The "Wahhabis"!?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Al-Kashmiri

Well-Known Member
Staff member
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم​

As-salaamu `alaykum warahmatullaah.

The purpose of this thread, inshaa' Allaah is to deal with the topic of the Imaam, the Shaykh ul-Islaam, Muhammad Ibn `Abdul Wahhaab Ibn Sulaymaan At-Tameemee, rahimahullaah. I know that the theme "wahhabis" has appeared in the past, but there hasn't been a positive thread dedicated to removing the doubts, destroying the lies and presenting the truth about the Shaykh, his life, his call and his so-called zealot followers (the "Wahhabis", in truth they are ahl us-Sunnah). Alhamdulillaah, I know there are many users here who are fully aware that the term "wahhabi" is quite frankly; incorrect, and was used by none other than the people of shirk, bid`ah and the kuffaar (namely the British). However, this site is aimed at removing the negative propaganda about Islaam, and in our time that cannot be achieved without dealing with this important subject. Today we find many journalists, historians and pseudo-experts of Islaam (those who spent (more like wasted) their lifetimes writing about celebrities and other useless trash and after the attacks of 9/11 or 7/7, read a few articles on Islaam and all of sudden, self-promoted themselves as experts of Islaam) blaming the Imaam and those who were with him for providing the fuel for the atrocities that have occured through-out the world, and linking them to the various takfeeri/khaariji ideologies? However, we know that this is all lies and that it has always been a trend of the kuffaar to denote the people of the Sunnah (and Muslims in general) as barbarians, terrorists, mischeif-makers, evil-doers and the list goes on.

So inshaa' Allaah, in this thread, I will post articles, various fataawaa (verdicts) and hopefully extracts from books on this subject, and I request the other mods/admins to do likewise. Users feel free to contribute, but if your intent is to attack the Shaykh and spread further misinformation, then don't bother; you won't have a place in this thread. Please bare in mind that the point in this thread is to deal primarily with the misconceptions that are prevalent regarding the subject and not to present for example, a biography of the Shaykh or a mention of his books, unless they assist in meeting the desired objective.

Baarak Allaahu feekum.

Was-salaam
 

Al-Kashmiri

Well-Known Member
Staff member
THE PURPOSE OF THE TERM 'WAHHABI'


SHAYKH MUHAMMAD KHALIL HARRAS (RAHIMAHULLAAH)​


Question:
Is there a religious sect called 'wahhabi' ?

Answer:
There is no such sect with this name. Rather this is just a nick name that the people of falsehood have branded it on the people who uphold the truth, the people of tawheed (Oneness of Allaah in everything). And this name they refer it to Shaykh Muhammad ibn AbdulWahhab, may Allaah have mercy on him. And he is a great Imaam from the Imaams of who brought religious rectification in the lands of Najd. 1 Thus he called to going back and establishing Tawheed (after people were into shirk) and reviving the methodology of the Salaf (pious predecessors). In this effort of his; the clan of Saud helped him until they managed to relinquish and remove almost all the shirk and bid'a (innovations), like calling on the dead people in the graves, and extremism in praising other humans. Thus all of the lands of Najd returned to Tawheed (Oneness of Allaah in everything) and Ikhlaas (sincerity in worshipping of Allaah) May Allaah have mercy on them and reward them greatly.

Shaykh Muhammad Khalil Harras

Footnotes:
[1] Najd is part of The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

Source : http://fatawa.al-islam.com/Fatawa/Display.asp?FatwaID=1742&ParentID=500&Page=1
Translation by : Aboo Waheeda as-Salafee
www.almuflihoon.com
 

Al-Kashmiri

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhaab – a reformer concerning whom many malicious lies have been told

Islam Q&A​


Why is so much of what is said about Shaykh al-Islam Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhaab so hostile, and why are his followers called Wahhabis?

Praise be to Allaah.
You should note that one of the ways in which Allaah deals with His chosen slaves is to test them according to the level of their faith, to show who is sincere and who is not. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Alif-Laam-Meem.

[These letters are one of the miracles of the Qur’aan, and none but Allaah (Alone) knows their meanings.]

2. Do people think that they will be left alone because they say: ‘We believe,’ and will not be tested.

3. And We indeed tested those who were before them. And Allaah will certainly make (it) known (the truth of) those who are true, and will certainly make (it) known (the falsehood of) those who are liars, (although Allaah knows all that before putting them to test)”
[al-‘Ankaboot 29:1-3]

Those who are most severely tested are the Prophets, then the next best and the next best, as it says in the saheeh hadeeth of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

If you study the seerah (biography) of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), you will see that he went through severe tests; he was even accused of being a liar, a sorcerer and a madman; garbage and filth were thrown on his back; he was expelled from Makkah; and his feet bled in al-Taa’if. This was the situation of all the Prophets who were rejected before him (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

Shaykh al-Islam Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhaab (may Allaah have mercy on him) suffered the same as other sincere scholars and daa’iyahs, but in the end the message of truth that he brought prevailed. How could it be otherwise? How could the light of truth be extinguished? Think about this man and how Allaah helped him to sow the seeds of Tawheed throughout the Arabian Peninsula and put an end to all kinds of shirk. If this indicates anything, it indicates that he was sincere in his call and made sacrifices for that cause as far as we can tell, and of course his efforts were supported and helped by Allaah.

But the enemies of this call have spared no effort to make false accusations concerning it. They claimed – falsely – that the Shaykh claimed to be a prophet, and that he did not respect the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) properly, and that he condemned all the ummah as kaafirs… and other fabrications and lies that were told about him. Anyone who examines these claims will realize for sure that they are all lies and fabrications. The books of the Shaykh which are widely circulated bear the greatest witness to that, and his followers who answered his call never mentioned anything to that effect. If the matter were as they claim, his followers would have conveyed the same ideas, otherwise they would have been disloyal to him. If you want to know more details about this and to clarify the matter, you should read the book Da’aawa al-Manaawi’een li Da’wah al-Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhaab by Dr ‘Abd al-‘Azeez al-‘Abd al-Lateef, which will answer all your questions, if Allaah wills.

With regard to calling his followers Wahhaabis, this is just another in a long series of fabrications made up by the enemies of his call, to divert people away from the call of truth and to place a barrier between his call and the people so that the call will not reach them. If you study the story of how al-Tufayl ibn ‘Amr al-Dawsi (may Allaah be pleased with him) became Muslim, you will see the parallels with what happened in the case of Imam Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhaab.

Ibn Hishaam narrated in his Seerah (1/394) that al-Tufayl set out towards Makkah, but Quraysh intercepted him at the gates of the city and warned him against listening to Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). They made him think that he was a sorcerer who could cause division between man and wife… they kept on at him until he took some cotton and put it in his ears. Then when he saw the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), he thought to himself that he would take out the cotton and listen to him, and if what he said was true then he would accept it from him, and if he what he said was false and abhorrent, he would reject it. When he listened to him, all he could do was become Muslim on the spot.

Yes, he became Muslim after putting cotton in his ears. Those who oppose the call of Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhaab fabricated lies the same way Quraysh did. Quraysh understood full well that the call of Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) had the power to reach people’s hearts and minds, so they exaggerated in their lies about the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) in an attempt to stop the truth reaching people. Similarly we see that those who speak against Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhaab and his followers repeat the same lies that were told against the original call.

You should – if you follow the truth – not pay any attention to these lies and fabrications. You should look for the truth of the matter by reading the books of Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhaab, for his books are the greatest proof that these people are lying, praise be to Allaah.

There is another subtle point that should be noted, which is that the Shaykh’s name was Muhammad, the attributive of which is Muhammadi. The word Wahhabi is the attributive derived from al-Wahhaab (the Bestower), who is Allaah, as He says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Our Lord! Let not our hearts deviate (from the truth) after You have guided us, and grant us mercy from You. Truly, You are the Bestower [al-Wahhaab]”
[Aal ‘Imraan 3:8]

As al-Zajjaaj said in Ishtiqaaq Asma’-Allaah, p. 126, al-Wahhaab “is the One Who gives a great deal. This form (fa’’aal) in Arabic is indicative of something that is done to a great extent. Allaah is al-Wahhaab (the Bestower) Who gives to His slaves one after another.”

Undoubtedly the path of al-Wahhaab is the path of truth in which there is no crookedness or fabrication, and His party is the one that will prevail. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And whosoever takes Allaah, His Messenger, and those who have believed, as Protectors, then the party of Allaah will be the victorious”
[al-Maa’idah 5:56]

“They are the party of Allaah. Verily, it is the party of Allaah that will be the successful”
[al-Mujaadilah 58:22]

Long ago they accused al-Shaafa’i of being a Raafidi (Shi’ah) and he refuted them by saying:

“If being a Raafidi means loving the family of Muhammad, then let the two races (of mankind and the jinn) bear witness that I am a Raafidi.”

We refute the claims of those who accuse us of being Wahhabis by quoting the words of Shaykh Mullah ‘Imraan who was a Shi’i but Allaah guided him to the Sunnah. He said:

“If the follower of Ahmad [the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)] is a Wahhaabi, then I affirm that I am a Wahhaabi. I reject the association of any other with Allaah, for I have no Lord except the Unique, the Bestower (al-Wahhaab). Those who were called by the Prophet accused him of being a sorcerer and a liar.”

(See: Manhaaj al-Firqat al-Naajiyah by Shaykh Muhammad Jameel Zayno, p. 142-143)

And Allaah knows best.

http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/36616
 

Al-Kashmiri

Well-Known Member
Staff member
"Wahhabism" - What Is Behind The Label?

