The Ruling of Imam Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab – may Allah have mercy on him – on the People of His Time
All praise is due to Allah, Lord of the worlds. May peace and blessings be upon the trustworthy Prophet, his family, and all his companions.
Among the most famous allegations made by the opponents of Shaykh Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab, and the falsehoods fabricated against him to repel people from him and turn them away from his call, is the claim that he declared all Muslims in the countries to be disbelievers. If only the matter had stopped there, but they went beyond it to claim that he asserted that Muslims for the past six hundred years had not been following the religion.
Ibn Ghannam – may Allah have mercy on him – stated, explaining the aim of the opponents behind this fabrication and claim: “Their aim with the generality of takfir (declaring others as disbelievers) was to warn people away from him and repel them.” (1)
This fabrication has been repeated by his opponents. Among the first to attribute it to the Shaykh were Sulayman ibn Suhaym, as in his letter to the scholars of the Two Holy Sanctuaries and the people of the lands; Sulayman ibn Abd al-Wahhab in his book Fasl al-Khitab fi al-Radd ‘ala Ibn Abd al-Wahhab; Muhammad ibn Fayruz in some of his letters; and others.
Sulayman ibn Suhaym said in his letter sent to Basra, al-Ahsa, and the Two Holy Sanctuaries, enumerating the Shaykh’s innovations and misguidances – according to his claim: “And from his innovations and misguidances… it has been established that he says: ‘The people for six hundred years have not been upon anything.'” (2)
And Muhammad ibn Abd Allah ibn Fayruz (1142-1216 AH) said in answer to a question about what causes a man to become a disbeliever: “The tyrant of al-‘Arid says with his tongue and his pen: ‘All those before him for about six hundred years were in a state of ignorance (Jahiliyyah) greater than the Jahiliyyah that was before the Prophet – peace be upon him,’ and he at that time is like them, and his shaykhs are likewise, until this good came.” (3)
Perhaps the origin of this fabrication arose from holding the Shaykh to the logical conclusions of some of his statements. For when they saw the Shaykh declaring as disbelievers those who believed in the dead and directed various types of worship to them, such as slaughter, vows, and supplication, and that shirk (polytheism) was ruled upon whoever performed these actions, even if they did not believe them to be partners with Allah or rivals to Him, or did not believe in their independent power to effect [outcomes] – which is the criterion for disbelief in their view concerning those who turn to the dead – and it was their assumption that these actions had become widespread in the lands of Islam since ancient times, they saw that among the necessary implications of the Shaykh’s statement was the declaration of Muslims as disbelievers for these actions.
Sulayman ibn Abd al-Wahhab, one of the Shaykh’s greatest opponents and adversaries, after mentioning some types of major shirk that Imam Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab condemned among the people, citing examples like slaughtering for other than Allah, vowing to other than Allah, supplicating to the dead and seeking rescue from them, said: “And it is known to the elite and the common folk that these matters have filled the lands of the Muslims, and according to their scholars, they have filled the lands of the Muslims for more than seven hundred years.” (4) (Note: Shaykh Sulayman accepted the call of his brother, first he was with him, then he left, then he came back and died while both brothers were happy with each other)
And Ibn Ghannam – may Allah have mercy on him – narrating from the Shaykh’s opponents, said: “So they said: ‘If what we do of supplications and beliefs concerning the people of the graves in those past times and eras [is shirk], then we are disbelievers, astray, without doubt.'” (5)
This fabrication has been denied by the Shaykh repeatedly in his letters.
