Being followers of the religion of Islam & Being devout Muslims, Why are we fighting Each other?



When ISLAM boasts itself to be a religion of peace and prosperity; why are we fighting between ourselves and killing each other in the most ruthless manner? Why are we allowing Western Crusaders on hidden agendas and on varies pretexts to kill our fellow Muslims with our own Money and stupid politically motivated “Instant Fatwa’s”? As we all are aware, by definition Islam means “Peace acquired In Submission to will of Almighty Allah” and a Muslim means by definition “One who submits to Allah” and “Muslims are one brotherhood”!!  Are we adhering to this fact?



Why are we being Anti-Islam & Anti-Muslim while ironically pointing the finger at the Kaafir and claiming them to be Anti-Muslim? This curse of killing fellow Muslims & its repercussions all started by a group of people referred to as KHAWARIJ (The outcasts) they were also known historically as the Shurat, literally meaning "the buyers" and understood within the context of Islamic scripture and philosophy to mean "those who have traded the mortal life (aldunya) for the other life [with God] (alakhera). However they referred to themselves as ahl al-'adl wal istiqama people of justice and uprightness". They’re actually an ancient Arab speaking secret Jewish cult of Najd who had been living in Arabia for tens of generations prior to Islam. While deceitfully converting to Islam for material, economical & social benefits with security given in Islam, they pretended outwardly to being devout Muslims, ie. Praying 5 times in Jamath, fasting the month of Ramadan, Sunnah Salah’s, etc,etc, and on the outset you would never imagine that these Godly looking pious “Muslim” people are actually a Cancer unto Muslims. These Khawarij initiated a campaign against true Muslims from which the Muslim’s would never recover.



These Kharijites were the first sect to appear in the history of Islam and later splitting up into more than 20 different sub-sects. They mingled with the Ahlel Sunnah Wal Jammah, Killed the Caliphs (Khalifas) Ali (ral) and instrumental in the Murder of Uthman (ral), They made Muslims fight with Muslims, the 1st Battle of Islam between the forces of Ali (Ral) and Ummul Moomineen Aysha (ral) was a great Anti-Muslim achievement of the Khawarij so was the wars between Ali (ral) & Muawiyah (ral). The 2nd & the greatest division among Muslims, the split as SUNNI Muslim & SHIA Muslim also occurred as a master plan of the Khawarij who devised the plan to split the Muslims and added fuel to fire.



The Khawarij belonged primarily to the tribes of Banu Hanifah and Banu Tamim of Najd numbering around 12.000 to 15.000 tested Warriors who originally fought against Holy Prophet Mohhamed(sal) and successive Caliphs (Khalifas)for the cause of Musaylima al-Kadhab, the Liar & pretender to prophethood the ancestor of Modern Day Saudi Ruling Family, the Ibn Sauds and the forefathers of Sheikh Mohammed Ibn Abdul Wahhab Al-Najdi the founder of Wahabism (Salafism & Tawheedsm).



Hadees 1- Bani Tamim :

Some people of Bani Tamim came to the Prophet and he said (to them), “O Bani Tamim! Rejoice with glad tidings.” They said, “You have given us glad tidings, now give us something.” On hearing that the color of his face changed then the people of Yemen came to him and he said, “O people of Yemen! Accept the good tidings, as Bani Tamim has refused them.” The Yemenites said, “We accept them.” — Narrated Imran bin Husain



Hadees 2- Bani Tamim :



Allah’s Messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace) was one day reviewing the horses, in the company of Uyayna ibn Hisn ibn Badr al-Fazari. Uyayna remarked: “The best of men are those who bear their swords on their shoulders, and carry their lances in the woven stocks of their horses, wearing cloaks, and are the people of the Najd.” But Allah’s Messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace) replied: “You lie! Rather, the best of men are the men of the Yemen. Faith is a Yemeni, the Yemen of [the tribes of] Lakhm and Judham and Amila. [...] Hadramawt is better than the tribe of Harith; one tribe is better than another; another is worse [...] My Lord commanded me to curse Quraysh, and I cursed them, but he then commanded me to bless them twice, and I did so [...] Aslam and Ghifar, and their associates of Juhaina, are better than Asad and Tamim and Ghatafan and Hawazin, in the sight of Allah on the Day of Rising. [...] The most numerous tribe in the Garden shall be [the Yemeni tribes of] Madhhij and Ma’kul.’ -– Ahmad ibn Hanbal and al-Tabarani, by sound narrators. Cited in Ali ibn Abu Bakr al-Haythami, Majma‘ al-zawa’id wa manba‘ al-fawa’id [Cairo, 1352], X, 43).



The village that Bani Tamim (tribe) occupied was known as al-Uyayna. The borough, though overshadowed by the larger town of Huraimila, was destined to be the source of a revolution that would not only reshape the Middle-East but also Muslim’s lives.



They were late converts, who when they came at last into Prophet Muhammad’s presence, insisted on debating with him. Appalled by their boasts of supremacy amongst Arab tribes, Prophet Muhammad elected Hassan ibn Thabit to reprimand them. This he did by composing a humiliating ode that belittled them. Later, of course, Bani Tamim played a key role in the birth of the Kharijites; a cult that regarded ordinary Muslims as hypocrites and apostates who could be killed with impunity.

By the 15th century, al-Uyayna fell into the hands of the Muammar family, who enjoyed a rather quirky reputation for longevity. Wadi Hanifa, the river that nourished al-Uyayna oasis, was also home to a number of tribes that lay like strung pearls along its banks. Nearby was al-Jubayla, whose glittering limestone hills had witnessed the fateful showdown between Khalid al-Walid, the brilliant Muslim general, and Musaylima al-Kadhab, the pretender to prophethood. The battle of Yamama had ended badly for Musaylima, who was unceremoniously acclaimed as a liar and a false prophet.

The most impressive feature of Najdi nomadism is its relative instability as compared with other tribal systems in the area. In North Yemen, for example, Yemeni tribes managed to preserve their structure over the same territory from pre-Islamic times until the present. Similarly, tribes in the Hijaz have managed to maintain their genealogical continuity over many centuries. This phenomenon is not replicated in Najd, where tribal turnover was both high and fickle. Constant immigration from the south and southwestern areas and migration out of Najd into the Fertile Crescent created a complex environment of fission and fusion among Bedouins. Prophet Muhammad’s frequent warnings about Najdi tribes proved far-reaching.

The Wahabis only publicize Hadees which favors them and leave the rest blank; Why? They have printed Million of Hadees Books interchanging the word NAJD with IRAQ and freely distributed them among pilgrims & Wahabi jamath; are they feeling bad that NAJD & Bani Tamim lost its blessings? Trying to make remedies? Which would mean that Shaithan Sheikh Al-Najdi Mohammed Ibn Al-Wahab is the same person Holy prophet (sal) described as HORN OF SHAITHAN! Wahabis are trying a cover-up! Maybe they failed miserably as we have all found-out their SHIRK by the grace of Almighty Allah!



The Holy Prophet (sal) prophesized maybe about Wahabism as:



“They recite the Quran and consider it in their favor but it is against them.



They transpose the Quranic verses meant to refer to unbelievers and make them refer to believers. What I fear most in my ummah is a man who interprets verses out of context.

They will pass through Islam as an arrow passed through its quarry.”



The Modern Day Khawarij; Wahabis, The followers of Sheikh Al-Najdi Mohammed Ibn Abdul Wahhab.



Mohammed Ibn Abdul Wahab Al-Najdi.



It was into this desolation that a man named Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab Al Najdi was born in 1703. His father was Abdul Wahhab ibn Sulaiman, a renowned qadi (judge) in al-Uyayna. He also had a brother, Sulayman ibn Abdul Wahhab. Abdul Wahhab ibn Sulaiman saw to it that both his sons received grounding in the fundamentals of religion.



From a very young age, though, Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab must have promulgated radical opinions. His father and brother, respected scholars, detected heresy and warned others not to follow him. Sulayman wrote a book refuting his brother’s ideas, entitled Al-Sawaiq al-Ilahia fi al-Ra’d ala al-Wahabia, or Divine Lightning Bolts on the Teachings of Wahhab. The book’s title is misleading. Its pages are inundated instead with gentle and sincere invitations for his brother to repent.



“My brother asks: ‘A hadith sharif says: “Of all that will befall you, shirk is what I fear most.” Is not this a detail of the fact that a part of this Ummah will be engaged in shirk?’

“I say: It is inferred by many other hadiths that this hadith refers to shirku-l-asghar. There are similar ahadith, narrated by Shaddad Ibn ‘Aws, Abu Hurayrah and Mahmud Ibn Labid (may Allah be pleased with all of them), according to which the Prophet (sall-Allahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) feared that shirku-l-asghar would be committed by his Ummah. It has exactly happened as it was foretold in the hadith, and many Muslims are guilty of shirku-l-asghar. But you, in your ignorance, confuse shirku-l-asghar with shirku-l-akbar, and the tragic consequence of this mistake of yours is that you regard as ‘unbelievers’ those Muslims that do not accept to call other Muslims unbelievers.”



Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab remained unmoved. He was wholly convinced that he was on the path of righteousness. After performing the hajj in Mecca, Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab resumed his education in Medina under the tutelage of such luminaries as Muhammad ibn Sulaiman al-Kurdi and Muhammad Hayat al-Sindhi. Both shaykhs (teachers) professed deep unease over his ideas. Nonplussed, Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab returned to al-Uyayna. Youthful zeal, however, soon propelled him to try his hand at exploration. Trade and business, which had been the Prophet Muhammad’s early occupation, seemed especially alluring. He left the oasis and traced a circuitous route that took him to Basra, Iraq, Iran and Damascus.



While there had always been a Shia presence in Mecca and Medina, Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab was to have his first real taste of Shia rituals when he reached Iran somewhere between 1725-26. Unsympathetic to the context of the Shia’s intensity, he was appalled by what he saw and later condemned as ‘deviations’ and ‘innovations’. The thrashing that the Shia administered on themselves during Ashura especially, must have shaken him. He roundly denounced the practices, and fled when a mob pursued him.


He arrived in the venerable city of Damascus, where abandoned Crusader forts built on lush, green hills still overlooked Arab cities. Certain Turkish sources say that the impressionable young man had met with a British spy named Hemper. Hemper, so the story goes, had been implanted by the British government to sow discord in the Muslim world. He successfully managed to impregnate Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab with revolutionary ideas. Aside from the fact that the British had tried this in India with the Bahais and Ahmedies, there is little else going for this hypothesis.



While in Damascus, Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab was greatly impressed by ideas from the Hanbali School of Thought, as filtered through the 13th century scholar, Ibn Taimiyya. The latter, while a towering Hanbalite of his day, eschewed traditional Islam’s attachment to the Four Schools of Thought, and claimed the mantle of mujtahid, which granted him the right to make independent decisions. Thereafter, under the Mamluk Sultan’s patronage, Ibn Taimiyya declared the Mongol ruler of Baghdad, Ghazan Khan, an apostate and agitated for a rebellion against the Mongol empire. His efforts earned the almost unanimous condemnation of the ulema (religious scholars). He was imprisoned where he died embittered by his failure.



Admirers of Ibn Taimiyya assert that he had been a victim of tyranny, but there is good reason to believe that it was his theological stance that had set traditional Sunni scholars against him. Ibn Battuta, the famous Moroccan globetrotter, for example, sets the record straight:



“When I came to Damascus there was a man called ibn Taimiyya speaking about religious science, but there was something strange in his mind… Once he was doing kutbat aljuma’a and he said yanzilou rabbuna ila assam’a adunya, then he went down two steps on the minbar and he said kanuzuli hatha (like my descending-comparing him to Allah). The people of Damascus jumped on him and wanted to kill him”.



Yet, unlike Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab, Ibn Taimiyya was, in the words of Hamid Algar (Wahabism, A Critical Essay):



“…a far more rigorous and careful thinker and an infinitely more prolific scholar.”



Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab next traveled to Medina, a natural stop to refine his interest in Hanbali jurisprudence. It was here also that Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab cultivated a passion for books on heretics such as Musaylima al-Kadhab, Sajah al-Aswad al-An’si and Tulaiha al-Assadi.

The proximity of Musaylima’s demise to his own hometown could hardly have escaped his notice. More remarkable still was that Musaylima had come from Bani Hanifa, whose remnants continued a brigand’s existence in the ramshackle outpost of al-Dirriya. Knowledge of al-Dirriya’s lineage would later prove invaluable.

Again, according to some commentators, Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab’s Medinite teachers voiced concerns about him:

“He will be misguided, and he will misguide those for whom Allah willed the misguidance.”



Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab returned to the Najd in 1727 with a band of African slaves as bodyguards. Settling in Huraimila, which was his father’s new residence, Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab quickly started preaching against what he saw as ‘innovations’. He dismissed practices such as visiting the graves of the Prophet Muhammad’s close companions as shirik, or polytheism. This is a label that the Quran applies on disbelievers rather than Muslims, so the accusations must have stung. Later, religious scholars who inherited Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab’s message would solidify this perception by spitefully redefining the practice of visiting the graves of honored predecessors as grave worship, though it was far from that.

