Thursday, 2 July 2015

Hindustani Fanatics, India’s Pashtuns, and Deobandism – Connections Part 1



There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root.
 Henry David Thoreau
… but the wretched Rohillas had no country; the country they had left had long been
possessed by others, and where were these miserable people to seek for a place of shelter –
from the persecution of whom? Of Englishmen – natives of a country renowned for its justice
and humanity. They will carry their melancholy tale into the numerous tribes and nations
among whom they are scattered, and you may depend upon it the impression which it will
make, will, sooner or later, have its effect.1
 Charles James Fox
The British literature about the military problems they encountered with the Pashtun2
 tribes in the region lying along the border with Afghanistan
is filled with references to antagonists they referred to as “Hindustani Fanatics.” Again and again, the huge British Empire went to war with these
people, but they are little understood. The purpose of this paper is to explain who the “Fanatics” were, their tribal connection, and their links to both
Islamic extremism and Deobandism. This study will also illustrate how political-religious leaders can modify a religion in order to match with the
general beliefs of the population they are attempting to sway toward supporting a new movement.
There are several important keys to understanding this paper:
The widespread unrest in India reflected in this paper was related to the disintegration of the Mughal Empire. This produced multiple
opportunities for regional warlords to create independent states while chaos produced nearly constant local warfare and rapidly shifting
alliances. European entry into the subcontinent during this period increased the unrest.
Northern Pashtuns, primarily from the Yusufzai and Bangash tribes, had migrated into northern India where they were called “Rohillas”
and served interchangeably as mercenaries and trader merchants. This process began during the 13th century and continued into the period
of Mughal disintegration.
The military immigrants maintained contact with the original segments of their tribe that didn’t migrate. Like the European Vikings, these
warrior-traders gradually established their own nations.
1. Fox, Charles James, The Speeches of the Right Honourable Charles James Fox in the House of Commons: With a Biographical Memoir, and Introductions and Explanatory Notes,
Aylott and Co., 1853, pg. 256.s
2. There are three names frequently used when referring to this large tribe: Pashtun, Pakhtun, and Pathan. This study will use the rendering used in the southern portion of the
tribal region, Pashtun.
Tribal Analysis Center, 6610-M Mooretown Road, Box 159. Williamsburg, VA, 23188
Hindustani Fanatics, India’s Pashtuns, and Deobandism – Connections

These Pashtuns spoke a unique common language that wasn’t understood by their southern cousins, even though they shared a common
written language. They remained a separate culture within India where the Indians referred to them as “Pathans” to connect them to one of
their major population centers, Patna. This eastern Indian city shows the breadth of Pashtun penetration into India, far from their original
homeland near Afghanistan.
The greater percentage of the Pashtuns were from the Yusufzai tribe, a group reported by the British known for quickly turning to religious
leaders for advice and control during tribal unrest. They accepted respected outsiders as leaders who could mediate between squabbling
subtribes rather than select a member of any of their subtribes as a leader who would only polarize current animosities rather than minimize
them.
The Pashtuns were exceptionally religious and tended to view any external threat to the tribe as a parallel threat against Islam, itself. This
perception of a dual threat allowed leaders to mobilize the tribes quickly to face outsiders, particularly those from another religion.
Pashtunwali’s Badal, the cultural requirement to seek revenge, keeps an insult to the tribe or tribes current in the memories of new
generations.
“Storytelling” and visits from wandering Pashtun poets3
 to isolated compounds having few other forms of entertainment, especially during
periods of extreme winters, keeps the memory of tribal heritage, religion, and revenge fresh in the minds of succeeding generations. Hafiz
Rahmat, the Rohilla chief killed by the British, was a recognized poet and his poetry and tales of his demise probably lingered long among
northern Pashtuns.