Abu Imraan Abdur-Rahmaan Al-Sharkhasi​


"And we are not allowed to wrong anyone by saying about them what is not true or even accurate. So what is behind this label, “wahhabi”, because that is what it has become: a label, a brand to brand anyone who is out of line, who does not agree, who dares to even criticise or ask for proof!"


For the full article, click here.

Was-salaam
 

Al-Kashmiri

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Wahabbism Unveiled

Abu Hammaad​


All Praise is due to Allaah (Azza wa Jall) who sent his Messenger (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) with guidance and the true religion so that it may become manifest over all other religions. May the Salaat and Salaam of Allaah be upon the last and noblest of All the Prophets, Muhammad (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam), on the family of the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) and upon the noble companions (ra) and on all those who follow the path of righteousness until the last day.

It is the habit of the people of today that they label as anyone who calls to Tawheed and warns against all forms of shirk a Wahabbi. So since this has become prominent amongst some of the Muslims, who call themselves Sunnis then we should refer back to the Qur'aan and the Sunnah upon the understanding of the first three generations in order to ascertain what is the truth.

(1) Firstly Al-Wahabb is one of the beautiful names of Allaah (Azza Wa Jall) meaning the all-giver and so how can anyone twist this beautiful name, Aoudhoubillah.

(2) The usage of 'Wahabbi' comes from a scholar who lived some time ago by the name of Muhammad Bin Abdul-Wahaab, who called to Tawheed and defended it and warned against Shirk and fought its people. So if these people were truthful they would use the term 'Muhammadi' since Abdul-Wahaab was the name of his father.

(3) Alllaah (Azza Wa Jall) has prohibited us from insulting using nicknames as He (Azza Wa Jall) says: "And do not insult by nicknames" Al Hujuraat 49:11

(4) The people of the past accused Imaam Shafiee of being a Rafidee and he replied with:

If Rafd is loving the Family of Muhammad (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam)
Then the humans and Jinns witness that I am a Rafidee.

So we refute with what a poet said:

If the follower of the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) is a Wahabbi
Then I affirm that I am a Wahabbi

(5) It is the duty of the Muslims to call to Tawheed and warn against Shirk:

Allaah (Azza Wa Jall) says: "And we have sent to every nation a Messenger saying Worship Allaah alone and avoid the Taghoot " [An Nahl 36]

The Taghoot is anything that is worshipped besides Allaah (Azza Wa Jall).

The call to Tawheed is the call of all the Messengers:

Allaah (Azza Wa Jall) says: "To Aad (We sent) their brother Hud. He said: 'Oh my people, worship Allaah, you have no other Illah except Him, will you not fear (Allaah) " [Al Aa'raaf 7:65]

And He (Azza Wa Jall) says: "To Thamud we sent their brother Salih. He said: O my people worship Allaah You have no other Illah except Him " [Hud 11:61]

So see how the dawah to Tawheed is the dawah of all the Prophets and the battle between Tawheed and Shirk is long standing.

But today if you make this call you are labelled a Wahabbi. But this call existed long before Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahabb was born. The evidences of Tawheed existed long before the birth of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahabb. The collection of hadeeth like Bukhari and Muslim existed hundreds of years before even the great great grandfather of Muhammad bin Abdul Wahaab was born. So if we quote hadeeth from Bukhari and Muslim as evidences for Tawheed and we are Wahaabis then was Imaam Bukhari a Wahaabi or Imaam Muslim.

(1) If you read the ayat in the Qur'aan: "You alone do we Worship and you alone do we seek help from " [Fatihah 1:4]

Then are you a Wahabbi?

(2) If you mention the hadeeth narrated by Ibn Abbas (ra) found in An-Nawawis Fourty Hadeeth:

The Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) said: "When you ask, then ask Allaah, and when you seek help seek help from Allaah alone " Are you a Wahabbi?

(3) Or maybe if you mention the hadeeth of the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam): "Whoever dies while calling upon other than Allaah shall enter the Hell fire " [Bukhari]

(4) Or maybe you are a Wahabbi if when told that the Awliyah know the unseen you say But Allaah (Azza wa Jall) says: "With him are the keys of the unseen, none knows them but He " [Al An'aam 6:59]

(5) And perhaps you are a Wahabbi if you expose Ibn Arabi for his kufr statements such as:

"The Lord is the Slave and the Slave is the Lord
Oh I wish I knew who was the one in authority"

(6) Or maybe you are a Wahabbi if you deny that the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) was made from light and that he had and still has the power to bring good to us:

Allaah (Azza wa Jall) says: "Say O Muhammad (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) I posess no power to benefit or hurt myself except as Allaah wills. If I had Knowledge of the unseen , I should have secured for myself an abundance of wealth, and no evil should have touched me. I am but a warner , and a bringer of glad tidings unto people who believe " [Al A'raaf 7:188]

(7) Or maybe you're a Wahabbi if you don't celebarate the birthday of the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) or Praise him highly elevating him above his being a Prophet:

The Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) said: "Do not exaggerate in praising me as the Christians exaggerated in praising the Son of Maryam (Eesaa) (alaihis-salaam), for verily I am only a slave, so say slave of Allaah and His Messenger " [Bukhari]

(8) Maybe you are a Wahaabi if you don't call upon Abdul Qaadir al-Jeelaanee to remove some harm from you and you mention the ayah: "If Allaah touches you with harm, none can remove it except He " Al An'aam 6: 17.

Was the Scholar who said the following a Wahabbi ?

"Ask Allaah and do not ask other than Him,. Seek help from Allaah and do not seek help from other then Him. Woe to you, with which face will you meet Him tomorrow? You contend with Him in the world, turning away from Him, and approaching His creation thus associating partners with Him. You submit your needs to them and rely on them in your important matters. Increase the ways and means between yourself and Allaah, for verily, if you stop that, then it is foolishness. There is no king, or authority, no self-sufficiency and no might except with Allaah, The Mighty, The Magestic, turn towards Allaah without the creation"

He seems to meet the criterion, who was he, he was none other than the one some people call upon, Abdul Qaadir al-Jeelaanee, he said this in Fath ur Rabaanee.

Or maybe the one who said the following was a Wahabbi:

"I hate to ask Allaah, by other than Allaah"

This man was Imaam Abu Haneefah, reported in Daar ul Mukhtaar.

They (the so called 'Sunnis') say the Wahabbis don't love the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) since we don't call upon him or make intercession through him, they claim that they are lovers of the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam), and we reply with the saying of a poet:

"If your love was true you would have obeyed him,
Verily the lover is to the beloved obedient"

In Conclusion:

It seems that they call people a Wahabbi who

(1) Worship Allaah alone, love Tawheed and hate Shirk
(2) Make duaa to Allaah alone
(3) Rely in Allaah alone
(4) Follow the Sunnah of the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam), and hate and avoid innovations.
(5) Adhere to the path of the companions (ra)
(6) Read the books of the Imaams and take from them.

And our final call is to Allaah Lord of all the Creation.


Taken from http://www.spubs.com article ID: MSC050001.
 

Mumin01

Junior Member
U cant be serious brother? you're defedning the man who not only killed innocent people, tore down religious structures, declared kufr on nearly every muslim but his own followers, allied with shiekh abdul aziz to form the kingdom of saudi arabia? while at the same time not only did scholars denounce the wahabiya but so did his brother and father as well.


theres no excuse for killing people because they are "mushriks" get your facts straight please. and this is neither the time, nor forum to post such things


Salaam
 

inam1971

Member
:salam2:

:jazaak: for sharing

there is such a need to understand and look for the truth,

May Allah reward you for your efforts,

:wasalam:
 

Al-Kashmiri

Well-Known Member
Staff member
U cant be serious brother? you're defedning the man who not only killed innocent people, tore down religious structures, declared kufr on nearly every muslim but his own followers, allied with shiekh abdul aziz to form the kingdom of saudi arabia? while at the same time not only did scholars denounce the wahabiya but so did his brother and father as well.


theres no excuse for killing people because they are "mushriks" get your facts straight please. and this is neither the time, nor forum to post such things


Salaam

As-salaamu `alaykum warahmatullaah.

All you have shown is how befooled you are regarding the subject. Your facts are well... not even facts (rather falsehood) and it is clear from your post that you haven't read a single book of Muhammad Ibn `Abdul-Wahhaab, and if you have then the words didn't reach beyond your eyes.

Firstly, the man didn't kill anyone from the innocent people, so where you have forged this conclusion I'd like to know! Secondly, there is nothing "religious" about a tomb, a structure over a grave (in fact building upon graves in this manner is haraam, see Saheeh Muslim), nor is there anything religious in the tree of Zaid Ibn Al-Khattaab (where the people would make du`aa to Zaid; what blatant shirk)! Thirdly, you have re-asserted one of the most pathetic claims I've heard to date. Ibn `Abdil Wahhaab dedicated many of his books on the issue you are talking about (look at his "Nawaaqid ul-Islaam" for instance) and not once did he make such a claim. On the contrary, the man, may Allaah have mercy on him said,

"Among the false accusations being propogated... is the claim that I consider all Muslims, except my followers, of being kuffaar and render their marriage contracts invalid. This is truly amazing. How can any sane person accept such accusations? Would a Muslim say these things? I declare that I disown, before Allaah, these statements that only a mad person would utter."
[See Judge Ahmad Ibn Hajar al-Butami's book, "Shaykh Muhammad Ibn `Abdul-Wahhaab"]​

Fourthly, he did not ally with `Abdul-`Azeez to form the Saudi state. Though he did make a pact with them. Sometime after the pact, the Shaykh wasn't pleased with the actions of Ibn Sa`ud and his successors, so what did he do? He left his position and remained as a teacher and continuously made clear that he didn't support their campaigns. The only time he did support any kind of campaign, is when the attack was upon them. The Shaykh later died upon this state, i.e. not being pleased with the actions of the Sa`ud family, and drawing a line between himself and their misdeeds. See Jalal Abualrub's biography of the Shaykh, read Natana J De-Long Bas' "Wahhabi Islam" read the works of his own chroniclers and companions (who knew the man better than any western traveller-writer (more like traveller-liar)), and quit with the technique of ranting claims that lack any foundations. Many of the claims you have made originate from a book whose author to this day is still unknown, and was written some 50 years or so after the Shaykh's death, so I think you are the one in (dire) need of your statement "get your facts straight" since yours are as crooked as anything and based upon miscellaneous works!

