Shaykh Muhammad bin ‘Abd al-Wahhab and Sufism

[Talo alle udaa]

Shaykh Muhammad bin ‘Abd al-Wahhab and Sufism
January 1, 2011An original Deoband.org article
By Shaykh ‘Abd al-Hafiz al-Makki

Translated by Ismaeel Nakhuda Translator’s foreword: Following on from the publishing of the introduction, below is the first chapter of the incomplete yet ongoing translation of Shaykh ‘Abd al-Hafiz’s Mawqif A’immat al-Harakat al-Salafiyyah min al-Tasawwuf wa al-Sufiyyah. In this chapter, the author, a student and khalifah of Shaykh al-Hadith Mawlana Muhammad Zakariyya al-Kandhalawi, produces several excerpts from the writings of Shaykh Muhammad bin ‘Abd al-Wahhab that show the positive manner by which the shaykh regarded Sufism.


Imam Muhammad bin Saud Islamic University (pictured above) in Riyadh held a “Shaykh Muhammad bin ‘Abd al-Wahhab Week” in which all of the shaykh’s writings were distributed in twelve volumes. Through the grace of Allah, I studied each volume page by page and never came across any place in which Shaykh Muhammad bin ‘Abd al-Wahhab criticises, refutes or rejects Tasawwuf or any one of the Sufi shaykhs on account of his Tasawwuf. These books are easily available and sold in markets and bookstores; it is possible for anyone to acquire and study them, and verify that which I shall mention here.

Rather, I came across several passages in these writings of his that clearly and plainly elucidate his clear position regarding Tasawwuf and the Sufi shaykhs (may Allah mercy them). I shall mention these in the following with the accordance and favour of Allah, and it is upon Him Most High that all trust is placed.

1: Mu’allafat al-Imam al-Shaykh Muhammad bin ‘Abd al-Wahhab, chapter regarding Fatawa wa Masa‘il (vol. 3, page 31, question no. 5). Compiled, revised and compared with the original by Shaykh Salih bin ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Atram and Shaykh Muhammad bin ‘Abd al-Razzaq al-Duways. The shaykh upon being asked an important question replied:

Let it be known — may Allah guide you — that Allah Most High sent Muhammad (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) with guidance, which is known as the beneficial knowledge, and true religion, which are virtuous actions.

When [it is the case that] among those who affiliate themselves to religion, there are those who focus on knowledge and fiqh and speak regarding it, such as the jurists, and those who focus on worship and the quest for the hereafter, such as the Sufis, then Allah has sent His Prophet with this all-inclusive religion for two reasons.[1]

From amongst the greatest things with which Allah has strengthened him and his Ummah is that He gave him the Qur’an (Jawami‘ al-Kalim). Allah mentions in His Book one word that becomes an all-inclusive principle under which innumerable masa’il come.

Likewise, the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him) spoke comprehensively. Whoever understands this issue well will understand that which He Most High mentions: “Today I have completed for you, your religion.” (5:3) This verse is also from among those that are comprehensive and concise…

2. Mu’allafat al-Imam al-Shaykh Muhammad bin ‘Abd al-Wahhab, chapter regarding fiqh (vol. 2, page 4). The shaykh writes in a treatise entitled Arb‘at Qawa‘id Tadur al-Ahkam ‘alayha:

Know — may Allah have mercy on you — religion revolves around these four sentences, in spite of their brevity; this is regardless of whether the speaker is speaking regarding the science of tafsir, the science of usul (principles of fiqh), the science of the deeds of the heart, which is known as the science of Suluk,[2] the science of hadith, the science of that which is permissible and impermissible and ahkam which is known as the science of fiqh, or regarding the knowledge of the rewards and punishments that aspire from good and bad deeds (wa‘d and wa‘id), or regarding any other religious science apart from these…3: Mu’allafat al-Imam al-Shaykh Muhammad bin ‘Abd al-Wahhab, chapter regarding tafsir and Mukhtasar Za‘d al-Ma‘ad (vol. 4, page 84). In the section regarding the Prophet’s (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) guidance during i‘tikaf, the shaykh writes:

