What’s wrong with Yasir Khan (“al-Hanafi”)’s aqidah? What about his claim of being upon the “Ash’ari aqidah as explained by Imam al-Ghazali”?
A Mufti writes:
It’s very important to understand how dangerous Yasir Hanafis opinion is.
If you say that a person who didn’t receive correct dawah of islam and they die, they will enter jannah, then there becomes no purpose of dawah. Why give him dawah? He was already going to Jannah. In fact, if he rejects your dawah, he will now go to jahannum. So your da’wah is more harmful to him.
In fact, even worse is how Yasir applies this. He says any slight ignorance or misunderstanding of islam would necessitate that a person is not mukallaf of accepting Islam. And if he died in that state, he would die and enter Jannah.
Just like in the following video he says that the Spanish lady’s kuffar parents are in jannah simply because they thought Muslims are terrorists and Islam promotes terrorism.
So the main question Yasir avoids and doesn’t answer is,
The IDF soldiers of Israel and Benjamin Netanyahu who beleive that Muslims are terrorists, will they go to Jannah? Yes or No
According to his opinion that he gave to the Spanish woman. Yes they would….inna lillah
The reality is, this isn’t simply “Yasir’s opinion”; he’s simply parrotting a very recent widespread twisting of the Ashari condition of being reached by the message of Islam (bulugh ad-da’wah) for legal responsibility (taklif), a twisting spread in the past years by Abduhist neo-Azhari zanadiqah and post-perennialists like “Hamzah Yusuf” Hanson.
Yasir “al-Hanafi” literally just took a TWO MONTHS course with some Ash’ari Syrian scholars in İstanbul covering a single elementary text of aqidah, and mixed the original concept of bulugh ad-da’wah (and eventual tashwish in the image of Islam) in the Ash’ari madhhab, with its neo-Azhari / NAK / Hanson twisting about “negative image of Islam”.
Then, there is also a second huge issue in Yasir’s beliefs: he said Kufr is only if it’s done out of ‘inad; I.e. He restricts kufr only to those consciously rejecting Islam after having understood that it’s the truth.
So, there are two extremely serious issues in Yasir’s beliefs.
1. Granting pretty much unlimited excuse on the basis of being reached by a “distorted negative message”, by twisting Imam Ghazali’s words and the shart of bulugh ad-da’wah.
2. Restricting kufr to inad of someone who has understood that Islam is actually the truth but still refuses to embrace it.
As a consequence of both of these false beliefs, he flatly refuse to even consider “kuffar” 99,9% of non-Muslims, for whom he invents a third category without a single basis in any book of fiqh of aqidah: “non-kuffar non-Muslims”, who will achieve salvation. And yes, that include Charlie Hebdos blasphemers, Netanyahu and Zionist soldiers, as all of them were reached by a “negative image of Islam” (TeRroRiSm), and they don’t believe that Islam is the truth, so – according to Yasir filthy kufric beliefs – they’re not kuffar, they are not mukallaf, and they will be saved in the afterlife.
Whereas, according to ijma`, even if a non-Muslim is not a mukallaf (notwithstanding the ikhtilaf between Ash’aris and Maturidis whether bulugh ad-da’wah is a condition for taklif, and glossing over the contemporary tahrif and tashwish of the concept of “distorted idea”), he is still termed and treated as a kafir in this life at least.
So, lack of taklif doesn’t equate to “not being a kafir” – such an equation instead is based on Yasir’s adopting the neo-Azhari/Hanson/Nouman Ali Khan kufric idea that the only type of kufr is ‘inad, and thus that only those who know that Islam is the truth but still decide to reject it, are kuffar.
Obviously, such a view is totally baatil and rejected, and even if someone is “genuinely convinced” that Islam is not the truth, he’s certainly a kafir anyway.