It was around this time (1736), in the relative safety and comfort of his hometown, that he commenced work on the only literary output of his lifetime, entitled Kitab al-Tawhid, or Book on Monotheism. This reactionary magnum opus produced no new insights, only an annotated reprint of ahadith that had been carefully selected to uphold his ideas. The title is provocative, to say the least, for it suggests that one of Islam’s most-cherished dogma, monotheism, had been abandoned by the Muslim community. The charge isn’t as superficial as it seems. A society without tawhid, or monotheism, is a throwback to the time of jahiliya, the age of ignorance which was characterized by disbelief and debauchery. Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab’s ideas on the Muslim ummah, or community, were beginning to evolve.



For obvious reasons, the majority of traditional scholars forbid the labeling of any Muslim environment, post-revelation, as jahiliya . Such conservatism is justified in the wake of Syed Qutb’s imitation of Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab’s apocalyptic theme in 20th century Egypt. Qutb considered present-day Muslim governments as apostates and hence, valid targets for jihad. In itself, revolution and rebellion went against the grain of traditional Islam.



While his father was alive, Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab’s activities were severely curtailed. Abdul Wahhab ibn Sulaiman, after all, was a respected authority on religion, and together with his elder son, Sulayman ibn Abdul Wahhab, had openly and concisely chastised Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab. The latter was astute enough not to provoke further repudiation of his teachings. When his father finally passed away in 1740, Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab embarked on a campaign of vociferous preaching. His belligerence angered Huraimila’s residents. At Sulayman’s persuasion, the town evicted his brother Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab.



He fled to his family’s holdings in al-Uyayna. There, his preaching attracted some of his younger relatives. It must be noted that Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab had only just returned from a long journey; in the eyes of al-Uyayna’s impressionable youth, he represented a worldly-wise figure who was everything that the stuffy old elders weren’t. Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab cultivated and used this aura effectively, railing against the ‘aberrant’ practices he had witnessed in his travels. The Shia, especially, became his favorite scapegoat. Among other things, he condemned the smoking of tobacco and declared trees to be religiously objectionable. An appreciation of their beauty, according to him, could lead to apostasy.



The governor and qadi of al-Uyayna, Uthman ibn Muammar, was initially sympathetic to Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab’s preaching,. To cement his links with the oasis and prevent another Hurailima-like scandal from happening here, Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab married Uthman’s paternal aunt, al-Jauhara. This was the first in a series of political marriages he would make to seal whatever tenuous alliances could be solicited in the Najd. In his lifetime, he married a total of 20 wives (taking care not to exceed 4 at a time, of course) who furnished him with 18 children.

Uthman ibn Muammar’s indifference, however, came to be sorely tested when Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab dragged a woman accused of adultery out into a public square and stoned her to death. Some report that he had, in fact, used a heavy boulder to crush her head. The action triggered widespread fury.



Non-Muslims would profess puzzlement at the villagers’ reaction. Does Islam, like Judaism, not condemn all adulterers to death by stoning?



The perception is true, but there is a caveat. Umar ibn Khattab, one of Prophet Muhammad’s close companions and a Rightly-Guided Caliph, is said to have caught a couple engaging in adulterous sex. The Quranic punishment for such behavior was indeed death by stoning, but Ali, another companion, reminded Umar that no fewer than four witnesses are required to certify guilt for such an accusation, and that if he acted without such testimony, he himself would sin. Umar abided by Ali’s advice and pardoned the couple. It must be noted here that although Umar- whose very shadow the devil was said to run away from- had witnessed the act, he had no authority to suspend Quranic laws.



Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab’s behavior was made worse by the fact that he was not recognized as al-Uyayna’s qadi, which was Uthman’s position. At best, the woman’s death was a product of vigilante justice, which flies completely in the face of Islam. In his book, the “The Eternal Message of Muhammad”, the late Abdul Rahman Azzam stated that an ulema “should be of mature age and a man of wisdom, enjoy popular support and be a person who draws on the…counsel of the natural leaders. But if he disobeys the commands of God and disregards the interests of the people, he will be repudiated.”



Hurailima had already repudiated him. History would repeat itself again. In 1744, under intense pressure from the ruler of al-Hasa, al-Uyayna expelled Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab. In the Najd’s context, being cast out was not an act of mercy, but a delayed death sentence. Set aside only for severe crimes, it entailed the critical loss of a tribe’s patronage and protection. It made him one of the non-asil, or outcasts with whom it was shameful to marry and befriend. After two expulsions, Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab was painfully aware of the danger. There was hope in the south, though, and it was toward this direction that he went.



A New Friend in Bani Hanifa
His well-exercised instincts led him along the bank of Wadi Hanifa, past al-Jubayla’s limestone caves and finally into a small outpost called al-Dirriya, which was governed by Muhammad ibn Saud. Al-Dirriya was a familiar name. It was populated by a people who proudly claimed to be the last vestiges of Bani Hanifa. From his studies in Medina, Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab knew that he was trespassing in the land of a tribe whose loins had produced one of Islam’s most malignant enemies, Musaylima.



The desert at that time consisted of two social components, namely the Hadar, or settled communities, and the Bedouins, or nomadic tribes. A striking feature of Hadari society was its total failure to evolve any reliable mechanism for effective rule and orderly succession. In most cases, dominance was fought over by several families, sometimes from disparate genealogical backgrounds. Succession was often effected through murder. This device reared its ugly head nearly a century later, when in the bitter war for power over Saudi holdings, Imam Turki was murdered by his nephew, who was in turn killed by Turki’s son, Faysal al-Saud.



In writings about Saudi Arabia, the kingdom is typically identified with the Bedouin and the ennobling tribal ethic that is supposed to suffuse the state, at least at its inception. This opinion is difficult to sustain for the state had been an exclusively Hadari effort with profound anti-tribal and anti-Bedouin tendencies. There is no greater evidence of this than the well-documented atrocities that the Saudi Ikhwan, who were inheritors of Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab’s flagellant message, inflicted on nomadic tribes decades later.



This dogmatism stemmed from Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab’s own contempt for the Bedouin. He had attempted to kick-start his pogrom by enlisting Huraimila and al-Uyayna, both Hadari communities. That had ended in dismal failure, and he fled to al-Dirriya, another Hadari place.



Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab’s teachings found fertile ground in al-Dirriya, both in terms of the Saud clan’s political opportunism and its theological heritage. Thus, Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab’s campaign to purify the faith was met with enthusiasm. He destroyed a tree that was particularly beloved by the Sufis, and prevented people from visiting caves which was believed to hold baraka in al-Jubayla. Ancient domes that had been constructed above tombs of the Prophet Muhammad’s companions and family were demolished, the sites covered over. By and large, his teachings were accepted, but not without friction. In a famous story, Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab had demanded that all women shave their heads, but an indignant woman stood up and challenged:



“Hair is the precious ornament of a female as is the beard for a male. Is it apt to leave human beings deprived of their ornaments bestowed upon them by Allahu ta’ala?”



The comical quality of the story disguises an important moral. This was not the first time that Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab had re-interpreted Islamic law. His non-response to the outraged woman is testimony to his methodology, which in the end, was not based on what traditional scholars call ‘ijma’, or consensus of the scholars. To do otherwise would be to go against one the Quran’s most powerful yet ignored verses:



“There is no compulsion in religion. Truth is distinct from error.”



Traditional Islamic scholarship is well-acquainted with the dangers of coalescing religious authority on a single individual. Without the check and balance of ijma, which Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab regarded as destructive and tainted by subjectivity, rulings have a habit of leaning toward extremism. Ijma upholds the prophetic assurance- “My ummah will not unite upon error.”- and chains Muslims to the Prophet Muhammad’s (sal) warning- “O you people, beware of being extreme…for that which destroyed the people before you was none other than extremism in the religion.”



The Saud clan saw in Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab’s message an opportunity to cloak their ambitions in religion. This aspiration for Najdi domination was eagerly sealed, first by marriage between Saud women and the preacher, and then by the formal declaration of a proto-Saudi state in 1746. Using al-Dirriya as its base, dakwah (evangelism) was initially conducted peacefully, but as soon as it was clear that ibn Saud’s ideology of religiously-justified dominion was being met with maddening amusement, quickly degenerated into a brawl.



The theme of ‘tawhid’, or the apparent loss of it, was the ideological pretext that the Saud-Wahhab alliance exploited to attack otherwise Muslim towns. Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab insisted, for example, that his followers call themselves al-muwahhidun, or monotheists. The path he laid out was hence clear. The rest of the Muslim ummah were al-mushrikun, or polytheists and therefore licit targets for persecution, embargo, property-confiscation and outright raids; all of these were conveniently stitched into the tapestry of jihad. As Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab’s kitab al-tawhid starkly puts it,



“The disbelieving polytheistand Muslims of Cities who were not embracing  Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab has only two choices: (i) To embrace Islam of Muwahhidun introduced by Mohammed Ibn Al-Wahhab or (ii) to be fought/War.”



Purity through the sword
This militant-cum-religious doctrine was crystallized in an essay Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab wrote for Muhammad ibn Saud. Entitled “The Clarification of Unclarity Concerning the Creator of Heaven and Earth”, the newly-appointed Shaykh al-Islam spelled out for his emir that all present-day Muslims were disbelievers and had been so for the last six hundred years; the tenure of Ottoman rule. It was this accusation that prompted Muhammad Ibn Sulayman Effendi, a prominent scholar of that time to retort:



“It is more correct to call you, a single person, kafir, than calling millions of Muslims kuffar.”

In a process that would last almost half a century, however, the Saud-Wahhab alliance slowly defeated their opponents, both ideologically and militarily.

Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab was certain that the religious authorities in the two holy cities would come round to his point of view. Made confident by the backing of a zealous emir in Muhammad ibn Saud, he dispatched thirty wakil, or emissaries to Mecca to request for permission to perform the pilgrimage. These wakil had a more important goal, however, and that was to summon the Meccan ulema to support Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab’s vision. Grimly, the judges of the four official schools of Sunni Islam listened to the wakils’ arguments, and in the end, pronounced a verdict of rejection. They accused Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab of being a deviant and forbade his followers from performing the annual hajj. The Chief Mufti, Sayyid Ahmad Zayni Dahlan as-Shafi’i, was incensed enough to denounce Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab’s ideas in a book entitled al-Futuhatu-al-Islamiyyah.



“To deceive the ulemas in Mecca and Medina, those people sent emissaries in al-Haramayn, but these missionaries were not able to answer questions asked by Sunni scholars. It became evident that they were ignorant bid’ah (innovation) holders. Muftis of the four madhhabs (schools of thought) wrote a fatwa that declared them kuffars, and this document was distributed in the whole Jazirah. The Amir of Mecca, Sharif Mas’ud Ibn Sa’id, ordered that the followers of Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab should be imprisoned. Some of them fled to Dariyyah and informed their leader of what was happening.”



This incident, among others, was one of the reasons that the Saud-Wahhab alliance desired control over the two holy cities. It seemed particularly criminal that Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab’s followers were barred while the Shia, whom he regarded as the worst of apostates, were allowed to walk Mecca’s streets freely. This, some commentators assert, was sufficient grounds to initiate hostilities against Mecca and Medina, ruled then by Ottoman Caliphate.

The logic is unnecessarily convoluted, given that the traditional ulema considered Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab as much a deviant as he considered the ummah-at-large to be in grave error. The ideological and physical embargo that the traditional ulema imposed on Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab’s followers find comfortable resonance with the aggressive action that both Prophet Muhammad (sal) and his companions took against heretics.

Meanwhile, the changes wrought on Bedouin society by the Saud-Wahhab alliance were drastic and violent. The nomads were re-indoctrinated in Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab’s interpretation of faith principles, and ritual observances forced down their throats. Ibn Bishr, Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab’s official biographer, proudly describes the Saud clan’s success in curbing Bedouin hegemony. His diagnosis of the Bedouin problem is typical of the Hadari view, in which he reiterates that the only way to deal with nomads was through the “sword”. In other words, compulsion.

Their campaigns enraged the rest of the Arab world, who saw in them a blatant and deadly denial of Quranic principles. Except for a few shameful bouts in history, Islam had never been spread at the point of the sword.

Other towns and tribes were attacked, their mosques and religious architecture demolished to make way for Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab’s “pure” religion, which he painstakingly anchored to the so-called Salaf, or Pious Predecessors. As a news report on the succession of the new King Abdullah puts it:



“Mohammad bin Abdul Wahhab…set about propagating by the sword a return to pure Islam.”

The only tribal ethic that the Saud-Wahhab alliance aspired to was the need for expansion, both to protect itself from other tribes who deplored hegemony, and also to sustain its growing size. But the ethic is less a tribal trait than it is a primitive idea of society. Once set in motion, the virus-like behavior can never stop without destroying itself. Saudi expansion was due more to Muhammad ibn Saud’s recognition of this desert law of survival than to any divine intervention.

“It was either kill or be killed”.