When the piety of the heart and its steadfastness in its journey to Allah Most High is dependent on its connection to Allah; and [when] the disorder of the heart can only be rectified by its complete attachment to Him, for the disarrangement of the heart can only be corrected by turning to Him; and [when] excessive drink and food, socialising with people, sleep and talk are from among those elements that increase its disorientation, disperse it in every valley, and separate, weaken, hamper and stop it in its journey to Allah Most High, then the wisdom of He Who is Powerful and Merciful has made it necessary on His slaves that a number of fasts be prescribed that would end the excessive consumption of food and drink, and vacate the heart from a mixture of carnal desires that have hampered it in its path to Allah. A suitable amount [of fasts] have been prescribed through which the slave may derive benefit in the affairs of his world and the hereafter, and not harm him.

I‘tikaf has been prescribed to them, the purpose and spirit of which is to devote the heart to Allah, separate it from the creation and preoccupy it with He alone. As a result, the individual becomes intimate and friendly (unsiyyah) with Allah instead of the creation. Hence, due to this intimacy with Allah, he will consider the time spent in solitude to be the time of loneliness in the grave.

When it is the case that this objective can only be accomplished through fasting, i‘tikaf has been prescribed in the best days of fasts, which are the last ten days of Ramadan. Allah Most High has also only mentioned i‘tikaf with fasting and the Prophet of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) only remained in i‘tikaf while fasting.

As far as talk is concerned, He has decreed that the Ummah restrain their tongues from all speech that is not beneficial in the hereafter.

As to excessive sleep, He has prescribed for them the prayer of the night, which is the best of all vigils and most praiseworthy in outcome, and that is the prayer of the middle of the night which benefits the heart and the body and does not hamper the interests of the slave. The focus of the religious exercises of the people of spiritual exercises and Suluk ((The reference is to the Sufis as is clear.)) is on these four principles. Fortunate from among them in this is he who treads the Muhammadan way, and does not diverge like those who are extreme and does not lax like those who are slack. We have mentioned his guidance in fasting, praying and speech, now we shall mention his guidance in i‘tikaf.4: Mu’allafat al-Imam al-Shaykh Muhammad bin ‘Abd al-Wahhab, (appendix, page 182), the shaykh writes in Hadhihi Masa’il:

It is known that the Ummah has been ordered to propagate the Qur’an, its words and its meaning; its propagation to the non-Arabs is done by translation. When a learned believer studies all philosophical writings and other such works written by other nations, he will find the Qur’an and the Sunnah revealing their condition, explaining their reality, and distinguishing between truth and falsehood. The Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) were the most knowledgeable of the creation regarding this; they were most firm in fighting the disbelievers and hypocrites. As Sayyiduna ‘Abd Allah bin Mas‘ud (may Allah be pleased with him) said: “Whosoever wishes to follow a way then let him follow the way of those who have died, for indeed the living are not immune from fitnah. Those Companions of Muhammad (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) were the most devout of heart, in-depth in knowledge and the least affectatious. They were a nation chosen by Allah for the companionship of His Prophet and the establishment of His religion. For their sake, understand their right and hold fast to their way for they were on an upright course.”

He has informed regarding them that they possessed complete righteous hearts and complete in-depth knowledge. This is something seldom found amongst the people of the latter times; it is as it is said: “From among the wonders is to find a Sufi who is a faqih and a scholar who is an ascetic (zahid).”

For indeed those who are concerned with the piety of the heart are often associated with a lack of ma‘rifah, which would necessitate abstinence from wrong and make jihad necessary. And those who are in-depth in knowledge at times mention such wickedness and doubts that place them in err and deviation.

The majority of those who are in-depth in knowledge from among the theologians and devout worshippers of the latter times are associated with blameworthy affectatious behaviour, and that is to speak and act without knowledge and to seek that which cannot be realised, contrary to that upon which the Companions were.