Fifthly, his father did somewhat denounce him, but agreed with his son towards the end of his life. This is what has been stated by his contemporaries like Husayn Ibn Ghannaam and `Uthmaan Ibn `Abdillaah Ibn Bishr Al-Hanbalee (whose works are considered to be the most authoritative accounts of his life, by people of reason). As for the scholars, then some of those who opposed him (like the sharifians of Makkah) wrote poems of mourn when he died (which shows their agreement with him). So how exactly did they oppose him? The judge of Yemen around the time, Imaam Ash-Shawkaanee clearly was in agreement with the Shaykh. The Imaam of Makkah at the time, Abu Samh `Abdudh-Dhaahir Al-Misri also authored a poem about the Shaykh. So who are these so-called scholars who opposed them? Where they scholars of sunnah, or callers to shirk and bid`ah?

Sixthly, there is no excuse for killing people, your right, which is why no one is pleased with the acts of the British-controlled Ottoman Empire of the time, when their leader was the infamous drunkard, Muhammad `Ali Pasha. He killed many innocent people in pursuit of the "Wahhabis". What is worth noting is that Muhammad Ibn `Abdil-Wahhaab came from a land independent of external rule (Najd wasn't an Ottoman power), unlike the soofee claim that he was with the Brits (when in reality it was they who were alligned with the British!). And as said before, when he saw that the campaigns of Sa`ud were being initiated with bad motives, he left and freed himself from them. The only people that died from a result of his order where those in Jihaad ud-Dafaa`ee (the defensive Jihaad) and of course, the adultress who was stoned to death. And tell me, in the shari`ah is there something wrong with this?

Anyway akhi, you only wasted your own time passing of information lacking any evidence, and demonstrating clearly that you base your knowledge upon hear-say and a few scattered articles. Alhamdulillaah, I've read the Shaykh's books, his biographies, works by his enemies, books written by orientalists and travellers and other than that. So next time you want to talk about your subject, try to at least meet that condition first (having read something objective about the Shaykh), instead of putting yourself forward as if you possess knowledge and awareness of this subject.

Was-salaam
 

Mohsin

abdu'Allah
Indeed Shaikh Muhammah ibn abdul Wahhab (rahimahu'Allah) was a great man, a man with a mission and with vision. He gave all his life for reformation of the Ummah and calling people back to monotheism that was lost in the practices of polytheism.

Shaikh Muhammad Ibn-'Abd-Al- Wahh'ab (1703 - 1792) And Wahh'abism:

Historical Justice Needed

The eighteenth century was an era of Western colonial expansionism. The entire Muslim World was groaning under the iron heels of the European colonialists. The mighty Ottoman Empire was heading towards a collapse. Muslim society suffered from superstitions, pagan practices, heretical innovations and apostatical leanings. The concept of pure and uncompromising Tawhid (monotheism) got mixed up with polytheism. Hijaz, the land of two sanctuaries of Islam, was no exception. The whole of the Arabian Peninsula was under the grip of superstitions and Jahiliya practices. Najd, the central part of the Peninsula, had also lapsed into pre-Islamic heathenism. Despite such a gloomy picture, the reformative impulse was always active and operational.

Religio-Cultural And Political Milieu Of Najd Before The Shaikh
Bedouin Arabia had slipped into ignorance, barbarism, bloodletting, discord and corruption. Religion was perverted and the socioeconomic and cultural life was paralysed. Few God-fearing 'Ulama' were combating the heathen beliefs and practices, such as stone, tree and grave worship. The state of affairs in Najd was awful:
"... They called upon idols and sought their intercession and aid, offered sacrifices to stones and rocks and trees in the belief that these possess the power to bring good and ward off evil, and so people sought their pleasure and approbation through
offerings .....” (Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhaab; Ahmad Abdul Ghafur)

The Najdians used to consult the soothsayers and oracles as if they were the successors of Al-Ablak al-Saadi, the famous oracle of pagan Najd. It resembled the practices of the Quraish before Islam. The life of Bedouins in the desert of Najd, as well as in its cities and villages, were characterised by lawlessness, bestiality, mad and brute freedom which was bound to let the society loose in ignorance, wickedness and political tyranny of the Amirs and Governors.

Bedouins assaulted the travellers and caravans and killed innocent men and women. Assassins fell upon villages and towns during day and night. They would plunder towns, kill and enslave people and kidnap children and infants to sell them into slavery. Since there was no strong ruler to ensure peace and security and since petty states were ruled by absolute tyrants, devoid of Islamic spirit, public safety was non-existent. The devilish and wicked rulers and leaders hired criminals to kill the 'Ulama' who were preaching the truth of Islam or were frightening the people with the punishments of the Hereafter. The 'Ulama', judges, notables, preachers and guides of Al-Kasim were killed in 1196 A.H., without discrimination. A conference was convened by the criminals to decide the fate of all those who preached reform. The unanimous decision of the conference was:

"... to get rid of the 'Ulama' by murder and every town and village would slay its 'Ulama' in a single day ... "

Thus on the specified day the 'Ulama'and learned men in every town and village were killed. It was on Friday that the 'Ulama' of Al-Khabra, and Al-Janah were slain when they were going to the mosque for their Friday prayers. Other towns and villages followed Suit.

Shaikh Husain ibn-Ghannam has recorded numerous tragedies of a similar nature in his famous book 'Rawdat al-Afkar wal-Afham' which mirrors the contemporary life in Najd. He shows how the Najdians had slipped into polytheism and heathenism and worshipped deities other than Allah, "calling them for protection in distress and invoking them to provide sustenance, and ward off evil and bring good". There was a general belief that certain shrines, domes, stones and trees possessed the power to harm and protect people. The famous palm tree called "al-Fahhal" in Bleida was worshipped by men and women who would call on it to provide sustenance, lighten their distress and cure their sicknesses. The women would invoke its help and ask it to give her a husband or a child. The tree of 'Tarjiya' was worshipped in the same way. The women begetting a male child would hang a rope or a piece of cloth on the tree, asking it to grant a long life to the child. The branches, leaves and stems of the tree was not visible because they were covered by piles of ropes and pieces of cloth. The cave, situated in the hill of Dar'iya, was the centre of pilgrimage. It was claimed that the cave was the grave of the daughter of a Prince. She was a great female saint. People invoked her for aid. (Ibid)

"The story was invented by a deceiver to lead people astray and to extort money through jugglery" (Ibid)

Similarly, a blind man was being worshipped after his death. To him was attributed great Karamat. There was hardly a city where tombs and graves were not worshipped. Special mosques were venerated and visited as objects of pilgrimage. People invoked succour and offered sacrifices on them. Islam as religion was forsaken and its teachings forgotten.

The Amirs and rulers, being totally ignorant of the laws of Allah, were blinded by lust, prejudices and mad impulses, slaying people without reason, and plundering their houses and lands. Wars were rampant among the tribal chiefs and Amirs who would enslave women and sell them for adultery. The savage bestiality swayed supreme. The two families, comparatively better in administering justice, were the rulers of Dar'iya and 'Uyaina. The former was ruled by the Sa'ud family while the latter was under the rule of the family of Muammar. They were religiously orientated. Other parts of the country were governed by tyrants and despots. Riad was ruled by Daham ibn-Dawas, a tyrant and hypocrite of the first order, who would sew the mouths of women, cut the tongues of innocent people, break their teeth and slash flesh from their bodies and force them to eat their own flesh after being roasted. He was a peerless brute, whose sports was nothing but pillage, plunder and aggression.

The economic life was as corrupt as was the religio-cultural life. Piracy and plunder had paralysed the trade routes and liquidated the import and export of merchandise. Agriculture perished due to the extortion of the tyrant rulers who would burn standing crops. Thus anarchy and famine prevailed, raiding, robbery and murders continued, and lust and ambitions swayed supreme. Moral and educational life was almost non-existent. Righteous 'Ulama' were resented and reformists were slain

The Advent Of The Shaikh:

It was in the background of such pitch darkness that Shaikh Muhammad ibn-'Abd-al-Wahhab appeared on the scene and started his Da'wa work. He was full of hope and promise and dispelled the clouds of gloom and frustration that had engulfed the souls of people. He revived the concept of pure Tawhid (monotheism) and called people to return to pristine Islam - the Quran and the Sunna. He launched his movement with full vigour and resolved to cut the roots of heathenism, superstitions and heretical innovations with the sharp scissor of Tawhid. Ruthless battles with the formidable adversaries had to follow and migration and persecutions were in store for the Shaikh. Had there been no protection of Allah descending on the Shaikh, he would have perished.