He – may Allah have mercy on him – said in his letter to Abd Allah ibn Suhaym: “As for the issues with which he – meaning Sulayman ibn Suhaym – caused an uproar: among them is what is from clear falsehood, and that is his statement: ‘I nullify the books of the schools of thought,’ and his statement: ‘I say that the people for six hundred years have not been upon anything’… These are twelve issues. My answer regarding them is to say: ‘Glory be to You! This is a great slander!'” (6)
And the Shaykh – may Allah have mercy on him – said in a general letter of his: “From Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab to whomever among the Muslims this reaches, peace be upon you and the mercy of Allah and His blessings. To proceed: What has been mentioned to you about me – that I declare general takfir – this is from the slander of the enemies. And likewise their statement that I say: ‘Whoever follows the religion of Allah and His Messenger while residing in his land, it is not sufficient for him until he comes to me’ – this is also from falsehood. The intended meaning is following the religion of Allah and His Messenger in whatever land it may be. However, we declare as disbelievers whoever acknowledges the religion of Allah and His Messenger and then shows hostility to it and prevents people from it. And likewise, whoever worships idols after knowing that it is the religion of the polytheists and an adornment for the people – this is whom I declare a disbeliever. And every scholar on the face of the earth declares these people disbelievers, except for a stubborn or ignorant man. And Allah knows best. And peace.” (7)
Upon examining the Shaykh’s letters and writings, his rulings regarding the people of his era can be divided into categories:
First Category: His Ruling on the Bedouins
The Shaykh mentioned in more than one place the state of most of the Bedouins in Najd regarding ignorance of the religion, distance from the Shari’ah, and even denial of the Resurrection.
He – may Allah have mercy on him – said in his letter to Muhammad ibn ‘Id: “It is known to the elite and the common folk what the Bedouins – or most of them – are upon. If a stubborn opponent denies, he cannot deny that ‘Anazah and Al Dhafeer and their like, all their notables and followers, acknowledge the Resurrection and have no doubt about it…” (8)
And he said in his letter to the scholars of the Sacred City (Mecca): “And I issued a fatwa declaring the disbelief of the Bedouins who deny the Resurrection, Paradise, and Hellfire, and deny the inheritance of women, while they know that the Book of Allah is with the settled people, and that the Messenger of Allah – peace be upon him – was sent with what they denied. So when I issued a fatwa declaring their disbelief, while they are the majority of the people in our land, the common folk found that strange, and their elite among the enemies from those who claim knowledge said: ‘Whoever says “La ilaha illa Allah” (There is no deity worthy of worship but Allah) does not become a disbeliever, even if they deny the Resurrection and deny all the laws.'” (9)
The Shaykh specifically referred in his speech to the Bedouins whose conditions he knew, particularly the Bedouins of Najd and Hijaz, and did not intend the generality of Bedouins in all countries.
Therefore, he – may Allah have mercy on him – said in his letter to Sulayman ibn Suhaym: “Woe to you! How do you command after this to follow the majority of the people? And it is known that the people of our land and the land of Hijaz, those among them who deny the Resurrection are more numerous than those who affirm it…” (10)
Despite this, the Shaykh did not intend by his speech to rule disbelief upon all the Bedouins of Najd and Hijaz. Rather, he intended to point to the widespread and prevalent disbelief-based beliefs among them. He also conditioned the ruling of disbelief upon those who fell into those disbelief-causing matters, not those who were free from them.
Indeed, he – may Allah have mercy on him – said in his letter to the scholars of the Sacred City: “And I issued a fatwa declaring the disbelief of the Bedouins who deny the Resurrection, Paradise, and Hellfire, and deny the inheritance of women…” (11)
Consider his statement: “declaring the disbelief of the Bedouins who deny,” and he did not say “declaring the disbelief of the Bedouins” generally. The ruling of disbelief is applied specifically to those among the Bedouins who deny the Resurrection, Paradise, and Hellfire, not to those who affirm the laws of Islam and did not fall into any of the disbelief-causing matters.
The Shaykh’s opponents did not oppose him in describing the condition of the Bedouins with what he mentioned of the prevalence of denying the Resurrection, Paradise, and Hellfire among them, and their turning away from the laws and rulings. Rather, they affirmed this description. Therefore, it is not established from any of them a description of the Bedouins contrary to what the Shaykh mentioned, nor a rejection of his report. Rather, they objected to his declaring them disbelievers; for they claimed that the Bedouins’ denial of the laws and their rejection of the Resurrection does not necessitate ruling disbelief upon them, because they say “La ilaha illa Allah,” and everyone who says this statement in their view cannot be declared a disbeliever, even if he denies what he denies of the religion.
