `ala a`da’ al-Abrar [“The Sword of the Almighty Drawn Against the Enemies of the Pure Ones”].

–Al-Muwaysi al-Yamani, `Abd Allah ibn `Isa: Unpublished manuscript of a refutation of the Wahhabi sect.

–Al-Nabahani al-Shafi`i, al-qadi al-muhaddith Yusuf ibn Isma`il (1850-1932): Shawahid al-Haqq fi al-istighatha bi sayyid al-Khalq (s) [“The Proofs of Truth in the Seeking of the Intercession of the Prophet”].

–Al-Qabbani al-Basri al-Shafi`i, Allama Ahmad ibn `Ali: A manuscript treatise in approximately 10 chapters.

–Al-Qadumi al-Nabulusi al-Hanbali: `AbdAllah: Rihlat [“Journey”].

–Al-Qazwini, Muhammad Hasan, (d. 1825). Al-Barahin al-jaliyyah fi raf` tashkikat al-Wahhabiyah [“The Plain Demonstrations That Dispel the Aspersions of the Wahhabis”]. Ed. Muhammad Munir al-Husayni al-Milani. 1st ed. Beirut: Mu’assasat al-Wafa’, 1987.

–Al-Qudsi: al-Suyuf al-Siqal fi A`naq man ankara `ala al-awliya ba`d al-intiqal [“The Burnished Swords on the Necks of Those Who Deny the Role of Saints After Their Leaving This World”].

–Al-Rifa`i, Yusuf al-Sayyid Hashim, President of the World Union of Islamic Propagation and Information: Adillat Ahl al-Sunna wa al-Jama`at aw al-radd al-muhkam al-mani` `ala munkarat wa shubuhat Ibn Mani` fi tahajjumihi `ala al-sayyid Muhammad `Alawi al-Maliki al-Makki [“The Proofs of the People of the Way of the Prophet and the Muslim Community: or, the Strong and Decisive Refutation of Ibn Mani`’s Aberrations and Aspersions in his Assault on Muhammad `Alawi al-Maliki al-Makki”] (Kuwait: Dar al-siyasa, 1984).

–Al-Samnudi al-Mansuri, al-`Allama al-Shaykh Ibrahim: Sa`adat al-darayn fi al-radd `ala al-firqatayn al-wahhabiyya wa muqallidat al-zahiriyyah [“Bliss in the Two Abodes: Refutation of the Two Sects, Wahhabis and Zahiri Followers”].

–Al-Saqqaf al-Shafi`i, Hasan ibn `Ali, Islamic Research Intitute, Amman, Jordan: al-Ighatha bi adillat al-istighatha wa al-radd al-mubin `ala munkiri al-tawassul [“The Mercy of Allah in the Proofs of Seeking Intercession and the Clear Answer to Those who Reject it”]; Ilqam al hajar li al-mutatawil `ala al-Asha`ira min al-Bashar [“The Stoning of All Those Who Attack Ash’aris”]; Qamus shata’im al-Albani wa al-alfaz al-munkara al-lati yatluquha fi haqq ulama al-ummah wa fudalai’ha wa ghayrihim… [“Encyclopedia of al-Albani’s Abhorrent Expressions Which He Uses Against the Scholars of the Community, its Eminent Men, and Others…”] Amman : Dar al-Imam al-Nawawi, 1993.

–Al-Sawi al-Misri: Hashiyat `ala al-jalalayn [“Commentary on the Tafsir of the Two Jalal al-Din”].

–Sayf al-Din Ahmed ibn Muhammad: Al-Albani Unveiled: An Exposition of His Errors and Other Important Issues, 2nd ed. (London: s.n., 1994).

–Al-Shatti al-Athari al-Hanbali, al-Sayyid Mustafa ibn Ahmad ibn Hasan, Mufti of Syria: al-Nuqul al-shar’iyyah fi al-radd ‘ala al-Wahhabiyya [“The Legal Proofs in Answering the Wahhabis”].

