Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab's lack of qualifications and the disasters that resulted from it!

[Abu Sulayman]

Good find. Most of the Salafi material I came across promoted the view that the Hadiths of Najd are exclusively referring to Iraq and Iran. I personally sympathize with the more generic interpretation which includes both Iraq and Central Arabia.

At the end of the day it is not even necessary for the Salafis to reject the proper Najd interpretation from a theological perspective. The Fitna/turmoil could be explained by the contraversies that took place in early Islam and the Horn of Satan traditionally referred to the emergence of al-Messih al-Dajjal. I mean, even when arguing against them all of the points put forth by Sulayman Ibn Abdul Wahhab(ra) in post #80 still make sense regardless if the Hadiths are only applicable to Iraq. What ultimately matters is that Central Arabia was not blessed by the Prophet(saws) unlike the lands which MIAW accused of being inhabited by Kuffar & Mushrikoon.

With that said, I thought the points you brought up on Mudar and Rabi'ah were really interesting. Wikipedia confirms that they are the same tribes that currently rule over and reside in Saudi Arabia:

Royal families which stem from the Rabi'ah tribe:

Al Saud, rulers of Saudi Arabia.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabi%27ah_ibn_Nizar

"They converted to Islam in mid 7th century CE and played a crucial role during the Muslim conquests of their region, although some sub-tribes were declared apostates during the false prophet wars after the death of Muhammad. Most of the tribes adopted Wahhabism after the rise of the House of Saud."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kindah

Al Sa'ud is not just from Rabi'a, but rather from the very branch of Rabi'a that Musaylima - the accursed liar - also belonged to, which is the Banu Hanifa.

This is the lineage of Muhammad bin Sa'ud (d. 1179 AH) - who is the founder of the first Saudi state - as found on the Arabic wikipedia:
"محمد بن سعود بن محمد بن مقرن بن مرخان بن إبراهيم بن موسى بن ربيعة بن مانع بن ربيعة المريدي والمردة من حنيفة من بكر بن وائل"

This tribe apostated in great numbers during the time of the Sahabat al-kiram and it was the first greater tribulation that happened after the Messenger of Allah - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - had passed away!
Musaylima and his followers from Banu Hanifa were defeated in the Battle of Yamama (which took place in Najd!) and the call of the Muslims on that day was "Ya Muhammadah!"!
A great number of these disbelievers - including the Dajjal Musaylima - were killed in this battle, but more than thousand from among the Muslims got martyred in it and from among them were the likes of Zayd bin al-Khattab, al-Tufayl bin 'Amr, Abu Dujana, Salim Mawla Abi Hudhayfa, Abu Hudhafya himself, 'Abdullah bin Suhayl and other than them. The mentioned companions were all from among those who had accepted Islam early on and most of them had participated in all major battles, may Allah ta'ala be pleased with all of them.

What is also interesting to know is that later on this tribe also produced the leaders of the early Khariji movements like the Azariqa and the Najdat:
- Nafi' bin al-Azraq al-Hanafi* was the leader of the Azariqa - who were known to be among the most extreme of the Khawarij - and the center of their activity was between 'Iraq and Iran.
- Najda bin 'Amir al-Hanafi* was the leader of the Najdat and the center of their activity was Yamama (Najd!), which they even controlled for a specific amount of time!

(* Al-Hanafi here indicates there lineage from Banu Hanifa and not them being from the Hanafi Madhhab. Imam Abu Hanifa (d. 150 AH) was not born yet in the time of these Khawarij and his lineage is obviously not from Banu Hanifa.)

Since in the early history of Islam this tribe produced many apostates and Khawarij, one sees that for a long amount of time after these incidents they didn't play any leading role anymore. This changes with the Al Sa'ud establishing their first Khariji state.

Note that in the narrations in Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim the tribes of Rabi'a and Mudar are mentioned in the context of the emergence of the horn of satan. The residence of Rabi'a and Mudar is Najd (al-Yamama) and this is why al-Qadhi 'Iyadh (d. 544 AH) mentions as a possible option for "the East" that "What is meant is Najd (!), the place of residence of [the tribes] Rabi'a and Mudar (!), and it lies in the east!".