The Shaykh – may Allah have mercy on him – said in his letter to Muhammad ibn ‘Id: “It is known to the elite and the common folk what the Bedouins – or most of them – are upon… Your scholars said: ‘It is known that this is the condition of the Bedouins, we do not deny it. But they say: “La ilaha illa Allah,” and it protects them from disbelief even if they do all of that.'” (12)
We have already pointed out in the previous episode that the Shaykh was not alone in his ruling on the Bedouins of his time. Indeed, more than one figure who preceded the Shaykh, his contemporaries, and those who came after him mentioned about the Bedouins of their time the same as what the Shaykh mentioned regarding the prevalence of disbelief in the Resurrection and denial of the laws.
Among those who preceded the Shaykh: Muhammad al-Sanusi (d. 850 AH) – may Allah have mercy on him – who said about the Bedouins of Syria in his time: “And many of the people of the desert deny the Resurrection.” (13)
Among the Shaykh’s contemporaries: Muhammad al-Khalili al-Shafi’i (d. 1147 AH) – may Allah have mercy on him – as came in his fatwas, narrating about the Arabs of the Sa’adinah, Bani ‘Atiyyah, and others among the Arabs of Syria, Egypt, Hijaz, and other desert Arabs, that they affirm his prophethood – peace be upon him – but they deny the Resurrection and the Rising. (14)
Among those who came after the Shaykh: Ibrahim al-Bayjuri al-Azhari (d. 1276 AH) – may Allah have mercy on him – who said about the Bedouins of Egypt: “And similar to that is widespread among the people. Among them are those who believe that the Companions are prophets, and this is disbelief. And among them are those who deny the Resurrection.” (15)
Second Category: His Ruling on the Settled People of Najd
The Shaykh mentioned in more than one place in his letters the spread of manifestations of shirk in the villages and towns of Najd, and the distance of most of its people from knowing the reality of Tawhid (monotheism) with which Allah sent His Messengers and revealed His Books.
He mentioned that what caused this was the absence of those among the scholars who would alert [people], and the heedlessness of many of them from knowing the meaning of the word of Tawhid.
The Shaykh – may Allah have mercy on him – said in his letter addressed specifically to those among the Muslims to whom the book reaches – particularly: Muhammad ibn ‘Ubayd, Abd al-Qadir al-‘Adili and his son, Abd Allah ibn Suhaym, Abd Allah ibn ‘Udhayb, Hamidan ibn Turki, Ali ibn Zamil, Muhammad Abu al-Khayl, and Salih ibn Abd Allah: “So what has filled the earth of the greater shirk – worship of idols – is not hidden from you. This one comes to the grave of a prophet, this one to the grave of a Companion like al-Zubayr and Talhah, this one to the grave of a righteous man. This one supplicates to him in hardship and in his absence, this one makes vows to him, this one slaughters for the jinn, this one seeks from him removal of worldly or religious harm, this one asks him for the good of this world and the Hereafter. If you know that this is from shirk like the worship of idols, which takes a person out of Islam, and it has filled the land and the sea and become widespread and prevalent, to the extent that many of those who do it pray at night and fast during the day, and are attributed to righteousness and worship, then why have you not spread this among the people and made clear to them that this is disbelief in Allah which takes one out of Islam?” (16)
And he – may Allah have mercy on him – said in his letter to Muhammad ibn ‘Id: “Know that I became known for four issues: The first: Clarifying Tawhid, despite it not having reached the ears of most people.” (17)
In the course of his speech on the stance of the scholars regarding knowing the reality of Tawhid and its opposite from shirk, and clarifying their ignorance of it, the Shaykh – may Allah have mercy on him – specifically addressed the scholars of al-‘Arid in particular, and did not generalize his ruling to the scholars of Muslims in other regions of Najd, let alone scholars in other provinces and countries.