There were four key events that occurred within the Indian subcontinent during the 19th century and the effects, while little understood, remain
as very significant factors in the religious politics of the Pashtun region lying between Afghanistan and Pakistan – the Pashtun belt. First, the Rohilla
Pashtun “statelets” that were located in northern India were destroyed by their Indian enemies and the British in 1774. Second, the relocation of
Sayed4
 Ahmad Shah of Bareilly, a city within the lost Rohilla territory, from what is today’s Uttar Pradesh state to the region of Pakistan’s NorthWest
Frontier Province is quite significant. He and his “Hindustani Fanatics” carried a new political-religious ideology system to the Pashtuns
that was essentially indistinguishable, except for minor details, from Wahabbism. Third, and interrelated, was the “Sepoy Mutiny of 1857” that
had a significant involvement of Sayed Ahmad Shah’s followers and supporters within the lost Rohilla territory in leadership positions among the
“mutineers.” Finally, Deobandism was developed by two of Sayed Ahmad Shah’s adherents in the aftermath of the failed “Mutiny.” This revolt
was worse within the Rohilla territory that had been destroyed in 1774. The purpose of this research is to demonstrate the very plausible connection
between these “Rohillas” and today’s political and religious strife found along the border separating Afghanistan’s Pashtuns from their cousins living
in Pakistan.
3. There is a serious connection between Pashtu songs, actually their prized poetry, and the destruction of the Rohilla states. In 1887, James Darmesteter studied their songs
and concluded, “… the literary poet, who can read … who has composed a Divan. Every educated man is a Sha-ir, though, if he be a man of good taste, he will not assume
the title. Writing Ghazal was one of the accomplishments of the old chiefs. Hafiz Rahmat, the great Rohilla captain, and Ahmad Shah, the founder of the Durrani empire,
had written Divans, were ‘Divan people.’” “Afghan Life in Afghan Songs,” Science, Vol. 10, No. 246, October 21, 1887, pg. 195. Amazingly, Hafiz Rahmat was viewed as an
equivalent of Ahmad Shah Durrani in 1887 and poets affiliated with the Pashtuns disseminated his poetry and stories about his fate down through the generations in a culture
having revenge as a major tenet.
4. There are multiple English transliterations of this word. The Pashto rendering, Sayed, will be used in this study.
Tribal Analysis Center, 6610-M Mooretown Road, Box 159. Williamsburg, VA, 23188
Hindustani Fanatics, India’s Pashtuns, and Deobandism – Connections
Missing in the available literature is an understanding of the Pashtun tribal connections to all of this new form of “revolutionary Islam”, as it
developed deeply within northeast India where scholars consistently refer to the Rohillas as “Afghans”, but there is an excellent reason for the speed
with which Sayed Ahmad Shah’s political-religious message was accepted by the Pashtuns, especially the Yusufzai tribe. The answer is simple: the
initial “Hindustani Fanatics” were simply returning home to Pashtun country. Most of the original group that followed and supported Sayed Ahmad
Shah, if not all of them, were probably Yusufzai Pashtuns. At a minimum, they were born and raised in a part of India that was once controlled by
the independent Rohilla Pashtuns, most of whom were members of the Yusufzai tribe.
Iqbal Husain, in his first-rate study, The Rise and Fall of the Ruhela Chieftaincies in 18th Century India, provides the necessary history that
allows connections to be made with early Pashtun military immigrations into India and the 19th century anti-British Islamic to impose shari’a on their
Muslim cousins. They established a cultural antagonism that revolutionaries seeking power that continues to exist today, possibly within some of
the descendents of the original Hindustani Fanatics that fought nearly continuous wars with the Sikhs and the British throughout the 19th century.
Husain, however, does not identify these military immigrants as Pashtuns and refers to them, generically, as “Afghans.” They were far more than just
Afghans. These people were northern Pashtuns with warrior traditions and great amounts of combat experience gained while fighting as mercenaries
inside India.
From Husain:
“The immigration of Afghans into India dates back to the time of the Ghorian conquests5
: they are found serving the Sultans of Delhi in the 13th
century with their own settlements at Gopalgir (Mewat), Afghanpur (Delhi), Bojpur, Kampil, Patiyali, and other places. During the Sultanate period,
after many vicissitudes, they rose from being petty mercenaries to a position where they acquired control of the Delhi Sultanate under the Lodis and
Surs. During the entire period stretching from the thirteenth to the fifteenth centuries, the process of Afghan immigration to India seems to have been
a continuous one; but after the fall of the Lodis6
, and still more, the Afghan immigrants suffered greatly and their settlements in various areas were
either destroyed or deprived of their prosperity.7

Much of this information escaped most western historians, but Husain’s use of both Urdu and Persian primary sources for his study of the
Ruehelas, known by their Anglicized name, Rohillas, clearly identifies these migrant soldiers and traders in their occupations used interchangeably
5. The Ghorian conquests occurred around A.D. 1200. See Irfan Habib’s “Pursuing the History of Indian Technology: “Pre-modern Modes of Transmission of Power”, Social
Scientist, Vol. 20, No. 3 / 4 (Mar. – Apr., 1992), pg. 16.