This is Allah’s favour on this Ummah, as is found in the saying of Sayyiduna ‘Isa: “I present them from my knowledge and forbearance.” This (the Qur’an) is one of the special things that continues after the Prophet. Hence, whosoever is the most adherent to it, he shall be the most perfect in relation to it.5: Mu’allafat al-Imam al-Shaykh Muhammad bin ‘Abd al-Wahhab (appendix, page 24). The shaykh writes in Hadhihi Masa’il following a delicate discussion on those who have rejected the love of Allah and those who have affirmed it:

So, His love itself is the basis of His worship, and assigning equals (shirk) in love is the basis of polytheism in His worship. These are those who resemble the Christians; in them is a form of polytheism of the type that the Christians possess.

This is why the ‘arif Sufi shaykhs would advise many to pursue knowledge. Some of them would say: “A person only leaves a single Sunnah due to the pride in him.”

It is like the saying: Indeed, when he does not follow that which the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) brought, then he is pursuing his carnal desires without any guidance from Allah. This is the mode of living of the carnal desires (nafs) and a form of pride, for indeed it is a branch from the sayings of those who said: “We shall only bring faith if we are given the likes of that which was given to the Messengers of Allah.”

6: The great ‘allamah Shaykh Muhammad Manzur Nu‘mani — former head of the faculty of hadith at Dar al-‘Ulum Nadwat al-‘Ulama, Lucknow, and member of the board at Dar al-‘Ulum Deoband — writes in his book, Di‘ayat Mukaththafah Didd al-Shaykh Muhammad bin ‘Abd al-Wahhab[3] (page 76), that Shaykh ‘Abd Allah, the son of Shaykh Muhammad bin ‘Abd al-Wahhab, has written a booklet that throws much light on his father’s da‘wah and movement. In it he writes:

We informed them that indeed that which we believe in and the way by which we worship Allah, in the principles of religion, is the way of the Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama‘ah and the predecessors (salaf) of this Ummah. As to matters of jurisprudence, we follow the madhhab of Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal; we do not refute those who follow the four imams, or consider ourselves to be worthy of ijtihad, nor does anyone among us claim such. However, in certain issues, when there is an evident text from the Book of Allah or the Sunnah – which has not been abrogated, nor is in any way specific (makhsus), or contradicted by a text stronger than it and one of the four imams has mentioned it — then we would take it and leave the madhhab. Indeed, the opinions of some of the imams within the four madhhabs, in some matters of fiqh, have been different to the way of those who firmly follow (taqlid) the madhhab’s founder…

Shaykh ‘Abd Allah bin Shaykh Muhammad bin ‘Abd al-Wahhab ends his treatise saying:

We do not negate the way of the Sufis and the purification of the inner self from the vices of those sins connected to the heart and the limbs as long as the individual firmly adheres to the rules of Shari‘ah and the correct and observed way. However, we will not take it on ourselves to allegorically interpret (ta’wil) his speech and his actions. We only place our reliance on, seek help from, beseech aid from and place our confidence in all our dealings in Allah Most High. He is enough for us, the best trustee, the best mawla and the best helper. May Allah send peace on our master Muhammad, his family and companions.[4]--

FYI: The article is written by a scholar that follows the Hanafi madhab and is from subcontinent (India/pakistan). The have a school in India called Darul Uloom Deaoband.
http://www.deoband.org/2011/01/tasawwuf ... ier_2_3013

[melo]

Abdul-wahhab's sheikh was a hanafi sufi. People confused his opposition to grave worshippin and bidcah sufism over true tasawwuf. Its the same case with Sheikh ibn Taymiyyah ra.

[DR-YALAXOOW]

BOTH mr maxamed abdulwahaab british jaajuus and IBN thaymiyah are ones who created lot of fidna in to umultul islaam . the time of ibn thaymiyah believes was Allah has human attributes like allah has a hands and face, istaqfurullahm laakiin alxamdulilaah ibn thaymiyah after he wrote that he was arrested the islamic goverment of shaam and 4 judges from 4 different mad-habs sentenced him life in prison and alxamdulilaah he died in prison.

the second British jaajuus maxamed abdulaahi was big fitan on hes days, he killed lot of muslim people and he started rebelian agains ottoman rulers because British wanted that,british wanted after muslims ottomon power were weaken to conquer Muslim countries, and thanks to jaajuus maxamed abdulwahaab british succeed after years to capture Palestine because wahhabis destroyed unity of umutul islaam and powerful ottoman empire was destroyed whit help of wahabis.