–Al-Subki, al-hafiz Taqi al-Din (d. 756/1355): Al-durra al-mudiyya fi al-radd `ala Ibn Taymiyya, ed. Muhammad Zahid al-Kawthari [“The Luminous Pearl: A Refutation of Ibn Taymiyya”]; Al-rasa’il al-subkiyya fi al-radd `ala Ibn Taymiyya wa tilmidhihi Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya, ed. Kamal al-Hut [“Subki’s treatises in Answer to Ibn Taymiyya and his pupil Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya”] (Beirut: `Alam al-Kutub, 1983); Al-sayf al-saqil fi al-radd `ala Ibn Zafil [“The Burnished Sword in Refuting Ibn Zafil (Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya)” Cairo: Matba`at al-Sa`ada, 1937; Shifa’ al-siqam fi ziyarat khayr al-anam [“The healing of the sick in visiting the Best of Creation”].

–Sunbul al-Hanafi al-Ta’ifi, Allama Tahir: Sima al-Intisar lil awliya’ al-abrar [“The Mark of Victory Belongs to Allah’s Pure Friends”].

–Al-Tabataba’i al-Basri, al-Sayyid: also wrote a reply to San`a’i’s poem which was excerpted in Samnudi’s Sa`adat al-Darayn. After reading it, San`a’i reversed his position and said: “I have repented from what I said concerning the Najdi.”

–Al-Tamimi al-Maliki, `Allama Isma`il (d. 1248), Shaykh al-Islam in Tunis: wrote a refutation of a treatise of Ibn `Abd al-Wahhab.

–Al-Wazzani, al-Shaykh al-Mahdi, Mufti of Fes, Morocco: Wrote a refutation of Muhammad `Abduh’s prohibition of tawassul. 

–al-Zahawi al-Baghdadi, Jamil Effendi Sidqi (d. 1355/1936): al-Fajr al-Sadiq fi al-radd ‘ala munkiri al-tawassul wa al-khawariq [“The True Dawn in Refuting Those Who Deny the Seeking of Intercession and the Miracles of Saints”] Pub. 1323/1905 in Egypt.

–Al-Zamzami al-Shafi`i, Muhammad Salih, Imam of the Maqam Ibrahim in Mecca, wrote a book in 20 chapters against them according to al-Sayyid al-Haddad.

-CONCLUSION-

This post proves beyond any shadow of a doubt that Yasir Qadhi (and al-Maghrib Institute) are propagaters and supporters of Wahhabism. He teaches and explains books by the founder of Wahhabism, defends Wahhabis against rightful accusations of extremism against them, and slyly hides the fact that countless Sunni (and Shi’ah) scholars have written entire books, poems, and other treatises opposing and refuting Wahhabis for their anti-Sunni, heretical beliefs and acts of worship. 

Allah Protect our children from misguidance and from taking a path separate from the Muslim majority that never practiced polytheism or anything resembling it as the Wahhabis falsely accuse!  Aaameen.

Advertisements

Shaykh Abdullah bin Hamid Ali of Zaytuna Institute Refutes Qadhi’s anti-Ash’ari Views.

Shaykh Abdullah bin Hamid Ali of Zaytuna responds to Yasir Qadhi’s article in Muslim Matters that demeaned Ash’aris and misconstrued their authentic positions. The following are some of his excerpts that shed light on the view held by Ahl al-Sunna wa’l Jama’ah and their differences with the distorted — in many cases, malevolent — understanding of the Salafi-Wahhabis. Allah make this of benefit to all of us!   

Shaykh bin Hamid Ali is a teacher at the Zaytuna Institute that provides the following biography of the Shaykh:

Abdullah bin Hamid Ali began the study of Arabic and Islamic Studies at the age of 17 with his first Arabic teacher, Imam Aberra—-may Allah show him mercy—-of Eritrea, a well-known private teacher in Philadelphia. He later studied Arabic, Qur’anic recitation (tajwid) and memorization (hifz), and other introductory topics with Imam Anwar bin Nafea Muhaimin and his brother Anas. He studied privately and as an undergraduate student with Dr. Khalid Yahya Blankinship of Temple University, and at the former Institute of Arabic and Islamic Sciences in Fairfax, Virginia. In 1997, he left the United States and began more intensive studies in the Islamic sciences at the University of Qarawiyyin of Fes, Morocco. In 2001, he graduated with a license from the Faculty of Shariah to teach the Islamic Sciences (al-ijazah al-‘ulya), and then returned to Philadelphia. Since his return, he has written a number of articles on various Islamic topics (www.lamppostproductions.com), taught numerous classes, workshops, and seminars, and translated and annotated The Attributes of God (Amal Press), a work by the great scholar, ‘Abd Al-Rahman ibn al-Jawzi. In October, Abdullah left a full-time position as chaplain with the State Correctional Institution of Chester, Pennsylvania, after five years, and joined the Zaytuna staff as a resident scholar. He lives with his wife and daughter in the Bay Area.
 