In 1750, an invigorated Saud-Wahhab alliance arrived at al-Uyayna to punish Uthman ibn Muammar for allegedly conspiring with al-Hasa. The irony was not lost on Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab, who must have seen in the return a just revenge on those who had precipitated his early disgraces. To Muhammad ibn Saud, however, it was another piece of land to be added to the tally. Unsurprisingly, Uthman was killed and al-Uyayna fell into al-Dirriya’s control. By then, Sulayman ibn Abdul Wahhab must have felt vindicated for his opposition to his brother. Gathering what people he could muster, he led a revolt in Huraimila. This came to naught when Muhammad ibn Saud’s son Abdul Aziz promptly invaded Huraimala with 820 men. Sulayman fled to Sudair. Ten years later, the Saud-Wahhab alliance entered al-Hasa in triumph.

But the Bedouin, who hated tyranny, particularly the one imposed by the Saud-Wahhab hegemony, were motivated enough to launch a rebellion in 1764. In Narjam, they killed 500 of Abdul Aziz’s men and captured 200. The numbers were shocking, a testimony to the power of Bedouin hatred for their recent subjugation. Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab, fearing that his adopted clan would be demoralized, quickly negotiated the prisoners’ release during an armistice.

In about this time, Sulayman ibn Abdul Wahhab and his family were captured and delivered to al-Dirriya, where the former ulema was given strict orders not to preach.

Muhammad ibn Saud died a year later and was succeeded by Abdul Aziz, but it would be another ten years before the Saud-Wahhab alliance consolidated their rule in Riyadh, which would henceforth become the capital of the new kingdom. By this time, more than 5000 people had been killed by a war that had been skillfully portrayed as a climatic showdown between muwahhidun and mushrikun. Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab’s adopted clan had gone beyond his wildest dreams, grabbing sizable territory, property and goods, and implementing teachings he had first tried, unsuccessfully, to impose on his birthplace. Ummah arabiyya, so to speak, stood on the brink of a glorious future.

Meanwhile, the rest of the Muslim world watched and waited as the crumbling Ottoman empire collected its still-considerable resources to deal with what they deemed was a rebellion to their rule. Muslim scholars who had not been subjugated continued to criticize and refute Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab. They saw in him a re-awakening of the ancient cult of the Kharijites, and based their opinion on an authentic hadith that said:

“They recite the Quran and consider it in their favor but it is against them.
They transpose the Quranic verses meant to refer to unbelievers and make them refer to believers.
What I fear most in my ummah is a man who interprets verses out of context.
They will pass through Islam as an arrow passed through its quarry.”

By 1787, Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab felt confident enough to declare himself the leader of a worldwide ummah. This was his most direct challenge to the Ottoman Empire. In 1791, the Saud clan seemed poised to overwhelm Mecca and Medina when Abdul Aziz routed Meccan loyalists, Shammar and Mutair, and true to his family tradition made off with 100,000 sheep and goats and thousands of camels. The battle for Islam’s two holiest cities was gaining momentum.

Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab did not live to see his adopted clan overcome Mecca and Medina. In 1792, he died, almost a decade shy of being a centenarian. His acumen for survival had made possible the dawn of a new age in which the Saud clan would attain to power and begin the arduous task of finishing, this time in a global scale, what they had started out to do with the Bedouin. Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab dedicated almost his entire adult life to imposing, not unity, which he saw as dangerous and unstable, but uniformity.

Unbeknownst to the Saud-Wahhab alliance, the Ottomans would send one of her most gifted generals, Muhammad Ali Pasha, into the Arabian Desert. There, he would break the rebellion and bring the Saudi clan to heel. But this lay in the future, beyond the lifetime of Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab.



Wahabism? What’s that?



So what does the Wahhabi teaching consist of? It is impossible to answer this question without an excursus into religious history. Moreover, because the Wahhabi expansion is at the same time well-protected and controversial, with explanations ranging from statements that there is no Wahhabism at all to claims that Wahhabism is merely true Islam.



What Is Wahhabism?

The word Wahhabism most often denotes religious and political extremism related to Islam. In its narrowest and most precise sense Wahhabism is a teaching that was formulated in the 18th century by Arabic religious “reformer” Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab. This teaching later became and still remains an official ideology of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Wahhabis are either supporters of the ideas, constituting the teaching of Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab,.



Why Do Wahhabis Not Want to Be Called Wahhabis?

And yet, followers of Wahhabi principles abstain from relating the word Wahhabism to the religious teaching of Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab, as well as to the official doctrine of the modern Saudi Arabia and to the ideology of movements and groups that accept and disseminate Wahhabi ideas and implement Wahhabi principles throughout the world.



The main reason why Wahhabis don't want to be called Wahhabis is that otherwise they would implicitly acknowledge the accusations that many Muslims bring against them. These are claims that Wahhabis are Islamic heretics (mubtadi'ah), or people who follow a specific religious teaching that was developed by a particular man (Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab) at a particular time (18th century), a teaching that hadn't existed before in this form. The Arabic word heresy (bid'ah) is derived from bada'ah (to introduce something new) and means a condemned and rejected innovation.



That's why Wahhabis don't call themselves Wahhabis but rather refer to themselves as just Muslims (Muslimun), monotheists (Mowahhidoon) or Salafi, "followers of the pious forefathers" (Salafiyyun).



Is It Admissible in Islamic tradition to Call Wahhabis Wahhabis?

According to Islamic tradition, particular branches of Islam that existed in the past or exist at present (schools of jurisprudence, branches of theological thought, Sufi Tariqat orders, sects, etc.) can be named after their founders, regardless of what theological, religious and juridical views those branches convey. There are numerous examples. The eponym of the Hanbali school of jurisprudence is Ahmad ibn Hanbal; of the Qadiri Sufi Tariqat, Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani; of the Asharis theological school, Abu'l-Hasan al-Ashari, etc. So there is nothing disparaging or depreciating in the word Wahhabi itself.



Members of the Saudi clergy also call followers of Ibn Abd al-Wahhab, including themselves, Wahhabis (Wahhabiyyun). When asked if it is admissible to refer to past and present followers of Ibn Abd al-Wahhab as Wahhabis, Saudi Arabia's Religious Affairs Minister Abdallah at-Turki said, "It is really a great honor for Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and its ulama, when one who acts according to the Scripture and Sunnah and exhorts to [follow] them is characterized as one who follows the practice and path that Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab kept and called to and that imams of the House of Saud upheld" (Al-Muslimun, November 7, 1997).

However ornate the language is, one can see that it is admissible to call Wahhabis as Wahhabis. Or consider a fatwa of the late Saudi mufti Sheikh Abd al-Aziz bin Baz, who didn't hesitate to use the word Wahhabis: "Wahhabis are not heretics; they are those who follow the path of the pious forefathers" (Al-Muslimun, January 17, 1997). Note that this fatwa is the mufti's answer to the claims of Muslims that Wahhabis disseminate condemned innovations, i.e. heretic views.



Wahhabism as Wahhabis See It


So much has been written about Wahhabis and so much controversial material exists that it's high time to come to know how Wahhabis themselves understand Wahhabi teaching, considering that they continually strive to propagate their ideas among readers. It is worth noting that the Wahhabi books published are among the millions that have been distributed in Arabic countries, the Middle East, Southeast Asia, South Europe, Western Europe, Latin America, North America, including the Russia and The United States.

Let us consider a number of Wahhabi texts, including the books and booklets in Sri Lanka distributed on the territory of Sri Lanka and among Sri Lankans in Saudi Arabia (for example, during the hajj) by Saudi authorities and public institutions. This will help us, first, to find out how these sources set out Wahhabi teaching and, second, to check on the accuracy of the widespread explanation of Wahhabi ideas.

Wahhabism is the result of the selection and adaptation of the Quran and Sunni postulates to Wahhabi views and ideas. Here is what a Wahhabi author writes about a typically Wahhabi approach to the Quran and the Sunnah. "In this book I gave answers to all questions relating to postulates of Islam and, as far as it was possible (!), backed my answers with quotations from the Quran and the authentic Hadith to convince readers of the truth of my words." (Muhammad ibn Jamil Zinu. Islamic Akida - Belief, Conviction, Outlook - as Stated in the Holy Quran and the Authentic Sunnah. Moscow: Badr, 1998, p.4).

In fact, the great majority of works written by Wahhabi authors are based on the following principle. A postulate is stated followed by a quotation from the Quran or the Sunnah that proves the postulate. If the authors cannot find an appropriate quotation, they do without citing the Quran or the Sunnah.



Although this method produces the illusion that the stated postulates agree with the Quran and the Sunnah, it violates the traditional Islamic belief that the Quran and the Sunnah are recorded divine revelation. The goal of Islamic ulama (learned people) is to understand what Allah chose to impart upon people in the Quran and the Sunnah, given to the divine envoy Muhammad - and not to use quotations from the Holy Scripture as a confirmation of their own ideas. Moreover, even when quotations from the Quran or the Sunnah are used, the meaning of Wahhabi postulates often partially or completely diverges from what the quotations really imply.

The postulates of the Quran and Sunnah that don't agree with the ideas given in Wahhabi literature are just ignored as if they don't exist. As a result, Wahhabi teaching attributes great importance to the concept of infidelity, Jews and Christians being reckoned among the infidels (more about this later). But none of the translations of Wahhabi texts that ground the infidelity of Jews and Christians include the following quotation from the Quran: "Verily! Those who believe and those who are Jews and Christians, and Sabians, whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day and do righteous good deeds shall have their reward with their Lord, on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve" (The Quran, 2:62).



Here is one more example. Wahhabi teaching attributes great significance to jihad. No attention, however, is paid to the words of the Prophet about the greater and the lesser jihad. On return from the battle of Badr (year 624), in which Muslims defeated polytheists, Muhammad said, "We are finished with the lesser jihad; now we are starting the greater jihad." But these words are traditionally interpreted in Islam as follows: armed fight is the lesser jihad, whereas peaceful, constructive labor is the main, greater jihad.



Thus, Wahhabism is the result of the selection of a few applicable Islamic postulates. One who has set to analyze and evaluate this doctrine should, on the one hand, not regard the Islamic postulates not included in Wahhabi literature as Wahhabi, and on the other hand, keep oneself from referring to the ideas that are conveyed in Wahhabi texts as truly Islamic. For "Infidels" Are proclaiming strict monotheism, Wahhabis use the absolute meaning of the concepts of infidelity (Arab. kufr) and polytheism (Arab. shirk). This is the main postulate of Wahabism, and the followers of this teaching call themselves accordingly - monotheists. In the history of Islam as a monotheistic religion, within the framework of jurisprudence (fiqh), theology (kalam), philosophy (falsafah) and theoretical Sufism (tasawwuf), there developed a maximally complete and adequate understanding of the idea of monotheism, as it is described in the Quran and Sunnah. Wahabis, however, deny the possibility of theological and philosophical interpretation of the texts of the Quran and Sunnah. They define the idea of monotheism from the contrary, by defining what monotheism is not!. Consider, for example, the main Wahhabi book, The Book of Monotheism by Ibn Abd al-Wahhab, as well as contemporary Wahhabi writings (see S.W.Fawzan. The Book of Monotheism, Makhachkala, Badr, 1997; M.A.Bashamil. What We Understand by Monotheism, Makhachkala, Badr, 1997). Eight to nine tenths of these books deal with what polytheism is and what infidelity as a denial of monotheism or deviation from it is. So what, in the opinion of Wahhabis, is polytheism and infidelity, and who are polytheists and infidels?



Jews and Christians are regarded as infidels in Wahhabi literature (see Programs of Studying Sharia Sciences. A joint edition of the Saudi Arabia's Ministry for Islamic Affairs, Waqfs, Levy and Orientation, and the Russian Ibrahim Al-Ibrahim fund. Moscow, 1999. Section Hadiths and Terms). Ibn Abd al-Wahhab confirms this postulate in his Book of Monotheism by selected sayings of the prophet Muhammad: "When one of their (Jews & Christians') Righteous men or righteous slaves of Allah dies, they build a temple on his grave and draw his images inside it. These (i.e. Jews & Christians.) are the worst of Allah's creatures!"



"May Allah damn Jews and Christians, who turned the graves of their prophets into temples!" (Ibn Abd al-Wahhab. The Book of Monotheism). The infidelity and polytheism of Jews and Christians is the commonplace of Wahhabi writings. Jews and Christians are polytheists because they "chose the graves of their prophets to say their prayers on them" (Programs of Studying Sharia Sciences. Section Foundations of the Islamic Teaching). People who build temples on the graves of their holy men and decorate them with icons "are reckoned among the worst creatures in the face of Allah" (Programs of Studying Sharia Sciences. Section Hadiths and Terms).



Infidels are also the Muslims who, in the opinion of Wahhabis, deviated from “Wahabi understanding of” monotheism ("apostasy"). Actually, the whole Book of Monotheism by Ibn Abd al-Wahhab is devoted to such deviations. Among these are glorification of the righteous, worship of Allah at the graves of the righteous (wali), worship of deceased righteous men, worship of idols; sorcery, astrology and any kind of prediction, wearing of amulets or any other things that are believed to protect from harm, worship of monuments and statues, glorification of a certain person, and many other deeds and actions (see also: S.W.Fawsan, The Book of Monotheism; M.A.Bashamil, What We Understand by Monotheism). Infidels are also the Muslims who "introduce any innovations in religion" (Programs of Studying Sharia Sciences. Section Hadiths and Terms). Particularly, Sufis are rated among such infidels.