6. The Sultanate of Delhi which was established in 1206 by the Indian viceroy of Sultan Mu’izz al-Din Muhammad ibn Sam of Ghor, continued to flourish for over a century
and a half, but fell on evil days during the reign of Sultan Firuz Shah Tughluq (1351-1388) who was destined to see the disruption of an empire which under his predecessor had
embraced nearly the entire subcontinent. After his death the throne of Delhi was continually contested by rival factions until Timur’s invasion in 1398 virtually put an end to the
Tughluq dynasty. The Sayyids who emerged in 1414 owed their rise to Timur’s benevolence, but their greatest achievement, perhaps, was to repulse further Mughal attacks and
delay the Mughal occupation of India by about a century. They were superceded in 1541 by the Lodi Afghans who extended the boundaries of the Sultanate and founded a new
capital at Agra. The last Lodi Sultan was defeated by Babur at the battle of Panipat in 1526, but the Afghans under Sher Shah Sur recaptured the throne in 1538 from Babur’s
son, Humayun, and continued to enjoy sovereignty till 1555 when Humayun was able to re-establish Mughal rule. See ud-Din, Hameed, “Historians of Afghan Rule in India,”
Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 82, No. 1 (Jan. – Mar., 1962), pg. 44.
7. Husain, Iqbal, The Rise and Decline of the Ruehela Chieftaincies in 18th Century India, New Delhi: Oxford, 1994, pp. 1-2.
Tribal Analysis Center, 6610-M Mooretown Road, Box 159. Williamsburg, VA, 23188
Hindustani Fanatics, India’s Pashtuns, and Deobandism – Connections
by the Pashtuns settling into India as far back the thirteenth century. As the new arrivals gained property and commerce brought them prosperity and
access to power, the continuous flow of additional Pashtuns continued as some migrant tribes actually gained control of the Indian empire.
From Husain:
“Most Afghan immigrants came from three distinct regions. The first was the region to the north and west of Attock, comprising Bajaur,
Tiran and Swat and the intervening areas, mainly inhabited by the Lodis and Yusufzais. The second was a large, and in parts fertile, district, called
Bangash, which lay to the south of the Tirah range, bounded by the Safed Koh Range in the north-west and by the Indus on the west. The Afghans
of this range mainly settled in Northern India, including present Uttar Pradesh. The third region, which comprised southeastern Afghanistan and the
adjoining parts of Pakistan, contained the Panni, Tarin and Kakar tribes, amongst others who largely settled in Gujarat and the Deccan….8
“…they served as soldiers, but were also ready to act as merchants or engage in trade, particularly in horses. The Afghans generally retained
these characteristics until the beginning of the twentieth century…. Those who had engaged in trade often changed their profession and became
soldiers.9

It was during the period that the Mughal Empire began to disintegrate that provided the chaos in local governance to allow the Pashtun
colonists and their relatively newfound wealth to actually take control over broad regions of India, including the imperial capital, Delhi, and its entire
sultanate. It was in India’s northern region, today’s Uttar Pradesh state, that the aggressive Pashtuns, primarily Yusufzai tribesmen, were able to gain
full control and create an essentially independent principality.
Husain explains:
“The decay of the Mughal empire after Aurangzeb’s death accelerated the process of Afghan immigration into India. Local chiefs, contending
for supremacy against neighboring zamindars10, were increasingly tempted to recruit Afghans as mercenaries for their own needs. Alternately, the
Afghans having themselves become local potentates, invited their kinsmen and compatriots over from Roh11 both to aid them and to share in the gains.
Afghan settlements in the north, especially in Katehr12, therefore, continued to grow even without imperial patronage, as is shown by the profusion
with which the eighteenth century settlements appear….
“An early Afghan settlement after Aurangzeb’s death took place at Bioli which was assigned to Daud Khan Ruhela, an Afghan adventurer,
in the service of Madar Shah13, an important zamindar. Daud Khan and his companions gradually occupied neighboring villages. This encouraged
8. Ibid, pg. 3.
9. Ibid, pg. 4.
10. A landlord, the zamindar was an appointed official responsible for collecting rents from peasants. Many of them became quite powerful and wealthy over the years of
having access to significant amounts of funds.
