Asalaamu’Alaykum
Bismillaah, wal-hamdulillaah, was-salaatu was-salaamu 'alaa rasoolillaah, wa ba’d,
Some brothers Had a problem with this shaykh so i was hoping to dedicate this thread to these issues. lets stick to the topic and try and work for a solution and the truth.
So…anyone who has a problem with this shaykh please bring forth yr argument and proof.
Jazzak’Allaah Kher.
Re: Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahaab
Your shaikh started the Takfir movement whereby thousands of innocent Sunni Sufis and Shia Muslims were killed. Your shaikh was a lackey of the British. Your shaikh made the Prophet (s) into a common man. Your shaikh stripped Islam of spirituality. Your shaikh was dismissed by the learned scholars of his age. Your shaikh introduced individual interpretation of faith to discredit the Ottomans so individual Muslims began giving fatwas. Your shaikh spread hatred for everyone except his "exclusive" group. Your shaikh looked the other way when "Saudis" massacred thousands of innocent people. Your shaikh accomodated faith to let the Saudi monarchy survive. Your shaikh destroyed the traditional madhabs of Islam. Aside from that, he was fine...
I suggest you read the Prophet's (s) hadith about the devils horns arising from Najd, which is where your Shaikh was from.
Re: Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahaab
Masha'Allaah u gave some ignorant opinions. now please show the evidence that 'my Shaykh' did all this. i checked out the link and iv Read most of them articles before and have studied the accusations against him and none show proof of there accusations so i just laugh at them. seeing that you have decided to reply why dnt u show me some proof of the accusations of the above u stated??
i want to see proof thatShaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhaab(rh)
-started a Takfir Movement
-killed innocent muslims.
-that he worked for the british considering that the British conspiracy with the Munaafiqs od saudi happened 200 yrs after The Shaykh dies.
-He Turned the Rasool(saw) into a comman man.
-he stripped Islaam of its spirituality.
-He introduced individual interpretation of faith to discredit the Ottomans so individual Muslims began giving fatwas
that he was spreading hatred for everyone except his "exclusive" group
That He looked the other way when "Saudis" massacred thousands of innocent people
-The shaikh accomodated faith to let the Saudi monarchy survive
so please show Proof for your accusations and then we'll talk. i want proof for all of the above. i dnt wanna see what saudis did i am on about the shaykh strictly.
only Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahaab we are talking about as the thread is named after him so dnt go pushing other scholars into this aswell. so please show me proof.
regarding the Hadeeth of Najd!! man u need to research more... try readin this...
**The Messenger of Allaah, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, said,
"O Allaah bestow your blessings on our Shaam. O Allaah bestow your blessings on our Yemen." The people said, "O Messenger of Allaah, and our Najd." I think the third time the Prophet, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, said, "There (in Najd) will occur earthquakes, trials and tribulations, and from their appears the Horn of Satan." Reported in al-Bukhaaree [Book of Trials, Chpt. 'The afflictions will come from the East' 9/166 no. 214 Eng. Trans]
A hadeeth which has some controversy surrounding it due to obvious sectarian reasons. A hadeeth which has been (deliberately) misunderstood by certain groups of people in order that they may spread their misguidance and deceive ignorant Muslims.
This because upon research and investigation and looking to the words of our early scholars we find that this hadeeth does not refer to the Najd that is famously known in Saudi today, but rather it refers to Iraaq.
About two years ago I read a book entirely devoted to this hadeeth entitled, "an-Najd Qarnu ash-Shaytaan" * I will quote in general from what I remember from this book, and refrain from mentioning precise quotes except from those references that I have on me.
Amongst the scholars that are mentioned who referred this hadeeth to Iraaq were: al-Khattaabee, al-Kirmaanee, al-Aynee, an-Nawawee, ibn Hajr and others. The reasons behind this are numerous and clear:
*The Generality of the Hadeeth Pertaining to the Fitna Coming from the East. *
Al-Bukhaaree includes this hadeeth in the chapter: "The affliction will appear from the East"
212) From the father of Saalim: The Prophet, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, stood up besides the pulpit (and pointed towards the east) and said: "Afflictions are there! Afflictions are there! From where appears the horn of Satan" or he said, "the horn of the Sun"
213) From ibn Umar that he said: I heard the Messenger of Allaah, sallallaahu alyahi wa sallam, saying while facing the east: "Indeed Afflictions are there, from where appears the Horn of Satan."
214) The hadeeth of Najd under discussion.
Similar hadeeth can be found in Saheeh Muslim (volume 4 no.'s. 6938+). Hadeeth that give the same meaning can be found in Saheeh Muslim (volume 1 no.'s 83+)
*That the Generality of the Early Trials and Tribulations arose from the East, many of them actually in Iraaq itself. *
Ibn Hajr al-Asqalaanee said after quoting the words of al-Khattaabee explaining the meaning of Qarn (horn), "and others have said that the People of the East were disbelievers at that time and the Messenger of Allaah, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, informed us that the trials and tribulations would arise from that direction and it was as he said. And the first of the trials that arose, arose from the direction of the east and they were the reason for the splitting of the Muslim ranks, and this is what Satan loves and delights in. Likewise the innovations appeared from that direction." [Fath al-Baaree 13/58 in commentary to the hadeeth of Najd]
Amongst the trials that arose in Iraaq and the east was the martyrdom of Alee, the martyrdom of the grandson of the Prophet, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, the first battle between the Muslims occurred in Iraaq, and many more.