SHAYKH ABDULLAH BIN HAMID ALI

“As Salamu ‘alaykum wa rahmatullah, Shaykh Yasir

“This is your brother, Abdullah bin Hamid Ali. How are things? I’d like to congratulate you on your excellently worded article related to the matter of atomism and its relationship to Ash’ari and Mutazili doctrine. I really enjoyed reading it. But, as you can expect I do have a couple of questions that I’d like for you to clarify for me. Before that, I’d like to first state as you would expect that I do not agree that you were able to prove your thesis that the Ash’ari doctrine of the attributes originate primarily from Hellenistic thought and philosophy. Rather, it is primarily originated from the Qur’an itself by inference, of course. If it then agrees with many aspects of Hellenistic thought, that should not be a problem, but of course you are free to hold whatever view that you like. Secondly, what puzzles me is that you do not see the rational origins of your own thought or even the rational origins of Ahl al-Hadith thought in doctrine generally speaking. All of us are making inferences from the sources, so why should the Ash’aris be implicated as those who have departed from the text? Furthermore, Ash’ari doctrine of the attributes is rooted in the language of the Arabs as understood during the time of the Salaf. My other question relates to this statement you made,

“The Ash`aris do indeed state that Allah’s actions are not done for a purpose, nor can they be characterized with “wisdom”. They deny what is called “al-Hikma wa al-Ta`lil’”

“I think it would be good to rephrase this to give the Ash’aris more justice on this matter. The way that you phrase it makes it sound like the Ash’aris hold that Allah’s actions are nothing more than ‘abath’ as the Qur’an clearly denies. Do deny that would be tantamount to apostasy for it would be an outright denial of Allah’s explicit words. This is not the Ash’ari view, and your words can be seen as distorting the true understanding they intend to convey….”

“Instead of simply appreciating your scholarship, many people will take your words as further support for whatever personal vendetta he/she has against certain Muslim factions, while the greater concerns of our community will continue to go neglected. We need to do our best to make sure that people don’t waste too much time on chat rooms and blogs going back and forth about matters they do not completely understand. May Allah make you a light for others out of darkness.”
(end of quote)

SHAYKH BIN HAMID ALI’S CLARIFICATION TO A YASIR QADHI FOLLOWER

Shaykh bin Hamid Ali also responded to a Salafi tarnished follower of the Al-Maghrib Institute in the issue of ta’wil, or figurative interpretation of the Attributes of Allah in the Qur’an and Sunnah:

“As for Brother Haithim’s comment, “In fact the Shaikh went against the Ash’ari creed.” Well, according to Abul-Hussein I’ve taken the view of “some” Ash’aris. If I am incorrect about that assumption, then I still haven’t seen how I have gone against the Ash’ari creed. I just think you are misunderstanding what is meant by “ta’lil” and are perhaps confusing it with “hikma.” Otherwise, I don’t think it would be appropriate for you to say, “Ash’aris believe that Allah SWT’s actions are neither based nor motivated by a divine wisdom.” and then to say “Imams Bajoori and Marghini have made similar statements. Ash’aris do believe Allah SWT’s actions to be wise, but not motivated by a divine wisdom.” I don’t see where I have said anything different from this.

“When a person has a sensor placed on a door to detect movement so that the door opens every time a person wants to enter, this is an example of ta’lil. Why the sensor? To detect the person who’s about to enter the door. What is the wisdom of that? Perhaps, it’s to remove the burden of having to push or pull the door open, thus lightening the burden of the people. Or perhaps the wisdom is for one to simply develop an admiration and appreciation for the creator of the door with the sensor and to feel amazement for one who could do such a thing. I hope that I am clear about what the difference is between “‘illah gha’iyya” and “hikma ilahiyya.”