[melo]

Yalaxoow. No one actually responds to you diatribe, because no one takes anything you say seriously. You are like a court jester. You've convinced yourself that you actually have legit arguments

[ToughGong]

Abdul-wahhab's sheikh was a hanafi sufi. People confused his opposition to grave worshippin and bidcah sufism over true tasawwuf. Its the same case with Sheikh ibn Taymiyyah ra.

True,and ibn Taymiya sheikh was non other than Abdul Qadir Jilani that great
Sheikh of Ilm tasawaf,matter of fact they burried next to each other in Iraq

[Addoow]

The Greath WAHABI "MYTH"

Sheikh Muhammad Bin abdal wahab" "Karamallahu Wajha" Did Not come up with a New doctrine ,He just Refurbished the opinions of The Great Scholars Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn al-Qayyim,Infact His Dacwa were based on "Towxiidka" and fighting the myths and Sufi Bidcah which were rampant in his days.so if someone is calling you a wahabi(which is invented by kufar people) then you know that inaad sax santahay.
Calling a Great Muslim scholr which is dubbed by millions as the "Mujadid aldiin" as jaajus is pure kufr.

[AhlulbaytSoldier]

He is the shaykh of qawaarijta naasibis(enemies of Imam Ali r.a).
This guy dismissed the jihad of al-hussain r.a saying that he was rebelling against "amir al mu'mineen" Yazid(la3natallah).

[melo]

He is the shaykh of qawaarijta naasibis(enemies of Imam Ali r.a).
This guy dismissed the jihad of al-hussain r.a saying that he was rebelling against "amir al mu'mineen" Yazid(la3natallah).

There were several sahabah who also took the view that Hussein should not have rebelled against Yaziid. That isn't because yaziid was good, but because of the fitnah that would result.

Sheikh ibn cabdul wahab did not Ali ra. Afkaada qabo your filthy shiica. Ceyr sufi sheikhs would hang you for crimes against the beesha and the diin.

[grandpakhalif]

HutuKing it's not lawful to uprise against the Amiir unless he doesn't pray or rejects sharia

[LiquidHYDROGEN]

Dadka aan laheyn cilmi waxa u fiicnaan lahayd iney iska aamusaan. SMH

[melo]

Dadka aan laheyn cilmi waxa u fiicnaan lahayd iney iska aamusaan. SMH

Yaa la hadalaysaa?

[Talo alle udaa]

TO Dr. yalaxoow

It seems you have two basic misconceptions about the the Shaykh and the revivalist movement he began in his homeland.

One is the Idea that the view of taking the attributes of Allah (swt) as their apparent meaning was something that began with Ibn Taymiyyah and Muhamad ibn Abd-al wahaab when it fact it's deeply rooted in the Hanbali madhab, and in my opinion closer to the truth. You claim to be a sufi, and the sufi's have a big respect for Shaykh Abdul qaadir jilaani. He himself was a Hanbali, and interestingly enough, the same remarks you accuse of Ibn Taymiyyah was said by him in his books;

Shaykh Abdul-Qaadir al-Jeeelaanee (d. 561H) said:


And from their saying [the Saalimiyyah] is that Allaah is in every place and [that] there is no difference between the Throne and [what] is other than it of the [various] places. And in the Qur'an is rejection of them [them being declared liars]. Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic said: "Ar-Rahmaan ascended above the Throne." And it was not said, "...ascended above the earth..." and nor upon the interiors of mountains. And mountains and other than them are from the places (amkinah).
And this is the end of what is associated with [the affair of] i'tiqaad (belief) and usool (foundations) from the aspect of (mere) indication and conciseness.