Imaam Nawawee mentions that one of the greatest trials to appear from the East will be the appearance of the Dajjaal. [Sharh Saheeh Muslim 2/29]
From the innovations that appeared in the east and specifically Iraaq, was many of the early deviant sects amongst them the Qadariyyah (as the first hadeeth in Muslim shows), the Jahmiyyah and their offshoots etc...
That at the time of the Prophet, sallaahu alayhis wa sallaam, there were 13 places known as Najd [according to 'Najd Qarnu ash-Shaytaan'] depending on where one was. This because Najd linguistically means a raised/elevated land. Therefore the Arabs referred to lands that were elevated with respect to them as Najd. One of the most commonly referred to areas at that time as Najd was Iraaq.
The Najd for those people living in Madeenah in the direction of the East would be Iraaq.
Ibn Hajr said: "al-Khattaabee said: 'the najd in the direction of the east, and for the one who is in Madeenah then his Najd would be the desert of Iraaq and it's regions [baadiya al-Iraaq wa Nawaaheehaa] for this is to the east of the People of Madeenah. The basic meaning of Najd is that which is raised/elevated from the earth in contravention to al-Gawr for that is what is lower than it. Tihaamah [the coastal plain along the south-western and southern shores of the Arabian Peninsula] is entirely al-Gawr and Mecca is in Tihaamah.'"
Ibn Hajr continues, "by this [saying of al-Khattaabee] the weakness of the saying of ad-Daawodee is understood that 'Najd is in the direction of Iraaq' [min Naahiya al-Iraaq] for he suggests that Najd is a specific place. This is not the case, rather everything that is elevated with respect to what adjoins it is called Najd and the lower area called Gawr." [Fath al-Baaree 13/58-59]
Al-Mubaarakfooree endorses these words in his commentary to Sunan at-Tirmidhee (10/314 no.4212)
*The Hadeeth in Saheeh Muslim [4/1505 no.6943] *
Saalim bin Abdullaah bin Umar said: O people of Iraaq, how strange is it that you ask about the minor sins but commit the major sins? [The killing of al-Husayn] I heard my father, Abdullaah bin Umar narrating that he heard the Messenger of Allaah, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, saying while pointing his hand to the east: "Indeed the turmoil would come from this side, from where appear the horns of Satan and you would strike the necks of one another..."
The Variations in Wording of the Hadeeth of Najd that Leave no Doubt Whatsoever as to what it refers to.
The hadeeth of ibn Umar Reported by Abu Nu'aym in al-Hilya (6/133), "O Allaah bestow your blessings on our Madeenah, and bestow your blessings on our Mecca, and bestow your blessings on our Shaam, and bestow your blessings on our Yemen, and bestow your blessings in our measuring (fee saa'inaa wa muddinaa)." A person said, " O Messenger of Allaah and in our Iraaq" and so he turned away from him and said, "there will occur earthquakes, trials and tribulations and there will appear the horn of Satan."
Shu'ayb al-Arna'ut declares it's isnaad to be saheeh as in his footnotes to 'Sharh as-Sunnah' (14/206-207 fn. 2) and he too endorses the words of al-Khattaabee quoted above.
The hadeeth of ibn Umar reported in at-Tabaraanee in 'al-Awsat' that the Messenger of Allaah, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam prayed Fajr and then faced the people and said, "O Allaah bestow your blessings on our Madeenah, O Allaah bestow your blessings in our measuring, O Allaah bestow your blessings in our Shaam and our Yemen." A person said, "And Iraaq O Messenger of Allaah?" He said, "from there arises the horn of Satan and the trials and tribulations would come like mounting waves."
Ibn Hajr al-Haythamee says in his 'Mujma az-Zawaa'id' (3/305 - chapter 'collection of du'aas made for (Madeenah)'): 'its narrators are trustworthy and precise.'
[This hadeeth could possibly considered to be the same as b) above, but I have included it separately due to the slight difference in wording. Allaah knows best.]
The hadeeth of ibn Abbaas reported by at-Tabaraanee in 'al-Kabeer' that the Prophet, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, supplicated and said, "O Allaah bestow your blessings on our Shaam and Yemen." A person from amongst the people said, "O Prophet of Allaah and Iraaq?" He said, "indeed there is the Horn of Satan, and the trials and tribulations will come like mounting waves, and indeed harshness/coarseness is in the east."
Al-Haythamee says: "it's narrators are trustworthy and precise." (ibid.)
The Virtues of Bani Tameem
Bani Tameem constitute the majority of the inhabitants of the Najd that is in Saudi Arabia.
The hadeeth of Saheeh Bukhaaree reported by Abu Hurayra (RA): "I have loved the people of the tribe of Bani Tameem, ever since I heard three things the Messenger of Allaah , sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, said about them. I heard him saying, 'these people (of the tribe of Bani Tameem) would stand firm against the Dajjaal.' When the Saddaqat from that tribe came, the Messenger of Allaah , sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, said, "these are the Saddaqat (charitable gifts) of our folk." Aa'ishah had a slave girl from that tribe, and the Prophet , sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, said to Aa'ishah, 'manumit her as she is a descendant of Ismaa'eel, alayhis salaam.'"