Muhammad bin 'Abd al-Wahhab (d. 1206 AH) was from Banu Tamim - a branch of Mudar - and this is the same tribe as that of the worthless forefather of all Khawarij Dhul Khuwaysira!

Was is interesting to know is that the scholars in the time of Muhammad bin 'Abd al-Wahhab (d. 1206 AH) saw him to be from the spiritual progeny of Musaylima and even explicitly stated that he was a false prophet just like him!
And there are clear indications from the speech of this Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab that he regarded himself a prophet (!) - even if he did not explicitly state "I'm a Prophet" - and that he regarded the obedience towards his ideas as absolutely obligatory in the same manner obedience is obligatory to real Prophets, peace be upon them!
In fact he put his station above the the station of the Prophets and even obliged FIGHTING whosoever doesn't accept his ideas!

The only thing that makes him different from Musaylima - the false prophet - is that he did not say "I'm a Prophet!" and some of his followers today think that this saves him from being the false prophet that he was, and thereafter they shamelessly describe him with the descriptions of a prophet and claim that God "helped him to sow the seeds of Tawheed throughout the Arabian Peninsula and put an end to all kinds of shirk" (see islamqa's ugly Fatwa in his defense)!

One of the Salafi Mashayikh even stated in the explanation upon his Kitab al-Tawhid that "God put him in the station of a Prophet among the people of Najd" thereby showing what kind of worthless heretics they are! (Will be quoted insha`Allah)

Note that one of the first actions through which Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab got negative publicity in his own hometown (i.e. 'Uyayyna) was when he desecrated the grave of the companion Zayd bin al-Khattab - radhiallahu 'anhu - and this is quite telling considering that he was among those martyred in the battle against Musaylima!



Let's think about it:
- Muhammad bin 'Abd al-Wahhab (d. 1206 AH) and Muhammad bin Sa'ud (d. 1179 AH) emerged from the lands of Rabi'a and Mudar, where one could find owners of camels with their harsh hearts and this is indicated towards in the narrations.
- One person is from Mudar and the other one is from Rabi'a.
- Muhammad bin Sa'ud specifically belongs to the Banu Hanifa, which has produced major false prophets, apostates and Khawarij in the early Islamic history!
- The Ahadith of the horn of satan are connected to the Khawarij, because they contain their descriptions and IAW's movement had been declared as Khawarij by major scholars of that time!
- The early Najdi followers of Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab would SHAVE [THEIR HEADS] - and this is explicitly stated as their SIGN in Sahih al-Bukhari and other than it! The grandson of IAW ADMITTED that they would do this and even justified this!
- They did not just appear from the east, but rather marched from the east towards Madina al-munawwara and killed the Muslims on their way and harmed the people of al-Haramayn al-sharifayn - which is explicitly warned against in the Ahadith - and attacked also Yemen and Sham, for whom our beloved Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - had prayed!

What I was initially curious about was whether or not anyone held the view that Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab or the Saudi/Wahhabi alliance were literally the Horns of Satan. I read an article on a relatively scholarly website that mentioned how some of the later Ulama made Ta'wil of this concept. Are you familiar with the spectrum of interpretations and whether it is even possible to consider someone or a movement as the manifestation of the Horns of Satan?

The early scholars who refuted IAW's call mentioned the issue of Qarn al-Shaytan and the issue of the emergence of tribulations from the east - especially Najd - and basically argued that their lands are not blessed ones and places for tribulations.
Some of them however specified IAW and his early followers and said that they are the horn of satan!
This was for example stated by the 'Allama 'Alawi bin Ahmad al-Haddad [al-Hadhrami al-Shafi'i] (d. 1232 AH) in his work Misbah al-Anam (see p. 7).