Indeed, he – may Allah have mercy on him – said in his letter to the people of Riyadh and Manfuha, which are from the villages of al-‘Arid: “And I inform you about myself – by Allah, besides whom there is no deity – I sought knowledge, and those who knew me believed that I had knowledge. And I, at that time, did not know the meaning of ‘La ilaha illa Allah,’ nor did I know the religion of Islam before this good which Allah bestowed. And likewise, my shaykhs – there was not a man among them who knew that. So whoever claims from the scholars of al-‘Arid that he knew the meaning of ‘La ilaha illa Allah,’ or knew the meaning of Islam before this time, or claims about his shaykhs that anyone knew that, then he has lied and fabricated, deceived the people, and praised himself with what is not in him.” (18)
Observe the specification of his ruling and description to the people of al-‘Arid from Najd in particular.
This description which the Shaykh mentioned about the reality of the settled people of Najd, and al-‘Arid especially, was affirmed by the greatest and most famous scholar of al-‘Arid, Abd Allah ibn ‘Isa, the judge of al-Dir’iyyah – may Allah have mercy on him.
The Shaykh – may Allah have mercy on him – said in explaining the status of Abd Allah ibn ‘Isa among the scholars of Najd: “And a witness to this is that Abd Allah ibn ‘Isa – we do not know among the scholars of Najd, nor the scholars of al-‘Arid, nor others, one more eminent than him. And this speech of his will reach you, Allah willing.” (19)
And Abd Allah ibn ‘Isa – may Allah have mercy on him – said in a letter directed to the general Muslims: “Fear Allah, O servants! Do not be deceived by one who does not know the testimony that there is no deity worthy of worship but Allah and is tainted with shirk while unaware. Indeed, most of my life passed and I did not know of its types what I know today. So praise be to Allah for what He has taught us of His religion. And let it not seem strange to you today that this matter is strange, for your Prophet – peace be upon him – said: ‘Islam began as something strange and will return to being strange as it began.’ And reflect upon the supplication of our father Ibrahim – peace be upon him – when he said in his supplication: ‘And keep me and my sons away from worshipping idols. My Lord, indeed they have led astray many of the people.’ And were it not for the brevity of this pamphlet and that Shaykh Muhammad has excelled and provided benefit with what he has already mentioned of speech in it, we would have prolonged the speech.” (20)
Similar to this is what Imam Abd al-‘Aziz ibn Muhammad ibn Sa’ud – may Allah have mercy on him (1133-1218 AH) – narrated in describing their condition before the Shaykh’s call. He was from al-Dir’iyyah from the region of al-‘Arid in Najd, among those who sought knowledge at that time. He said in a letter of his: “You are eager to know our condition and what we are upon? So we inform you of the state of affairs: We and the people in the past were upon one religion: we supplicated to Allah and we supplicated to others besides Him; we made vows to Him and we made vows to others; we slaughtered for Him and we slaughtered for others; we relied upon Him and we relied upon others; we feared Him and we feared others. And we acknowledged the laws: prayer, zakat, fasting, and Hajj – and those who acted upon this among us were few, despite the acknowledgment. And we acknowledged the prohibitions: types of usury, fornication, drinking wine, and the like from the types of prohibitions, and none of our elite objected to it from the common folk. Then Allah clarified Tawhid for us at the end of this time at the hands of Ibn Abd al-Wahhab, and we rose with him, and the people rose against us with aggression.” (21)
And he said in another place – may Allah have mercy on him: “Because the people introduced innovations after their Prophet – peace be upon him – and the righteous Salaf, claiming they were good innovations. The ugliest and most severe of these: supplicating to other than Allah, seeking rescue from the righteous among the living and the dead to bring benefits, remove hardships, and asking them for needs so that they may intercede for them with Allah and bring them closer to Him. And likewise, we used to do this before Allah blessed us with the religion of Islam – us and others – until it became widespread in many lands, and it became, according to most people, the ultimate form of venerating and loving the righteous. And whoever rejected it to them, they declared him a disbeliever and expelled him.” (22)
Ibn Ghannam extensively described in his history the condition of the people of Najd and the lands and cities of Islam.
There is no wonder in the Shaykh describing the condition of Najd as he mentioned. For when falsehood is acted upon and not rejected in the prescribed and obligatory manner, people become accustomed to it, and it becomes a habit for them, and they believe it to be religion and an act of worship.