[Hadeeth no. 2543, 4366 of al-Fath] Ibn Hajr al-Asqalaanee said, "this hadeeth also contains a clear mention of the excellence and superiority of Bani Tameem." [Fath 5/217]
The hadeeth of Ikrimah from one of the Companions reported in the Musnad of Imaam Ahmad and in it occurs, "do not say of Bani Tameem anything but good, for indeed they are the severest of people in attacking the Dajjaal."
Al-Haythamee says: "its narrators are those of the Saheeh." [Mujma 10/48 chpt: What is reported concerning Bani Tameem]
It is not strange that Bani Tameem would be the most severe against the Dajjaal, because the tools required to combat him are none but a correct and firm belief and proper beneficial knowledge. Alhumdolillaah many of the scholars of Saudi are from the most noble and skilled scholars on the face of this earth today, firmly upon the way of our noble Messenger, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam. This is what Allaah has allowed me to very quickly put together. And our Lord Most High Knows best.**
hope its clear to you now. look 4ward to your response with proof i hope.
I have Letters from the Shaykh himself that clarifies what you are saying but lets just see what you have to show.*
Re: Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahaab
^ Can I laugh in religion forum plz 
angrezon ki haddi par palne waale aaj khaadime haremain sharefen ban bethe hain. Its not Allah’s Arab or Arabian’s Arab, its Saudi Arab. Pirates became emporers. I don’t wanna say anything about Ibne Wahab as his movement and Lawrence of Arabia episode is well written and documented in the history books and we are still seeing the fruites of them uptil now and will continue to do so. The division that he caused among muslims led to the breakup of khilaafa and ummah was never able to come close from that day. The only achievement of his life is the durablity of foreign-controlled Saudi family’s empire and their cosmetic Islam in the streets of KSA. We all know what happens behind the doors in real. 
This fitna is not enough to interprete Prophet :saw: hadith, and you are bringing logic from the Mars. shabaash.
Re: Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahaab
Salafi saahib: Lakum deenu kum wal yadeen.
Take your religion from the Saudis if you wish. Hope that works out for you. I don't have the time or energy to give you an education.
Re: Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahaab
I think the thread is about Imam Mohammad ibn Abdul Wahhab and not about Lawrence of Arabia who was born about a 100 yrs after the Imam died. Neither has the thread or the Imam, got anything to do with the issues Saudi Arabia is facing in recent times.
I find it really stupid of people here, to relate 21 century issues to a person who lived in the 18th century.
and to those who say, that the Imam was an ally of the West…I ask them, what presence or interest did the West have in Arabia at that time in the early 18 century?
You’d always find Westerners using the term “Wahhabi” as a synonym for Islamic Extremism, so what ally are we talkin about over here? On the other hand its the Sufism which you would find Westerners attracted to.
Re: Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahaab
nah i dnt think its bcos u dnt have the energy or time. i believe its because u have not got the proof i asked for. which makes YOU the one that needs educating. maybe we could give you some lessons 1 day??
As far as your accusations are concerned against him check this out....
The Imaam, The Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhaab(rh) said
“as for the charges my enemies have accused me of: that I perform takfir merely by association or that I perform Takfr on an ignorant person who has not had the evidences presented to him, then verily this is a fabricated slander (mu’alafat al Shaykh 3/10)
that destroys your accusation that he started a "takfiri movement"!!
The Shaykh also wrote ***“as for the lies that are spread against us in order to cover the truth and to confuse people, that we consider all muslims to be disbelievers, the people of our times, and all the the peoples of the last six centuries, except those who follow us, and the lie based upon this lie, that we do not accept anyones allegiance until he testifies that he was a pagan before joinging us, and that both his parents were pagans(mushriks)(these lies can be seen in the book doctrine of Ahle sunnah wal jamma’ah vs the salafee movement p23-27)…then all of these salnders have absolutely no basis whatsoever. Everytime we heard something of these lies, we would reply “subhanak!! This is indeed a great slander and lie”. So whoever narrated this from me, will accuse me of these matters. Then he has indeed lied and slandered me. And whoever has witnessed my situation, and attended my gathereings, and verified what knowledge is with me, knows of a certainty that all of these charges have been fabricated against me by the enemies of the religion and the brothers of Shaytaan!” they only do this so as to repel people from submitting to Allaah alone with Tawheed and worship, by leaving all forms of shirk. Veriyl Allaah has clearly stated that he wil not forgive shirk, but will forgive anything less than that. So I firmly believe that whoever does any of the major sins, such as murdering another muslim without any reason, or fornicating, or taking interest, or drinking intoxicants, that such a person does not leave the fold of Islaam, nor will he be in the hell fire forever. As long as he died upon Tawheed.(al hadiyyah al Suniyyah p.40)*
that also destroys the same accusation!
also he stated “ as for ruling someone to be a kafir, then I consider a kafir to be the person who knows the religion of the prophet(saw), then, after such knowledge, curses it, and prevents people from following it, and shows enmity to whoever follows it. So this is the one whom I consider to be a kafir. And the majority of this ummah is not like this”( al durrar al saniyyah1/73)
and he also said “and if we do not pronounce takfir on those who worship idols that are present upon the graves of abd’ al qadir al jilanee and ahmad al badawa due to their ignorance and that they do not have the people to explain shirk to them then how can we consider kafir those who do not migrate with us nor fight with us to be Kafir?? Verily this is an evil slander!” (ibid)
HE said in a letter when he was asked who he calls to “and I am not one of those who calls to the belief of the Sufis nor the blind following of a faqih or one the philosophical groups, or even to the scholars that I respect myself such as ibn al qayyim, ibn katheer, al dahhabi and others, rather I call to Allaah(swt) alone, for he is one of having no partners and I call to the sunnah of the Prophet(saw). And this is what he (saw0 commanded the first and the last of nation. And I hope I do not reject any truth if it comes to me. Rather I call to Allaah(swt), his angel and the whole of creation to witness that if a word comes from you that is true, then of a surety I will accept it with all respect, and I will throw against the wall everything that goes against it, from the statements of the scholars that I respect, exept for the prophet(saw) for only he speaks nothing but the truth! (Majmu Mu'alafat 5/252)
and this destroys the claim where you said he destroyed Madhabs etc.