One last thing to be considered: There are narrations that say that the last group of the Khawarij will be with the Dajjal!
Since the emergence of IAW bascially all Khariji groups are connected to the ideology of this man!
Whether it's his own early followers, or the GIA in Algeria, or ISIS in Iraq and Sham - who would even print and distribute his works! - or other than them! It is therefore possible that the last hardcore Najdi group will be the one that will be with the Dajjal, especially considering that they are anthropomorphists at the same time and that accepting the Dajjal as their God is easier for them.

[Abu Sulayman]

Table of contents (3-10-2020):

- OP (includes examples of IAW's shocking level of ignorance): Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab's (d.1206 AH) lack of qualifications and the disasters that resulted from it!
- The results of Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab's ignorance and extreme ideas on a theoretical level (includes Takfir against scholars, cities, whole regions and basically the whole Umma!):
Part 1, Part 2, Part 3
- The results of Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab's ignorance and extreme ideas on a practical level (includes terrorizing, robbing, burning down fields, cutting trees and mass-killing the Muslims of the Arabian peninsula and surrounding regions; Part 12 is specifically regarding what they did to the people of the Haramayn al-Sharifayn and their stopping of the Hajj!):
Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6, Part 7, Part 8, Part 9, Part 10, Part 11, Part 12, Part 13
- Different examples of stealing, killing and destruction caused by Wahhabis according to 'Unwan al-Majd
- Translations of some of the examples given on the theoretical and practical results of MIAW's extremism and ignorance


- Proving that the scholars were truthful regarding Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab (d. 1206 AH) and that IAW himself was the liar!
- Proving that "islamqa(.)info" are liars like their leader MIAW!
- Proving that the "Salafi" Mashayikh are liars just like their leader MIAW!


- The knowledge of the people of Washm regarding their Creator and the ignorance of IAW's followers regarding Him!
- MIAW usage of fabricated narrations in his so called Kitab al-Tawhid


- 'Allama Ibn Suhaym al-Hanbali (d. 1181 AH) regarding the extremism of IAW
- 'Allama al-Saffarini al-Hanbali (d. 1188 AH) regarding IAW being a Mujtahid in destroying the divine law!
- 'Allama Muhammad bin Sulayman al-Kurdi al-Shafi'i (d. 1194 AH) advising his student IAW to stop his Takfir against the Umma of Islam
- Shaykh Sulayman bin 'Abd al-Wahhab al-Hanbali (d. 1208 AH): Some of his statements in response to the ignorance of his brother IAW
- 'Allama 'Abdullah bin Dawud al-Hanbali (d. 1225 AH) regarded IAW a FALSE PROPHET in his "Lightnings and Thunders in Response to the Wretched Ibn Sa'ud"
- 'Allama Ibn Humayd al-Hanbali (d. 1295 AH): Praising the father and brother of IAW and criticizing IAW as "the founder of the mission whose evil had spread across the horizon" and mentioning his attempt to assassinate his brother
- Shaykh Mustafa bin Ahmad al-Shatti al-Hanbali (d. 1348): Idolatry and its forms (contains criticism of MIAW by the 'Allama Hassan al-Shatti (d. 1274 AH))


- Regarding the Hadith of Najd and the tribulations that will appear from the East and its connection to MIAW's "Najdi call":
Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4
- Al-Lajna al-Da`ima admitting that Najd is included in the narrations regarding the tribulations and the horn of satan that would appear and emerge from the east!!!
- Ibn Bishr (d. 1288 AH) - the Najdi Khariji! - AFFIRMS that Najd has always been a place for tribulations!

To be continued insha`Allah...

[AmantuBillahi]

Bro Hajji and Dilly Hussain speak about the atrocities committed by Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab and the Khuruj of the Saudi/Wahhabi alliance from 1:12:15:

[AdoonkaAlle]

Bro Hajji and Dilly Hussain speak about the atrocities committed by Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab and the Khuruj of the Saudi/Wahhabi alliance from 1:12:15:

It was a good start and the only thing that i would point out is that, there was no discussion into the reasons underlying the takfir of the najdi movement. Their takfir, khuruj, killing etc is simply an outward manifestation of their aqeedah. As salafis of our time still retain the same views that miaw and his early followers used to sanction those killings,that's why it's important to address and critique the justifications used to legitimatise those atrocities.

