Qaadi al Shawkani and Muhammad bin abdul Wahaab may Allah be pleased with them.
Qaadi Shawkani mentioned some things against the ruler of Najd when he himself said the reports whose authenticity he did not know for example they claim, whoever is not under their rule is a disbeliever, or whoever does not pray should be killed. He himself stated that he had only heard these things and that Allah knows their truthfulness. Then he refuted these claims, he said:
وَبَعض النَّاس يزْعم أَنه يعْتَقد اعْتِقَاد الْخَوَارِج وَمَا أَظن ذَلِك صَحِيحا فَإِن صَاحب نجد وَجَمِيع أَتْبَاعه يعْملُونَ بِمَا تعلموه من مُحَمَّد بن عبد الْوَهَّاب وَكَانَ حنبليا ثمَّ طلب الحَدِيث بِالْمَدِينَةِ المشرفة فَعَاد إِلَى نجد وَصَارَ يعْمل باجتهادات جمَاعَة من متأخرى الْحَنَابِلَة كَابْن تَيْمِية وَابْن الْقيم وأضرابهما وهما من أَشد النَّاس على معتقدى الْأَمْوَات
Some people falsely claim that he (ruler of najd) holds the beliefs of the Khawarij, but I do not believe that is correct. For the leader of Najd and all his followers act upon what they learned from Muhammad bin Abdul-Wahhab, who was a Hanbali. He then sought hadith in the noble city of Medina, returned to Najd, and began to follow the juristic reasoning of a group of later Hanbalis, such as Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn al-Qayyim, and their like who are among the harshest critics of those who believe in the dead. ( al-Badr aṭ-Ṭāliʿ bi-Maḥāsin man Baʿda al-Qarn as-Sābiʿ vol 2 page 6)
Then, when he read the letter from the ruler of Najd himself, he praised his aqaid, he said:
I saw a letter from the ruler of Najd, who is now in control of those regions, in response to some scholars who had written to him asking him to clarify his beliefs.
فَرَأَيْت جَوَابه مُشْتَمِلًا على اعْتِقَاد حسن مُوَافق للْكتاب وَالسّنة فَالله أعلم بِحَقِيقَة الْحَال
I found his reply to contain a sound belief in accordance with the Quran and the Sunnah, but Allah knows best the true reality of the situation
As for the people of Mecca, they began to declare him a disbeliever and openly call him a kafir (because of the rumors and their fights). We heard that some scholars from Najd arrived in Mecca for the purpose of debate. They debated the scholars of Mecca in the presence of the Sharif on issues that demonstrated the firmness of the ruler of najd and his companion’s stance in religion.
In the year 1215 AH, two small volumes arrived from the aforementioned ruler of Najd, which he had sent to the presence of our Master, the Imam (may Allah preserve him). One of them contained epistles by Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab,
كلهَا في الْإِرْشَاد إِلَى إخلاص التَّوْحِيد والتنفير من الشرك الذي يَفْعَله المعتقدون فِي الْقُبُور وهي رسائل جَيِّدَة مشحونة بأدلة الْكتاب وَالسّنة والمجلد الآخر يتَضَمَّن الرَّد على جمَاعَة من الْمُقَصِّرِينَ من فُقَهَاء صنعاء وصعدة ذاكروه في مسَائِل مُتَعَلقَة بأصول الدَّين وبجماعة من الصَّحَابَة فَأجَاب عَلَيْهِم جوابات محررة مقررة مُحَققَة تدل على أَن الْمُجيب من الْعلمَاء الْمُحَقِّقين العارفين بِالْكتاب وَالسّنة
All of them guiding towards the sincerity of Tawheed (monotheism) and warning against the shirk (polytheism) committed by those who hold beliefs concerning graves. They are excellent epistles, replete with proofs from the Quran and the Sunnah. The other volume contained refutations of a group of negligent scholars from Sana’a and Sa’dah who had raised objections to him regarding matters related to the fundamentals of religion and concerning a group of the Companions. He answered them with precise, decisive, and well-researched replies, which indicate that the respondent is from among the verifying scholars who are knowledgeable of the Quran and the Sunnah. (al-Badr aṭ-Ṭāliʿ bi-Maḥāsin man Baʿda al-Qarn as-Sābiʿ vol 2 page 7)
He also said about those lands:
وَكَانَت تِلْكَ الْبِلَاد قد غلبت عَلَيْهَا أُمُور الْجَاهِلِيَّة وَصَارَ الإسلام فِيهَا غَرِيبا ثمَّ مَاتَ مُحَمَّد بن سعود وَقد دخل فى الدَّين بعض بِلَاد النجدية وَقَامَ وَلَده عبد الْعَزِيز مقَامه
Those lands had been overcome by the affairs of Jahiliyyah (pre-Islamic ignorance), and Islam had become strange within them. Then Muhammad bin Saud died after some regions of Najd had entered into the deen and his son Abdul Aziz took his place. [al-Badr aṭ-Ṭāliʿ bi-Maḥāsin man Baʿda al-Qarn as-Sābiʿ 1/262]
All that he mentioned against them was based on the news of which he himself was uncertain. However, when he read the response from the ruler of Najd, he praised it and said it is in accordance to Quran and sunnah. Subsequently, after reading the books of Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab, he praised both the author and his beliefs (aqidah). He even stated that his followers are not Khawarij. Furthermore, he remarked that Najd returned to the true religion during their reign, having previously been in a state of ignorance (jahiliyyah).