I provide proof when i answer which you blindfollowers fail to do and even if you its most probably something u just copied and pasted without reading.
you see he didnt come with anything new, he simply revived what was lost!
what do you have to say about that?? dont be a blind follower bro. Verify what you hear as Allaah(swt) said in the Qur'aan
*O you who believe! If a rebellious evil person comes to you with a news, verify it, lest you harm people in ignorance, and afterwards you become regretful to what you have done. (Al-Hujurat 49:6) *
I was told to stay away from this Shaykh but when i read his books i see nothing that goes against Qur'aan and Sunnah.
'smoothguy' so u have some documents?? why dnt you show me as i already have many docuements on him which are based on lies. if you believe that Hadeeth is wrong then you stick to associating that hadeeth to The Shaykh cos By Allaah(swt) it is a great accusation to make! on Qiyamaah u can answer as to why you felt that hadeeth was abt him!
one more thing i a dont take my religion frm "saudis" i take them from Muslims who refer back to the classical sources. the same "saudis" you are trying to associate me with are the same Saudis i HATE for the sake of Allaah(swt) as they have joined with Kuffar against muslim. imprisoned some of the scholars i refer to bcos they spoke out against the Taghoots of saudi arabia.
either talk to me in a manner that befits a Muslim or dnt speak at all as Our Rasool(saw) said "either speak good or stay silent" you have not spoken good so please....sshhh!!
Re: Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahaab
Its pretty ironic how everyone over here who is jumping up and down calling the Imam an ally of the West, are themselves living in the West, supporting their nations and their wars against Islam, with their tax money and have hatred for the Mujahideen.
really ironic...
Re: Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahaab
How about a Mubaahilah? We pray that "may Allaah's curse be upon the one who is being insincere to His Deen and supporting his own desires over Allaah's orders, may Allaah humiliate such a person, Aameen"
Re: Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahaab
really ironic...
Who is the Imam?
Imam mehdi?
Re: Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahaab
Imam mehdi?
Imam Mohammad bin Abdul Wahhab, one who's the topic of this discussion.
Re: Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahaab
Early history of Wahhabism
Wahhabism in Saudi Arabia was founded by Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahab, an Arabian cleric who had come to believe that Sunni Islam had been corrupted by innovations (bidah) such as Sufism. He discovered the works of the early Muslim thinker Ibn Taymiyya and started preaching a reformation of Islam based on Ibn Taymiyya’s ideas. He was repudiated by his father and brother, who were both clerics, and expelled from his home village in Najd, in central Arabia.
(His brother later wrote a book harshly criticizing al-Wahhab: Divine Thunders Refuting the Wahhabis, or in Arabic, الصواعق الإلهية في الرد على الوهابية.)
Al-Wahhab then moved to the Najdi town of Diriya and formed an alliance with the Saudi chieftain Muhammad bin Saud. Bin Saud made Wahhabism the official religion in the First Saudi State. Al Wahhab gave religious legitimacy to Ibn Saud’s career of conquest. Ibn Taymiyya had been controversial in his time because he held that some self-declared Muslims (such as the Mongol conquerors of the Abbasid caliphate) were in fact unbelievers and that orthodox Muslims could conduct violent jihad against them. Ibn Saud believed that his campaign to restore a pristine Islam justified the conquest of the rest of Arabia.
In 1801, the Saudis attacked the Iraqi city of Kerbala and sacked the shrine of Imam Hussain. In 1803, Saudis conquered Mecca and Medina and sacked or demolished the shrines of the daughter of the Prophet Mohammad and various shrines and mosques. They also wanted to destroy the shrine of Prophet Mohammad but due to the intervention of the king they were forced to abandon their plan. The Saudis held the two cities until 1817, until they were retaken by Mohammed Ali Pasha, acting on behalf of the Ottomans. In 1818, the Ottoman forces invaded Najd, captured the Saudi capital of Diriya and the Saudi emir Abdullah bin Saud. He and his chief lieutenants were taken to Istanbul and beheaded. However, this did not destroy Wahhabism in Najd.
The Wahhabiyya are the most important sect of latter-day Islam. The late great Scholar of al-Azhar and specialist of Juridical principles (Usul), Imam Muhammad Abu Zahra, wrote in his book on the history of the madhahib (Schools) in Islam titled Tarikh al-Madhahib al-Islamiyya (“History of the Islamic Schools”):
"The Wahhabis appeared in the Arabian desert …] and revived the School of Ibn Taymiyya. The founder of the Wahhabiyya is Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Wahhab who died in 1786CE. He had studied the books of Ibn Taymiyya which became inestimable in his sight, deepening his involvement in them until he brought them out from the realm of opinion into the realm of practice. …] The Wahhabis exaggerated [and bowdlerized] Ibn Taymiyya’s positions and instituted practical matters that can be summarized thus:
"I. They did not restrain themselves to view worship (ibada) in the same way that Islam had stipulated in the Qur'an and Sunna and as Ibn Taymiyya had mentioned, but they wished to include customs (adat) also into the province of Islam so that Muslims would be bound by them. Thus they declared cigarette smoking haram and exaggerated this ruling to the point that their general public considered the smoker a mushrik [idolater]. As a result they resembled the Khawarij who used to declare apostate whoever committed a sin.