[AmantuBillahi]

Abu Sulayman

What are your thoughts on the Najdi claim that the Muslims during the time of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab were worshipping trees and things of that nature? Is there any historical validity to this claim? And what were the opinions of the contemporary Hanabilah of that era concerning this issue? Did they also make Takfir of these people and label them Mushrikoon?

[TazkiyyatunNafs]

Are you familiar with Shaykh Yasir Qadhi's reccent denounciation of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab and the Najdi Da'wah?

In all fairness this forum doesn't seem to have a Wahhabi representative to make an actual case in favour of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab. However, the overall silence of the Salafi community in the West to Yasir Qadhi's heavy allegations against their 'spiritual founder' speaks volumes in my books.

From the few who publicly challenged his claims were:

There's a Dutch site called sahieh.nl and they have just started a series on the allegations made by Yasir Qadhi. So far only two parts have been published yet but they said they'll be going to respond to all of his claims - in shaa Allaah. The overall site is in Dutch but this particular series will be posted in English. I know most if not all on here are not from the Netherlands but I am, so I'm familiar with some of the students posting on that site. I haven't read the remainder of this thread yet nor am I sure I will to be honest, but I assume it hasn't been mentioned yet.

I've been living under a rock since I made hijrah and admittedly never knew about these Azhari Hanbalis until I start reading on here (nor about these videos of Yasir Qadhi or other recent events/fitan within the 'Salafi' community). They also have an article about that but it's in Dutch. Interesting.

[AmantuBillahi]

There's a Dutch site called sahieh.nl and they have just started a series on the allegations made by Yasir Qadhi. So far only two parts have been published yet but they said they'll be going to respond to all of his claims - in shaa Allaah. The overall site is in Dutch but this particular series will be posted in English. I know most if not all on here are not from the Netherlands but I am, so I'm familiar with some of the students posting on that site. I haven't read the remainder of this thread yet nor am I sure I will to be honest, but I assume it hasn't been mentioned yet.

I've been living under a rock since I made hijrah and admittedly never knew about these Azhari Hanbalis until I start reading on here (nor about these videos of Yasir Qadhi or other recent events/fitan within the 'Salafi' community). They also have an article about that but it's in Dutch. Interesting.

Yasir Qadhi isn't saying anything new in this video. The Sufis and contemporary opponents of Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab have been making these allegations ever since his Da'wah initiated. What's interesting about this video though is that Yasir Qadhi was formerly a Najdi Salafi and he's claiming that MIAW was theologically inconsistent with Ibn Taymiyyah(ra).

I don't doubt that the followers of Ibn Abdul Wahhab are capable of issuing some sort of response. There are people out there who believe in things like the Trinity and are capable of making arguments in their favour. What we need to sincerely examine is whether the responses to the accusations against the Aqeedah and Da'wah of MIAW are more convincing than the claims.

From my little bit of research on the topic it doesn't look like there is much space for the Najdis to wiggle if they are honest about history. Most people are passionate about defending Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab due to his unanimous acceptance amongst Salafi scholars and the simplistic books he authored on Tawhid. The status of Ibn Abdul Wahhab within the Salafi movement makes it difficult for people to be objective because his deviation would require admitting that the foundations of the modern Salafi movement were corrupted. Moreover, it would imply that the Saudi/Wahhabi alliance which the Najdis continue to enjoy was founded upon deviation and extremism. It's not an easy pill to swallow.

[aMuslimForLife]

There's a Dutch site called sahieh.nl and they have just started a series on the allegations made by Yasir Qadhi. So far only two parts have been published yet but they said they'll be going to respond to all of his claims - in shaa Allaah. The overall site is in Dutch but this particular series will be posted in English. I know most if not all on here are not from the Netherlands but I am, so I'm familiar with some of the students posting on that site. I haven't read the remainder of this thread yet nor am I sure I will to be honest, but I assume it hasn't been mentioned yet.