“As for the first thing “ta’til”, Allah’s actions are free from being bound by such motivations, while ever action of the Creator is characterized by wisdom. This is the Ash’ari view. To actually study that with an Ash’ari rather than read about it may be at the root of misunderstandings. Harshness with people many times results from autodidacts and their independent studies of the rational and legal sciences. This is one thing that Imam Shatibi in his Al-Muwafaqat considered to be the reason for Ibn Hazm’s harshness toward the ‘ulama. Perhaps you need to read what I wrote again for the sake of fairness. However, if your intention is to merely make this a tit for tat exchange, don’t hold your breath. This is only a one shot deal for me. My time and work is too valuable for such a waste of time. I just thought that I would reach out in the hopes that I have found “brothers” who I am able to “reason” with. Beyond that, those of you who may seek only disputation can go right ahead and argue with my corpse (metaphorically “or not”).”

(end of quote)

(SOURCE: http://muslimmatters.org/2008/04/09/the-role-of-atomism-on-groups-of-kalam/)

Shaykh Abu Adam Responds Again: Qadhi’s anti-Ash’ari Position.

Though the debate on Ash’ari theology below is not new, it is the first time it has been published in this blog. The more one reads about Yasir Qadhi and his statements, the more one realizes that he is leading Muslims on a path that contradicts the majority of Muslims. Allah Protect us from people like him who attempt to promote their unorthodox, distorted understandings on our Muslim youth!

Below, Shaykh Abu Adam responds to Yasir Qadhi’s maligning of Ash’aris.  As one can see from the listed posts, Yasir Qadhi’s maligning of Ash’aris seems to be a favorite hobby of his. Yasir assumes he has mastered the subject, though a learned scholar like Shaykh Abu Adam is easily able to point to his inaccuracies and heterodoxy without any difficulty whatsoever.

The following is Yasir Qadhi’s response to a string of comments made by Shaykh Abu Adam in the Muslim Matters forum. Because Yasir had closed the comments, he had the last word and prevented Shaykh Abu Adam from responding. Shaykh Abu Adam, however, responded in his own website for all to see. Both can be read below, in full.

YASIR QADHI’S STRANGE VIEWS

Yasir Qadhi said:

Salaam Alaikum

There were numerous miscellaneous issues brought up in the previous comments, I’ll try to answer them briefly. Those that remain unanswered are being dealt with in upcoming articles insha Allah.

– One of the major differences between orthodox Sunni Islam (a.k.a. the Ahl al-Hadith) and the people of kalaam is the issue of theological priorities. The people of kalaam, of all stripes, considered proving the existence of God to be their utmost priority. Hence, they exhausted much of their efforts to this end. Every major theological textbook of the Ash`arites begins with this in mind. And this, of course, is a byproduct of their philosophical inclinations (this issue continues to remain center-stage in modern philosophy classes). The Quran, in stark contrast, hardly devotes any attention to actually proving the existence of God; in fact Allah says, upon the tongue of one of the prophets, “Is there any doubt about Allah?” (Surah Ibrahim, 10). And the Prophet (saw) informed us “Every child is born upon the fitrah; then his parents make him a Jew or Christian” (Sahih Muslim). Hence, the fitrah, which is ingrained in every human, innately affirms the existence of God. It is for this reason that atheism has always been an aberration and minority belief in all societies. Atheism has never been a serious threat to the Muslim ummah, it is currently not a threat, and it never will be a threat. I am obviously not denying that it is possible to find some people who leave Islam and become atheists, but for every one such person, there are thousands upon thousands of Muslims whose problems have more to do with a weakness of Iman, not a lack of Iman.

– The grandiose claim that the Ash`arites “saved” the Muslim Ummah from embracing atheism en masse by using their own philosophical proofs to refute them, while placating to Ash`arite ego, is actually historically and intellectually false. There simply was no serious threat from atheism, and there continues to be no serious threat, simply because man by his nature (fitrah) needs to believe in a Divine Being. Rather, the threat of worshiping other than the True God (i.e., shirk) is actually much more real and pronounced, and it is for this reason that literally thousands of verses in the Quran deal with the problem of shirk, whereas only a handful deal with atheism. And to this day, shirk is a greater problem for the Muslims than atheism (how many Muslims make du�aa to other than Allah, claiming this is a legitimate form of “tawassul”?). I only wish the Ash`arites took on refuting shirk with the same passion and zeal that they do in determining what God “can” and “cannot” be characterized with.