It is a trait inherent in Wahhabism to regard as infidels the Muslims who deviate from monotheism. Although they could never prove and claim with evidence that any Muslims deviated from  monotheism. According to Islamic tradition, the believer who performs what is considered infidelity by Wahhabis (like wearing an amulet, laying flowers to a monument, performing a ziyarat to the grave of the righteous-wali) remains a believer if this action is not a deviation from the symbol of Islamic faith - "There is no God but Allah; Muhammad is his messenger". Wahhabis, however, say that any deviation from their view of monotheism turns a Muslim into an infidel. Thus, he becomes an apostate, and the punishment for apostasy in Islam is death. So they pass Fatwa’s and kill Muslims!



Wahhabis assert that neither pronouncing the formula "There is no God but Allah; Muhammad is his messenger", which, in Islam, signifies conversion into a Muslim, nor strict adherence to postulates of Islam can guarantee that a Muslim who deviated from (wahabi type)monotheism by act of "infidelity" will remain a Muslim (see Ibn Abd al-Wahhab. The Book of Monotheism). Moreover, Wahhabis declare that a Muslim ceases to be a Muslim if he deviates from (wahabi type)monotheism even in the least degree. In this case, his life and property are no longer immune; therefore he may be killed and deprived of his property. "Pronouncement alone does not ensure immunity of life and property, nor does the understanding of the meaning of the evidence ("There is no God but Allah; Muhammad is his messenger." - A.I.), nor the pronouncing and acknowledgement of it, nor appealing in namazes (prayers. - A.I.) to the one and only Allah, who has no companions. The property and life of a man are immune only when everything mentioned above is complemented by a complete rejection of all objects of worship except Allah (by the way, No Muslim ever worships anything besides Almighty Allah, it is only a baseless unproven allegation of Wahabis). Any doubt or hesitation deprives a man of immunity of his property and his life" (Ibn Abd al-Wahhab. The Book of Monotheism).

The so-called "hypocrites" constitute a separate group of infidels. A hypocrite is a Muslim who "demonstrates adherence to Islam and conceals his infidelity" (Programs of Studying Sharia Sciences. Section Foundations of the Islamic Teaching). In other words, Wahhabis can proclaim any Muslim a hypocrite and infidel. "…The one who deviates (from their form of monotheism, as understood by Wahhabis), openly or secretly, must know that he becomes an infidel and expect a possibility of being killed or confined." (Ben Baz. The Necessity of Obeying the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah and Declaring Those Who Repudiate It Infidels. Riyadh, Waquf Ministry's General Print Board, 2000).

Wahhabis also regard as infidels followers of all ideological movements without exception. Thus, "adherence to atheistic movements, such as communism, secularism, democracy, capitalism and other such movements of infidels is an apostasy from the Islamic religion (S.W.Fawsan. The Book of Monotheism). The list of these ideological movements also includes "Marxist socialism and atheistic masonry" (Zinu. Islamic Akida). Communism is, obviously, an infidelity as well. Naturally, no exception was made for "Judaism, which stands behind everyone and every destructive doctrine subversive of morality and spiritual values", to which also belong "masonry, world Zionism and babuism". I have no wish to guess what the last word ("babuism") means.

According to Wahhabis, infidelity is also implementation of any formula of socio-political organization that is not based completely and exceptionally on the Sharia, or Islamic rule, as Wahhabis understand it. Infidelity is "the ruling and judging not in accord with what Allah sent down" (S.W.Fawsan, The Book of Monotheism). Wahhabis regard any legislative human activity as infidelity. Infidelity is "any pretense on the right to ordain laws, to allow and to forbid." Wahhabis call infidel everyone who is involved in the system of social relations, providing for delegation of authority and redistribution of public resources, including exchange of values and services. A polytheist and infidel is also one "who makes appeals to a prophet, king, ruler or anyone else, or asks someone, besides Allah, for help…" (Ibn Abd al-Wahhab. The Book of Monotheism).

Predestined Salvation (The "Saved Group")

Wahhabis claim the Wahhabi movement to be totally impeccable where questions of monotheism are concerned, and usurp the right to judge and penalize "infidels", "polytheists" and "hypocrites." But one thing Wahhabis usually avoid discussing is who or what gave them the right, which in Islam belongs to God and no one else, to take a final judgment on whether a man is a true monotheist (especially in the cases of the so-called "concealed" or "secret" infidelity, i.e. "hypocrisy"), and enforce the penalty for infidelity (including death)? Nobody and nothing in Islam could give them such right.

Wahhabis, however, can't ignore this problem, as their Muslim adversaries always remind them of it. They try to solve this problem in three ways.

First, they allege that they follow true monotheism. They also call themselves Salafi, i.e. those who follow what the Prophet and the first three generations of Muslims followed. Apart from that, they call themselves the "saved group" - this is how one of the Prophet's Hadiths calls the group that will evade the infernal flame on Judgement Day (Zinu. Islamic Akida).

Secondly, to prove this, Wahhabis search out further evidence of their selectness. They claim that the "saved group" "presents a minority" in the umma - community of Muslims (Zinu. Islamic Akida). By the way, this statement proves the minority status of Wahhabis and the sectarian character of their movement.

Wahhabis claim the ethnic character of their movement as another supporting piece of evidence. And they specify what group comprises the true monotheists. In their opinion, these are Arabs. "Arabs are missionaries of Islam… Having brought Islam into life, they will become the best ones on Earth" (Zinu. Islamic Akida). This idea is not backed with a quotation from the Quran or Sunnah; Wahhabis wouldn't be able to do it. From the very beginning Islam was a supranational religion, denying supremacy of one national group over the other. Besides Arabs, initially among the "missionaries of Islam" were also Ethiopians, Persians, Jews, Berbers…

But it is important for Wahhabis to claim it in order to characterize more precisely the group that knows, even before Judgment Day, that it is the "saved" one. Wahhabis describe their own movement as Arabic.



Hate as a Religious Requirement

According to Wahhabis, only complete obedience to the Wahhabi group and active hostility (including killing) towards everyone who doesn't belong to it can prove the man to be a monotheist.

How can the man protect himself from being proclaimed an infidel and thus avoid punishment for his infidelity? There is only one way - he must reject every kind of infidelity and polytheism (see above) and, after repenting his infidelity, adhere to monotheism as Wahhabis understand it. But this cannot spare this man of accusations of hesitation, doubt and hypocrisy, i.e. concealed infidelity, so he can be subjected to takfir, which deprives his life and property of immunity, and be punished (maybe even killed).

If the man is a Muslim in the first place, the decisive argument for his faithfulness to Allah, or the condition by which he can avoid being proclaimed an infidel, is his loyalty to Wahhabis and hostility to every non-Wahhabi. "The only way it can be achieved is by love to those who practice tauhid of Allah (i.e. to monotheists; this is how Wahhabis call themselves. - A.I.), devotion to them, rendering them every kind of help, as well as by hate and hostility to infidels and mushriks (polytheists. - A.I.)". (Ibn Abd al-Wahhab, The Book of Monotheism.)

What marks a member of Wahhabi group is a number of characteristics: particular appearance (men, for example, shave mustaches and don't shave beards) and particular clothes (short trousers, cut up the ankle, etc.). Remarkably enough, even here Wahhabis act from the contrary, implementing the principle of "inadmissibility of the imitation of infidels" (Programs of Studying Sharia Sciences. Section Hadiths and Terms).

But the most important characteristic is that the Muslim who adopts Wahhabism must confirm his monotheism by "hate and hostility." The true monotheist, according to Wahhabis, must hate all those whom Wahhabis regard as infidels, polytheists, and hypocrites. Hate, however, is an emotion that is not easy to control. Wahhabis pay special attention to visible behavior of the man. Visible manifestation of hate is what can preserve the Muslim from accusations in infidelity; otherwise his life and property are deprived of immunity. This hate must be always openly manifested as hostility to infidels. In order to be a Muslim, the man must "be hostile to polytheists and infidels. There are so many Muslims who are pure and free from paganism (polytheism) but are not hostile to pagans (polytheists)! In this case the man can't be a Muslim… Every true Muslim must be hostile to pagans and hate them". It is forbidden to have any positive attitude to infidels and do them any good. "Friendliness to infidels and rendering them help are not allowed."

The main Wahhabi punishment for infidelity is death. If the man doesn't obey the Sharia, as understood by Wahhabis, he becomes an infidel. According to Wahhabis, "The Most High said, "The one who let it be like this is an infidel, who should be killed," if he doesn't get back to the Law of Allah and His Messenger" (M.A.-L. Ibrahim. Instituting the Laws of Allah. Makhachkala, Badr, 1997). The killing of infidels according to Wahhabi doctrine must be systematic and orderly, in the form of jihad against infidels.

Armed Struggle Is the Main Form of Jihad as Understood by Wahhabis

According to Wahhabis, jihad as an armed struggle is required for the purpose of spreading their teaching. Jihad is a war against infidels, polytheists and hypocrites. Wahhabis specify various kinds of jihad. Here is an example: "There are four kinds of jihad. 1. Jihad against shaitan. 2. Jihad against the soul. 3. Jihad against infidels. 4. Jihad against hypocrites". However, Wahhabi books that were translated don't specify "jihad against shaitan" and jihad against the soul". All Wahhabi postulates concerning jihad relate to jihad against infidels, polytheists and hypocrites, or rather against those whom Wahhabis call so.

Jihad is defined as an "armed struggle from the position of Islam" (Programs of Studying Sharia Sciences. Section Life of the Prophet), "an armed way of defending the interests of Allah" (Bin Baaz. The Necessity of Obeying the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah…). Since Wahhabis understand jihad as an armed struggle, it becomes clear why their texts lack postulates concerning, for example, "jihad against the soul" (that is, moral self-improvement). Arguments for an "armed struggle" of the man against his own vices would look strange.

For Wahhabis, jihad is obligatory. "Jihad is the ultimate manifestation of Islam, as the Messenger said (the words attributed to the Prophet Muhammad are not cited, however. - A.I.). It is a furnace in which Muslims are melted out and which allows the separation of the bad [Muslim] from the good one. It is also a pass to the Eden," and "the Eden is in the shade of swords" (Programs of Studying Sharia Sciences. Section Life of the Prophet). It would be appropriate to note (however obvious it is) that an "armed struggle" means the use of arms with the purpose to kill the enemy. "Muslims come victorious out of an armed struggle in both cases, whether they killed or were killed."

The aims of jihad as an armed struggle are the following (the order of the items varies in Wahhabi literature). Firstly, the aim of jihad is to lead an armed struggle against everyone who hinders the spreading of Wahhabi teaching and its exclusive predominance. "1. An armed struggle for the sake of raising the word of Allah above everything and devoting the whole religion to Allah only" (Programs of Studying Sharia Sciences. Section Life of the Prophet). Or, in other words, "2. Removal of all obstacles to the spreading of the call to Allah. 3. Protection of religious doctrines and Islamic akida of any threats overhanging them" (Zinu. Islamic Akida).

Secondly, the aim of Wahhabi jihad, understood as an armed struggle, is a fight against all infidels, polytheists and hypocrites: "1. A struggle against paganism and pagans, as Allah strictly forbids attaching anyone else to Him" (Zinu. Islamic Akida). "5. An armed struggle against hypocrites" (Programs of Studying Sharia Sciences. Section Life of the Prophet). Infidels, however, can escape killing if they adopt Islam and recognize the authority of Wahhabis. "When the leader of Muslims meets infidels, he urges them to adopt Islam. If they refuse, they must pay capitation, otherwise an armed struggle follows" (Programs of Studying Sharia Sciences. Section Life of the Prophet). But, strictly speaking, this will not save them from death. Wahhabis can accuse these people of hypocrisy at any moment.

And finally, the third aim of jihad as an armed struggle is: "4. Protection of Muslims and their native land" (Zinu. Islamic Akida). The important point is that Wahhabis call to arms to protect Islam, Muslims and their native land against the potential enemy as well, i.e. against those whose intents can be regarded as hostile. "2. Armed struggle against the enemy, fighting or intending to fight with Muslims" (Programs of Studying Sharia Sciences. Section Life of the Prophet).

If Wahhabism had remained inside Saudi Arabia, I think there would be no serious problems. But in the early 1970's, Wahhabis began deliberately and actively spreading their principles outside the peninsula. Meanwhile, the United States, while trying to find a counterbalance to the Soviet Union and communism in the countries of Near and Middle East during the Cold War, actively encouraged Wahhabi pervasion into different countries. Over a period of three decades, Wahhabism spread in three directions:

70's - early 80's - Arabic countries (Egypt, Syria, Algeria and other regions of the Middle East).

80's - Afghanistan.

90's - the territory of the former Soviet Union (Russia, Central Asia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, etc.), South East Asia (including Sri Lanka), Western Europe, both Americas, Australia, Africa.

Wahhabism first began to manifest as an ideology among antigovernment extremist groups in Arabic countries during the 70's and 80's. Thus, Islamic extremism in the form of terrorist groups and illegal armed formations in Egypt, Algeria and other Arabic countries took form as a result of Wahhabi pervasion into the Muslim environment of these states.