I've been living under a rock since I made hijrah and admittedly never knew about these Azhari Hanbalis until I start reading on here (nor about these videos of Yasir Qadhi or other recent events/fitan within the 'Salafi' community). They also have an article about that but it's in Dutch. Interesting.

I wouldn't call them Azhari Hanbali, they are non-Salafi Hanbalis or traditional Hanbalis, who live in Lebanon, Syria, Palestine, Egypt and certain parts of Saudi Arabia. They're not anti-Ibn Taymiyyah, but they don't promote his creed, in the way Salafis do. They promote the Hanbali creed of the following Hanbalis...

Al-I`tiqad by Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal

Mujmal ul-I`tiqad by Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal

Qawl fil-I`tiqad by Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal

Al-Jama`ah by Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal

Kitab us-Sunnah Harb ibn Isma`il Al-Kirmani (d. 280)

As-Sunnah by Imam Abu Bakr Al-Athram (d. 281)

Nasikh ul-Hadith wa Mansukh by Imam Abu Bakr Al-Athram (d. 281)

Sharh us-Sunnah by Imam Abu Muhammad Al-Barbahari (d. 329)

Al-Ibanah by Imam Ibn Battah (d. 387)

Al-Mu`tamad by Imam Al-Qadi Abu Ya`la Al-Baghdadi (d. 458)

Ibtal ut-Ta’wilat by Imam Al-Qadi Abu Ya`la Al-Baghdadi (d. 458)

At-Tabsirah fi Usul id-Din Abul Faraj Ash-Shirazi (d. 487)

Al-Manzumah fil-I`tiqad by Imam Mahfuz Al-Kalwadhani (d. 510)

Al-Idah fi Usul id-Din by Imam Ibn Az-Zaghuni (d. 528)

Al-I`tiqad by Imam `Abdul Qadir Al-Jilani (d. 561)

Al-Ghunyah by Imam `Abdul Qadir Al-Jilani (d. 561)

Al-Iqtisad fil-I`tiqad by Imam `Abdul Ghani ibn `Abdul Wahid Al-Maqdisi (d. 600)

Kitabut-Tawhid by Imam `Abdul Ghani ibn `Abdul Wahid Al-Maqdisi (d. 600)

Lum`at ul-I`tiqad by Imam Muwaffaq ud-Din Ibn Qudamah (d. 620)

Nihayah by Imam Ibn Hamdan (d. 695)

Riyad ul-Jannah li-Athari Ahl is-Sunnah by Imam Ibn `Abdul Baqi (d. 1071)

Al-I`tiqad by Imam Al-Balbani (d. 1083)

Najat ul-Khalaf fi I`tiqad is-Salaf by Imam Ibn Qa’id An-Najdi (d. 1097)

Ad-Durrat ul-Madiyyah fi `Aqd Ahli l-Firqat il-Mardiyyah by Imam Muhammad As-Saffarini (d. 1189)

[AmantuBillahi]

There's a Dutch site called sahieh.nl and they have just started a series on the allegations made by Yasir Qadhi. So far only two parts have been published yet but they said they'll be going to respond to all of his claims - in shaa Allaah. The overall site is in Dutch but this particular series will be posted in English. I know most if not all on here are not from the Netherlands but I am, so I'm familiar with some of the students posting on that site. I haven't read the remainder of this thread yet nor am I sure I will to be honest, but I assume it hasn't been mentioned yet.

I've been living under a rock since I made hijrah and admittedly never knew about these Azhari Hanbalis until I start reading on here (nor about these videos of Yasir Qadhi or other recent events/fitan within the 'Salafi' community). They also have an article about that but it's in Dutch. Interesting.

I misread what you said earlier. Two of the articles have already been posted on their website.

