In this small pamphlet I want to show with their own evidences that the people of the Dawah an-Najdiyyah were not upon the deen, which Allah, ta’ala, has send to His Prophet, Muhammad (salliAllahu alayhi wa sallam), but they were on a religion, which excuses those who are ignorant about shirk.
This doesn’t mean, that whoever does not make takfeer on Muhammad ibn AbdulWahhab immediately is a kafir. But it means, that whoever knows about the mistakes und kufriyat (in the books) of Muhammad ibn AbdulWahhab (or any other person) and does not make takfeer on him is a kafir.
I also want to note, that it could be possible that the books of the scholars of Najd have been altered and that these kufriyat have been put into their books later and they are free from this kufr, as a lot of books -even the Tawrah and Injeel- have been altered.
Therefore I say, if the books written by Muhammad ibn AbdulWahhab, his students and followers are not altered and the kufr which is in these books belongs to them, they are kuffar without any doubt.
Another point I want to mention is that some people believe that the deen only exists of the Dawah an-Najdiyya and if you talk to them about Islam, they only response with: Ibn AbdulWahhab said, Sulayman said, Ibn Ateeq said, Ibn Sahman said. As if their words are Qur’an sent by Allah. If they hear “Muhammad ibn AbdulWahhab said” they take this word as evidence and make it their deen.
They excuse ignorant mushriks and stay away from making takfeer on them:
| Muhammad bin Abd al-Wahhab said:And when it is the case that we do not make takfir of the one who worships the idol (i.e. tomb) which is on the grave of Abd al-Qadir, and the idol which is on the grave of Ahmad al-Badawi and their likes, due to their ignorance, and the absence of the one to notify them (of their opposition), then how could we make takfir of the one who does not associate partners with Allah, when he does not emigrate to us and who does not make takfir and does not fight? “Glory be to you (O Lord), this is a mighty slander.” (24:16) Al-Durar al-Saniyyah 1/66 |
| A similar narration from Muhamad Ibn Abd al-Wahhab Fataawaa wa Masaa’il, 4/11:And as for the lie and slander, then it is like their saying that we make generalized takfir (of the masses), and that we make emigration (hijrah) obligatory towards us for the one who is able to manifest his religion, and that we make takfir of the one who does not make takfir and who does not fight, and multiple times the likes of this (type of lying and slander). All of this is from lying and slander by which they hinder the people from the deen of Allah and His Messenger. And when it is the case that we do not make takfir of the one who worships the idol (i.e. tomb) which is on the grave of Abd al-Qadir, and the idol which is on the grave of Ahmad al-Badawi and their likes, due to their ignorance, and the absence of the one to notify them (of their opposition), then how could we make takfir of the one who does not associate partners with Allah, when he does not emigrate to us and who does not make takfir and does not fight? “Glory be to you (O Lord), this is a mighty slander.” (24:16) |
| And Abd al-Lateef Abd al-Rahman bin Hasan Aal al-Shaykh said in his book “Minhaaj al-Ta’sees wal-Taqdees” (pp. 98-99):And “Shaykh” Muhammad is from the greatest of people in withholding and abstaining from applying (the ruling of) disbelief. To such a degree that he was not resolute in the takfir of the ignorant person – from the people (attached) to the graves or other than them – who calls upon other than Allah (in the case) where one who could advise them and make such proof reach them – the abandoner of which would fall into disbelief – was not readily available to him. He said in one of his rasaa’il (letters):And when we do not fight against the one who worships the shrine of al-Kawaaz until we advance calling him to make the religion sincerely and purely for Allah (alone), then how can we make takfir of the one who did not emigrate to us despite being a believing monotheist.And he had been asked about the likes of these ignorant people and he affirmed that the one upon whom the proof had been established and is capable of knowing the proof, he is the who disbelieves by worshipping the graves. |
| Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab said in his letter to Muhammad bin ‘Eed:As for what the enemies have mentioned about me: That I make takfir on the basis of presumption, and on the basis of loyalty, or that I make takfir of the ignorant person upon whom the proof has not been established, then this is a mighty slander. They desire to make the people flee from the deen of Allah and His Messenger by it. Majmoo’ Mu’allafaat Muhammad bin Abd al-Wahhaab 7/25 |
As you can see, they excuse the ignorant mushrik, although Allah ta’ala says:
| “If one amongst the mushriks ask thee for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of Allah; and then escort him to where he can be secure. That is because they are men without knowledge.” (At-Tawba, 9/6) |
| In the tafsir of this ayah Tabari states: “Allah’s word to His prophet is: O Muhammad after the months of haram have passed, if one among the mushrik I had ordered you to fight against and kill asks asylum from you to hear the word of Allah ‘give him time’: Give him asylum until he hears and until you recite to him the word of Allah. Afterwards take him to where he is going. What is meant here is: After hearing the word of Allah if he does not become Muslim and if he is not influenced by the word of Allah you had read and if he does not accept take him to the place he is going in security…“That is because they are men without knowledge”By granting them asylum you must act in such manner so that they listen to the Qur’an. The reason behind taking them to the place they are headed in security is because they are a tribe of ignorance who is not able to comprehend any evidence of Allah. As such, they will not know of the advantages if they are to have iman in Allah nor will they be aware of the disadvantages of sin and crookedness originating against them in abandoning their iman in Allah. (Tabari, Tafsir) |
As it can be very clearly seen, these mushriks were, men without knowledge and according to Tabari, a tribe of ignorance who is not able to comprehend any evidence of Allah. But despite their lack of knowledge and clear ignorance, Allah called them mushriks.