– Neither the “Proof from Accidents” nor the Ash`arite belief in atomism are “Quranic” proofs per se. What I mean by this is that the Quran itself does not make such claims; if someone wishes to read in such elaborate premises and cosmological views into vague verses, then while I would applaud them for their imagination, I would venture that any unbiased reader would concur that the Quran itself does not call to these matters. And the greatest evidence for this is that the earliest generations of Islam (and even the Prophet (saw) himself) did not derive such complex cosmological premises from the Quran. Now, the claim that a certain proof or theory does not contradict the Quran is not the same as saying it is Quranic. Much of what is taught in science classes in our times does not contradict the Quran, but at the same time no one would claim that it is Quranic (meaning, derived from the Quran). With this differentiation in mind!

– The problem then comes that one takes a non-Quranic evidence as a certain fact, and then uses it to deny or distort what is clearly Quranic (in this case, the Attributes of God). Herein actually lies the main contention that the Ahl al-Hadith have with the Ash`arites. The Ash`arites give precedence to what they perceive to be intellectual proofs, claiming that these proofs have greater authority than the texts of the Quran and Sunnah. Both al-Ghazali and al-Razi quite explicitly (and nonchalantly, I might add) state so. But the fact of the matter is that their “intellectual proofs” are merely anachronistic byproducts of Hellenestic debates that occurred in centuries gone by. What is quite poignant in this regard is that all the groups of kalaam, who claim to have such “intellectual proofs”, actually reach “incontrovertible”proofs which are directly in contradiction to one another. What the Mu`tazilites perceived as a “proof” was denied by the Ash`arites as an “impossibility”, and vice versa (this is not to mention the pure falasifa, or even the differences between various Ash`arite schools and Mu`tazilite branches – all of whom posited ‘intellectual proofs’ which are mutually exclusive to one another). Yet the source of both of these groups was the same: what they perceived to be “aql”, or intellect.

– The claim that atomism plays no role in making ta`wil of the Attributes is simply false; perhaps the one who made this claim is not aware of the intricacies of Ash`arite or Mutazilte theology. The very reason why the Ash`arites denied, for example, Allahs nuzool (descent), or istiwa (rising over the throne), is because it clashed with their basic philosophical proof for the existence of God, which is wholly based upon the belief in atomism. For them, motion is an “accident”, and an “accident” by definition must subside in a “body” (which is composed of multiple atoms), and a “body” has been proven to be created. Hence, to ascribe “motion” to God would necessitate, based upon Ash`arite theology, that God was created. For the Ahl al-Sunnah, firstly “motion” is a term that they do not delve into with respect to God’s attributes – neither affirming it nor denying it, as this word or its Arabic equivalents are not used in the Divine Texts. Secondly, the philosophical premises that the Ash`arites use to arbitrarily deny what Allah and His Prophet have quite explicitly affirmed are not premises that the Quran itself calls to. Rather, the Ahl al-Sunnah give greater precedence to the Divine Texts and take what Allah says about Himself without questioning “how can this be so?” for indeed Allah is the One who said, ‘There is nothing like Him’. If there is nothing like Him, we should not compare Him to ‘accidents’ or ‘bodies’ but rather simply accept what He says about Himself.