Ghunyat ut-Taalibeen of Shaykh Abdul-Qaadir al-Jeelaanee (1/241-242)


And in Another place, the Shaykh said:

And it is proper to mention regarding the Sefaat of Establishing/Istiwah (upon the 'arsh) literally without ta'weel. And it (means) Establishment of the self (istiwah adh-dhaat) upon the Throne, (but) not meaning by way of Bodily settlement (qu'ud), and making physical contact (al-mumassa) as the Mujjasimah and Karamiyyah say, nor (does it) mean exaltedness (al-'uluw) and elevated dignity (al-rif'a) as the Ash'ariyyah say, and nor does it mean control (al-'istila) and dominaton (al-ghalaba) as the Mu'tazilah say, the shar'a has not come with anything supporting these (doctrines) not one of the sahaaba, or tabi'een from the salaaf as-salih from the Ashaab ul-Hadith have passed anything to support them. Rather the evidences point towards the literal (itlaaq) expression
Al-Jilani, Abdul-Qadir abee salih, Al-Ghunya li-Talibee Tareeq al-Haqq 'aza wa jal, pg. 124, volume 1, Dar al-Kutub al-'ilmiyyah, First edition (1997/1417)

Same words as above in Arabic:


وينبغي إطلاق صفة الاستواء من غير تأويل ، وأنه استواء الذات على العرش لا على معنى القعود والمماسة كما قالت المجسمة والكرامية ، ولا على معنى العلو والرفعة كما قالت الأشعرية ، ولا معنى الاستيلاء والغلبة كما قالت المعتزلة ، لأن الشرع لم يرد بذلك ولا نقل عن أحد من الصحابة والتابعين من السلف الصالح من أصحاب الحديث ذلك ، بل المنقول عنهم حمله على الإطلاق
Al-Jilani, Abdul-Qadir abee salih, Al-Ghunya li-Talibee Tareeq al-Haqq 'aza wa jal, pg. 124, volume 1, Dar al-Kutub al-'ilmiyyah, First edition (1997/1417)




This same question was posed to a famous Sufi scholar (ashari aqeeda) of our time about the view of the famous scholar on Istawa

Was Abdul Qadir Jilani (rahmatullahi alayhi) of the belief that Allah the exalted was literally in the sky? If so, was this a corrupt belief i.e., in contradistinction of Ahl Sunna wa Jama''? If so, could he have been a ''true'' wali?

As-Salamu `alaykum:

It is a poorly phrased question that ends with such a conditional sentence: "If so, could he have been a 'true' wali." If he were not, then who! Therefore, from the firm assumption that Shaykh `Abd al-Qadir al-Gilani was one of the great major Friends of Allah we can safely deduce that:

[1] either the text in which he is related to say that Allah Most High is "above" (fawq) the heaven and the Throne "with his Essence" (bi-dhatihi) is a corrupt text;

or:

[2] our own understanding of what he actually meant is corrupt.

The latter is probably more correct, since it is related that Shaykh `Abd al-Qadir said "bi-dhatihi" in more than one text and this is the literalist Hanbali stance he inherited from his School.

Hence, we must categorically affirm that he meant it in an orthodox sense far away from anthropomorphism; namely, that Allah Most High is indeed "high above" with his Essence, not in the sense of altitude and location or direction, but in the sense of being exalted high above and beyond the characteristics of creatures.

This is nothing new. It is the correct belief over which no two Muslims would have differed, except that shaytan fanned the flames of misunderstanding and dissension by focussing people on wordings and labels rather than meanings, splitting the ranks of the Muslims and then proceeding further to split the ranks of Ahl al-Sunna.

Hence it is best, as our pious predecessors always cautioned, to stay away from hair-splitting discussions on points of doctrine and what they called "kalam" - theological discourse.

Was-Salam,

gibril
[2006-05-30

]

About your second point on Shaykh Muhammad ibn Abdel wahaab being a british agent, I will give you a thorough reply for the benefit of the users on Snet when time permits.