He never, in his life, said anything against Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab himself. If he spoke against some Najdis in his diwan for certain wrong actions for example, advising them that declaring grave visitation to be disbelief (kufr) is the way of the Khawarij it does not imply that Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab or his direct students were wrong. This is because they never declared visiting graves to be an act of disbelief. Notably, this is the same context in which Al-Shawkani himself called those who seek help from saints (auliyah) at their graves “grave worshippers, even though he (Shawkani) believed in seeking tawassul through the Prophet (peace be upon him) which is a matter of jurisprudential difference (fiqh).
As al Shawkani said that his teacher:
Al-San’ani said:
“Disbelief in action(Kufr al-‘Amali) includes asking for help from (dead) saints (Auliyah), seeking their aid in distress, performing circumambulation (tawaf) of graves, kissing the walls of graves, and making vows to them. These constitute disbelief in action, not disbelief in belief (Kufr al-I’tiqadi). Such a person is among those who believe in Allah, His Messenger, and the Day of Judgment, but Satan has beautified for them the belief that saints have the power to benefit and harm and can intercede. Thus, they hold the same belief about saints (Auliyah) that the disbelievers (kuffar) held about idols during the Days of Ignorance (Jahiliyyah). However, these people affirm monotheism (tawheed) for Allah and do not make the saints their god…. Therefore, they should be stopped through sincere advice (naseeha) and made aware of their ignorance….” [Al-Fath al-Rabbani min Fatawa al-Imam al-Shawkani, page 364]
Al-Shawkani responded, stating that this is actually disbelief in belief (Kufr al-I’tiqadi) rather than disbelief in action. He argued that the grave worshippers of his time are even worse, for the polytheists (Mushrikeen) used to call upon Allah in times of severe distress (quoting al-Isra 67, al-An’am 40, Luqman 32), while generally asking idols for help. In contrast, the grave worshippers of his time ask the dead for help even during calamities, with only a few calling upon Allah.
AN INTERESTING NARRATION:
Al-Shawkani said:
“A man who traveled to Hajj by sea informed me that when a great storm arose,he saw most of the travelers asking the dead for help… No one was asking Allah for help. I felt a great fear of drowning at that moment, seeing this type of idolatry (shirk) being committed against Allah.” [Al-Fath al-Rabbani min Fatawa al-Imam al-Shawkani, page 368, Maktaba al-Jaleel al-Jadeer, Yemen, Sana’a]
He also said about the ruler of najd that whoever came under his rule established prayer, zakat, fasting, and all the other rites of Islam. Many of the Arabs of the Levant living between the Hijaz and Sa’dah submitted to his authority. They began to establish the obligations of the religion after having known nothing of Islam and not fulfilling any of its duties.
Last but not the least, he said about Muhammad bin Abdul Wahab
الشَّيْخ الْعَلامَة مُحَمَّد بن عبد الْوَهَّاب الداعي إِلَى التَّوْحِيد الْمُنكر على المعتقدين في الْأَمْوَات
The Shaykh the Allama, Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab, the caller to monotheism (Tawhid), who denounced the beliefs of those who venerate the dead. [al-Badr aṭ-Ṭāliʿ bi-Maḥāsin man Baʿda al-Qarn as-Sābiʿ 1/262].
In short, he never retracted his praise of Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab, the ruler of Najd, or their followers. If he ever criticized some of their followers, it does not discredit his overall position. For example: If certain Taliban members claim the Hanafi school, it does not mean Imam Abu Hanifa is to be blamed. If some Hanbalis harassed at-Tabari, leading to his death in seclusion, Imam Ahmad is not responsible. Historically, Hanafis and Shafi’is have clashed, yet neither Imam Abu Hanifa nor Imam al-Shafi’i should be blamed.
Note: If anyone has observations regarding Imam al-Shawkani, that is fine you may comment.