– The claim that objects have no ta`thir (or “effect”) on other objects is also one that has no basis from Scripture, reason, or even human experience. Rather, Allah has created each and every substance with intrinsic properties, and these properties may in fact effect other substances if Allah allows them to. Once again, this is the “middle position” that the Ahl al-Hadith subscribed to. On the one hand you had the philosophers and natural scientists who claimed that natural causes must take effect. They claimed that, for example, if fire is exposed to cotton in normal circumstances, it is inevitable that the cotton will itself catch fire. The Ash`arites, in their attempt to defend their conception of miracles, went to the exact opposite and claimed that, in fact, fire has no effect in causing cotton to burn. The Ahl al-Hadith claim that natural causes are effective if and only if Allah wills them. Allah can prevent these natural causes from acting, but if He wills, the cause can have an effect. Hence, nothing happens except by the Will of Allah, and Allah is indeed the creator of all things, but this does not negate that Allah Himself has created substances with intrinsic properties. Ibn al-Qayyim, in his magnificent work Shifa al-Alil, discussed this point in great detail, and mentions that the evidences for this simple fact number in the thousands in the Quran. As one example, Allah says numerous times in the Quran that He sends down rain so that gardens and plants may flourish. In other words, Allah Himself states that rain is a direct cause of plants flourishing. There is no rational human being (apart from a few who have been exposed to some type of philosophical rhetoric, such as Ash`arite kalaam) who denies natural causality. Humans the world over, in fact even animals, live their lives with this basic foundational premise in mind. If they don’t eat, drink, sleep, avoid dangers, etc. they will not survive, and all of this is with the Will and Permission of Allah, not independent of it. I will insha Allah talk about this issue in greater detail in a later paper.

Once again, I appreciate all the comments. As stated before, we do not want to start an endless debate, and this thread has been open for a good amount of time. There will be other articles, on many miscellaneous theological issues, where we can continue discussions between the two groups.

I believe that this method (of leaving the comments open for a good amount of time before close them) is the most practical and useful, as all of us have limited times, and a debate between any two established groups will never actually result in a final, decisive conclusion. After ten centuries of debate (the first works written in Ash`arite theology date back to the fourth century – of course the first works that we have on Ahl al-Hadith methodology date back to the second century), it is not possible that we will produce anything new on these pages. The two groups will continue to exist, and it is only a question of individuals deciding which of the two they believe to be closer to the truth.

We will be using the same format for future theological articles (leaving comments open for a while, and then closing them). If anyone has anything to add to this article, please e-mail info at muslimmatters dot org.

I am fully confident that sincere, open-minded readers can conclude for themselves which of the two theologies presented above is orthodox and Scriptural (meaning derived purely from the Divine Texts), and which is not.

Jazak Allah Khayr.
Yasir
(SOURCE: http://muslimmatters.org/2008/04/09/the-role-of-atomism-on-groups-of-kalam/)

SHAYKH ABU ADAM RESPONDS

Yasir said: The people of kalaam, of all stripes, considered proving the existence of God to be their utmost priority.

As if this is something bad. This is because this is the basis for knowing Allah; knowing that His existence is a must. In any case, we are not interested in your opinion, we are interested only in verdicts. Are you saying it is haram? If it isn’t haram, then by what right are you blaming us?

Yasir said: Rather, the threat of worshipping other than the True God (i.e., shirk) is actually much more real and pronounced, and it is for this reason that literally thousands of verses in the Quran deal with the problem of shirk, whereas only a handful deal with atheism. I only wish the Ash`arites took on refuting shirk with the same passion and zeal that they do in determining what God ‘can’ and ‘cannot’ be characterized with.

The Ahl al Sunnah wal Jama’ah are concerned with the problem of shirk. We want everyone to believe that Allah is not a body. There is no difference between someone who believes that Allah is a body, and says “but I don’t know how,” and a Hindu that only worships one idol that he has not seen yet, and says “I don’t know how.” Both are worshiping something physical that they don’t know the shape of, but that has a shape; they are two things of the same kind. Al-Qurtubi in his commentary in the Quran narrates from his Shaykh Ibn Al-Arabi, the famous hadith scholar of Andalus, regarding those who say Allah has a body: “The sound verdict is that they are blasphemers, because there is no difference between them and those that worship idols and pictures. Thus they are requested to repent from this belief, and if they refuse they are killed” (4/14).

What it comes down to is that it is of extreme importance that you actually worship Allah, not just something that you call Allah. You don’t become a believer in Allah by calling an idol “Allah.” This is the main concern of Ahl al Sunnah wal Jama’ah, and it is a concern about shirk.

Yasir said: Neither the ‘Proof from Accidents’ nor the Ash`arite belief in atomism are ‘Quranic’ proofs.