It is narrated from Abu Wa’il, from Hudhayfah ibn al-Yaman – may Allah be pleased with him – that he took two stones and placed one on top of the other, then said to his companions: “Do you see what light is between these two stones?” They said: “O Abu Abd Allah, we do not see between them any light except a little.” He said: “By the One in whose hand is my soul, innovations will certainly appear until nothing of the truth is seen except the amount you see of light between these two stones. By Allah, innovations will become so widespread that if something from them is left, they will say: ‘The Sunnah has been abandoned.'” (23)
And with the passage of time, falsehood may become hidden from many of the people of knowledge, to the extent that there is hardly anyone among them who rejects it.
Al-Shawkani – may Allah have mercy on him – said: “Know that what we have elaborated and established – that much of what the believers in the dead do constitutes shirk – may be hidden from many of the people of knowledge. This is not because it is inherently hidden, but due to the overwhelming consensus of the majority on this matter, and because it has become ingrained in the old and grown up with the young. He sees it and hears it, and he does not see or hear anyone rejecting it. Rather, he may even hear someone encouraging it and urging people towards it. Added to that is what Satan shows people of the fulfillment of needs for those who seek some of the dead who have fame… So with the combination of these matters along with the passage of long times and the extinction of generation after generation, a person imagines from the beginning of his life and the early days of his time that this is from the greatest acts of worship and the best of obedience. Then whatever knowledge he learns after that does not benefit him. Rather, he forgets every legal proof that indicates that this is shirk itself. And if he hears someone saying that, he rejects it, his hearing shuns it, and he finds it intolerable, because it is extremely far-fetched that his mind should shift all at once, at one time, from something he believes to be among the greatest acts of obedience, to it being among the ugliest of vile things and the greatest of prohibitions – along with it being what his forefathers practiced, his descendants followed, and successive generations and ages adhered to. And such is the case with everything in which people imitate their forefathers and give authority to established customs.” (24)
What confirms the correctness of the Shaykh’s description of the settled people of Najd as mentioned is the opposition of most of those attributed to knowledge in Najd to his call. For despite his attribution to them of ignorance of the reality of Tawhid and the meaning of “La ilaha illa Allah” before the advent of this call, and his description of them in his letter we referred to earlier with his statement: “So whoever claims from the scholars of al-‘Arid that he knew the meaning of ‘La ilaha illa Allah,’ or knew the meaning of Islam before this time, or claims about his shaykhs that anyone knew that, then he has lied and fabricated, deceived the people, and praised himself with what is not in him” – and his declaration of that – none of them denied his claim. Rather, they confirmed it by opposing his call, invalidating what he brought of the interpretation of Tawhid, and claiming that he innovated the concept of Tawhid al-‘Ibadah (Oneness of Worship), and they declared him misguided for declaring the worshippers of graves and saints to be disbelievers.
And those among them who agreed with him in interpreting the reality of Tawhid and clarifying the meaning of “La ilaha illa Allah” in line with what he called to, none of them claimed knowledge of that before the Shaykh’s announcement of the call. The Shaykh mentioned in more than one place the agreement of some of them with him in interpreting Tawhid and clarifying shirk, while they differed with him on takfir and fighting.