They only takfeer the mushriks after they gave hujjah (made clear the proof):
| Muhammad bin Abd al-Wahhab said:Rather, we call Allah to witness over what he knows from our hearts that whoever acts upon Tawhid and frees himself from Shirk and its people, then he is a Muslim in whatever time and place (he maybe in). But we make takfir of the one who associates partners with Allah in His Ilayhiyyah (sole right of worship), after we have made clear to him the proof for the futility of Shirk. Majmoo’ Mu’allafaat Muhammad bin Abd al-Wahhaab (3/34) |
| And a similar statement:He also said: “And likewise, his distortion upon the common people that Ibn Abd al-Wahhab says, ‘Whoever does not come under my obedience is a disbeliever.’ And we say: Sublime are you (O Lord), this is a mighty slander! Rather, we call Allah to witness over what he knows from our hearts that whoever acts upon Tawḥid and frees himself from Shirk and its people, then he is a Muslim in whatever time and place (he maybe in). But we make takfir of the one who associates partners with Allah in His sole right of worship (ilahiyyah), after we have made clear to him the proof for the futility of shirk. Likewise, we make takfir of the one who beautifies it to the people, erects false doubts for its permissibility, or who raises his sword to defend these mausoleums (mashahid) at which [others are worshipped as] partners to Allah, and who fights against the one who rejects them and strives to remove them, and from Allah is aid sought.” Al-Durar al-Saniyyah (7/60) |
| Muhammad bin Abd al-Wahhab said:What has been mentioned to you that I make generalized takfir (of the masses), this is from the slanders of the enemies. Likewise, their saying that I say whoever follows the deen of Allah and His Messenger whilst resident in his own land, this is not sufficient until he comes (emigrates) to me. This is also from slander. Rather, the intent is for [a person] to follow the deen of Allah and His Messenger in whichever land it may be. However, we make takfir of the one who affirmed the deen of Allah and His Messenger, then showed enmity towards it and prevented the people from (following) it. Likewise the one who worships idols (awthaan) after he came to know that it is the deen of the pagans, and who then beautified it to the people. This is the one that I make takfir of, and every scholar on the face of the earth makes takfir of (the likes of) these, except a stubborn opposer or an ignoramus. Majmoo’ Mu’allafaat al-Shaykh (3/33) also in al-Durar al-Saniyyah 10/131 and in Al-Durar al-Saniyyah (7/58) |
| And he also said:As for what the enemies have mentioned about me: That I make takfir on the basis of presumption, and on the basis of loyalty, or that I make takfir of the ignorant person upon whom the proof has not been established, then this is a mighty slander. They desire to make the people flee from the deen of Allah and His Messenger by it. Majmoo’ Mu’allafaat al-Shaykh (3/14) |
| Abd al-Lateef Abd al-Rahman bin Hasan Aal al-Shaykh said in Misbaah al-Dhalaam (p. 499):The one to whom the call of the Messengers to the Tawhid of Allah and the obligation of submitting to it has reached and he understands that the Messengers came with this, he does not have an excuse in opposing them and abandoning the worship of Allah (alone). Resolution is made in the takfir of such a person when he worships other than Allah and sets up rivals and deities alongside Him. And the Shaykh (Ibn Abd al-Wahhab) and others from the “Muslims” do not withhold from the likes of this one, and our Shaykh has affirmed this and explained it in agreement with the scholars of the Umma, and in following them (in this matter). And he did not make takfir except after the establishment of the proof and the evidence becoming plain and apparent, until he even withheld from the takfir of the ignorant person from the worshippers of the graves when one who could notify him (of his error) was not readily available to him.” |
| And he also said in Misbaah al-Dhalaam (p. 516):And our Shaykh did not make takfir of anyone through the mere act (of that person) and his (act) of shirk (alone). Rather, he withheld from that until he [the one falling into such an act] knew the establishment of the proof whose abandoner becomes a disbeliever. This is very clear in his speech in more than one place and his written letters in that regard are well known. |
| Muhammad ibn AbdulWahhab said:“Whomsoever has the proof established upon him and he is suited to knowing it, takfeer is made upon him for worshipping the graves. And as for the one who inclines towards the earth and follows his desire, then I do not know what his condition is.” Muallafaat Muhammad Bin ‘Abdul-Wahhaab, Part 3, fataawa and issues, page 37 |