First of all, if an argument is valid, then it is a proof, and it does not matter if you feel it is “Quranic” or not, whatever that means. A valid argument is a valid argument and a proof. If you start rejecting some valid arguments for no reason, then you have destroyed the bases for human knowledge beyond what the senses provide. You have sunk to the level of dumb animals. You have taken the view of the Baraahimah, the philosophers of ancient India and Persia. They rejected the idea that knowledge can be achieved beyond what is strictly sensory. This is the heritage of your cow-worshiping neighbors back home.

The belief that there is an indivisible element is clearly stated in the Quran, because it unequivocally implies that created things are not infinitely divisible. Rather, they are finite in size:

وما من غائبة في السماء والأرض إلا في كتاب مبين

Meaning: “there is nothing hidden to creation in the skies or earth that is not in a clear book.” (Suuratu-l-Naml, 75)

As you know, the book is not infinite in size, therefore, the created things in the sky and earth are limited in number, and not infinite.

Another aayah:

لا يعزب عنه مثقال ذرة في السماوات ولا في الأرض ولا أصغر من ذلك ولا أكبر إلا في كتاب مبين

Meaning: “Nothing is hidden from Him, not what has the size of the smallest ant in the Skies or Earth, and nothing smaller or larger than that, and it is all recorded in a clear book.” (Suuratu Saba’, 3)

This aayah tells you very clearly that everything smaller than the smallest ant is recorded, this means that it is not infinitely divisible, because the book is not infinite in size. Further to this is another aayah:

وأحْصَى كُلّ شَيْءٍ عَدَدا

Meaning: “Allah knows the number of all things.” [Al-Jinn, 28]

Another aayah:

وكل شيء أحصيناه كتابا

Meaning: everything has been recorded in a book. (An-Naba’, 29)

At-Tabari said: “It means that all things have been counted and recorded in a book, that is, its total number, amount, and value.” Clearly then, they are not infinite, because that would make all the numbers infinity.

Denying that creation has an indivisible element is also against ijmaa, for Abdul Qahir Al-Baghdadi stated in his “Usul al Din” regarding it : “This is the saying of most Muslims, except An-Nattaam (a Mutazili leader),” and the disagreement of someone like An-Nataam is certainly not considered for ijmaa.

Yasir said: What I mean by this is that the Quran itself does not make such claims (I.e. ‘Proof from Accidents’). And the greatest proof for this is that the earliest generations of Islam (and even the Prophet (saw) himself) did not derive such complex theological premises from the Quran. Now, the claim that a certain proof or theory does not contradict the Quran is not the same as saying it is Quranic.

If the proof is valid, complies with the Quran, and proves something stated in it, then why is it not Quranic? Different times and different people are affected by different types of proofs. The encouragement to think of proofs of Allah’s existence and attributes are very many in the Quran, and they are not restricted to what is verbatim mentioned in the scriptures. An example of such encouragement is in this ayah:

أَفَلاَ يَنظُرُونَ إِلَى ٱلإِبْلِ كَيْفَ خُلِقَتْ

Meaning: “What, do they not consider how the camel was created?”

In light of the ayah, if you want me to restrict how I consider the camel, then you need to show me an explicit text prohibiting me from considering the “how” of the camel. It does not matter if the consideration is simple or not, lucid or not. This is because the encouragement to consider is absolute in the ayah, and cannot be restricted without a scripture text as proof.

What you call “accidents,” which would be better translated as incidents, refers simply to the different events and attributes bodies have, that is, anything with a size. The Quran states that Allah created everything. Does this not include what happens to bodies? This claim of yours is truly puzzling. An example of an ayah from the Quran that encourages thinking about bodies (things with size) and accidents (attributes and actions of things with size) is:

إِنَّ فِي خَلْقِ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ وَاخْتِلَافِ اللَّيْلِ وَالنَّهَارِ لَآَيَاتٍ لِأُولِي الْأَلْبَابِ

Meaning: “Verily in the creation of the Skies and the Earth, and the differences of night and day there are signs for those who have perceptive minds.” (Aal Imraan, 190)

The Skies and the Earth are both bodies, because they both have size, and the changes of night and day are “accidents”. Clearly then, seeking proofs of Allah’s existence and attributes in bodies and events is something Quranic of the highest order.

Anyway, using the proofs mentioned in the Quran will lead to the same conclusions as proofs based on the indivisible element, namely that Allah is not like creation. This is because all creation as we know it is either something with size (a body), or an attribute of it (“accident”). If you prove that Allah exists based on them, then you are implicitly saying that Allah is not like that, because you are already arguing that these bodies and their attributes need a creator.