The Shaykh – may Allah have mercy on him – said in his letter to Muhammad ibn ‘Id: “So when these four matters – meaning: clarifying Tawhid, clarifying shirk, declaring as disbelievers those who abandon Tawhid, and fighting them – became famous from me, those who claim to be from the scholars in all the lands believed me regarding Tawhid and negating shirk, but they rejected takfir and fighting… And we say secondly: If they have been acknowledging for more than twenty years, night and day, secretly and openly, that the Tawhid which this man has brought forth is the religion of Allah and His Messenger, but the people do not obey us; and that what he rejects is shirk, and he is truthful in his rejection; but if only he would be safe from takfir and fighting, it would be right. This is their speech in front of everyone.” (25)
And he – may Allah have mercy on him – said in his letter to Ahmad ibn Ibrahim: “And you and your like bear witness night and day that this which we have brought forth to the people of Tawhid and rejection of shirk is the religion of Allah and His Messenger, and that the difference between us is regarding takfir and fighting.” (26)
And Ibn Ghannam – may Allah have mercy on him – explaining the stances of those attributed to knowledge in Najd regarding the Shaykh’s call, said: “The majority of them, from those who earned and committed [wrong], acknowledged upon themselves and confessed that what Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab brought is the truth and correctness, and that this is the required Tawhid. And whoever does not realize it does not differentiate between the Lord and the created. But then hearts became averse to it, fearing that their leadership, worldly life, and status would all be taken away. Many of them explicitly stated in large gatherings that what is done at graves, trees, idols, and stones is from the greater shirk which is not erased except by repentance and forgiveness. And some of those persisted in obstinacy and continued in denial. And some would acknowledge it in private secretly, and deny it among the people openly.” (27)
Despite the acknowledgment of some of them of the correctness of what he brought in interpreting Tawhid and clarifying shirk, none of them claimed knowledge of that before the Shaykh’s call. For it is known that if they had known the reality of Tawhid before the Shaykh’s call, they would have hastened to deny his claim, invalidate the attribution of ignorance to them, and remove the blame from them, especially since the matter pertains to the foundation of the religion. All of that did not happen, which confirms the correctness of his claim.
When this is known, and we have verified the Shaykh’s description of the settled people and Bedouins of Najd with what was mentioned of ignorance and distance from the reality of Tawhid, it is necessary to point out that this description does not in any case imply its generalization to every specific individual. Rather, among the people of Najd there were those who knew Tawhid and adhered to it. His speech is applied to what was apparent, declared, and manifest, not to what was concealed and hidden.
It is also important to point out that the Shaykh’s description of the condition of Najd as resembling Jahiliyyah does not necessitate ruling disbelief upon their specific individuals. For ruling upon specific individuals differs from ruling upon descriptions. The Shaykh merely mentioned a general description of the reality in Najd before his call, and he did not generalize this description to every specific person in Najd, let alone rule upon him with it. Because ruling upon specific individuals requires the fulfillment of conditions and the absence of impediments. The Shaykh alerted to this in more than one place in his letters, and applied it practically by refraining from declaring as disbelievers specific individuals among the worshippers of graves and saints from the people of Najd and others at the beginning of his call due to the prevalence of ignorance, the lack of knowledge of the effects of the Message, and the absence of an adviser.
From that is his statement – may Allah have mercy on him – in answer to a question about what is fought for and what causes a man to become a disbeliever: “And if we do not declare as disbelievers those who worship the idol upon [the grave of] Abd al-Qadir, and the idol upon the grave of Ahmad al-Badawi, and their like, due to their ignorance and the absence of anyone to alert them, then how can we declare as disbelievers those who have not associated partners with Allah?! If they did not emigrate to us, or did not declare disbelievers and fight… Glory be to You! This is a great slander!” (28)
The Shaykh clarified his methodology in applying rulings to specific individuals, and made clear that he does not declare as a disbeliever anyone who falls into disbelief out of ignorance until knowledge reaches him and the proof is established upon him.