Introduction/questioning the integrity of Yasir Qadhi:

https://www.sahieh.nl/2020/09/29/1046/

The state of Najd prior to the Da'wah of Ibn Abdul Wahhab:

https://www.sahieh.nl/2020/10/22/ans...abd-al-wahhab/

[AmantuBillahi]

Introduction/questioning the integrity of Yasir Qadhi:

https://www.sahieh.nl/2020/09/29/1046/

"The arguments Yasir used then were strong and sound and he seemed totally convinced that people who deviate on these issues are greatly mistaken. All this is important to know before delving into the subject.1 After our extensive research in order to answer all of Yasir Qadhi’s claims, we couldn’t find any rational explanation but that the problem seems to be that Yasir changed his methodology to be accepted by a greater audience. Maybe financial gains also play a role? So he left his former sound creed for a small worldly gain. We can’t make anything else out of it. We know Yasir Qadhi is a smart fellow and a great researcher, his former works have proven this fact, he rarely left an issue unanswered. Now we see him leave out key historical information, which shines a crucial light on events and developments regarding the da’wah of Muhammed ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab and the three Saudi states. We see him use derogatory names like “Najdis” and “Madkhalis” without any nuance..."

This quote is very revealing of the author. He is ready to admit that Yasir Qadhi is an excellent researcher who is fully acquainted with the strongest (Salafi) arguments but cannot figure out why he could have possibly renounced his previous views. Did the author not think that perhaps his own biases were getting in the way and preventing him from giving credit to an alternative perspective? May Allah forgive him for assuming that Yasir Qadhi abandoned his former creed for a "small worldly gain". Rather when a sincere person is exposed to further knowledge then it is upon them to verify the information and confirm the truth.

Yasir Qadhi's objections were both historical and theological. Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab had a radical understanding of Tawhid & Shirk that was unprecedenant by the classical scholars in the way he applied it. He explained that MIAW had a unique understanding which was condemned by many of his contemporaries and inconsistent with Ibn Taymiyyah. If these assertions are in fact true, then that is the explanation as to why Yasir Qadhi altered his views.

[AmantuBillahi]

The state of Najd prior to the Da'wah of Ibn Abdul Wahhab:

https://www.sahieh.nl/2020/10/22/ans...abd-al-wahhab/

Prof. Sulaiman al-Huqali wrote about 18th century Najd: “In the field of religion, paganism and polytheism had made inroads into the belief of many people. Graves and tombs of saints and pious people had become places of worship. Supplication to living and dead saints had become common. The traits and characters forbidden by Islam had spread far and wide and the mystic schools had become popular resorts for deviants. These were the circumstances when Shaykh Muhammed ibn Abd al-Wahhâb launched his reformation movement.”

What is described in the quote is not necessarily condemned as major Shirk without further investigation. When Prof. Sulaiman uses the phrase "places of worship" it should not be understood as Muslims worshipping the graves and tombs of pious people.

Prof. Sulaiman al-Huqali wrote: “In the Hijaz, supplication at graves was rampant. The grave of Khadija (May Allah be pleased with her) at al Mu’allât and the Tomb of Abu-Talib were among the places of supplication and invoking intercession for worldly gain. In Yemen, as in Hudyeda, Hadramaut and Yafi ‘, famous graves and tombs were the centres of supplication and worship. Similarly in Syria, Damascus, Aleppo and remote parts were full of such places, where people used to go to seek blessings. In Iraq, the graves of Abu-Hanifah, and Ma’arûf Karkhi were places of such activities. Shiites, likewise, did the same at Najaf, the place where Ali ibn Abu-Talib (May Allah be pleased with him) was martyred, and at the tombs of Husain and Kazim in Karbala. People used to come to these graves and such places, supplicated and worshipped there and wanted these graves, tombs, etc. to fulfil their needs and remove their difficulties.

This should also not be interpreted as large regions of Muslims nullifying their Islam and becoming Mushrikeen. The examples in the quote are not ruled as major Shirk without investigating the specific details of those practices.

So it is proven beyond the slightest doubt that al-Imaam Muhammed bin ‘Abd al-Wahâb – rahiemahullâh – was confronted with a society that was filled with shirk and unislamic customs.