The rise of the Tawhid Movement, threatened the rulers politically and the 'Ulamaa` as-Su`’ (evil-minded religious scholars), religiously. The Ottoman Empire got frightened and hastened to liquidate the movement through military operations. 'Ibrahim Pasha, the son of Muhammad 'Ali, the Turkish governor of Egypt, was sent to crush the movement which he did in April 1818, when Dar'iya was raised to the ground and men and women, old and young and infants were slain. Amir 'Abd-Allah, the Sa'udi ruler of Dar'iya, was arrested and sent to Turkey via Egypt, where he was executed at the Aya Sofia Square with humiliation. His companions were also executed in Turkey.

A Profile Of The Shaikh:

The Shaikh, who descended from a noble family - the Musharraf - a branch of Banu-Tamim, was born in 1703/1115 in the family of learned 'Ulama'. His father 'Abd-al-Wahhab himself was a great Jurist, 'Alim and a chief Qadi (Judge) of Dar'iya. He personally taught his son all the sciences of Islamic learning. He learnt the Qur'aan by heart while still a child. His brilliance and good memory helped him to cut short the years of study. By the age of twenty, he excelled all the 'Ulama' of his town. Since his movement involved his whole family in open hostility leading to the use of force by the adversaries, his father had to migrate in 1139 from 'Uyaina to Huraimila, along with his family. The Shaikh resolved to stay behind and promote his Da'wa. The 'Ulamaa` as-Su`’ started refuting him and instigated people to rise against him, ridicule, abuse and insult him. The opposition reached such a passe that the Shaikh had to migrate from his hometown 'Uyaina', so that the fire of discord kindled by the opponents, could be extinguished. He went to Mecca and Madina for higher education and for the promotion of his mission. Many 'Ulama' in Mecca and Madina supported his Da'wa. He studied under the 'Ulama' of Madina, especially under Shaikh Ibn-Saif who initiated him to study Imaam Ahmad ibn-Hanbal, and the Sihah Sitta, the six famous compilations of Hadith. The Shaikh launched his Da'wa in the holy cities which were also under the grip of un-Islamic practices. One day he was shocked when he saw painful scenes in front of the tomb of the Holy Prophet (SAW), and he decided to emancipate people from acts which were forbidden even by the Holy Prophet (S.A.W.) himself. After having finished his education in Madina he returned to Najd and survived the ordeals that he had to face during the course of his journey from Madina to Najd via Basra, az-Zubair and al-Ahsa. He reached Huraimila where his parents lived. His father pledged his support, help and protection to the son and encouraged him to carry on with his call. The 'Ulama' of Huraimila rose against the Shaikh and instigated the rank and file to stiffen their resistance to his call and murder the Shaikh.

The Shaikh left his parents and reached 'Uyaina where he was welcomed by the Amir, 'Uthman-ibn-Mu'ammar, who lent all his support to the Shaikh and gave the daughter of 'Abd-Allah ibn-Mu'ammar into his marriage. The matrimonial relations helped the Shaikh in the promotion of his Da'wa. Now people of 'Uyaina, in addition to people of Huraimila, Riad and Dar'iya also joined the Shaikh in his noble mission.

The Da'wa In Action:

The Shaikh started teaching people the Qur’aan, and Hadith and the concept of Tawhid and invited them to return to pristine Islam and renounce the idolatrous cult. The first acid test of public faith appeared when the Shaikh invited them to pull down the gigantic sacred tree at 'Uyaina and to demolish the idols that were worshipped by them. People were scared to do so because they feared that some divine curse would befall them soon after the act was committed. The tree was, however, pulled down and the idols were removed. People's faith was strengthened in the call of the Shaikh when no curse descended upon them after the tree was cut off. They were spellbound with amazement.

There was still another test to follow, namely, the demolition of the dome from the tomb of a grave, which was ascribed to Zaid ibn-al-Khattab, situated at Gubaila. Scholars do hold that the said grave has not yet been located by archaeologists. The supposed grave was a centre of pilgrimage, where people committed idolatrous acts. It was, however, demolished in the presence of the ruler of 'Uyaina. The tomb was a means of earning a living. The ruler himself took part in its demolition. People were now more scared of divine afflictions and chastisement of the town that had to follow after such acts of desecration. But their faith was further strengthened when they saw that no affliction descended on them from the heavens. Consequently, people followed the call of the Shaikh in large numbers. 'Uyaina and its suburbs were cleared from such trees, stones and domes.

The news of the success of the Shaikh and of the support given to him by the ruler of 'Uyaina alarmed other tyrant rulers who were afraid of losing their political power. The rulers of Najd and Al-Ahsa' made an alliance to destroy the movement as soon as possible. The ruler of Al-Ahsa' asked the Amir of 'Uyaina to suspend his support and present himself to Al-Ahsa', which he did not comply with. The ruler of Al-Ahsa' stirred a revolt against the Shaikh in order to expel him from 'Uyaina. He succeeded in doing so. The Shaikh left his hometown and reached Dar'iya, which was destined to become the cradle of the immortal Tawhid movement. Ibn-Sa'ud, the Amir of Dar'iya, lent his full support to the Da'wa of the Shaikh and protected and promoted the call. The town and its people were now transformed from darkness unto light and from ignorance to knowledge. The Shaikh gave lessons in the Holy Book, the Hadith and other Islamic 'Ulum in the famous hall Dar-an-Nadwa'. Mosques were filled with the youth. The envious 'Ulamd' could not see the scene and branded the Shaikh as soothsayer, sorcerer and false pretender and charged him with trickery and charlatanry. Some of them charged him of being a heretic, an unbeliever and a lying sorcerer. The Shaikh, however, exercised maximum forbearance for his sufferings at the hands of the clergy and the laity and endured the mischief they inflicted upon him. He simply prayed to Allah for the guidance of the opponents. Forbearance and fortitude became the elements of his sterling character and pattern of behaviour.

An unholy alliance, against the Shaikh, was made between the rulers of Riad, Al-Katif and Basra. The 'Ulamaa` as-Su`’ joined them. The most determined and vehement enemies of the call were the Ulama' of Najd. Muhammad ibn-Sahim and his son Ibrahim were among them. Daham ibn-Dawas, the Amirr of Riad, and Sulaiman, the Amir of Al-Ahsa', the absolute tyrants, launched their offensive and militant crusades against the Da'wa. The war between Daham, the ruler of Riad and Ibn-Sa'ud, the ruler of Dar'iya, who was the protector of the Da'wa of Tawhid, raged for about twenty seven years, but to no avail. The Amir of Al-Ahsa', another sworn enemy of the Shaikh, approached various tribes to join him. Their combined armies swarmed the plains and heights of the desert as never witnessed before. The tribes had joined him in lure of plunder and booty. They unleashed their tyrannies, by killing the followers of the Shaikh. In 1188, he destroyed their towns, and burnt their homes. He wanted to march on Dar'iya but his sudden death in 1188 stopped him from his brute ambitions and after his death the opposition could not survive any more.

The failures and discomfiture of the opponents became a source of strength to the Shaikh and his Da'wa and helped him to gain more adherents. The call reached the soil of Iraq, Syria and Hijaz. The call survived and brought radical transformation in the religious, intellectual and political life of the Umma. Now the 'Ulama' were divided into two camps, those who supported the Da'wa and those who opposed it vehemently.

The Wahhabi-Sa'udi Rule:

Since there was no separation between religion and state in Islam and since the state was supposed to enforce the laws of Islam as ordained by Divine Revelation and the Hadith, the Sa'udi rulers of Dar'iya, accepted the call of the Shaikh in letter and spirit and the new state was in fact a Wahhabi-Sa'udi State, promoting justice, truth, righteousness and happiness for the people. The Shaikh himself did not assume any power. He merely motivated the Sa'udi rulers to enforce canonical law and guided them towards Islamic justice. He gave his judgements in disputes in regard to religio-political conflicts or treaties signed between States. He worked both as a religio-social reformer as well as a political leader with vision, insight and acumen. He did not live in isolation from the society or political affairs of the state. The Shaikh and Ibn-Sa'ud acted in perfect harmony because they were on the same wave length of ideas.The harmony reached to such an extent that the Sa'udi rulers could not decide anything without consulting the Shaikh. Even his decisions on war and peace were accepted by the rulers. Thus the government of Dar'iya - was the first Islamic state in the eighteenth century - that was run jointly by the Sa'udi and Wahhabi" leaders.

The Da'wa of the Shaikh succeeded so rapidly because it had a political power and executive authority at its back. Despite hostile assaults, wars for decades, the Da'wa emerged triumphant and the Shaikh saw the fruits of his sacrifice during his own lifetime. The Shaikh, who started his Tawhi'd movement when he was only twenty years old or even less, was happy at heart for he had established the Islamic commonwealth at Dar'iya and had restored the Islamic life-style. After having achieved his mission, the Shaikh surrendered himself to the call of his Creator and passed away in 1792/1206. The news of his demise engulfed the souls of Muslims with sadness, sorrow and grief. Great 'Ulama' mourned the demise in elegiac odes. His message, however, reached Asia, Africa and Europe. One can see the hands of the Shaikh moving in the present resurgence of Islam throughout the Muslim World. It is, however, the saddest episode in the history of Islamic movement that the same Sa'udis who had promoted the call in the beginning have forgotten it today and have slipped into luxuries and are entrapped into the cobwebs of the Superpowers.