"II. In the beginning of their sway they would also declare coffee and whatever resembled it as haram [categorically prohibited] to themselves but it seems that they became more lenient on this point as time went by.
"III. The Wahhabis did not restrain themselves to proselytism only, but resorted to warmongering against whoever disagreed with them on the grounds that they were fighting innovation (bida), and innovations are an evil that must be fought, and it is obligatory to command good and forbid evil.1 ...] The leader of Wahhabi thought in the field of war and battle was Muhammad ibn Saud, the ancestor of the ruling Saudi family in the Arabian lands. He was a brother-in-law to Shaykh Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab and embraced his madhhab, defending it fervently and calling unto it by force of arms. He announced that he was doing this so as to uphold the Sunna and eradicate bid`a. Perhaps, this religious mission that took a violent turn was carrying with itself a rebellion against Ottoman rule. …]
Until the governor of Egypt, Muhammad Ali Basha al-Albani, faced them and pounced on the Wahhabis with his strong army, routing them in the course of several battles. At that time their military force was reduced and confined to the Arabian tribes. Ryad and its vicinity was the center for this permanent dawa that would turn violent whenever they found the strength and then lie still whenever they found violent opposition.
"IV. Whenever they were able to seize a town or city they would come to the tombs and turn them into ruins and destruction …] and they would destroy whatever mosques were with the tombs also. …]
"V. Their brutality did not stop there but they also came to whatever graves were visible and destroyed them also. And when the ruler of the Hijaz regions caved in to them they destroyed all the graves of the Companions and razed them to the ground …]
"VI. They would cling to small matters which they condemned although they had nothing to do with idolatry nor with whatever leads to idolatry, such as photography. We found this in their fatwas and epistles at the hands of their Ulema, although their rulers ignore this saying of theirs completely and cast it by the wayside.
"VII. They expanded the meaning of bida [innovation] to strange proportions, to the point that they actually claimed that draping the walls of the noble Rawda [near the Prophet's chamber in Madina] is an innovated matter. Hence they forbade the renewal of the drapes that were in it, until they fell in tatters and became unsightly, were it not for the light that pours out to all that are in the presence of the Prophet - upon him peace - or feels that in this place was the abode of Revelation on the Master of Messengers. In fact, we find among them, on top of this, those who consider that the Muslim's expression "our Master Muhammad" (sayyiduna Muhammad) is an impermissible bida / and they show true extremism about this and, for the sake of their mission, use foul and furious language until most people actually flee from them as fast as they can.
"VIII. In truth, the Wahhabis have actualized the opinions of Ibn Taymiyya and are extremely zealous followers and supporters of those views. They adopted the positions of Ibn Taymiyya that we explained in our discussion of those who call themselves “Salafiyya.” However, they expanded the meaning of bida and construed as innovations things that have no relation to worship. ...] In fact, it has been noticed that the Ulema of the Wahhabis consider their own opinions correct and not possibly wrong, while they consider the opinions of others wrong and not possibly correct. More than that, they consider what others than themselves do in the way of erecting tombs and circumambulating them, as near to idolatry.2 In this respect they are near the Khawarij who used to declare those who dissented with them apostate and fight them as we already mentioned. This was a relatively harmless matter in the days when they were cloistered in the desert and not trespassing its boundaries; but when they mixed with others until the Hijaz country was in the hand of the Saud family,3 the matter became of the utmost gravity. This is why the late King Abd al-Aziz of the Sa`ud family opposed them, and treated their opinions as confined to themselves and irrelevant to others."4 [End of the text quoted from Imam Abu Zahra’s book Tarikh al-Madhahib al-Islamiyya (“History of the Islamic Schools”).]
Among the titles Wahhabis gave themselves are the names Muwahhidun (“Monotheists”), Islahiyyun (“Reformists”), and Salafiyyun (“Followers of the Pious Predecessors”) while their opponents name them Hashwiyya (“Illiterates” lit. “Visceralists”), Mujassima (“Anthropomorphists”) and Khawarij (“Seceders”). They name Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab "Shaykh al-Islam" - although he is by his own Hanbali Madhhab's account a minor figure - and name his descendants Al al-Shaykh [House of the Shaykh] while his brother Sulayman ibn Abd al-Wahhab declares him an heretic in his fatwa printed under the title Fasl al-Khitab min Kitab Allah wa-Hadith al-Rasul (Sallallahu alayhi wa-Sallam) wa-Kalam Uli al-Albab fi Madhhab Ibni Abd al-Wahhab ("The Final Word from the Qur’an, the Hadith, and the Sayings of the Scholars Concerning the School of Ibn Abd al-Wahhab"), also known as al-Sawaiq al-Ilahiyya fi Madhhab al-Wahhabiyya (“The Divine Thunderbolts Concerning the Wahhabi School”).