The reason we began with this extremely important point is that the New Yasir did not mention this at all and doesn’t mention what the da’wah of the Mujaddid brought of Islamic and Social and Political improvements in the Arabian Peninsula! He brought more positive change than his opponents who ruled the area for more than 400 years!

1. The author has not proven beyond the slightest doubt that Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab was confronted by a society filled with Shirk. Rather the only thing he did was use Wahhabi theology to condemn the very actions the majority of scholars do not consider major Shirk to prove his point.

2. Yasir Qadhi didn't mention the state of Najd during his podcast because he spent a significant portion of his time explaining why MIAW's understanding of Shirk was not mainstream in the first place.

With all due to respect to the author, it is clear that he is not knowledgeable enough to pick up on what was being addressed in the video and shouldn't be writing articles refuting others.

[TazkiyyatunNafs]

What is described in the quote is not necessarily condemned as major Shirk without further investigation. When Prof. Sulaiman uses the phrase "places of worship" it should not be understood as Muslims worshipping the graves and tombs of pious people.



This should also not be interpreted as large regions of Muslims nullifying their Islam and becoming Mushrikeen. The examples in the quote are not ruled as major Shirk without investigating the specific details of those practices.



1. The author has not proven beyond the slightest doubt that Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab was confronted by a society filled with Shirk. Rather the only thing he did was use Wahhabi theology to condemn the very actions the majority of scholars do not consider major Shirk to prove his point.

2. Yasir Qadhi didn't mention the state of Najd during his podcast because he spent a significant portion of his time explaining why MIAW's understanding of Shirk was not mainstream in the first place.

With all due to respect to the author, it is clear that he is not knowledgeable enough to pick up on what was being addressed in the video and shouldn't be writing articles refuting others.

I think the article made clear that they wanted to address this first so it would give further insight before addressing the claims Yasir Qadhi made. As they wrote: "The reason we began with this extremely important point is that the New Yasir did not mention this at all..."

The author has only posted introductions so far and hasn't even addressed any of the claims mentioned in the video, so how could you then say it's clear he is not knowledgeable enough to pick up on what was being addressed in the video?

Let me make clear that I'm not defending the author or the site per se, I shared it because you said the 'Salafi Community' (which is broad since people that ascribe to Salafiyyah differ in many issues) in the West has been silent about that video.

[TazkiyyatunNafs]

What is described in the quote is not necessarily condemned as major Shirk without further investigation. When Prof. Sulaiman uses the phrase "places of worship" it should not be understood as Muslims worshipping the graves and tombs of pious people.

This should also not be interpreted as large regions of Muslims nullifying their Islam and becoming Mushrikeen. The examples in the quote are not ruled as major Shirk without investigating the specific details of those practices.

1. The author has not proven beyond the slightest doubt that Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab was confronted by a society filled with Shirk. Rather the only thing he did was use Wahhabi theology to condemn the very actions the majority of scholars do not consider major Shirk to prove his point.

You're speaking now about Muslims nullifying their Islaam and becoming Mushrikeen as if any of that has been mentioned yet, which so far hasn't been the case*. And per my own understanding even though the Shaykh used to regard those actions as Shirk, he also excused them due to ignorance. We've had a discussion on this topic before where I shared some of his words on this topic, if I have the time I'll try to look them up and re-share them - in shaa Allaah. So yes, the people did fall into Shirk according to them, but even the Shaykh himself didn't make absolute Takfir on them.

*Now as a disclaimer I want to make clear that I'm not speaking on behalf of the author since there's a group ascribing to Salafiyyah who don't apply the excuse of ignorance. So it may be that the author doesn't apply the excuse of ignorance. People ascribing to Salafiyyah are not a one size fits all. Again, I shared this piece not because I necessarily agree with it, but because you claimed the 'Salafi Community' has been silent about it.

Wa Allaahu a3lam.

[AmantuBillahi]

I think the article made clear that they wanted to address this first so it would give further insight before addressing the claims Yasir Qadhi made. As they wrote: "The reason we began with this extremely important point is that the New Yasir did not mention this at all..."