Militant Crusade Launched By The 'Ulama':

The 'Ulama', as alluded to repeatedly, constituted a united front in exciting the states and the public against the Shaikh. Since the Shaikh did not believe in verbal exhortation and guidance and since he was a political positivist, and took part in battles along with Ibn- Sa'ud, he was suspected, disliked and disowned by the 'Ulama' who had accepted gladly the divorce between religion and politics or the state. The Shaikh believed that Islam needed political authority in order to uphold and support the commandments of the Qur’aan and the Sunna. The Shaikh neither introduced any new doctrine nor invented a new creed in Islam. Revival of the concept of Tawhid and renunciation of heathen practices was the core of his call. Scholastic

Disputes Disowned:

Despite insurmountable obstacles blocking the way as fetters on his movement, he clung fast to the Qur’aan and the Sunna. He died as a poor man. The great Imaams of Islam, such as Imaam Ahmad ibn Hanbal of Madina, Imaam Ibn-Taimiya and Imaam ibn-Qayyim al-Jawzi, served as inspirational sources for him in the field of reform and reconstruction of the Muslim society which had relapsed into heathenism and had drifted rapidly from its pristine origins. The Shaikh adopted the Qur'anic method in proving and reviving the concept of Tawhid and rejected the scholastic methodology of Greek logic and dialectics that were adopted by some Muslim scholastic theologians (Mutakallimin). Revelation and not logic or empiricism, according to him was the sole guide in metaphysical affairs ('Ilm al-Ilahiyat). He believed that the method of the Qur’aan in regard to the assertion or negation of metaphysical issues and in arguing with disbelievers and sceptics was enough for the defence of the Islamic standpoint. Greek logic or dialectics aimed merely at defeating the opponents, rightly or wrongly, through false wrangling. The method adopted by him in proving the existence of God and His indivisible Unity was purely Qur'aanic. The reply given by him to Shaikh Ibn Sahim, is self-explanatory. Questions related to the Being or the Nature of God, (Zat and Sifat) such as, whether God is a substance, a body or an accident, were debated by the philosophers and scholastic theologians. Imaam Ahmad ibn-Hanbal argued that the Qur’aan and the Sunna, rather than logic and speculative philosophy of the Greeks, were the sole guides for the Muslims in this regard.

The same view was endorsed by the Shaikh. Since scholastic theologians were not the real 'Ulama' of Islam, they had introduced erroneous doctrines that were based on Greek rationalism. They were disowned and denounced by all classical 'Ulama' of Islam. The Shaikh answered the queries that were made by Shaikh 'Abd-al-Latif of Al-Ahsa' in the same strain. He was well aware of the Ahadith in which the Holy Prophet (SAW) had warned the Muslim Umma not to get involved in speculative conjectures in regard to metaphysical issues, such as the essence of and attributes of God, (Zat and Sifat of Allah), predestination and the like, for previous nations lost their way due to such futile discourses; the Muslim Ummah had to follow as it was commanded by the Qur’aan and the Ahaadith. Muslims were dissuaded from discussing topics of no avail. The companions of the Prophet (SAW) followed the course prescribed by the Holy Prophet. The Shaikh followed the Ahaadith in letter and spirit and attacked the Mutakallimin who were ignorant of the evil consequences of 'Ilm al-Kalam and advised them to follow the path laid down by the Holy Prophet.

Waves Of Allegations:

Despite such orthodox faith in the Qurdn and Hadith, the Shaikh was branded by the 'Ulama' as an unbeliever, who regarded all Muslims as infidels, save his own followers. It was alleged that he did not believe in reciting Darood and Salaam on the Prophet and prevented people from doing so. Moreover, he prevented them from visiting the mausoleum of the Holy Prophet (S.A.W.). All such charges were refuted by the Shaikh in his books, letters and discourses.

His response to the queries made by Shaikh 'Abd-ar-Rahman as-Suwaidi of Iraq, is illuminating. He asserted that he neither regarded any Muslim as apostate nor condemned their marriages as invalid. Neither had he ever thought of pulling down the dome of the Holy Prophet, nor to bring any change in the Kaba. These, he asserted, were blatant lies. He, however, advised people to read the Qur’aan instead of books like Dalaa'il al-Khairat. A similar reply was sent to 'Abd-Allah ibn-Sahim in response to his twelve questions addressed to the Shaikh. He rejected the allegation that he was at war with the 'Ulama'. On the contrary, he invited people to follow the rightly guided 'Ulama' of Islam. The domes that were demolished were not the result of desecration of holy shrines but because they were converted into centres of corruption and above all money-making complexes, which corrupted and enfeebled the faith (Aqaaid) of people. The Holy Prophet (S.A.W.) was the first to dismantle the centres of idolatry and priesthood and to ask people to turn to Allah alone and ask Him for Bounties or Favours instead of asking the stones and idols. His mission was, the Shaikh asserted, the revival of the same message. But no amount of explanation could satisfy the 'Ulama' who framed new stories and coined new phrases. It was alleged that Wahhabism and the sword go together and they were inseparable. Thus lies were ascribed to the Shaikh and his Tawhid movement, every now and then. He was intensely detested by the 'Ulama'. His statements and writings were tampered with in order to deceive the innocent public, who were the victims of 'Ulamaa` as-Su`’.

Examples of the Prophet were followed by the Shaikh. The Holy Prophet himself had ordered the pulling down of a tree called 'Dhat Anwat', on which polytheists used to hang their arms and worship it. This analogy did not convince the theologians who charged the Shaikh of disrespecting the Holy Prophet. The truth is that the Shaikh rarely mentioned the name of the Holy Prophet without having recited the Darood and Salam on him.

The 'Ulama' who ignited both the rulers and the public were in fact, court-'Ulama', patronised by the rulers and Amirs. They were afraid of losing face in the public if people were acquainted with the truth of the Tawhid movement, the most powerful emancipating and liberating force from all earthly bondages and mundane loyalties. Consequently, they sowed the seed of discord among the Muslims, instilled hatred and hostility in their hearts against the Da'wa of the Shaikh. The passions of the public, stirred by the 'Ulama' rose so high that they were ready to assassinate the Shaikh. The Sharif of Mecca - Ghalib ibn-Sa'id (1204), hastened to ask 'Abd-al-Aziz-ibn-Sa'ud, the Amir of Dar'iya to send to him some of the learned Wahhabi 'Ulama' in order to clear the mist of mistrust and suspicions befogging the climate about the credentials of the movement. The son of the Shaikh was sent to Mecca with a special message from the Shaikh which is worth reading.

It was also alleged that the Shaikh was very harsh in his Da'wa works. The fact is that the Shaikh in his 'Sadir', advised his followers to be kind, and patient in Da'wa work. He cannot be held responsible for the harshness of some of his followers who were prone to such behaviour due to their Bedouin temperament. The Shaikh explained his views in regard to intercession and made it clear that he believed in the intercession of the Holy Prophet on the Day of Resurrection. Authentic books, such as 'Al-Tawassul wal-Wasila' by Ibn-Taimiya and 'Ad-Dur an-Nadir'by Imaam Shawkaani, were also cited by him. He finally quoted the Qur'anic verse: "... Those whom you call on, themselves desire nearness to Allah, which of them shall be nearer to Allah.”

He further explained the Qur'anic injunctions in which Allah says that all intercessions belonged to Him and He alone will grant permission for intercessions. The Holy Prophet was granted the right to intercede. The chapter on intercession in his "Kitab at-Tawhid' is quite elaborate. Ibn-Taimiya had divided intercession into six categories. The Shaikh also discussed the visit to the graves in the light of Ahadith. Ibn-Qayyim made an express statement in the following words: "Among evil practices are using them (tombs) as religious festivals, performing prayers in them, walking round them, kissing them and touching them, rubbing the face against the dust, worshipping persons buried in them, making supplication to them and calling on them for sustenance, health, repayment of debts, alleviation of distress, aid to the needy, and other things such as idolaters used to ask their idols"

Ibn-Taimiya, in his 'Al-Tawassul wal-Wasila' wrote that: “Numerous are the traditions telling that the Prophet forbade using tombs as mosques and cursed anyone who does so, and forbade using his grave as a religious festival, for polytheism first started among the people of Noah.”

The Shaikh was not different in his message from those of Ibn-Qayyim or Ibn-Taimiya.

From Hostility To Compromise:

The mighty forces rallied against Wahhabism, in and outside of the Arabian Peninsula, could no longer afford to battle against it, either through the pen or the swords. They had to seek compromise and accommodation. The British had already exploited and abused the term of Wahhabism, in order to divide Muslims and rule over them. They had hired religious scholarship in order to produce books against the movement. Syed Ahmad Shahid of Baraili and his movement were branded as Wahhabi movements in the Indo-Pak Subcontinent and gave a brutal blow to his Jihad movements in Balakot in 1831. The Turkish Khilafat, already cracking down, used the term as a source of hate in the Arab and non-Arab world and smeared its good name. They also hired such 'Ulama' who could issue religious decrees of infidelity (Fatwa of Kufr). It was propagated that Wahhabism was a movement of assassins and of unbelievers.

The offensive tides started receding only when progressive 'Ulama' and theologians began to write articles on the movement and evaluated the Shaikh as a great religious reformer and political leader that the eighteenth century had produced. They defended the movement and attacked the Arab rulers who had liquidated it in their countries. Muhammad Kurd 'Ali, a renowned Syrian scholar, wrote his famous article entitled "The Origins of Wahhabism" in the monthly 'Al-Muqtattaf' in 1901/1318, reproduced in his book entitled 'The Old and The New', printed in Egypt in 1925/1343. The movement was favourably evaluated and false accusations were dismissed. Dr. Taha Husain, a well known Egyptian scholar and stylist, changed the climate when he evaluated the movement highly and wrote an article in 'Al-Hilal' in March 1933, about the literary life in the Arabian Peninsula. He rejected the views of Al-Azhar about the Shaikh, and regarded the movement as a great Islamic movement in the Middle East, which liberated the Arabian Peninsula from heathenism and emancipated them from Jahiliyya practices and brought the Bedouins back into Islam, as the Holy Prophet had done in his own time. He concluded by saying: "Had the Turks and Egyptians not made common cause to combat this doctrine and did not combat it in its homeland with force and arm, never known before to the people of the desert, it would have been very probable that this doctrine could have united the Arabs in the twelfth and the thirteenth centuries, just as the advent of Islam had united them in the first century. It awakened the Arab soul and presented it with the lofty ideal it loved."