This book is the earliest refutation of the Wahhabi sect in print, consisting in over forty-five concise chapters spanning 120 pages that show beyond doubt the fundamental divergence of the Wahhabi school, not only from the Consensus and Usul of Ahl al-Sunna wal-Jama`a and the fiqh of the Hanbali madhhab, but also from their putative Imams, Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn al-Qayyim on most or all the issues reviewed.5 The last point shows the fundamental dishonesty of Salafism toward the very Imams they claim as their true link to the Salaf.
Other reliable literature on that sect includes:
The Yemeni contemporary of Muhammad Ibn Abd al-Wahhab: Sayyid Alawi ibn Ahmad ibn al-Hasan ibn al-Qutb Abd Allah al-Haddad's Misbah al-Anam fi Radd Shubuhat al-Bidi al-Najdi al-Ladhi Adalla biha al-Awamm ("The Lamp of Mankind in Refuting the Insinuations Used by the Innovator from Najd to Misguide the Public" 1216); I have translated the introduction and outline of this important book in full and it is available in the UK appended to Sayyid Yusuf al-Rifai’s 1999CE pamphlet: “Advice to our brethren the Scholars of Najd” (see excerpts of the latter at http://www.sunnah.org/aqida/Sh_Rifai/Default.htm).
Sayyid Abd Allah ibn Hasan ibn Fadl Ba Alawi’s Sidq al-Khabar fi Khawarij al-Qarn al-Thani `Ashar (“The Truthful News Concerning the Kharijis of the Twelfth Century”);
Hasan ibn Umar ibn Maruf al-Shatti al-Hanbali’s (1205-1274) al-Nuqul al-Shariyya fil-Radd alal-Wahhabiyya (“The Legal Texts that Refute the Wahhabis”);
Sayyid Ahmad ibn Zayni Dahlan’s (d 1304) al-Durar al-Saniyya fil-Radd `ala al-Wahhabiyya (“The Resplendent Pearls in Refuting the Wahhabis”);
Ibrahim al-Samannudi al-Mansuri’s (d 1314) Saadat al-Darayn fil-Radd ala al-Firqatayn al-Wahhabiyya wal-Zahiriyya (“The Bliss of the Two Abodes in the Refutation of the Two Sects: Wahhabis and Zahiris”);
Shaykh Salamat al-Azzami's (d 1376) al-Barahin al-Satia fi Radd Bad al-Bida al-Sha’i`a (“The Radiant Proofs in Refuting Certain Widespread Innovations”);
and the esteemed contemporary Yemeni Shaykh of Jeddah, al-Habib Zayn al-Abidin Al Sumayt al-Alawi’s al-Ajwiba al-Ghaliya fi `Aqidat al-Firqat al-Najiya (“The Precious Replies Concerning the Doctrine of the Saved Group = mainstream Sunnis]”).
Re: Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahaab
When did he become imam?
What were his qualifications???
I think this area is seriously looked over in sunnism. If sunnis were more strict, we wouldn't have people claiming to fatwagirs sprouting from all places.
Anyhow just rejoice in the fact that ibn wahab worked with the british to destroy khilafat yet hizb and allied orgs falsely try to be jihad champions. You can't change the facts dude.
As for the western comment I have seen MSA students saudi influence come and badmouth america as much as to end the country yet it is in islam that you serve and protect a promise you make (amana). You do remember they take the oath of allegiance to america right? Saudi arabia itself is a biggest lota satellite state of America, NO QUESTIONS ASKED!
Re: Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahaab
They are true yazidis if how they believe a caliphate should be run.
In early islamic history, the caliphs were elected by people while we all know the history of yazeed. The hizb tehereer wants democracy ended and have this idiotic idea that somehow from somewhere a true ruler will appear and rule islamically.
Yazeed also believed he was the rightious caliph and we all know what events happened because of him.
Re: Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahaab
Where is sadiyah the biggest supporter of them all or lajawab in this thread?
Re: Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahaab
The Wahhabi who Loved Beauty
Kerim Fenari
Spending three years in the desert heat of Saudi Arabia was for me a time of Ultimate Enlightenment, which raised the veil from the Umma’s most enigmatic and closely-guarded secret. Access to the Ka‘ba is relatively straightforward when compared to the challenge of grasping this secret, namely, the hidden, Manichean division in today’s Muslim world, which is not between secularisation and Islam - a relatively straightforward tension - but between normative Islam and the heresy which is its latter-day simulacrum. As I came to realise, understanding this schism is the key to grasping everything that is wrong with the Muslim nation today.
Saudi Arabia has undoubted virtues. Its crude but generally effective erasure of vice from public spaces is praiseworthy and deserves our respect. Once, returning to London, I took my small child into the Fleet Street church of St Dunstan’s, to escape from the February rain. Inside, however, we were confronted with an exhibition of giant terracotta bas-reliefs depicting the Disciples of Christ, all nude and grimacing, their grotesquely deformed pudenda projecting into the nave. We hurriedly exited into the rain; and I silently prayed for a long life for King Fahd, who, despite all that may be said, is not ashamed before the world to suppress the perversions of the age, and to drive them deep underground where they belong.
The King deserves our prayers, too, for his patronage of several mosque projects: not the extensions to the Great Sanctuaries of Makka and Madina, which were accomplished by teams of mediocrities; but the smaller mosques of Quba and Qiblatayn in Madina, and the astonishingly beautiful Miqat of Dhu’l-Hulayfa, the oasis-like structure just south of the Holy Prophet’s city where pilgrims from the north bathe, pray, and don their Ihram; a truly noble setting for the primordially beautiful and dignified rites of our religion.