He – may Allah have mercy on him – said in his letter to Abd al-Rahman al-Suwaydi, the scholar of Iraq: “As for takfir, I declare as a disbeliever whoever knows the religion of the Messenger, then after knowing it, reviles it, forbids people from it, and shows enmity to those who act upon it. This is whom I declare a disbeliever. And most of the Ummah, praise be to Allah, are not like that.” (29)
And he – may Allah have mercy on him – said in his letter to Muhammad ibn ‘Id: “As for what the enemies mention about me – that I declare takfir based on suspicion or based on allegiance, or that I declare the ignorant person upon whom the proof has not been established a disbeliever – this is a great falsehood with which they intend to repel people from Allah and His Messenger.” (30)
And Ibn Ghannam – may Allah have mercy on him – said: “Indeed, he – may Allah have mercy on him – when he openly declared that matter and cause in those times and eras, and the hearts of the people had become imbued with the love of sins and disobedience, and they were infatuated with what they were upon of transgression and the vile desires prevailing over every person, his tongue did not hasten, nor was his mind and heart determined, to declare those Bedouins disbelievers. Rather, he held back, being cautious from advancing in that arena…” (31)
Similarly, his student and grandson, Abd al-Rahman ibn Hasan – may Allah have mercy on him – mentioned the Shaykh’s condition at the beginning of his call, saying: “So he – may Allah have mercy on him and grant him honor – meaning Ibn Taymiyyah – mentioned what necessitated for him not to pronounce kufr (disbelief) upon them specifically, except after clarification and obstinacy (32). For he had become a community alone, because among the scholars were those who declared him a disbeliever for forbidding them from shirk in worship, so he could not treat them with the likes of what they said – as happened to our Shaykh Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab, may Allah have mercy on him and grant him honor, at the beginning of his call. For when he heard them supplicating to Zayd ibn al-Khattab, he would say: ‘Allah is better than Zayd,’ training them to negate shirk with gentle speech, considering the benefit and avoiding repulsion.” (33)
Thus, it becomes clear the ignorance and error of those who attributed to the Shaykh declaring takfir without right, and claimed that he declares the people of Najd in general disbelievers, using as evidence what the Shaykh mentioned about the condition of the people in Najd before his call and his description of them with ignorance of the reality of Tawhid and lack of knowledge of shirk. For this ignorant, mistaken, and slanderous person did not differentiate between ruling on descriptions and ruling on specific individuals and persons.
Third: The Ruling on the General Lands of the Muslims
It is not established from the Shaykh a ruling of disbelief or shirk or Jahiliyyah upon the general lands of the Muslims, let alone declaring the general people disbelievers in the manner his opponents falsely accuse him. Rather, he mentioned in his letters the predominance of ignorance and the spread of manifestations of shirk in many countries. Nevertheless, he explicitly stated the absence of generalization.
From that – may Allah have mercy on him – is his statement in his letter to Abd al-Rahman al-Suwaydi, the scholar of Iraq: “As for takfir, I declare as a disbeliever whoever knows the religion of the Messenger, then after knowing it, reviles it, forbids people from it, and shows enmity to those who act upon it. This is whom I declare a disbeliever. And most of the Ummah, praise be to Allah, are not like that.” (34)
And he – may Allah have mercy on him – said in the course of his speech about Abd Allah al-Muways: “But he comes from Syria, and they worship Ibn al-‘Arabi, having placed an idol upon his grave which they worship. And I do not mean all the people of Syria, certainly not! Rather, there will always remain a group upon the truth, even if it is small and isolated.” (35)
And he – may Allah have mercy on him – said in his letter to Fadhil Al Mazyad, clarifying that if his call were presented to the scholars of Syria and Yemen, they would affirm it: “And the second matter: that this which they rejected me for and hated me because of – if they ask about it every scholar in Syria, Yemen, or others, he will say: ‘This is the truth, and it is the religion of Allah and His Messenger. But I am not able to manifest it in my place because the state is not pleased with it. And Ibn Abd al-Wahhab manifested it because the ruler in his land did not reject it.'” (36)
With this detailed explanation, the reality of the Shaykh’s stance and his detailed ruling regarding the people of his time becomes clear to every fair-minded person. And through it, the falsehood of what his opponents fabricated against him – the claim that he declares Muslims in general, and the people of his country and region in particular, disbelievers – is known.
It is also good to point out that when the Shaykh mentions in his letters the strangeness of Islam in his time, he does not mean by “strangeness” the Islam that is the opposite of disbelief. Rather, he means by it the strangeness of Islam pure from innovations, newly-invented matters, and polytheistic practices – meaning the strangeness of the pure Sunnah among the people of innovation.
He – may Allah have mercy on him – said in his letter to Abd Allah ibn Suhaym: “So if you know that the correct view is with me, and that the religion of Islam today is among the strangest of things – I mean the pure religion of Islam which is not mixed with shirk and innovations – then as for the Islam whose opposite is disbelief, there is no doubt that the Ummah of Muhammad – peace be upon him – is the last of the nations and upon it the Hour will be established.” (37)
I say: This confirms the falsehood of what his opponents fabricated against him – the claim that he declares people disbelievers generally, or the claim that the people have returned to the state of the general, first Jahiliyyah that was before the prophethood.