These statements captured the imagination of the Arab youth who were enchanted with the magical prose style of Taha Husain (1889 - 1973). They were emancipated from both hate and hostility towards Wahhabism, that they had inherited from their elders. 'Abbas Mahmud al-'Aqqad, (1882 - 1964), Muhammad Abduh (d. 1905), Rashid Rida and Ahmad Amin rejected the prejudiced approach and regarded it as a great Islamic movement in the eighteenth century.

The impact of the movement reached beyond the confines of the Arabian Peninsula. The whole of the Islamic World, whether in Asia, Africa or Europe, was influenced by its reform movements. Al-‘Aqqad remarked that the Hajj pilgrims imported the revolutionary message to Iraq, Sudan, India and other distant parts of the world, such as China, Java, Indonesia and Africa. The African leaders, such as Ahmad Bello of Nigeria, killed in 1966 for his Islamic commitment and reform impulse, was influenced by the movement. The Shaikh can be bracketted along with Shah Wali-AllAh, Jamal ad-Din al-Afghani, and Syed Ahmad Shahid of Baraili.

Continued ...
 

Mohsin

abdu'Allah
European Colonialists and Wahhabism:

The movement of Tawhid (pure monotheism), launched by Muhammad-ibn-'Abd-al-Wahhab, was slandered and maligned by the Europeans as well. The very term "Wahhabism" or "Wahhabiya", coined by them had malicious designs. It intended to prove that the movement was nonconformist and was out of the pale of Islam. This forgery was hatched by the English, the Turks and the Egyptians. It was unfortunate to note that for the last two centuries, all resurgent or reformist movements initiated in the Muslim World, are being branded by the Orientalists as "Wahhabi Movement", in order to discourage the revival of Islam or Islamisation of the Muslim lands. The colonial powers were afraid of any kind of Islamic revival or of Jihad movement in Muslim lands colonised by them. They connected all Islamic reformist movements with Wahhabism. Since the Sanusi Jihad Movement of North Africa (al-Maghrib) had challenged the Italian colonialists and wanted to expel them from North Africa, the Italian Orientalists linked the Sanusi' movement with Wahhabism. Similarly, the English colonialists, being challenged by the Jihad Movement of Syed Ahmad Shahid, branded his Jihad movement as the replica of Wahhabism. The truth is that the latter was never influenced by the former. Logically speaking, the movement of Muhammad should have been called either "Muhammadis" or "Muhammadiyun" rather than “Wahhabiyun", related to the name of his father 'Abd-al-Wahhab.

The European Travellers And Writers On Wahhabism:

The Orientalists tried to confuse people about the founder of the movement. H.J. Bryges, in his "Wahhabiya", regarded 'Abd-al-Wahhab as the founder of the movement and W.W. Hunter declared 'Abd-Allah, the son of Muhammad, as his grandson (Hafid). The earliest traveller of Bedouin Arabia, Caresten Nie Bury, believed in Bryges' theory and wrote that Muhammad was opposed to the movement of his father. He wrote it in 1764 when Muhammad was alive and was leading his movement. He died twenty eight years later. A Christian clergy regarded the movement as a new religion. He asserted that Ibn-Taimiya, who proclaimed himself a Hanbali, was in fact a "Wahhabi”. Can there be a statement more ridiculous than this? This was either a gross ignorance or wilful distortion. How could ibn-Taimiya be a follower of the Wahhabi Movement which emerged four hundred years after his death? How could ibn-Taimiya then be regarded as a Wahhabi?

It is not certain as to who invented the term "Wahhabi” and when. It is, however, certain that the term was used during the lifetime of Muhammad. The term was used frequently during the First World War.

The travellers started mentioning the movement immediately after the death of Muhammad 'Ali Beg (1807) and N. Burkhardt (1814) who visited Arabia before and after the invasion of Dar'iya by Muhammad 'Ali of Egypt. The latter wrote his books in 1816, entitl ed: 'Notes on the Bedouins and the Wahhabis', 1831 and frequently used the term 'Wahhabi’ in Volume two. The famous Egyptian historian 'Abd-ar-Rahman al-Jabarti, who wrote his history in 1238, also referred to the term in his third volume.

Caresten Nie Bury, the first traveller of Arabia, who set out from Denmark in 1761 along with his companions and reached Yemen in 1762, has recorded some of his observations in his book 'Travels Through Arabia and other Countries in the East'. Since he could not visit Najd he had to depend on secondary sources for his information about Muhammad, which led him to erratic judgements. His work was translated by Robert Heren and published in Edinburgh in 1792. Harford Jone Bryges, an English governor of Basra (1784 - 1794) and of Baghdad (1797 - 1806), in his 'Brief History of the Wahhabys', has furnished some valuable information. But his accounts are also based on N. Burkhardt who visited Hijaz in 1814 and wrote 'Notes on the Bedoins and the Wahhabys', published in two volumes in 1829 and 1831 respectively. The work of Bryges, which appeared in London in 1834 was, therefore, not based on primary experience.

No account of the Shaikh and his movement, furnished by the Europeans, was fair and objective. Grifford Paigrave, in his 'Narrative of a Year's Journey through Central and Eastern Arabia' (1862 - 1863), has slandered Islam in general and Muhammad and his movement of Tawhid in Najd, in particular. G. Percy Bedger, in his 'Imaams and Syeds of Oman' (London 1871), and Ch. M. Doughty, in his 'Travels in Arabia Deserta' (1875), have mentioned nothing worthwhile. Wilfred Scawn Blint, who visited Najd in 1879, in his 'Future of Islam' (1882), made erratic and false statements. Zwemer's work 'Arabia the Cradle of Islam' is full of falsehood. It is he who forged the story of the demolition of the tomb of the Holy Prophet by King Sa'ud and flashed it in Europe. David George Hagarth, in his 'The Penetration of Arabia' (London 1904), and 'A History of Arabia', despite his accuracies, has made serious errors. H. St. J. Philby, in his 'Arabia', has covered the history of Najd, highlighting the mission of Muhammad. His work is mostly based on Arabic sources. D.S. Margoliouth, in his 'Wahhabiya and Wahhabies', has proved both his ignorance and antipathy against Islam. No different is W.W. Hunter, who in his 'The Indian Musalman' (1871) has shown his indignation against the Jihad movement of Syed Ahmad Shahid and has connected the Jihad movement with the Wahhabi movement. Andre Servier, in his 'Islam and Psychology of the Musalman' could not hide his hatred both against Islam and the mission of Muhammad. He regarded Islam as the greatest enemy of humanity. 'The Expansion of Islam', written by Wilson Cash, is a heap of falsehood. He scoffed at the movement of Muhammad. Richard Coke, who, in his 'The Arab's Place in the Sun', despite his sympathetic attitude to the movement, has relied on superstitions and forgeries. He could not make a distinction between 'Abd-Allah ibn-Sa'ud and Sa'ud ibn-'Abd-al-'Aziz. These are only few names among the primary and contemporary sources which contain some information regarding the Tawhid movement of Muhammad ibn-'Abd-al-Wahhab. Many works have appeared in recent decades which are worth studying.

The Muslim Writers:

Books written about Muhammad and his movement, by the Muslims merit brief mention here. Among the early Arab writers the noted ones are Shaikh 'Abd-al-Ghafur Attar, and Amin Sa'id. Among the writers of the Indo-Pak Subcontinent are Moulana Manzur Nu'mani and Moulana Mas'ud 'Alam Nadwiy. The latter's work, Muhammad ibn-Abd-al-Wahhab: Muslih, Mazlum and Muftara 'Alaih' (Arabic version Zamzam Press, 1977) is based on high scholarship and research. The author has exhausted all accessible material in Arabic, Urdu and Persian, in addition to European sources. Chapter one deals with the life and works of Muhammad while chapters two and three treat the rise of the Sa'ud family and the Turkish conquest of Hijaz and Najd respectively. The writings of Muhammad have been examined in the third chapter, while his Da 'wa and message have been analysed in the fourth chapter. The fifth chapter exposes the falsehood that were forged against Muhammad by pioneer forgers. The last chapter, being the critique of sources, is most significant. The author analyses his Arabic, Urdu and Persian, as well as the European sources objectively.

Writings Of Muhammad: A Critique Of His Critics:

Muhammad ibn-'Abd-al-Wahhab wrote many treatises (Risalat). Sixteen of them are extant now, while the others have been mentioned in his other works. The main treatise, being 'Kitab at- Tawhid’, served as the manifesto of his movement. He revitalised the concept of Tawhid in the light of the Qur'anic verses and the Ahadith. All other writings revolved around the same axis of Tawhid. The doctrinal, moral and ethical issues were discussed in the light of Tawhid. He also wrote commentaries of certain chapters of the Holy Qur’aan, the biography of the Holy Prophet and summarised the Sira of Ibn-Hisham and Zad-al-Ma’ad of Imaam Ibn-Qayyim.