The logic of Wahhabi takfir and jihad fully manifested itself in Algeria (however complex and contradictory were the events of the civil war, which claimed 100 thousand lives and ultimately destroyed the society and the state). According to the fundamentalist ideas of Algerian Wahhabi groups, all rulers who deviated from Islam were subject to death, as were all those who executed their rulers' orders. Nor did Wahhabi doctrine spare those who merely made no resistance to such rulers, nor those who did not agree with Wahhabis. Naturally, they didn't call themselves Wahhabis, but instead rather referred to themselves as Salafi Jamath.

Ultimately, a complex network of Wahhabi groups, outposts, footholds, training camps, educational institutions and coordinating centers had been created worldwide. There is hardly a country in the world today that is not a host (whether it knows this or not) to one of this network's cells - consider Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Great Britain, Algeria, Germany, Nigeria, Switzerland, the United States, Palestine, Uruguay, the Philippines...

Wahhabism also became the main ideology of the Arabic task groups during the war in Afghanistan, in which they fought not only against the Soviet "infidels" but also against Afghan Muslims, who were proclaimed "infidels" as well. Today, Wahhabism is also rampant among the so-called "Afghans of the second generation" - extremists of various nationalities currently being trained in Wahhabi camps on the territory of Afghanistan controlled by the Taliban, an ally of the Wahhabi movement. The new "Arabic Afghans" have spread around the world.

In the 90's Wahhabis launched a series of attacks against Russia, a nation that, the Wahhabis felt, kept Chechnya from becoming an Islamic state. The most dramatic manifestation of armed Wahhabi aggression was the invasion of Dagestan by Chechen and Arabic Wahhabis from the territory of Chechnya in 1999. Prior to this, they had invaded Chechnya - officially Russian territory - and committed a massacre in the Yarysh-Mardy ravine in April 1995. Before this, there were also fights between the newly converted Dagestan Wahhabis and traditionalist Muslims in Chabanmakhi (May 1997).

The spreading of Wahhabism, judging from the experience of its 30-year worldwide expansion, has always had negative results, as far as social stability and national security are concerned. These results include:

- split in the Muslim society of the affected country;

- conversion of a part of the nation's Muslim society (however small it might be) into an active anti-social or anti-government group or groups;

- spreading of the ideology of national intolerance and hostility, discrimination and segregation in the areas where Wahhabism has managed to take footing;

- theoretical justification of violence, extremism and terrorism in respect to those who are proclaimed "infidels;"

- active armed struggle or performance of terrorist acts against "infidels."

According to judicial inquiry and court proceedings, 1999's acts of terrorism in Moscow (where a block of residential buildings exploded), Buinaksk and Volgodonsk were performed by Wahhabi extremist groups. While in Chechnya Wahhabis kill imams, sheikhs and any Muslims who don't accept Wahhabism, many Russian towns were also swept by a wave of Wahhabi terror. Behind every act of violence, every incident in which weapons are involved, and every terrorist act, there are particular purposes and motives. It is the Wahhabi preaching of jihad, understood as obligatory armed fighting against "infidels," whom Wahhabis call "the worst of Allah's creatures" and whom "Allah hates," that has lifted the common Islamic ban on killing innocents.

Western civilization hasn't fully understood what has happened. The historic challenge that humankind has had to face in the last quarter of the previous century was interpreted as a clash of civilizations. From the point view of liberal humanism, the enemy was regarded as an equal (a civilization was thought to come into collision with another civilization). Moreover, Wahhabi teaching and Wahhabi ways were incorrectly interpreted as a manifestation of Islam by westerns with vested interests and crusaders justifying their invasions.

But to put it realistically, world civilization (including its important Islamic constituent) has collided with barbarity. It has clashed with a new totalitarianism, which is trying to bring down all humankind - whether in Kabul and Grozny, New York and Moscow, Jerusalem and Djakarta, Algiers and Paris, Beruwala and Eastern province, Mumbai and Chennai, Jakarta and Sumatra, Kuala Lumpur and Penang, Southern Thailand, Western China, Somalia, etc,etc. - and rule over people in accordance with the principles developed to suit only the aims of the 18th-century Arabic tribal aristocracy.

Hadith on the present Fitna

from

THE DOCTRINE OF AHL AL-SUNNA VERSUS THE "SALAFI" MOVEMENT

{ And say: Truth has come and falsehood has vanished away. Lo! falsehood is ever bound to vanish. } (17:81)

These ahadith are cited in the Six Books of authentic traditions for the most part. They have been collated for the most part from the following two books written in refutation of the Wahhabi heresy: a) al-Sayyid al-`Alawi ibn Ahmad ibn Hasan ibn `Abd Allah ibn `Alawi al-Haddad: Misbah al-anam wa jala' al-zalam fi radd shubah al-bid`i al-Najdi al-lati adalla biha al- `awamm ["The Lamp of Creatures and the Illumination of Darkness Concerning the Refutation of the Errors of the Innovator From Najd by Which He Had Misled the Common People"] published 1325H.
b) al-Sayyid Ahmad ibn Zayni al-Dahlan (d. 1304/1886). Mufti of Mecca and Shaykh al-Islam in the Hijaz region of the Ottoman state: Khulasat al-kalam fi bayan umara' al-balad al-haram ["The Summation Concerning the Leaders of the Holy Sanctuary"] (A History of the Wahhabi Fitna in Najd and the Hijaz) p. 234-236.
The Prophet said, Peace be upon him:

1. "They [Khawarij = those outside] transferred the Qur'anic verses meant to refer to unbelievers and made them refer to believers."

2. "What I most fear in my community is a man who interprets verses of the Qur'an out of context."

3. "The confusion [fitna] comes from there (and he pointed to the East = Najd in present-day Eastern Saudi Arabia)."

4. "A people that recite Qur'an will come out of the East, but it will not go past their throats. They will pass through the religion (of Islam) like the arrow passes through its quarry. They will no more come back to the religion than the arrow will come back to its course. Their sign is that they shave (their heads)."

5. "There will be in my Community a dissent and a faction, a people with excellent words and vile deeds. They will read Qur'an, but their faith does not go past their throats. They will pass through religion the way an arrow passes through its quarry. They will no more come back to the religion than the arrow will come back to its original course. They are the worst of human beings and the worst of all creation. The one who kills them or is killed by them is blessed. They summon to the book of Allah but they have nothing to do with it. Whoever kills them is closer to Allah than they. Their sign is that they shave (their heads)."

6. "A people will come out at the end of times, immature, foolish and corrupt. They will hold the discourse of the best of creation and recite Qur'an, but it will not go past their throats. They will pass through religion the way an arrow passes through its quarry. If you find them, kill them, for verily whoever kills them will have his reward from Allah the Day of Judgment."

7. "There will be people in my Community whose mark is that they shave (their heads). They will recite Qur'an, but it will not go past their throats. They will pass through religion the way an arrow passes through its target. They are the worst of human beings and the worst of all creation."

8. "The apex of disbelief is towards the East [Najd]. Pride and arrogance is found among the people of the horse and the camel [Bedouin Arabs]."

9. "Harshness and dryness of heart are in the East [Najd], and true belief is among the people of Hijaz."

10. "O Allah, bless our Syria and our Yemen!" They said: "Ya Rasulallah, and our Najd!" He didn't reply. He blessed Syria and Yemen twice more. They asked him to bless Najd twice more but he didn't reply. The third time he said: "There [in Najd] are the earthquakes and the dissensions, and through it will dawn the epoch [or horn] of shaytan."

11. A version has, "The two epochs [or horns] of shaytan." Some scholars have said that the dual referred to Musaylima the Arch-liar and to Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Wahhab.

12. Some versions continue with the words: "And in it [Najd] is the consuming disease," i.e. death.

13. Some books of history mention the following version in the chapters devoted to the battles against the Banu Hanifa:

"At the end of times a man will come out of Musaylima's country and he will change the religion of Islam." Note: Most of the Khawarij were from the Najd area, from the tribes of Banu Hanifa, Banu Tamim, and Wa'il. Musaylima was from the Banu Hanifa, and Ibn `Abd al-Wahhab is from Tamim.

13a. Abu Bakr said concerning the Banu Hanifa (the tribe of Musaylima the Liar): "Their valley [Najd] will not cease to be a valley of dissensions until the end of time, and the religion will never recover from their liars until Judgment Day," and in another version: "Woe to al-Yamama without end."

13b. When `Ali killed the Khawarij, someone said: "Praise be to Allah Who has brought them down and relieved us from them." Ali replied: "Verily, by the One in Whose hand is my soul, some of them are still in the loins of men and they have not been born yet, and the last of them will fight on the side of the Antichrist."

14. "A people that recite the Qur'an will come out of the East, but it will not go past their throats. Every time a generation of them is cut down another one will come until the last one finds itself on the side of the Antichrist."

15. "There will be a huge confusion within my Community. There will not remain one house of the Arabs except that confusion will enter it. Those who die because of it are in the fire. The harm of the tongue in it will be greater than that of the sword."

16. "There will be a dissension (in which people will be) deaf, dumb and blind (this means they will be blind and not see the true issue nor listen to the voice of truth): whoever tries to control it, the dissension will control him."

17. "A shaytan will appear in Najd by whose dissension the Arabian island will quake."

18. On the authority of al-`Abbas: "A man will come out of the Wadi Abu Hanifah [in Najd] (whose appearance is) like a bull that lunges against its yoke. There will be much slaughter and killing in his time. They will make the possessions of Muslims lawful for themselves and for trade among themselves. They will make the lives of Muslims lawful for themselves and for boasting among themselves. In that confusion the despised and the lowly will attain positions of power. Their idle desires will keep company with them the way a dog keeps company with its master."

19. On the authority of Abu Sa`id al-Khudri: "Verily in the wake of this time of mine comes a people who will recite Qur'an but it will not go past their throats. They will pass through religion the way an arrow passes through its quarry. They will kill the Muslims and leave the idolaters alone. If I saw them, verily I would kill them the way the tribe of `Aad was killed [i.e. all of them]."

20. "There will be towards the end of time a people who will say to you what neither you nor your forebears ever heard before. Beware of them lest they misguide you and bring you confusion."

21. "They will pass through Islam like an arrow passes through its quarry. Wherever you meet them, kill them!"

22. "They are the dogs of the people of Hell."

23. "They recite Qur'an and consider it in their favor but it is against them."

24. "There will be thirty dajjals (antichrists) after me, all claiming prophethood."

25. "Some people will be standing and calling at the gates of hell; whoever responds to their call, their will throw him into the Fire. They will be from our own people [i.e. Arabs] and will speak our language [Arabic]. Should you live to see them, stick to the main body (jama`a) of the Muslims and their leader. (If there is no main body and no leader,) isolate yourself from all these sects, even if you have to eat from the roots of trees until death overcomes you while you are in that state."

26. "Just before the Hour there will be many liars." Jabir ibn Samurah said: "Be on your guard against them."

27. "The Hour will not come until thirty dajjals appear, all of them lying about Allah and His Messenger."

28. "There will be Dajjals and liars among my Community. They will tell you something new, which neither you nor your forefathers have heard. Be on your guard against them and do not let them lead you astray."

29. "The time of the Dajjal will be years of confusion. People will believe a liar, and disbelieve one who tells the truth. People will distrust one who is trustworthy, and trust one who is treacherous; and the ruwaybidha will have a say." Someone asked: "Who are they?" He said: "Those who rebel against Allah and will have a say in general affairs."

30. "If the leadership is entrusted to those unfit for it, expect the Hour."

31. "You will see the barefoot ones, the naked, the destitute, the shepherds and camelherds take pride in building tall structures in abundance."

32. "One of the signs of the change of religion is the affectation of eloquence by the rabble and their betaking to palaces in big cities."

www.livingislam.org

AL-ALBANI Concise Guide to the Chief Innovator of Our Time

by Sh. G F Haddad

Nasir al-Albani is the arch-innovator of the Wahhabis and "Salafis" in our time. A watch repairman by trade, al-Albani is a self-taught claimant to hadith scholarship who has no known teacher in any of the Islamic sciences and has admitted not to have memorized the Book of Allah nor any book of hadith, fiqh, `aqîda, usûl, or grammar. He achieved fame by attacking the great scholars of Ahl al-Sunna and reviling the science of fiqh with especial malice towards the school of his father who was a Hanafi jurist. A rabid reviler of the Friends of Allah and the Sufis, he was expelled from Syria then Saudi Arabia and lived in Amman, Jordan under house arrest until his death in 1999. He remains the qibla of the people of Innovation, self-styled re-formers of Islam, and other "Salafi" and Wahhabi sympathizers, and the preferred author of book merchants and many uneducated Muslims. Most of the contemporary Sunni scholars warned of his heresy and many of them wrote articles or full-length works against him such as:

- The Indian hadith scholar Habib al-Rahman al-A`zami who wrote al-Albani Shudhudhuh wa Akhta'uh ("Al-Albani's Aberrations and Errors") in four volumes.