| And he also said:“… Indeed, disobeying the Messenger with respect to Shirk and the worship of the idols after the arrival of knowledge, is clear disbelief of the natural disposition and the (branches of Islamic) knowledge which are necessary (to know).” Muallafaat Muhammad bin Abdul-Wahhab, Part 1, ‘Aqeedah, Mufeed-ul-Mustafeed, page 307 |
| Muḥammad bin Abd alWahhab said: We do not make takfir of [anyone] except a man who came to know the truth and rejected it after the proof had been established upon him, who is invited to it but does not accept it, shows stubborn resistance and obstinacy. What has been mentioned about us -that we make takfir of the one who condition is other than this- is a lie against us.” Al-Durar al-Saniyyah (3/20-21) |
| The compiler of al-Durar al-Saniyyah, Abd al-Raḥman bin Muḥammad bin Qasim said: “Reflect upon how he labelled this statement as disbelief (kufr) but did not make takfir of the one who said it. So understand the difference, because applying the label of disbelief to a specific individual upon whom the proof has not been established is not permissible.” Al-Durar al-Saniyyah (3/23) |
| Muhammad bin Abd al-Wahhab also said: “As for what occurred of soliciting intercession from the Prophets and Righteous after their death, venerating their graves, building domes over them, praying next to them, taking them as places of celebration, and putting keepers [guards] over them and making oaths to them, all of these are newly-arisen affairs (bidah) which the Prophet informed about and warned against… This is what has necessitated the differing between us and people until the affair led them to make takfir of us, fight us and declare the spilling of our blood and taking of our wealth lawful, until Allah aided us against them and granted us victory over them. This is what we call the people to and we fight them [in their aggression against us] over this, after we have established the proof against them from the Book of Allah, the Sunnah of His Messenger and the consensus of the Righteous Salaf.” Majmu Muallafat Muḥammad bin Abd al-Waḥḥab (7/110-115) |
| And he also said:“And as for takfeer, then I make takfeer upon the one who knew the religion of the Messenger and then after he knew it, he abused it, prohibited the people from it and opposed the one who practised it. This is the one I make takfeer of. And the majority of the Ummah, and the praise is due to Allah, are not like that.” Muallafaat Muhammad Bin ‘Abdul-Wahhab, Part 3, fataawa and issues, page 38 also in Al-Durar al-Saniyyah (1/73) |
And his word: „And the majority of this Ummah – alhamdulillah – is not like this.“ If he doesn’t make takfir on someone who claims Islam and reads Qur’an and understands it, with which right does he make takfir on the jews and christians, and hindus and others? And they don’t know the Qur’an and don’t read it. That’s a big injustice.
If the case would be like this, there wouldn’t be a single kafir on the earth. But ignorance would be better than knowledge, like ash Shafii said:
| „If the ignorant is excused for his ignorance, the ignorant would be better than the scholar.“ |
Allah ta’ala says:
| “Those who reject (Truth), among the People of the Book and among the Polytheists (mushriks), were not going to depart (from their ways) until there should come to them Clear Evidence.” (Al Bayyinah 98/1) |
| In some of the Tafasir of this ayah it is said: “‘Until bayyinah comes to them.’ The remark of this ayah is mustakbal (future) but the meaning is madhi (past). This means until open proof (bayyinah) comes to them, in other words until Muhammad (saw) comes to them, with the Qur’an and shows them their straying from the right path and their ignorance and calls them upon iman and until Allah saves them from their ignorance and straying from the right path.” |
| “Wahidi said: Allah informs us the kuffar will not end their shirk and kufr until RasulAllah (salliAllahu alayhi wa sallam) comes to them with Qur’an and explains to them their straying from the right path and their ignorance. This is explaining a blessing and ending straying from the right path and ignorance.” |
This ayah clearly shows that before Muhammad (salliAllahu alayhi wa sallam) had been sent and before the evidence from the Qur’an had been revealed the attribute of shirk and kufr was valid for individuals. Just like both ignorance and shirk had been mentioned together. This is proof that even if it is before the arrival of hujjah people in ignorance are kuffar.