Extravagance Of Accusations And Slanders And Mutilation Of Historical Facts:
Strange stories were forged by the opponents of the Shaikh. The pioneer of the movement was Sulaiman bin Muhammad bin Sahim (d. 1181) who, during the lifetime of Muhammad, launched the campaign of slander and accused him of demolishing the tomb of Zaid-ibn al-Khattab in Jahila, of the mosque adjacent to the grave, of burning books such as Dalaail Khairat and Rauda ar-Riyaahin and of condemning books such as Ibn-al-Farid and ibn-al-'Arabi as apostates. The truth is that the graves of Zaid and his companions, as aforesaid, were still unknown and the story of burning of the books is a blatant lie. The Shaikh, however, advised his followers not to read such books. With regard to the belief in sufi-Pantheism, he, being opposed to pantheistic ideas, cautioned his followers about the hazards of such beliefs.

Many scholars and Shaikhs joined the campaign of slander which was based on enmity and hatred, rather than on academic grounds. Shameless poems were written by Ibn-Firoze (d. 1801).

Muhammad ibn-'Abd-al-Wahhab, who purified and sanctified the concept of Tawhid and revived the Sunna of the Prophet, was also accused of laying claims to Prophethood and of denying the body corpus of Hadith. Shaikh Ahmad Zainil Wahlan was a deadly enemy of Muhammad and accused him of laying claims to Prophethood, although he could not declare it openly, due to public fear. These rumours were imported to the Indo-Pak Subcontinent. Moulvi Fadl Rasul Badayuni (d. 1822), spread the rumour about the denial of Hadith literature by the Wahhabis. 'Abd-Allah Yusuf 'Ali, the translator of the Holy Qur’aan, also believed in such fanciful rumours. It merely shows his ignorance about such an important Islamic movement. Even the Christian writers, such as Thomas Patrick Huges, who compared Wahhabism with the Protestants, confessed that the Wahhabis were the staunch followers of the Qur'aan and Sunna.

Another serious allegation was made that Muhammad considered Muslims, other than his own followers, as apostates and recommended their execution. Ibn-'Abdin ash-Shami (d. 1842), forged the story and he was joined by Ahmad Zaini Wahlan (d. 1886).These allegations were emphatically denied by Mubammad himself. It was unfortunate that a great scholar like Qadhi Muhammad ibn-'Ali Shawkani, without making a thorough investigation into the matter, supported such forged views. Similar confusion prevailed in the Indo-Pak Subcontinent when a scholar like Nawab Siddiq Hasan Khan (d. 1890), made conflicting remarks and statements about the movement, in his writings.

Some of the students of Muhammad took a hard line. Shaikh Ahmad ibn-Nasir ibn-'Uthman al-Mu'ammar (d. 1225 A.H.), a pupil of Muhammad, believed that the grave-worshippers and seekers of help from anyone other than Allah, were apostates. Similar views were held by Muhammad ibn-Ismail al-Aamir al-Yamani (d. 1182 A.H.), a contemporary supporter of Muhammad, although he softened his attitude later on.

The opposition movement reached its peak when it declared that Muhammad "kills people, robs them of their wealth and condemns Muslims as apostates". Some of the Indian scholars, such as Moulana Anwar Shah Kashmiri (d. 1933), also accused Muhammad of baseless charges, as mentioned above.

Allegations, such as undermining the Holy Prophet, free interpretation of the Qur’aan and the Sunna, denial of intercession of the Holy Prophet on the Day of Judgement, were emphatically refuted by both Muhammad and his son 'Abd-Allah. Among the forgeries, most shameful was the story that was concocted by the enemies about Sa'ud ibn-'Abd-al-Aziz ibn-Muhammad ibn-Saud (d. 1803). The enemies rumoured that King Sa'ud wanted to demolish the tomb of the Holy Prophet, but could not do so because of the lack of heavy instruments which could demolish such a solid building. This was a pure lie. Such stories were exploited by the colonialists and the Orientalists in order to incite Muslim sentiments against the movement. The Turkish government propagated that the Saudis had prohibited the Muslims from going for Hajj. One of the most amazing forgeries committed by Shaikh Badawi was when he wrote that portions of the Holy Qur'aan, deleted by Hadhrat 'Uthman the third Caliph from the main text of the Book, was still in possession of the Wahhabis.

Such lies, falsehood and slanders were broadcast and exploited by Western authors, in favour of the colonialists who were already trying to incite the colonized Muslims against the Wahhabi movement. They succeeded in doing so, especially in the Indo-Pak Subcontinent where they incited Muslims against the Jihad movement of Syed Ahmad Shahid, of which the prime targets were the English. They sowed the seed of incurable division, now being ploughed and harvested by their sympathisers - both the laity and the lettered.

[ Islamic Resurgent Movements in the Indo-Pak Subcontinent ; Syed Habibul Haq Nadvi ]
 

Meraj

Brother
Asalamu-Alikum warehmatullahi wabarakatuh

Dear Brothers and Sisters if you don't have any correct knowlege about a perticular matter just be silent and try to gain the true knowledge before you say anything blindly.
Jazak Allah Brother Al Kashmiri for this thread important indeed....

Here is a breif introduction about the shaikh..hope inshallah you will get that what many brothers and sisters don't know about inshaAllah..

Imaam Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab - His Life and Mission​

Imaam Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab His Life and Mission

by Shaikh Abdul Aziz Ibn Abdullah Ibn Baz

This article is based on a lecture given by Shaikh Abdul Aziz Ibn Abdullah Ibn Baz about the life and Mission of Imam Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab.
Published by Darussalaam​

Imam Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab was a great man, an outstanding reformer and a zealous preacher, who appeared in the Arabian Peninsula in the twelfth century A.H. He was educated by his father in his homeland, Oyayna, a village located at Yamama in Najd, northwest to the city of Riyadh. He learnt to read the Qur'aan at a very early age and exerted himself in studies and advanced learning at the hands of his father, Shaikh Abdul Wahhab Ibn Sulaiman, who was a great jurisprudent and the Judge of Oyayna.

Having attained puberty, the Shaikh traveled to Makkah and then to Medina to learn from learned personalities there. Then he went to Iraq (Basrah) to seek after knowledge. It was in Iraq that he started his mission. There he called the people to Tawheed and the Sunnah of the Prophet (). He announced that it was the duty of every Muslim to follow his or her religion (Islam) strictly in accordance with the Qur'aan and the Sunnah. He engaged in debates and discussion with scholars and thus became famous. However, some characterless scholars rebelled against him and he faced some harms and persecutions from them. So, he left Basrah moving towards Az-zubair, then to al-Ahsa, and then finally to Huraymela, where also he faced much suffering at the hands of the wicked because he enjoined the good and forbade the evil and persuaded the rulers to punish the criminals severely. So, some of them even attempted on his life, but Allah saved him. Then he moved to Oyayna, which was then governed by Prince Uthman Ibn Muhammad Ibn Muammar, who welcomed the Shaikh with hospitality and promised him all support and help in calling people to Islam.

People in Najd at that time lived in a condition that could not be approved by any believer. Polytheism had spread widely; people worshiped domes, trees, rocks, caves or any persons who claimed to be Awliya (saints). Magic and soothsaying also had spread. When the Shaikh saw that polytheism was dominating the people and that no one showed any disapproval of it or no one was ready to call people back to Allah, he decided to labor singly and patiently in the field. He knew that nothing could be achieved without Jihad, patience and suffering.

The Shaikh continued calling people to the Path of Allah and guided them to piety, righteousness and love in the cause of Allah. Gradually, the Shaikh became famous in and around Oyayna. People came to Oyayna to meet him from neighboring areas and villages. He also wrote to many scholars requesting their support and reminding them of their task of helping Allah's Religion and fighting against polytheism. Many scholars from Najd, Makkah and al-Medina accepted his request, while some disagreed with him, reproached his mission, condemned him and kept him away.

The Shaikh and those with him were in between two types of people; one group consisted of the ignorant people, who knew nothing about Islam and followed deviations and innovations, superstitions, etc. which their forefathers had upheld. The Qur'aan says about them, "We found our fathers following a certain way and religion and we will indeed follow their footsteps." The second group, on the other hand, was related to knowledge but responded negatively to the Shaikh because of their envy and also because they were ashamed and afraid that the people would question their integrity, 'why did you keep silent without warning us against such and such evils until Abdul Wahhab appeared?'

But the Shaikh carried on patiently seeking the Help of Allah in all matters. He strove hard in studying the Qur'aan and reading useful books. He had a special skill of interpreting the Qur'aan and deducing from it. He also worked hard in studying the life of the Prophet r and the lives of his companions (radhi allahu anhum).

The Shaikh went on teaching and preaching. Gradually, he exerted himself on practically removing polytheism when he noticed that his call to Islam had no affect on some. One day, the Shaikh said to the governor, 'Let us demolish the dome at the grave of Zaid Ibn al-Khatab t (Zaid Ibn al-Khatab was the brother of Umar Ibn al-Khattab t and a martyr, who died in the fighting against Musailimah Khaddhab in 12 A.H, he was buried and later on people built a dome on his grave). It is erected on deviation and the Prophet r has forbidden building domes or mosques on graves. Moreover, this dome has destroyed the people's belief with polytheism. So, it must be demolished.'