- The Syrian scholar Muhammad Sa`id Ramadan al-Buti who wrote the two classics al-Lamadhhabiyya Akhtaru Bid`atin Tuhaddidu al-Shari`a al-Islamiyya ("Not Following A School of Jurisprudence is the Most Dangerous Innovation Threatening Islamic Sacred Law") and al-Salafiyya Marhalatun Zamaniyyatun Mubaraka La Madhhabun Islami ("The `Way of the Early Muslims' Was A Blessed Historical Epoch, Not An Islamic School of Thought")

- The Moroccan hadith scholar `Abd Allah ibn Muhammad ibn al-Siddiq al-Ghumari who wrote Irgham al-Mubtadi` al-Ghabi bi Jawaz al-Tawassul bi al-Nabi fi al-Radd `ala al-Albani al-Wabi ("The Coercion of the Unintelligent Innovator with the Licitness of Using the Prophet as an Intermediary in Refutation of al-Albani the Baneful"), al-Qawl al-Muqni` fi al-Radd `ala al-Albani al-Mubtadi` ("The Persuasive Discourse in Refutation of al-Albani the Innovator"), and Itqan al-Sun`a fi Tahqiq Ma`na al-Bid`a ("Precise Handiwork in Ascertaining the Meaning of Innovation").

- The Moroccan hadith scholar `Abd al-`Aziz ibn Muhammad ibn al-Siddiq al-Ghumari who wrote Bayan Nakth al-Nakith al-Mu`tadi ("The Exposition of the Treachery of the Rebel").

- The Syrian hadith scholar `Abd al-Fattah Abu Ghudda who wrote Radd `ala Abatil wa Iftira'at Nasir al-Albani wa Sahibihi Sabiqan Zuhayr al-Shawish wa Mu'azirihima ("Refutation of the Falsehoods and Fabrications of Nasir al-Albani and his Former Friend Zuhayr al-Shawish and their Supporters").

- The Egyptian Hadith scholar Muhammad `Awwama who wrote Adab al-Ikhtilaf ("The Proper Manners of Expressing Difference of Opinion").

- The Egyptian hadith scholar Mahmud Sa`id Mamduh who wrote Wusul al-Tahani bi Ithbat Sunniyyat al-Subha wa al-Radd `ala al-Albani ("The Alighting of Mutual Benefit and Confirmation that the Dhikr-Beads are a Sunna in Refutation of al-Albani") and Tanbih al-Muslim ila Ta`addi al-Albani `ala Sahih Muslim ("Warning to the Muslim Concerning al-Albani's Attack on Sahih Muslim").

- The Saudi hadith scholar Isma`il ibn Muhammad al-Ansar who wrote Ta`aqqubat `ala "Silsilat al-Ahadith al-Da`ifa wa al-Mawdu`a" li al-Albani ("Critique of al-Albani's Book on Weak and Forged Hadiths"), Tashih Salat al-Tarawih `Ishrina Rak`atan wa al-Radd `ala al-Albani fi Tad`ifih ("Establishing as Correct the Tarawih Salat in Twenty Rak`as and the Refutation of Its Weakening by al-Albani"), and Ibahat al-Tahalli bi al-Dhahab al-Muhallaq li al-Nisa' wa al-Radd `ala al-Albani fi Tahrimih ("The Licitness of Wearing Gold Jewelry for Women Contrary to al-Albani's Prohibition of it").

- The Syrian scholar Badr al-Din Hasan Diab who wrote Anwar al-Masabih `ala Zulumat al-Albani fi Salat al-Tarawih ("Illuminating the Darkness of al-Albani over the Tarawih Prayer").

- The Director of Religious Endowments in Dubai, `Isa ibn `Abd Allah ibn Mani` al-Himyari who wrote al-I`lam bi Istihbab Shadd al-Rihal li Ziyarati Qabri Khayr al-Anam ("The Notification Concerning the Recommendation of Travelling to Visit the Grave of the Best of Creation ) and al-Bid`a al-Hasana Aslun Min Usul al-Tashri` ("The Excellent Innovation Is One of the Sources of Islamic Legislation").

- The Minister of Islamic Affairs and Religious Endowments in the United Arab Emirates Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Khazraji who wrote the article al-Albani: Tatarrufatuh ("Al-Albani's Extremist Positions").

- The Syrian scholar Firas Muhammad Walid Ways in his edition of Ibn al-Mulaqqin's Sunniyyat al-Jumu`a al-Qabliyya ("The Sunna Prayers That Must Precede Salat al-Jumu`a").

- The Syrian scholar Samer Islambuli who wrote al-Ahad, al-Ijma`, al-Naskh.

- The Jordanian scholar As`ad Salim Tayyim who wrote Bayan Awham al-Albani fi Tahqiqihi li Kitab Fadl al-Salat `ala al-Nabi .

- The Jordanian scholar Hasan `Ali al-Saqqaf who wrote the two-volume Tanaqudat al-Albani al-Wadiha fi ma Waqa`a fi Tashih al-Ahadith wa Tad`ifiha min Akhta' wa Ghaltat ("Albani's Patent Self-Contradictions in the Mistakes and Blunders He Committed While Declaring Hadiths to be Sound or Weak"), Ihtijaj al-Kha'ib bi `Ibarat man Idda`a al-Ijma` fa Huwa Kadhib ("The Loser's Recourse to the Phrase: `Whoever Claims Consensus Is a Liar!'"), al-Qawl al-Thabtu fi Siyami Yawm al-Sabt ("The Firm Discourse Concerning Fasting on Saturdays"), al-Lajif al-Dhu`af li al-Mutala`ib bi Ahkam al-I`tikaf ("The Lethal Strike Against Him Who Toys with the Rulings of I`tikaf), Sahih Sifat Salat al-Nabi Sallallahu `alayhi wa Sallam ("The Correct Description of the Prophet's Prayer "), I`lam al-Kha'id bi Tahrim al-Qur'an `ala al-Junub wa al-Ha'id ("The Appraisal of the Meddler in the Interdiction of the Qur'an to those in a State of Major Defilement and Menstruating Women"), Talqih al-Fuhum al-`Aliya ("The Inculcation of Lofty Discernment"), and Sahih Sharh al-`Aqida al-Tahawiyya ("The Correct Explanation of al-Tahawi's Statement of Islamic Doctrine").

Among Albani's innovations in the Religion:

1- In his book Adab al-Zafaf he prohibits women from wearing gold jewelry - rings, bracelets, and chains - despite the Consensus of the Ulema permitting it.

2- He claims that 2.5% zakât is not due on money obtained from commerce, i.e. the main activity whereby money circulates among Muslims.

3- He absolutely prohibits fasting on Saturdays.

4- He prohibits retreat (i`tikaf) in any but the Three Mosques.

5- He claims that it is lawful to eat in Ramadan before Maghrib as defined by the Law, and similarly after the true dawn.

6- He compares Hanafi fiqh to the Gospel.1

7- He calls people to imitate him rather than the Imams of the Salaf such as the founders of the Four Schools, and his followers invalidate the hadiths that contradict his views.

8- He prohibits the make-up performance of prayers missed intentionally.

9- He claims that it is permissible for menstruating women and those in a state of major defilement (junub) to recite, touch, and carry the Qur'an.

10- He claims over and over that among the innovations in religion existent in Madina is the persistence of the Prophet's grave in the mosque.

11- He claims that whoever travels intending to visit the Prophet or to ask him for his intercession is a misguided innovator.

12- He claims that whoever carries dhikr-beads in his hand to remember Allah Most High is misguided and innovating.

13- He invented a location to Allah Most High above the Throne which he named al-makân al-`adamî - "the non-existent place."

14- He claims in Tamam al-Minna that masturbation does not annul one's fast.

15- He published "corrected" editions of the two Sahihs of al-Bukhari and Muslim, which he deceitfully called "Abridgments" (mukhtasar) in violation of the integrity of these motherbooks.

16- He published newly-styled editions of the Four Sunan, al-Bukhari's al-Adab al-Mufrad, al-Mundhiri's al-Targhib wa al-Tarhib, and al-Suyuti's al-Jami` al-Saghir, each of which he split into two works, respectively prefixed Sahih and Da`if in violation of the integrity of these motherbooks.

17- He said: "Many of those who interpret figuratively [the Divine Attributes] are not heretics (zanâdiqa), but they say what heretics say," and "figurative interpretation is the very same as nullification (al-ta'wîl `ayn al-ta`tîl)."2

18- He suggests that al-Bukhari is a disbeliever for interpreting the Divine Face as dominion or sovereignty (mulk) in the verse { Everything will perish save His countenance } (28:88) in the book of Tafsir in his Sahih: "Except His wajh means except His mulk, and it is also said: Except whatever was for the sake of His countenance." Albani blurts out: "No true believer would say such a thing" and "We should consider al-Bukhari innocent of that statement."3

19- In imitation of the Mu`tazila, tawassul (seeking means), istighâtha (asking for help), and tashaffu` (seeking intercession) through the Prophet or one of the Awliyâ' he declared prohibited acts in Islam (harâm) tantamount to idolatry (shirk) in his booklet al-Tawassul as did his friends Bin Baz and those who obey them such as al-Qahtani in al-Wala' wa al-Bara' and others, in flat rejection of the numerous sound and explicit narrations to that effect, such as al-Bukhari's narration of the Prophet from Ibn `Umar - Allah be well-pleased with him -: "Truly the sun shall draw so near on the Day of Resurrection that sweat shall reach to the mid-ear, whereupon they shall ask (istaghâthû) help from Adam - upon him peace -, then from Musa - upon him peace - , then from Muhammad who will intercede (fa yashfa`u)... and that day Allah shall raise him to an Exalted Station, so that all those who are standing [including the unbelievers] shall glorify him (yahmaduhu ahlu al-jam`i kulluhum)."

20- He denies that the name of the Angel of death is `Azrâ'îl and claims such a name has no basis other than Israelite reports, although `Iyad reports the Consensus on the Umma on it in al-Shifa'.

21- Like the rest of Wahhabi and "Salafi" innovators he declares Ash`aris, Maturidis, and Sufis to be outside the fold of Ahl al-Sunna and even outside the fold of Islam, although Allah Most High and His Prophet praised them! Upon revelation of the verse { Allah shall bring a people whom He loves and who love Him } (5:54), the Prophet pointed to Abu Musa al-Ash`ari - Allah be well-pleased with him - and said: "They are that man's People."4
Al-Qushayri, Ibn `Asakir, al-Bayhaqi, Ibn al-Subki, and others said that the followers of Abu al-Hasan al-Ash`ari - i.e. Ash`aris who were mostly Sufis - are included among Abu Musa's People for in every place that a people are affiliated to a Prophet, what is meant is the followers of that Prophet. As for Maturidis, they are referred to in the narration of the Prophet from Bishr al-Khath`ami or al-Ghanawi with a sound (sahîh) chain according to al-Hakim, al-Dhahabi, al-Suyuti, and al-Haythami: "Truly you shall conquer Constantinople and truly what a wonderful leader will her leader be [Mehmet Fatih Sultan - Allah be well-pleased with him -], and truly what a wonderful army will that army be!" Both the leader and his army were classic Hanafi Maturidis and it is known that Mehmet Fatih loved and respected Sufis, practiced tawassul, and followed a Shaykh. Moreover, enmity against Ash`aris, Maturidis, and Sufis, is nifâq and enmity against the Umma of Islam as most of the Ulema of Islam are thus described.

22- In at least five of his books5 he calls for the demolition of the Green Dome of the Prophet's Mosque in al-Madina al-Munawwara and for taking the Prophet's grave outside the Mosque.

23- He states: "I have found no evidence for the Prophet's hearing of the salaam of those who greet him at his grave" and "I do not know from where Ibn Taymiyya took his claim6 that he hears the salaam from someone near." This and the previous item are among his greater enormities and bear the unmistakable signature of innovation and

24- He considers it an innovation to visit relatives, neighbors, or friends on the day of `Eid and prohibits it.8

25- He gave the fatwa that Muslims should exit Palestine en masse and leave it to the Jews as it is part the Abode of War (dâr al-harb).9

26- He advocates in his Salat al-Nabi , the formula "Peace and blessings upon the Prophet" instead of "upon you, O Prophet" in the tashahhud in contradiction of the Four Sunni Schools, on the basis of a hadith of Ibn Mas`ud whereby the Companions used the indirect-speech formula after the passing of the Prophet . But the Prophet himself instructed them to pray exactly as he prayed saying: "Peace and blessings upon you, O Prophet" without telling them to change it after his death, nor did the major Companions (whose Sunna we were ordered to imitate together with that of the Prophet ), such as Abu Bakr and `Umar, teach the Companions and Successors otherwise!

27- He prohibits praying more than 11 rak`as in Tarawih prayers on the grounds that the Prophet never did and in blatant rejection of his explicit command to follow the Sunna of the well-guided Caliphs after him.