And Allah knows best. May peace and blessings be upon the Messenger of Allah, his family, and his companions.
Footnotes:
([1]) Rawdat al-Afkar wa al-Afham (1/34)
([2]) Rawdat al-Afkar wa al-Afham (1/112)
([3]) Manuscript
([4]) Fasl al-Khitab fi al-Radd ‘ala Ibn Abd al-Wahhab (p. 7)
([5]) Rawdat al-Afkar wa al-Afham (1/33)
([6]) Mu’allafat al-Shaykh al-Imam Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab (p. 64)
([7]) Mu’allafat al-Shaykh al-Imam Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab (p. 58)
([8]) Mu’allafat al-Shaykh al-Imam Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab (p. 25)
([9]) Mu’allafat al-Shaykh al-Imam Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab (p. 41)
([10]) Mu’allafat al-Shaykh al-Imam Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab (p. 235)
([11]) Mu’allafat al-Shaykh al-Imam Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab (p. 41)
([12]) Mu’allafat al-Shaykh al-Imam Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab (pp. 25-26)
([13]) Sharh ‘Aqidat al-Tawhid al-Kubra (p. 37)
([14]) Fatawa Muhammad al-Khalili (2/282)
([15]) Hashiyat al-Bayjuri ‘ala Jawharat al-Tawhid (p. 78)
([16]) Mu’allafat al-Shaykh al-Imam Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab (p. 125)
([17]) Mu’allafat al-Shaykh al-Imam Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab (p. 25)
([18]) Mu’allafat al-Shaykh al-Imam Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab (p. 187)
([19]) Mu’allafat al-Shaykh al-Imam Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab (p. 187)
([20]) Mu’allafat al-Shaykh al-Imam Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab (p. 193)
([21]) Al-Durar al-Sunniyyah (1/279)
([22]) Al-Durar al-Sunniyyah (2/171)
([23]) Al-Bida’ by Ibn Waddah (p. 110)
([24]) Al-Durr al-Nadid fi Ikhlas Kalimat al-Tawhid (pp. 93-94)
([25]) Mu’allafat al-Shaykh al-Imam Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab (pp. 25-26)
([26]) Mu’allafat al-Shaykh al-Imam Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab (p. 210)
([27]) Rawdat al-Afkar wa al-Afham (1/35-36)
([28]) Al-Durar al-Sunniyyah fi al-Ajwibat al-Najdiyyah (1/104)
([29]) Mu’allafat al-Shaykh al-Imam Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab (p. 38)
([30]) Mu’allafat al-Shaykh al-Imam Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab (p. 25)
([31]) Rawdat al-Afkar wa al-Afham (1/33)
([32]) Referring to what he – may Allah have mercy on him – said: “So after knowing what the Messenger brought, we know of necessity that he did not legislate for his Ummah to supplicate to anyone from the dead – neither the prophets, nor the righteous, nor others – neither with the wording of seeking rescue nor otherwise, neither with the wording of seeking refuge nor otherwise. Just as he did not legislate for his Ummah to prostrate to a dead person nor to a living one, and the like. Rather, we know that he forbade all these matters, and that this is from the shirk which Allah and His Messenger prohibited. However, due to the prevalence of ignorance and the lack of knowledge of the effects of the Message among many of the later generations, it was not possible to declare them disbelievers for that until what the Messenger – peace be upon him – brought, which contradicts it, becomes clear to them.” (Talkhis al-Istighathah, p. 411, Dar al-Minhaj edition, verified by Dr. Abd Allah al-Suhayli)
([33]) Al-Durar al-Sunniyyah fi al-Ajwibat al-Najdiyyah (2/211)
([34]) Mu’allafat al-Shaykh al-Imam Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab (p. 38)
([35]) Mu’allafat al-Shaykh al-Imam Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab (p. [page number missing in original])
([36]) Mu’allafat al-Shaykh al-Imam Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab (p. 32)
([37]) Mu’allafat al-Shaykh al-Imam Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab (p. 66)
See Original Article here: https://www.al-jasem.com/archives/2262