Yet it cannot be said that the modern Saudi soul is attuned to beauty. Buildings surviving from before the 20th century are uniformly impressive; more recent structures are exhibitions of the worst of Third World kitsch. And people’s homes are lurid and garishly decorated with shocking pink carpets and fluffed-up Ziegfeld Follies furniture, all illuminated by fluorescent tubes or mock-Bourbon chandeliers.
To those who have come to Islam, as I did, out of a love for Islamic art and the art of Islamic living, this collapse of the age-old Muslim aesthetic is puzzling. The usual explanation is the obvious supply-side account, which describes how the invasion of Muslim suqs in the 19th century by cheap European manufactured goods destroyed the crafts and the artisanal classes which for centuries had cultivated beauty. The Islamic guilds which presided over the production of artefacts which are absent from modern Muslim homes but which are the prized possessions of Western museums had been training grounds not only for technique, but for spiritual excellence, taking as their motto the hadith: ‘Allah is beautiful, and He loves beauty’. The ihsan here advocated is an intuitive gift. Guild masters would train their apprentices for seven years in religious practices as well as in the mechanics of crafting carpets, lamps or ceramics. Every guild was either part of a Sufi tariqa, or functioned as a tariqa in its own right. Manual work was hence turned into a method of dhikr; every instant at the potter’s wheel, or the rugmaker’s frame, would be occupied with the mention of God and His Prophet. The production of beauty was seen as evidence of the craftsman’s inner repose and detachment; faults were the consequence of faults in the soul.
The Industrial Revolution swept most of this away; and ironically the Muslim crafts now survive largely thanks to the Western demand. Nowadays, ‘ethnic’ artifacts, from costly Afghan rugs down to humble brass candlesticks sold at Oxfam, are mainly attractive to people who do not share the worldview which made their beauty possible.
Saudi Arabia, because it has the money to demolish and rebuild and import, has been ravaged more deeply than most Muslim countries in this regard. Most Moroccans are too poor to pull down their stone houses and replace them with cement imitations of Western models; but the Saudis have been unrestrained. Almost all of Makka and Madina, and a good part of Jeddah, has been uncomprehendingly bulldozed and replaced with concrete carbuncles, faced in ghastly variegated marble.
Standing in the ruins of a formerly exquisite Saudi city, one realises that the ‘decline of the guilds’ explanation does not go far enough. Offered the choice between beautiful and ugly Western imports, the Saudis seem invariably to choose what is ugly. They reject their own music, but do not listen to Mozart instead, but to Michael Jackson and other exhalations of the damned degeneracy of America. They throw out traditional Arab or Ottoman furniture, and replace it with mock “Louis Farouk” vulgarity so extreme that it is produced in Europe largely for export. One can imagine the truckers and removal men in Italy or Spain averting their eyes from their awful loads, thankfully putting them on ships bound only for distant Arabian ports.
While living in Saudi Arabia, I had an acquaintance who was troubled by all of this. He was an American convert from a middle-class background who had a scholarship to study at the ‘Umm al-Qura Islamic University’ in Makka. Although he is today the least likely of men to read Q-News http://www.aapi.co.uk/qnews, I will preserve his anonymity by calling him Jalal.
Jalal loved Islamic art, and the great lyrical productions of Sufi poetry. He had come to the religion not through reading Mawdudi, or Muhammad Qutb - for their complex-ridden resentfulness would have repelled a person of his culture and sensitivity - but through travelling in tribal Muslim areas, where he breathed that precious and liberating air which one can only describe as the Islamic spirit. Not the boy-scout bonhomerie of the liberal Ikhwan, or the nervous guilt of the Tabligh, but authentic, unpolluted Islam, as shaped and lived for countless generations by joyfully untroubled lovers of Allah.
Jalal’s fate, however, was to don a gas-mask supplied by the Wahhabi sect, which cut him off from the liberating oxygen of normative Islam and slowly asphyxiated him with fumes of human making. At the university, his open-mindedness made him heedless of our counsels about choosing company that would open his heart to the love of his Lord, rather than close it in recriminations and self-exaltation. And this was his undoing.
I never learned the name of the man who converted him to Wahhabism. But one can deduce his character, and the expression on his face, and his body-language, without difficulty. As months passed, and Jalal the Arabic student fell under the spell of the shouting sermoniser he insisted on hearing, a shadow crept over his features. Formerly a frequent visitor to Madina, he went less often, troubled by Wahhabi polemic against paying too much attention to God’s messengers. His confidence that the sacred could be discerned in nature, in saints and in beauty began to waver, a process that clearly agonised him. At times, when we spoke, he would return for a while to his old self, and talk enthusiastically about architecture, of textiles, of the sacred geography of Muslim cities. But then a cloud would come over his face, and he would almost shudder, as his programming once again took him over, and he parroted the shallow slogans of Wahhabism. I thought, once, of the film Invasion of the Body Snatchers. Jalal was being possessed.
Prior to my years in Saudi Arabia, I had been puzzled by the vehemence of the traditional ulema’s hostility to Wahhabism. Wahhabism, I felt sure, was no more than an overheated Hanbalism, with a naive Bedouin literalism in speaking of a delineated and anthropomorphic God.