For example, based on the ayah, if you say that night and day are timed orderly, and that this shows that someone orders them, then you must also hold that Allah is not something “timed”. Otherwise you would end up saying that Allah needs a creator according to your original argument.

Moreover, if you say that the skies and the earth are highly ordered structures, and that someone must have ordered them, then you must also hold that Allah is not a structure. Otherwise you would end up saying that Allah needs a creator according to your original argument.

Yasir said: The problem then comes that one takes a non-Quranic evidence as a certain fact, and then uses it to deny or distort what is clearly Quranic (in this case, the Attributes of God). Herein actually lies the main contention that the Ahl al-Hadith have with the Ash`arites. If there is nothing like Him, we should not compare Him to ‘accidents’ or ‘bodies’ but rather simply accept what He says about Himself.

Actually, if there is nothing like Him, then you must deny that what is mentioned in the Qur’aan about the attributes of Allah means Him having a like. Asharis do not deny Allah’s attributes, and they do not compare Allah to accidents and bodies, they deny that He is like them. They deny that His attributes should be quantitative or limited. That is something very different. This does not involve comparison, but knowing the characteristics of creation that makes them need a creator. This is something obvious to even common people, because it simply means that Allah is not limited, not by time and not by place. Rather, He created time and space, and He existed without them before they existed, and He is now as He was before they existed.

Yasir said: Rather, Allah has created each and every substance with intrinsic properties, and these properties may in fact affect other substances if Allah allows them to…..Allah can prevent these natural causes from acting, but if He wills, the cause can have an effect. Hence, nothing happens except by the Will of Allah, and Allah is indeed the creator of all things, but this does not negate that Allah Himself has created substances with intrinsic properties.

Are you telling me that substances can act without Allah having created that act? That they will act unless He prevents them? If you do, then you are a contradicting the Quran, because Allah said:

وَخَلَقَ كُلَّ شَيْءٍ فَقَدَّرَهُ تَقْدِيرًا

Meaning: “And He created everything and predestined it.” (Al-Furqaan, 2)

If this is not your opinion, then you don’t know what you are saying, because this is exactly the position of the Asharis. No one is saying that if you put a fire on your hand you won’t burn, what is being said is that the fire itself, the heat that it generates, and the burn that it makes are all separate creations. So whenever fire has heat it means that Allah has created that particular heat of that particular incident, and if it ever burns a hand it is because Allah created the burn in the hand for each and every incident. This is true even if the burning never fails to happen, because Allah said:

وَخَلَقَ كُلَّ شَيْءٍ فَقَدَّرَهُ تَقْدِيرًا

Meaning: “And He created everything and predestined it.” (Al-Furqaan, 2)

This comes back to the belief of Ahl al Sunnah wal Jama’ah that Allah is the only creator. Only He can bring any event into existence, and no one and nothing else, ever, without exception. Every single movement, every single thought, every single change that occurs is created and predestined by Allah. If you believe this, then it is clear that no substance has actual and real power to affect things, it just appears that way.

So if water is followed by growth of the harvest, then this is because every incident of growth in every single plant has been created and predestined by Allah. If it did not grow, it was not because it was going to grow by itself and then Allah prevented it, but because Allah has not created growth in it. Rather, He created the next periods of its existence as a non-growing plant. The non-growing plant is not remaining this way independently either. Rather, every moment of its existence is created by Allah.

Your statements “Allah is indeed the creator of all things,” and “Allah has created each and every substance with intrinsic properties, and these properties may in fact affect other substances if Allah allows them to” are contradict one another. Why? Because in the first you say that Allah creates all things, and in the second you are saying that properties might affect things. If something happens in this world, however minute, it is because Allah has created it. You cannot say that Allah willed something, anything at all, and did not create it, because:

وَخَلَقَ كُلَّ شَيْءٍ فَقَدَّرَهُ تَقْدِيرًا

Meaning: “And He created everything and predestined it.” (Al-Furqaan, 2)

 (SOURCE: http://sunnianswers.wordpress.com/2008/05/01/responding-to-sheikh-yasir/)