[Talo alle udaa]

How the stories of the Shaykh being a spy arose:

It began with a questionable character called Humphrey, who presumably wrote a book called Confessions of a British Spy which was his memoir. In it he claimed to have met the Shaykh in Basra in the year 1712. According to the english encyclopedia-Britannica, Muhammad bin 'abdel al wahhab was born in the year 1703. At 1712, he would only have been 9 yrs old. At 9 yrs old, the young Muhammad in 'uyaina, his birth place under the care of his father, Abdel wahhab who was a qaadi at the city.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/top ... -al-Wahhab

More on the book

Confessions of a British Spy
The founder of Wahhabism (also known as Salafism) is Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab (1703-1792) who lived and preached in Arabia. There is a book Confessions of a British Spy that claims that the actual founder of Wahhabism was British spy Hempher who had an assignment from British intelligence to cause divisions among Muslims in order to weaken Turkish Ottoman empire. As it is stated in this book, Hempher taught Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab his version of Islam though Hempher never was a Muslim. He used Quran to make Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab believe that many commandments of Islam are not necessary (such as prayer, fast, jihad, prohibition of alcohol and extramarital sex). Then, Hempher told Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab that he saw Muhammad (the founder of Islam) in his dream and he gave Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab commission to preach this version of Islam.

There are, actually, some odd things regarding this book. There is no indication who is the author and where he found this information. Also, there is a great difference between what Hempher supposedly taught Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab as written in this book and what Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab wrote in his book Kitab at-Tauhid (The Book of the Unity of God) - his most famous book (there is also an audio version of this book). The main ideas of Kitab at-Tauhid are: purification of Islam and coming back to Quran and Sunnah, worship and prayer requests only to Allah, prohibition of innovations, prohibition of a number of things that can lead to polytheism. However, none of these points is mentioned in Confessions of a British Spy.

It is also interesting that this book was published in Turkey and its authors are obviously anti-Wahhabis. So, this book looks like a counterfeit. However, this absolutely does not mean that I have any intention to defend Wahhabism or its founder.

http://borzlemanal.blogspot.com/2009/05 ... h-spy.html

More on some of the inaccuracies found within the book.

Humphrey’s ‘Memoirs’

This book 30 was translated into Urdu in India and it was claimed by its publishers that Humphrey was an English spy whose duty was to spy on the Ottoman caliphate in the 18 th Century. He went through training in adopting an Islamic identity and learning Arabic, and then travelled to Basra where he met Sheikh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab, and a strong friendship developed between the two. The Publishers claim that these memoirs remained hidden until they fell into the hands of the Germans during World War II, who published it as a way of slandering the British government. It was translated into French, Arabic and Urdu. A perusal of this book makes it abundantly clear that it is an imaginary fictional narrative, coined deliberately to discredit Sheikh ibn Abdul Wahhab and his followers by the British. Our evidence to prove the book is a concoction is twofold: historical evidence from its contents, and our fruitless search to find the original English version.

1. We began with a trip to the British Library’s Rare Books Section, which contains books printed prior to 1975. There were 72 entries under Humphrey, but none related to our subject. We found one entry under Humphrey’s Memoirs (printed 1734), but these were the memoirs of the Duke of Gloucester who recorded his relations with the ruling family of the time.

The publishers of the offending book had also given a number of alternative titles such as ‘Colonisation Ideal’ and ‘The English spy in Islamic countries’. Needless to say we found no such book, and neither did our search under ‘spy’ reveal anything useful. The advent of computers has made access to rare and remote books very easy, and we have been forced to conclude after an intensive search that no such book exists and that we have a fabricated translation published by the enemies of the Sheikh ibn Abdul Wahhab.

2. Humphrey claims he travelled to Istanbul in 1710 at the age of 20. He returned to London and then travelled to Basrah in 1712 after a long sea journey lasting six months. This claim is irrational as sea travel between England and Gulf was not that long. He also claims to have met Shaikh At Taee, one of the Sheikhs of Basrah. He then met a carpenter of Iranian origins called Abdul Riza with whom he began working, and there he met a. young man who spoke Turkish, Persian and Arabic. He wore the garb of students and was known as Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab. [31] The claim of this acquaintance is clearly false. Sheikh ibn Abdul Wahhab was born in 1703, attaining majority at the age of twelve when his father arranged his marriage. After travelling to the Hijaz for the Hajj, he returned to Najd and stayed with his father to study. He did not travel to seek knowledge until 1722 when he travelled to Makkah, Madina and Basrah. There is thus no possibility of the Sheikh and the fictional Humphrey meeting in Basrah as the dates do not correspond. And all the scholars who have researched the biography of the Sheikh have rejected claims that the Sheikh travelled to Turkey and Persia. [32]