28- He declares that adding more to 11 supererogatory rak`as in the late night prayer (tahajjud) is an innovation rather than an act of obedience on the grounds that the Prophet "never ever prayed one hundred rak`as in his whole lifetime"10 although the Ulema agree that there is no prescribed limit to something which the Prophet commanded without specifically quantifying it, and he said in three authentic narrations: "Know that the best of your good deeds is prayer,"11 "Prayer is a light,"12 and "The night prayer is in cycles of two [rak`as] and when one of you fears the rising of the dawn, let him pray a single one."13 It is also established in many authentic narrations collected by Imam `Abd al-Hayy al-Lacknawi in the second part of his Iqamat al-Hujja `ala anna al-Ikthar min al-Ta`abbudi Laysa bi Bid`a that the Companions and Salaf prayed hundreds if not thousands of rak`as in every twenty-four hours!

29- He considers it an innovation to pray four rak`as between the two adhâns of Jumu`a and before Salat, although it is authentically narrated that "the Prophet prayed four rak`as before Jumu`a and four rak`as after it."14

30- He declares it prohibited (harâm) and an innovation to lengthen the beard over a fistful's length although there is no proof for such a claim in the whole Law and none of the Ulema ever said it before him.15

31- He gives free rein to his propensity to insult and vilify the Ulema of the past as well as his contemporaries. As a result it is difficult to wade through his writings without being affected by the nefarious spirit that permeates them. For example, he considers previous editors and commentators of al-Bukhari's al-Adab al-Mufrad ("Book of Manners"!) "sinful," "unbearably ignorant," and even "liars" and "thieves." Of one he says: "There are so many weak hadiths [in his choice]... that it is an unislamic practice"; of another: "It is ignorance which must not be tolerated"; of another: "Forgery and open lie... His edition is stolen [from a previous one]."16 Such examples actually fill a book compiled by Shaykh Hasan `Ali al-Saqqaf and titled Qamus Shata'im al-Albani wa Alfazihi al-Munkara al-Lati Yatluquha `ala `Ulama' al-Umma ("Dictionary of al-Albani's Insults and the Heinous Words He Uses Against the Scholars of the Muslim Community").

32- He revived Ibn Hazm's anti-madhhabî claim that differences can never be a mercy in any case but are always a curse on the basis of the verse { If it had been from other than Allah they would have found therein much discrepancy } (4:82).17 Imam al-Nawawi long since refuted this view in his commentary on Sahih Muslim where he said: "If something is a mercy, it is not necessary for its opposite to be the opposite of mercy. No-one makes this binding and no-one even says this, except an ignoramus or one who affects ignorance." Similarly, al-Munawi said in Fayd al-Qadir: "This is a contrivance that showed up on the part of some of those who have sickness in their heart."

33- He expresses hatred for those who read Imam al-Busiri's masterpiece, Qasidat al-Burda, and calls them cretins (mahâbîl),18 i.e. millions of Muslims past and present including the likes of Imams Ibn Hajar al-`Asqalani, al-Sakhawi, and al-Suyuti who all included it as required reading in the Islamic curriculum.19

34- He perpetuates lies if they detract from Ash`aris, such as his remark that Imam Sayf al-Din al-Amidi did not pray,20 although Dr. Hasan al-Shafi`i in his massive biography entitled al-Amidi wa Ara'uhu al-Kalamiyya showed that the story that al-Amidi did not pray was a forgery put into circulation during the campaign waged by Imam Ibn al-Salah against him for teaching logic and philosophy in Damascus.

35- He perpetuates the false claim first made by Munir Agha the founder of the Egyptian Salafiyya Press, that Imam Abu Muhammad al-Juwayni - the father of Imam al-Haramayn - "repented" from Ash`ari doctrine and supposedly authored a tract titled Risala fi Ithbat al-Istiwâ' wa al-Fawqiyya ("Epistle on the Assertion of Establishment and Aboveness").21 This spurious attribution continues to be promoted without verification - for obvious reasons - by modern-day "Salafis" who adduce it to forward the claim that al-Juwayni embraced anthropomorphist concepts. The Risala in question is not mentioned in any of the bibliographical and biographical sources nor does al-Dhahabi cite it in his encyclopedia of anthropomorphist views entitled al-`Uluw. More conclusively, it is written in modern argumentative style and reflects typically contemporary anthropomorphist obsessions.

36- He derides the fuqahâ' of the Umma for accepting - in their massive majority - the hadith of Mu`adh ibn Jabal on ijtihâd as authentic then rejects the definition of knowledge (`ilm) in Islam as pertaining to fiqh but claims that it pertains only to hadith,22 although the Ulema of the Salaf explicitly said that a hadith master without fiqh is a misguided innovator! And he defines the `âlim as "meaning, of course, the `Salafi' `âlim, not the `Khalafi [late Egyptian Shaykh] Ghazali'!"23 Al-Qurtubi said: "One of the knowers of Allah said: A certain group that has not yet come up in our time but shall show up at the end of time, will curse the scholars and insult the jurists."24


NOTES

1 In his commentary on al-Mundhiri's Mukhtasar Sahih Muslim, 3rd ed. (Beirut: al-Maktab al-Islami, 1977, p. 548). This phrase was removed from later editions.

2 Fatawa (p. 522-523) and Mukhtasar al-`Uluw (p. 23f.).

3 Fatawa (p. 523).

4 Narrated from `Iyad by Ibn Abi Shayba and al-Hakim who said it is sahîh by Muslim's criterion, and by al-Tabarani with a sound chain as stated by al-Haythami.

5 Ahkam al-Jana'iz wa Bida`uha, Talkhis Ahkam al-Jana'iz, Tahdhir al-Sajid, Hijjat al-Nabi, and Manasik al-Hajj wa al-`Umra.

6 In Majmu`a al-Fatawa (27:384).

7 In his notes on Nu`man al-Alusi's al-Ayat al-Bayyinat (p. 80) and his Silsila Da`ifa (#203).

8 Fatawa (p. 61-63).

9 Fatawa (p. 18).

10 Fatawa (p. 315-316).

11 Narrated as part of a longer hadith from Thawban with sound chains by Ibn Majah and Ahmad. Malik cites it in his Muwatta'.

12 Part of a longer hadith narrated from Abu Malik al-Ash`ari (Ka`b ibn `Asim) by Muslim, al-Tirmidhi (hasan sahîh), al-Nasa'i, Ibn Majah, Ahmad, and al-Darimi.

13 Narrated from Ibn `Umar in the Nine Books.

14 With a fair chain from `Ali and Ibn `Abbas as stated by al-`Iraqi in Tarh al-Tathrib (3:42), Ibn Hajar in Talkhis al-Habir (2:74), and al-Tahanawi in I`la' al-Sunan (7:9).

15 Fatawa (p. 53).

16 Sahih al-Adab al-Mufrad (Introduction, p. 15, 20, 26).

17 Al-Silsila al-Da`ifa (1:76 #57).

18 Introduction to al-San`ani's Raf` al-Astar (p. 24-25).

19 Cf. al-Suyuti, Husn al-Muhadara (Cairo 1293 ed. 1:260) and al-Sakhawi, in A.J. Arberry, Sakhawiana: A Study Based on the Chester Beatty Ms. Arab. 773 (London: Emery Walker Ltd., 1951, p. 5-9).

20 In his notes to Nu`man al-Alusi's al-Ayat al-Bayyinat (p. 88).

21 Mukhtasar al-`Uluw (p. 277).

22 In his notes on al-Qasimi's al-Mash `ala al-Jawrabayn (p. 38). On the hadith of Mu`adh see our May 1999 post titled, "[4] Probativeness of the Sunna" and Note 5 in that post.

23 Tahrim Alat al-Tarab (p. 160).

24 Al-Qurtubi, Tafsir (7:191).

Wal-'Aqibatu lil-Muttaqin.

GF Haddad ©

With the arrival of God’s Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings, in Madina, the struggle between Islam and unbelief entered a new phase. In Makka, the Prophet devoted himself almost exclusively to expounding the basic principles of Islamic faith and to the moral and spiritual training of his Companions. After the Emigration, however, people belonging to different tribes and regions of ‘Arabia, who had embraced Islam, began to concentrate in Madina. Although the Muslims held only a tiny piece of the land, the whole of Arabia, under the leadership of the Quraysh, moved against them, bent upon their extermination.


In these circumstances, the very survival, let alone the success, of this small group of believers depended upon several factors. First, that they should propagate their beliefs with the utmost conviction in order to convert others. Second, that they should demonstrate the falsity of their opponents’ standpoint so convincingly that there could remain no justifiable ground for any intelligent person to entertain any doubt on the question. Third, that they as the followers of the Prophet should not become disheartened because they had been driven out of their homes and were faced, through the hostility and opposition of the whole country, with economic stringency, hunger, and constant insecurity and danger, but that they should confront the situation with patience and fortitude. Fourth, that they should be able to find a way to retake all their wealth and goods usurped by the Makkans during Emigration. Fifth, that they should be prepared to resist with both courage and the force of arms the violent assault by which the enemy intended to frustrate their movement, and that in this resistance they should not heed the enemy’s superiority in either numbers or material resources.


In addition to the threats coming from Makka and its allied tribes, there were, in Madina itself, three tribes of the Jews. As explained earlier, the Jews held the control of the economic life of the city. Although they had been waiting for the emergence of a Prophet, they severely opposed God’s Messenger because he did not appear from among them, among the descendants of the Prophet Isaac. They felt constrained to sign a pact with God’s Messenger but, entertaining feelings of hatred against him, they never refrained from conspiracies to exterminate Islam. For example, among their poets, Ka’b ibn Ashraf composed poems to satirize God’s Messenger and instigate his enemies against him.


In Madina, another element of enmity against Islam also began to emerge in the form of hypocrisy. One group of hypocrites consisted of those who had no faith in Islam but had entered the ranks of the Muslim community merely in order to create mischief. Another group of hypocrites, conscious of the political dominance of the Muslims in Madina, considered it advantageous to gain acceptance as fellow-Muslims. At the same time, they maintained contacts with the enemies of Islam so that they could secure all the advantages of friendship with the two opposite camps and thus remain safe from any hostilities. There was still another group of hypocrites - those who were in a state of ambivalence and indecision between Islam and Ignorance but who had accepted Islam because the majority of their tribe or family had done so. The final group consisted of those who, although they believed Islam to be true, found it difficult to forsake their inherited way of life, their superstitions, their customs and usages, and to discipline themselves to observe the moral restraints and fulfill the obligations prescribed by Islam.

Grave Destruction and Desecration

You destroyed all the sign-posts by which we knew the graves of the Companions, the Mothers of the Believers, and the noble members of the Family of the Prophet . You left them a vacant lot, the grave-posts scattered stones so that we can no longer know whose grave is where. Gasoline was even poured on one of them.1 Truly there is no change nor power except with Allah Most High, Most Great!

Leave stone superstructures intact for they are allowed! Leave the hand-span elevation for it is allowed, together with the two grave-posts! It is established that the Prophet placed a rock on top of `Uthman ibn Maz`un's grave - Allah be well-pleased with him - saying: "With it I shall designate the grave of my [milk-]brother and later bury in it whoever dies among my relatives."2 Kharija ibn Zayd said: "I can see myself when we were young men in the time of `Uthman [ibn `Affan] - Allah be well-pleased with him. The strongest one of us in high jump was he who could jump over the grave of `Uthman ibn Maz`un and clear it."3

NOTES

1 The grave of Amina bint Wahb the Prophet's mother .

2 Narrated from an unnamed Companion by Abu Dawud and al-Bayhaqi in al-Kubra (3:412) with fair chains cf. Ibn Hajar, Talkhis al-Habir (2:134); Ibn al-Mulaqqin, Tuhfat al-Muhtaj (2:29). The complete report states that the Prophet asked a man to place a rock on top of Ibn Maz`un's grave; when he was unable to move it, he - Allah bless and greet him - rolled up his sleeves and helped him and the whiteness of his arms was visible. Ibn Maz`un was the first of the Muhâjiršn buried in Baqi` al-Gharqad. Ibrahim, the Prophet's son, was buried next to him.

3 Cited by al-Bukhari without chain in his Sahih chapter-title, "[Placing] a Stalk on Top of the Grave." Ibn Hajar said in Fath al-Bari (3:256=1959 ed. 3:223): "Al-Bukhari narrated it with its [sound] chain in al-Tarikh al-Saghir (1:42)... It contains a proof for the licitness of raising high the grave and elevating it above the surface of the earth."

Ironically, when the Sufi cemetary was razed to make way for the university of Damascus and its campus in that city, King `Abd al-`Aziz ibn Sa`ud intervened personally to preserve intact the tombs of Ibn Taymiyya and his student Ibn Kathir.

As for the report on the qubba (= khayma, fustat, i.e. a tent) built for one full year over al-Hasan ibn al-Husayn ibn `Ali's grave by his wife Fatima bint al-Husayn ibn `Ali is narrated in Ibn Abi al-Dunya's Kitab al-Qubur and cited in al-Bukhari's Sahih in mu`allaq form (chainless) but positively attributed by the Imam, i.e. he considers it sahih even if it may not necessarily meet his standard in the Sahih. Chapter titled: "The dislike over what is considered taking the grave as a place of worship." After a year she folded up the tent and heard a voice saying: "Had they but found what they had lost!" Another voice replied: "Nay, they despaired and then turned back!" Ibn Hajar said in Fath al-Bari (3:238=1959 ed. 3:200): "Admonishment came to them in the form of the two callers decrying what they had done. It seems they were from the angels or else from the believers of the Jinn. Al-Bukhari mentioned this report only because it agrees with the proofs of the Law, not because it is a proof in itself."