The Prince agreed and mobilized an army of six hundred soldiers and marched towards the grave, headed by the Shaikh. As soon as they approached the dome, the people came forward to defend it but when they saw the Prince with his army, they changed their decision. Then the Shaikh took the action of demolishing and removing the dome. Allah removed it by his hands and Al-hamdulillah, none of its traces remains now. Similarly, there were other domes, caves, trees, etc. that were also destroyed and removed. The Shaikh, thus, continued his mission by words and action, for which he became very famous. Also, one day a woman came to him and confessed that she had committed adultery. After realizing that she was sane, married and had confessed without external compulsion, he gave the order according to the Sunnah that she should be stoned to death as a punishment, as he had now become the Judge of Oyayna.

Meanwhile, the Prince of al-Ahsa (and surrounding villages) feared the Shaikh's position, because committing wrong, robbery, murder, etc, were usual for them. He wrote to Prince Uthman threatening him and demanding him to kill the Shaikh. The Prince approached the Shaikh saying, "the nomad prince has sent me a message to do so and so. We never wish to kill you, but we are afraid of the prince and we are unable to fight him. So if you think you may leave." The Shaikh replied: "I am simply calling people to Islam and to the fulfillment of the testimony of Faith that there is no god except Allah and Muhammad is Allah's Messenger. Whoever holds fast to Islam and upholds it truthfully, Allah will help him and make him ruler of his enemy's countries. And if you endure and be righteous and accept this Religion, then be glad that Allah will help you and protect you from the nomad prince and others. Allah will also give you power over his country and his kinfolk." But Uthman said: "O Shaikh! But we cannot fight him nor can we stand his oppression." So, the Shaikh had to leave Oyayna for Dareyya on foot because Uthman did not even provide him any means of transportation.

On reaching Dareyya, the Shaikh stayed in the house of a man who was one of the best personalities in Dareyya, but he feared the prince of Dareyya, Muhammad Ibn Suad. The Shaikh said to him, 'be glad and hope for the best. I am simply calling the people to Allah's Religion, and He will undoubtedly make it victorious.'

The news of Shaikh's arrival in Dareyya reached Muhammad Ibn Suad. It is said that his wife first informed him of the Shaikh. She was a kind and pious lady and she addressed her husband saying, 'Here is a great fortune sent to you by Allah. A man who is calling the people to Islam, calling to the Qur'aan and the Sunnah of the Prophet r. What a good fortune! Rush to him and support him. Never resist him or stop him from that.' Muhammad Ibn Suad accepted her advice and went to the Shaikh and made a contract with the Shaikh that he should not leave the country.

The Shaikh now settled in Dareyya. People started to come to him for learning from everyplace - from Oyayna, Iraq, Manfooha, Riyadh and other neighboring places. Respected, loved, supported by the people, the Shaikh arranged lectures on various topics; Creed, the Holy Qur'aan, the Qur'aanic commentaries, Islamic Jurisprudence and its principles, the Hadeeth and its terminology, and others. He arranged classes for the public as well as for the selected persons. Thus, he continued his mission and activities of preaching in Dareyya. He wrote to the scholars and rulers establishing his arguments and warning them against polytheism and innovation. Because of his correspondence with scholars and rulers and his struggling in the cause of Allah, the Shaikh became famous. His mission continued and spread all over the Islamic world and also other countries.

It is a known fact that every favor has its envier, as every preacher has his enemies. Allah, the Exalted, said in the Qur'aan: "And so We have appointed to every Prophet an enemy - devils among the men and Jinn - inspiring to each other adorned speech as a delusion. And had your Lord willed they could not have done it. So, leave them alone to their fabrication." [Soorah al-An'aam (6): 112]

When the Shaikh became famous for his teaching, and his writings received wide popularity among the people, many envious groups emerged as his opponents. One group consisted of characterless scholars who saw the truth as falsehood and falsehood as truth, and believed that building domes and invoking the engraved as pertaining to Islam. The second group was associated with knowledge but was ignorant of the reality of the Shaikh's mission. They simply believed others and kept aloof from the Shaikh. The third group that opposed the Shaikh consisted such people who feared the removal of their positions and ranks. They showed humility so that the supporters of the Islamic mission might not reach them and remove their positions and take over their lands.

So, some opposed him in the name of religion, while other opposed him in the name of politics though they hid under the cover of knowledge and religion and exploited the enmity of those scholars who had hated him and accused him of deviation. Sometimes, his opponents argued that he belonged to the Khawarij, at times some criticized him out of their lack of proper knowledge, etc. Thus, the fighting between words continued through debates and arguments. He would write to them and they would reply to him, and he would refute them, and thus numerous questions and answers were accumulated and compiled into volumes. And Al-hamdulillah, most of them have been published. Then the Shaikh turned to Jihad in 1158 A.H, he wrote to people to enter the field of Jihad and remove polytheism, which existed in their countries.

The Shaikh, thus, strove in his preaching and Jihad for fifty years from 1158 A.H. until he died in 1206. He resorted to all methods of his mission - Jihad, preaching, resistance, debates and arguments until people adhered to obedience and demolished the domes and mosques built by them on the graves and agreed to run their affairs in accordance with Islamic Law, discarding all rules and laws which had been applied by their fathers and forefathers. Then after the death of the Shaikh, his sons, grandson and supporters continued his mission and struggle in the cause of Allah.

Walikum Asalam warehmatullahi wabarakatuh
 

zedbj

Junior Member
Wahabi , bidaah etc.

:salam2:
I don’t understand the need of this type of thread i.e issues of wahabbi or bidaa to be discussed in online forum like this. This issue has been discussed in numerous occasions by scholars. By restarting the issue again by us who are not in full knowledge, will create more hatred among our brothers and sisters. In addition, discussing this sort of complex issue via online forum like this will create more confusion. This issue shall be discussed in face to face forum. Let online forum like this focus more things that are obvious. This mode of communication i.e. online forum, ‘talking’ to another person by ‘typing’ out, bound to cause misunderstanding in dealing of complex issues. Misunderstood statement will create conflicts, trigger anger etc. I am sure the shaytan love this to happen. I know some of us want to inform something he/she feel important, but we should never force it on anybody. Do it more in diplomatic way and please remember feeling of our brothers/sisters, insyaAllah Allah guide those who sincerely looking for truth. I hope my comment will not interpreted as rude or excessive. I sincerely hope we value brotherhood in islam, focus on our strength instead of our thorny issues.

Wassalam
 

a_stranger

Junior Member
:salam2: brother
I think that we all muslems try to be as the prophet salla Allah alaihi wa sallam was We should try to understand Quran and correct hadiths and be sincere to Allah swt our creator but in doing so we need good arabic language and good knoweldge in islamic history , I think that sunni and salafi follow the same sources while shiaa have different resources. No muslem should pray to any grave this is voilating tawheed( no need for intermediats between man and his creator). Islam through history was subject to many distortions that is why Imam Muhammad ibn abd Wahabb tried to correct the misconceptions and bidaas and return to the origional teachings of Islam. Shaytan is trying his best through times to deviate people from their true Lord.
 

Oem Soufiane

Junior Member
assalamu aleikum wa rahmatulahi wa barakatuh,

The ones accusing the sheikh need to get their understandings corrected, don't just assume what other peope tell you, get the facts.
May Allah swt have mercy on sh. ibn Abdul Wahhab, he only has what he has brought forth in his life now, we still need to collect good deeds, so watch your tongues for false accusations.:astag:
 

Mumin01

Junior Member
I am not justs some blind hater mongerer, i have done my research into wahabism and i wouldnt so so naive as to believe other people immediately without looking into myself first, I am not just shouting false accusations, I have read on the movement

I have done research into the movement and i can conclude that Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab did not, DID Not, bring anything new,His brother, father, and scholars told him other to stay away from what he was doing. To say that islam wasnt being practiced correctly during that time is kind of shocking to me, i can believe that there were some isolated incidents of shirk, but to say that he liberated the peninsula from endless heretical practices seems illogical to me since the Prophet SAW did say that the Ummah will never be unanimously wrong or incorrect on a matter, and its strange how Kufr was being practiced in the peninsula where islam was established. I am not going to judge the movement based on what he said, but i judged it based on what he believed and the actions he committed.

My apologies if i seemed like i was coming on like an idiot, i respect and love all the Brothers in this forum for the sake of Allah azza wa jal, but i wont sit by when people are getting on the pro side of the story. anyway im done here arguing, the Prophet SAW clearly forbade arguing





Salaam
 

abu turaab

Junior Member
:salam2: "Invite to the way of your lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching..."i think if we could help bro and sis here on TTI to correct their belifs with simple Qur'an and hadith and not magnifying any of the great Imams...only then they would be able to see the beauty of the glorious services done by our righteous predeccesors...and importantly then they would be able to distinguish distinctively the conflict b/w the way of the Rightly guided ones and of the deviant sects...which was created in the earliest times of islam and would continue with more divergence and the punishment of ALLAH will desend frequently in forms of various clamities...resulting the mass deaths of muslims as narrated in hadiths...humilation in the hands of the invaders like in Iraq and Afghanistan and it will go on....evidence in hadiths!!..
 

Mabsoot

Amir
Staff member
Assalamu Alaykum,

Of Course Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahab did not bring anything new. No Scholar brings anything new, if they did, then they are not good scholars!

We simply have to return to the Book of Allah and the Hadith of the Blessed Prophet Muhammad :saw: . Scholars such as Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah), Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahab (rahimahullah) were simply instructing people to worship Allah properly and know the real Aqeedah. As such, they were revivers of the Deen.

For example, the beliefs of the Sufi and Shia were widespread in the levant and in Arabia. These scholars addressed these issues.

As such, even today some of the Sufi and Shia are vehemently opposed and bitter against any person, let alone these scholars who refutes their various Shirk or Bidah.

JazakAllahu khayr for this thread

Wasalam.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top