The author has only posted introductions so far and hasn't even addressed any of the claims mentioned in the video, so how could you then say it's clear he is not knowledgeable enough to pick up on what was being addressed in the video?

Let me make clear that I'm not defending the author or the site per se, I shared it because you said the 'Salafi Community' (which is broad since people that ascribe to Salafiyyah differ in many issues) in the West has been silent about that video.

The author in the first article admitted that he had no idea why Yasir Qadhi switched his views on this issue. He even went as far as saying he might have did for worldly benefits.

I'm not trying to be hasty in judgement but the second article seems to indicate how they intend on proving their case. What is missing in the new YQ from the old YQ is his consideration of the widespread 'Shirk' during that period.

Anyway this is the crux of the argument for the Najdis. You have to somehow justify the statements and "Ghazwat" of MIAW and the early Najdiyya.

[TazkiyyatunNafs]

These are some from the other thread:

The Shaykh didn't make mass takfir on the ummah. Rather he had a clear principle he worked by which was that he doesn't make takfir on individuals as long as the proof was not established on them and they were eligible for the excuse of ignorance. This is a very important matter and precisely why the Shaykh keeps saying that he doesn't make takfir on the masses. This is just slander that his enemies used against him. In the same volume he says this:

“And as for takfīr: Then I make takfīr of the one who knew (the reality) of the religion of the Messenger, and then after he came to know it, he reviled it, prohibited the people from it and showed enmity to the one who implemented it. This is the one I declare a disbeliever and most of the ummah, and all praise is due to Allāh, is not like that. As for fighting, then we did not fight anyone till this day except to protect our lives and honour. They are the ones who came to our lands, and they left no [other] possibility [for us]. However, we may sometimes fight some of them from the angle of reprisal [i.e. for their unjust attack against us], and the reward for evil is [an evil] of its like.”Al-Durar al-Saniyyah (1/73)


"And when it is the case that we do not make takfīr of the one who worships the idol (tomb) which is on the grave of ʿAbd al-Qādir, and the idol which is on the grave of Aḥmad al-Badawī and their likes, due to their ignorance, and the absence of the one to notify them (of their opposition), then how could we make takfīr of the one who does not associate partners with Allāh, when he does not emigrate to us and who does not make takfīr and does not fight (against us)? “Glory be to you (O Lord), this is a mighty slander.” (24:16). Fatawa wa Masāʾil in Majmūʿ Muʾallafāt (4/11)


Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhāb (may Allah’s mercy be upon him) said in reply to Sulaymān Ibn Suhaym who accused him of takfīr:

“Indeed Allah knows that this man has fabricated lies against me by ascribing to me what I never said, and most of which have never even occurred to me! From them is his claim that I invalidate the books of the Four Madhhabs, and that I say that the people (i.e. the ummah) has been upon nothing (i.e. no Islam) for 600 years! And that I make takfīr of the one who makes Tawassul (seeks nearness to Allah) through the righteous ones [who have passed away]. He claims that I made takfīr of Al-Busayri… and that I said that whoever swears by other than Allah is an unbeliever… My answer to all of this is: ‘How free you are, O Allah, from all imperfections, the Most Perfect. Indeed this is a great slander.’ And before this, there were those who slandered the Messenger Muhammad (ﷺ) claiming that he had reviled Jesus the son of Mary (may Allah’s peace be upon them) and that he reviles the righteous. So their hearts resemble one another in their fabrication of lies and bearing false witness.”

Sharhu Aqīdat Al-Imām Al-Mujaddid Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhāb, by Shaikh, Dr. Sālih Al-Fawzān, pp. 142-156.

Having posted that, I'd like to say that I don't like to discuss it. I did a bit on the other thread and I just don't want to do any of it anymore. I posted this to show you what my understanding is from the Shaykh's works. Now I know there are quotes that may indicate otherwise, but I think they hang together in the end. Anyway, I'm ignorant. I'm not eligible to discuss this in any way. And Allaah knows best.