Watching the shadows gather around Jalal, however, convinced me that something more ominous, even infernal, was at work. Wahhabism seemed to be not simply or even primarily a package of ideas; it was an existential condition. It breathed an intensity, a dark radioactivity which could, on prolonged exposure, make me physically weak, or sick. After one intense session with a Wahhabi, whose blindness had veiled from him my own orientation, I had to detoxify myself by taking a long walk, breathing deeply, and repeating thousands of prayers upon the Holy Prophet.
I once met a Ugandan who lamented the decline of Islam in his country, and laid the blame very bitterly at the Wahhabis’ door. Before they came, he said, Islam had been spreading fast, largely through the public and joyful celebrations of Mawlid. Singing with passion and rhythm is the key to the African soul, he told me; and yet the Wahhabis, well-funded and with deadly zeal in their eyes, slowly turned off the taps to the Mawlid, until the entire community became disconsolate, forced awkwardly into a dry type of religion that failed to speak to their condition. With the Muslims browbeaten by an organised anti-tariqa and anti-Mawlid sect, the Christian missionaries, with their Africanised hymns, suddenly found the going much easier.
Back in Makka, Jalal’s condition was getting worse. He began to stand very close in front of me, fingering my lapels as he spoke. In this I recognised a symptom of a very advanced case of Wahhabism. When I spoke to him of beauty, or art, or literature, or holiness, his face now blazed with an amused and self-righteous contempt. All that was bid‘a. A mosque could be made of concrete, carpeted with lime-green rugs, and illuminated with multicoloured fluorescent strips, and it was just as good a space for prayer as a medieval structure erected by great craftsmen. Jalal’s room at the university, which he shared with three others, was slowly stripped of anything “ethnically” Muslim - small rugs from Kashmir, rosewater sprinklers, and, of course, his ebony prayer beads. His life was stripped down, sterilised, irradiated with ultraviolet light from the harshest end of the religious spectrum. His reading habits withered, as he realised that the great sacred poets of Islam: Rumi, Sana’i, Shabistari and the rest, were all Sufis, and that the soil of Wahhabism had been as sterile for literature as it had been for all the other arts of Islam.
I watched this transformation with pain. I had hoped, as had others, that he would someday combine his cultural sensitivities with his Islamic knowledge to become a major Muslim leader back in America, speaking two languages with fluency. His destiny, however, lay through the Wahhabi desert. And in the end, he died of thirst.
He suffered a kind of spiritual heart-attack. His attempt to change his spiritual makeup finally collapsed, as I should have anticipated. A crisis which must have tortured him almost beyond endurance brought about his sudden departure from the university, and from the country. He renounced Islam, and encountered and married a Chinese girl. He now practices a form of Nishiren Buddhism which no doubt helps to satisfy, as Wahhabism never could, his craving for contemplation and beauty.
Jalal’s case was extreme, but I fear it is not unique. The spread of Wahhabism, fostered by the general disequilibrium of the age, is rapid, and is contaminating many thousands of souls that might otherwise, with proper exposure to traditional ulama and an attachment to a spiritual director, have found the tranquillity and serenity of authentic Islam. While I know that everything is by Allah’s decree, I blame myself for Jalal’s apostasy. I should have taken him to visit the saints, and the true gatherings of divine love that discreetly flourish in Saudi Arabia, which could have inoculated him against the virus which led to his death. But he represents, in extreme form, the whole story of the Umma’s contemporary crisis. Our lack of recognition of, of insistence upon, beauty, as the traditional accompaniment to the Muslim life, indicates the absence of beauty in our souls, and the distance from our Maker that ensues from the decline of tradition and from the diabolically-contrived spread of heresy and disharmony.
Thankfully, the Umma is still filled with saints, Sufis, and great craftsmen. Economic backwardness has in this respect been a great preservative. Having travelled the world, I know that amid no other community may one find such glories of spirituality and human excellence. All the more reason to defend tradition against this new plague, which denatures and impoverishes Islam precisely at the moment in history when the West, shattered by the decline of its own religion, could begin to see it as an appealing and desperately-needed alternative.
Re: Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahaab
TUMS, isn't that what you've been doing ever since you first replied to this thread?
Associating us with the present day Saud family, when you haven't got a clue what is out stand on that issue. And yeaa...pity on you on being refuted and made to look like an utter fool in your other anti wahaabi thread.
enjoy... :)
Re: Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahaab
What I don’t get is how an org like hizb started by a pali ended up being run by our desi hindooomuslims? 
Look at UK and how radical these hindooomuslims have become thinking not for once to thank their country for putting them on welfare. Same with radicals in the rest of MSAs.
One word: namak haram! :yukh:
Re: Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahaab
I love you said “us” that answered all our questions.
Re: Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahaab
Much of the stuff here does in fact go way off topic. Abdul Wahab does not equate to the Saud royal family.
BUT, it must be said that in his life, Abdul Wahab made a pact with the chieftain of Najd - Muhammad Ibn Saud, the founder of the modern royal family, that all regions conquered by this bandit would adhere to his teachings. His making a pact with a bandit (and one who was at war with an Islamic empire) is a serious stain on his character and judgment. At best, we can afford him an excuse of being ignorant of politics and a bad judge of character.
In fairness, given the nature of his writings (which focused on purifying Islamic rituals from what he thought were harmful intrusions), this was most likely the case - and as a historical Muslim figure that managed to gain a following among his contemporaries, his personal failures should not make us reject wholesale what he had to say.