They don’t regard al Walaa and al Baraa from Aslu Deen:
In Sabil an Najat Hamad bin Ateeq said, that al Walaa and al Baraa is not from Aslu Deen. He was asked: Are ‘muwalat’ (friendship) and ‘muadat’ (enmity) among the meanings and necessities of ‘la ilaha illaAllah’? What would you say about this matter?
| His Answer: It is sufficient for a Muslim to know that showing enmity towards the mushrik is fardh (obligatory) and that it is required not to establish friendship with them. It is because by Allah (swt) commanding to show friendship towards the Muslim, He had informed that this is a necessity of iman. Those who befriend the closest relatives even his fathers, brothers and kins if they were those who fight against Allah and RasulAllah and showing enmity towards them are not considered having made iman.When it comes to the fact whether this reality is a necessity of ‘la ilaha illaAllah’ or not: Allah (swt) did not make us responsible to research this.That which is wajib for us is to know that showing enmity towards the mushrik is fard and to perform accordingly. Whoever knows and accepts that this is a necessity of ‘la ilaha illaAllah’ this is goodness for him. However none is responsible to know this exactly this way. (Sabil an-Najat Wal-Fikak min muwalat al murtadin wa’l atrak; Hamad b. Atiq) |
| In other places in the books of the Najdiyyah this idea is refuted. Even Hammad b. Atiq himself said: “Aslu Deen Islam of all Prophets is to practice Tawheed, to love people of Tawheed and to allie them; to dissociate from people of shirk, to make takfeer upon them and to have hatreed toward them.” (Ad Duraru As Saniyyah volume 7 page 199; Ad Durar As Saniyyah 58/12) |
| And Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab said: Aslu Din al-Islam and its principles are in two issues: The first: The commandment of worshipping Allah alone Who has no partners, the incitation to this, allying based on this and declaring takfir on whoever leaves this. The second: Warning against shirk in the worship of Allah, being harsh in this, having enmity based on this and declaring takfir on whoever commits this. (Risalah Aslu Din Al-Islam wa Qa’idatuhu) |
They invented a third category of people:
In Rasail wa Masail an Najdiyya 5/576 “Shaykh” AbdulAziz, the Qadi from Dariyya said, answering this question: “About the believer in Allah and in His messenger, when he says or does something what is kufr, but is ignorant about it. They don’t make takfeer on him until they made clear to him the proof?” said:
| “If he does kufr or shirk out of ignorance, we don’t judge him as a kafir until we made clear the proof to him; but we don’t judge (neither) that he is muslim. But we say, this deed of him is kufr, which makes the wealth and the blood allowed, even if we don’t judge on this person, because the proof wasn’t made clear on him. And it is not said, that if he isn’t a kafir, that he is a muslim, but we say: His deed is the deed of a kafir, but we don’t judge on this person, we stop (tawakuf, we don’t give any hukm) until the proof is made clear to him. The scholars mentioned that the people of Fatrah will be tested on the Day of Resurrection in Al-Aarsat and did not make their rule the rule of the kafir nor the rule of the righteous.” |
So “Shaykh” AbdulAziz invented a third category of people, although Allah ta’ala says:
| “It is He Who has created you; and of you are some that are Unbelievers, and some that are Believers: and Allah sees well all that ye do.” (at-Taghabun 64/ 2) |
| “For an individual there are only two religions: Islam or kufr, otherwise kufr or iman. Whoever is not Muslim then he is kafir.” (see Al-Faslu fi’l-Milal wa’l-Ahwau wa’n-Nihal, 3/276-285) |
As you can see, there is no third category, a person is either Muslim or kafir.
There is no doubt that Muhamad ibn AbdulWahhab was closer to the Haqq than his contemporaries, from the grave worshippers, asharis, jahmis, turks and others. But this doesn’t mean, that he was on the Tawheed and that he was from Ahlu Sunnah wa’l Jammah.
The Dawah an Najdiyyah -although the claim tawheed and fought against the worshippers of the graves- is not a Dawah Islamiyyah, but is a Dawah Shirkiyyah which doesn’t make takfeer on the mushriks and excuses the mushriks for their ignorance.