GF Haddad

Charging The Muslims With Shirk

1 - Calling the Muslims: "Pagans"

It is not permitted to charge Muslims - believers in monotheism who pray with you, fast, pay zakât, and perform pilgrimage shouting over and over, "Ever at Your call, O Allah! Ever at Your call, there is no partner with You, ever at Your call! Truly all glory and praise, all favor and grace belong to You, and all sovereignty and dominion! No-one can be a partner to You!" - It is not permitted, by Law, to charge them with idolatry (al-shirk) the way your books and publications are filled with such charges; the way your preacher clamors on the day of the Major Hajj in the mosque of al-Khayf in Mina, the eve of the Feast of the pilgrims and all Muslims; and the way his fellow preacher frightens the people of Makka and those in the Holy Mosque on the Day of `Id al-Fitr through all their verbal assaults and false accusations. Stop this, and may Allah guide you! To frighten a Muslim is prohibited, especially the dwellers of the Two Sanctuaries. There are many sound sacred texts to that effect.

2 - Calling the Muslims: "Apostates"

You have declared the Sufis disbelievers then the Ash`aris. You have denied and denounced imitation of and adherence to the Four Imams (Abu Hanifa, Malik, al-Shafi`i, Ahmad ibn Hanbal) whereas their imitators formed and continue to form the vastest mass (al-sawâd al-a`zam) of the Muslims, just as the official ideology of your state and that instituted by King `Abd al-`Aziz - may Allah have mercy on him! - textually stipulates reliance upon, and due consideration of the Four Madhâhib. Therefore, stop this, and may Allah Most High guide you!

Whoever turns disbeliever after his Islam has the status of an apostate (murtadd) whose killing becomes licit. Therefore, remember the narration of your Prophet the Elect One : "Do not revert after me and turn disbelievers again, striking at one another's neck."1

3 - Calling the Muslims: "Deviants"

After you finished doing the above, you let loose certain hirelings you had nurtured, so that they began to throw accusations of misguidance and deviance at the Islamic groups and organizations that work in the field of calling to Islam (da`wa) and are active raising up the Word of Allah and commanding good and forbidding evil. I mean organizations such as Jama`at al-Tabligh; al-Ikhwan al-Muslimin; the Deobandi group that represents the brightest Ulema of India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh; and the Barelwi group that represents the vastest mass of the common Muslims in those countries. In so doing they have made use of books, tapes, and the like. Then you went and translated those books into various languages, distributing them free through your numerous outlets. Likewise, you published a book that contains the declaration that the people of Abu Dhabi and Dubai are disbelievers, together with the Ibadis, your colleagues on the board of Majlis al-Ta`awun. As for your attacks on the renowned Azhar University and its scholars, they are too numerous to count!

4 - Calling the Muslims: "Innovators"

You keep repeating the phrase of the noble hadith, "Every innovation is misguidance"2 without discernment, only to criticize and condemn others, yet approving certain actions that contradict the Prophetic Sunna without condemning them nor counting them as innovations. We shall list some of them...

NOTES

1 Narrated from Ibn `Umar and Jarir - Allah be well-pleased with them - by al-Bukhari and Muslim.

2 Narrated from Jabir ibn `Abd Allah - Allah be well-pleased with him - by Muslim. See Sayyid `Abd Allah ibn al-Siddiq al-Ghumari's Itqan al-Sun`a fi Tahqiq Ma`na al-Bid`a.

GF Haddad ©

Raised Graves

Dr. G.F. Haddad

It is evident that the claim that "Islam condems building edifices over graves for whatever reasons" is failse since Islam has condoned the edifices over the graves of the Prophet (saws), his Companions (ra), and the pious `ulama since the early centuries. Was Islam so weak back then as to be unable to stop the edifices being built, as it is weak today and incapable of stopping the destructive hand of those at work in the Hijaz, destroying those very grave sites? What is condemned is to build such structures for worldly considerations such as pride, luxury, or imitation of non-Muslims.

The topic of tombs is present in the Qur'an. The verse from Surat al-Kahf is in fact adduced by some to illustrate the permissibility of tombs. Those who say "Islam condemns" when in fact the reverse is true, silence themselves through lack of proof. Their (lack of) authority should definitely be exposed as uninformed and unethical.

The reply to the claim of a close relationship 'between graves exaltation and rearing the causes that lead to associating other gods -no matter how minor and in whatever form - with Allah Almighty' is that this is gibberish by and for unthinking minds. "And speak not, concerning that which your own tongues qualify (as clean or unclean), the falsehood: "This is lawful, and this is forbidden," so that ye invent a lie against Allah. Lo! those who invent a lie against Allah will not succeed."

As for the "genuine religious leaders" who oppose the Ul`u of the Umma in every day and age, this is the wont of the people of bid`a in every day and age. They all claimed they were genuine although they were and are misguided. Wa min Allah al-Tawfiq.

Now for the proofs and fatawa of the `ulama on the issue of tombs:

The first Sahabi buried in the cemetery of al-Madina, al-Baqi`, was `Uthman ibn Maz`un (ra), the milk-brother of the Prophet (saws). The latter placed a large boulder on top of his grave to mark it, saying: "By this I shall know where the grave of my brother `Uthman is and add to him my relatives." Abu Dawud and others narrated it.

A stronger proof than any non-mutawatir text is the universal practice of the Umma from the earliest centuries in building up tombs over the graves of those celebrated for their piety so that they would find them easily during their visitation, as ordered by the Prophet (saws): "Visit the graves." Hence Fatima (ra) had also marked the grave of her uncle Hamza (ra) with a rock, as she used to visit it every Jumu`a.

Imam al-Shawkani admitted that the Salaf built up the graves high. Concerning the hadith of `Ali ordering the destruction of tombs in the Sahihayn, Sunan, and Musnad with various wordings:

Ibn al-Jawzi in al-Tahqiq said: "This [hadith] is understood to refer to the elevated graves they used to build with high and beautiful structures." Al-Zayla`i mentioned it in Nasb al-Raya.

Imam al-Nawawi in his Sharh Sahih Muslim said: "The Sunna is that the grave not be raised up a lot above the earth['s surface], nor rounded, but that it be raised up approximately a hand-span (shibr) and flattened, and this is the madhhab of al-Shafi`i and those [of the other schools] who agreed with him, while al-Qadi `Iyad related that most of the `ulama prefer it to be rounded [in the shape of a mound], and this is the madhhab of Malik."

Al-Shawkani in Nayl al-Awtar added to this that it is haram to build them up high and he claimed that the fact that the Salaf and Khalaf built them up high is no proof that it is not haram, and al-`Azim Abadi approved him whole-heartedly in `Awn al-Ma`bud.

But the Amir al-San`ani in Subul al-Salam said: "The Jumhur - vast majority - hold that the prohibition of building up and plastering graves is one of preference (tanzih) [i.e. not strictness (tahrim)]."

Indeed, there is nothing wrong in signalling the graves of the awliya, as stipulated by Shaykh `Abd al-Ghani al-Nabulusi and others. See the article by Ustadha Umm Sahl under the subtitle: "Domes over the Grave of the Awliya."

Dawud ibn Salih said: "[The governor of Madina] Marwan [ibn al-Hakam] one day saw a man placing his face on top of the grave of the Prophet. He said: "Do you know what you are doing?" When he came near him, he realized it was Abu Ayyub al-Ansari. The latter said: "Yes; I came to the Prophet, not to a stone." Narrated by Ahmad (5:422) and al-Hakim in his Mustadrak (4:515 "sahih") cf. al-Subki in Shifa' al-siqam (p. 126) and Ibn Taymiyya in al-Muntaqa (2:261f.).

The use of the word "stone" in the previous hadith, if authentic, indicates that the Prophet's (saws) grave was built up with stone already in the time of Abu Ayyub al-Ansari (ra).

The Ulema cited two reasons for the permissibility of building up the grave or plastering it with gypsum: to protect it from collapse generally speaking, and to keep it in the public view if it is the grave of a Shaykh, a Scholar, or someone from the family of the Prophet (saws) as mentioned in Ibn `Abidin's Hashiya (1:601).

Shaykh Isma`il Haqqi said in his Qur'anic commentary Ruh al-Bayan under the verse "The mosques of Allah may only be built and maintained by those who believe in Allah and the Day of Judgement, perform the prayers and give zakat, and are afraid of none other than Allah and they are those who are guided" (9:18):

Shaykh `Abd al-Ghani al-Nabulusi said in Kashf al-Nur `an Ashab al-Qubur ("The Unveiling of Light from the Occupants of the Graves") the sum of which is that a good innovation that agrees with the objectives of the Sacred Law is called a sunna. Thus, building domes over the graves of Scholars, friends of Allah (awliya') and the righteous and placing covers, turbans and cloth over them is permissible if the objective therein is to create reverence in the eyes of ordinary people so that they will not disdain the occupant of that grave.

If the above were not the case, or if it were not in conformity with the Sunna, then ponder the statement of our Mother `A'isha in Abu Dawud's Sunan: "When the Negus died, we were told [i.e. by the Prophet (saws)] that a light would be seen perpetually at his grave."

May Allah enlighten our understandings, our hearts, and our graves with His kindness and forgiveness. Amin.

Tasawwuf is nothing but shari'at



A problem that arises in the final couplet of "What is Tasawwuf ?" is that in equating Tasawwuf and shari'a, the poet brings up and then resolves an apparent tension between Tasawwuf and shari'a. Such a tension, however, exists only to the degree that one defines these two terms as being mutually exclusive. While various extremists persist in excluding one from the other, we do have many inclusive statements - such as that of the poet of "What is Tasawwuf ?" – in which Tasawwuf and shari'a are interwoven, similarly defined, or equated. Qushayri (d. 465/1074), for example, defined "shari'a" as "assiduous observance of servanthood." Defining Tasawwuf in a comparable fashion, Abu al-Hasan al-Shudhili (d. 656/1258) stated: "Tasawwuf is training the self (nafs) through servanthood and subjecting it to the commands (ahkam) of Lordship."



Supporting the close relationship between Tasawwuf and shari'a, the Sufi Abu Yazid al-Bistami (d. 260/874) asserted that observing the shari'a was a touchstone for judging a person's spiritual degree: "Were you to see a man who performs miracles such that he ascends into the air, do not be deceived by him. Instead, observe how well he is following the Divine commands, abstaining from what is prohibited, keeping within the limits set by God, and observing the shari'a."Similarly, Abu al-Husayn al-Warraq (d. before 320/932), asserted the futility of trying to reach God without conforming one's actions to shari'a and the sunna: "A servant will only reach Allah through Allah and by being in harmony with his loved one [the Beloved Prophet (Peace and Blessings of Allah Almighty upon him)] through his laws (shari'a). And whoever believes that he can follow a path without emulating (al-iqtida) [the Beloved Prophet (Peace and Blessings of Allah Almighty upon him)] will become lost, on account of imagining that he is being guided."Undoubtedly, for all but a minority of Sufis throughout history, carefully observing the shari'a has been a crucial and on-going component of their spiritual practice.



One way of understanding the interrelationship of Tasawwuf and shari'a was expressed by the Kubrawi Sufi, Najm al-Din Razi (d. 654/1256). Using the term tariqa (path) to denote Tasawwuf – as Sufis commonly do – he clarified its relationship to shari'a: "The shari'at has an outer (zahiri) and an inner (batini) aspect. Its outer aspect consists of bodily deeds… The inner aspect of the shari'at consists of deeds of the heart (qalbi), of the inner mystery (sirri), and of the spirit (ruhi) and is called the tariqat. "Hence, for Razi, the tariqa (or Tasawwuf) is not separate from shari'a, it is, rather, its inner dimension.



In summary, it should be clear, then, that in spite of extremist views that see Tasawwuf and shari'a as mutually exclusive, the author of "What is Tasawwuf?" – like most Sufis – bridges the false dichotomy between Tasawwuf and shari'a.

Conclusion

The poem "What is Tasawwuf?" provides answers to a question that has perplexed people since the term first began to be used, over 1200 years ago. Its answers to this question involve technical terms referring to many of the key concepts of Tasawwuf (or Sufism, as it is commonly called today). In this commentary we have not discussed the more obvious phrases and answers expressed by the poet, phrases such as "faith" (iman) and "the affirmation of unity" (tawhid). The terms that we have addressed are the following: good character (akhlaq), awareness of God (ihsan), love ('ishq), affection (mahabba), the heart attaining tranquillity (itminan-i qalb), concentrating one's mind (jam'i khatir), the religion of Ahmad (din-i Ahmad) (peace and blessings of Allah upon him), contemplation (fikr), certainty (yaqin), the most exalted paradise (khuld-i barin), ecstasy (wajd), wearers of wool (suf pushan), taste (dhawq), and the close relationship between Tasawwuf and shari'a.



From this study, it should be evident that there are numerous dimensions of Tasawwuf, including actions in the world, consciousness of Allah Almighty, spiritual states and practices, and shari'a.



And nothing more – nor less.

www.spiritualfoundation.net