3. The book claims that the Sheikh expressed a desire to travel to Istanbul, but was advised against it by Humphrey for fear of persecution from the Ottomans. He advised the Sheikh to travel to Isfahan instead, and the Sheikh did so. This too is a lie. Syyed Abdul Haleem al Jundi quotes in

‘Al Imam Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab ‘ the victory of the Salafi method’, ‘I discussed this with Sheikh ibn Baz, who denied the journey to Kurdistan and Iran. Sheikh Ibn Baz told me he took this information from his Sheikhs, including the grandchildren of Sheikh Ibn Abdul Wahhab, and especially his own Sheikh, Muhammad ibn Ibrahim’. [33]

4. Humphrey claims that the Sheikh declared his da’wah in 1143 AH. This is the only time he uses the hijrah calendar in his book. It also reveals his ignorance of historical facts, as the Sheikh returned to Huraymilah three years before the death of his father in 1153, and declared his da’wah after the death of his father.

5. There is yet more evidence that Humphrey was devoid of historical knowledge. Humphrey travelled to Istanbul in 1710, giving the ostensible reason that the British Empire was assigning great importance to its established colonies. The Empire was so vast it was said that the sun did not set within its boundaries. Although the British Isles were themselves relatively small, the extended territories including India, China and the Middle East were extensive and required careful governance. The Ministry for Colonies decided to recruit spies to gather information from the territories, and so Humphrey became involved. 34 It is historically inaccurate to place these events at the beginning of the 18 th Century. India at the time was not a colony; the East India Company began trading in the 17 th Century but had no political hold until.

1757 when Bengal was captured. It began expanding until the rule of the Company was transferred to direct rule from England in 1857. Therefore, there was no Indian colony in 1710. There was also no British colonial involvement in China at the time; Hong Kong did not fall to the British until the Treaty of 1898.

It is therefore clear that the inventor of the Memoirs has let his imagination run riot and abandon historical accuracy. He has set his story at the end of the 19 th Century in the heyday of the British Empire, when the sun truly did not set on its colonies. But in doing so, he has exposed himself to be a writer of fiction, not fact.

6. The author attributes many actions and words to the Sheikh which are at clear odds with the beliefs, teachings and distinctly Islamic character of the Sheikh. There is no need to discuss these filthy slanders in any detail, as the authenticity of the facts in the book has been proven to be false.

7. In order to lend credibility to his ‘memoirs’, the author sprinkles the novel with stories of plots by the British government to disunite the Muslims; to create ideological and religious upheaval among them; to spread evil among their men and women; to distance them from Arabic, the language of the Qur’an; to encourage the use of national and social languages; to establish missionary schools; and to weaken the position of the Muslims politically and economically.

I have attempted to prove the fabrication of this book through its historical inaccuracy and doubtful authorship, as I believe that no one else has done so yet. In fact, a book as insignificant as this does not deserve even a second glance, let alone a serious critical study. But from a sense of duty and Amanah, I decided to shed light on the lies contained within it. And Allah knows best the intentions.

Source: Athaar Forum - Powered by vBulletin

[WiglessBidaar]

Waraa Abdul Wahab is the one eyed Shaytan who poisoned the discourse of the Ummah with his takfiiri ideology from which evil resonates like the Devil's gay lover.

This imbecility has no place in the traditional Sufi creed of the Horn. Plague take him!

[abdalla11]

Abdul-wahhab's sheikh was a hanafi sufi. People confused his opposition to grave worshippin and bidcah sufism over true tasawwuf. Its the same case with Sheikh ibn Taymiyyah ra.

True,and ibn Taymiya sheikh was non other than Abdul Qadir Jilani that great
Sheikh of Ilm tasawaf,matter of fact they burried next to each other in Iraq