11. Roh was the name of the area around Peshawar city, in today’s Pakistan.
12. The Pashtuns later called Katehr “Rohilkhand.” See Rheula Chieftaincies, pg. 4, for additional details. Katehr literally means soft well aerated loam that is extremely suitable
for cultivation.
13. The name “Madar” identifies this man as a Pashtun as it is probably derived from the “Madar Khel,” a subdivision of the Pashtun Dotani tribe.
Tribal Analysis Center, 6610-M Mooretown Road, Box 159. Williamsburg, VA, 23188
Hindustani Fanatics, India’s Pashtuns, and Deobandism – Connections
other Afghans to emigrate to Katehr. Originally a stronghold of the Katehriyas…. It continued to be held by the Katehriyas till A.D. 1730 when Ali
Muhammad Khan Ruhela killed Duja, chief of the clan, seized it, and made it his capital.
“The settlement of Mirganj (Bareilly) was established at about the same time as other Afghan settlements in Rohilkhand.14
“Useha, where the Afghans settled during the ascendancy of the Bangash15 Afghans of Furrukhabad, is described as an ancient place. Qaim
Khan, the Bangash chief, held the pargana16 till his defeat and death in the battle of Daunri in 1748, when victorious Ruhelas seized the pargana and
assigned it to Fath Khan….17”
The aggressive Rheulas, or Rohillas, and their martial experience soon dominated a wide region in north India after capturing lands belonging
to the Katehriyas. They soon turned their expansionist tendencies toward their Pashtun cousins, the Bangash Pashtuns who were also military
colonists and captured their territory that surrounded the major town of Furrukhabad. Their “Rohilkhand” consisted of independent “chieftaincies,”
as Husain labeled them, in an area that extended from the Himalayan foothills southward for approximately 600 kilometers and west of Delhi for
approximately 250 kilometers. They were able to defend their territorial gains with forces of experienced warrior tribesmen that numbered as high as
80,000 fighters, many of whom were cavalrymen.
The Imperial Gazetteer of India explains the growth of Rohilla supremacy that developed within the power vacuum following the death of
Aruangzeb, the Mughal ruler, and the break up of the Mughal Empire, in its discussion of the city where Sayed Ahmad Shah originated, Bareilly:
“…In 1657 Raja Makrand founded the new city of Bareilly, cut down the forest to the west of the old town and expelled all the Katehriyahas
from the neighborhood. A succession of regular governors followed during the palmy [sic] days of the great Mughal emperors; but after the death of
Aruangzeb, in 1707, when the unwieldy organization began to break asunder, the Hindus of Bareilly threw off the imperial yoke, refused their tribute,
and commenced a series of anarchic quarrels among themselves for supremacy.
“Their dissentions only afforded an opportunity for the rise of a new Muhammadan power. Ali Muhammad Khan, a leader of the Rohilla
Pathans, defeated the governors of Bareilly and Moradabad, and made himself supreme throughout the whole Katehr region. In 1744 the Rohilla
chieftain conquered Kumaun right up to Almora; but two years later the emperor Muhammad Shah marched against him, and Ali Muhammad was
taken a prisoner to Delhi. However, the empire was too much in need of vigorous generals to make his captivity a long one, and in 1748 he was
restored to his old post in Katehr….”18
14. Ibid, pp. 15-16.
15. The Bangash are also a large Pashtun tribe found in the same region as the Yusufzai tribe, Pakistan’s Northwest Frontier Province and its Federally Administered Tribal
Areas.
16. From Wikipedia: A pargana is a former administrative unit of the Indian subcontinent, used primarily, but not exclusively, by the Muslim kingdoms.
17. Ibid, pp. 17-18.


خلاصہ 
ہندوستانی جنونی ، پشتون اور دیوبندی ازم ----- تعلقات 
ٹرآئبل ریسورس سنٹر کی جانب سے 55 صفحات کا ایک تحقیقی پیپر مرے سامنے ہے اور اس پیپر میں بتایا گیا ہے کہ برٹش لٹریچر میں بار بار ان علاقوں میں فوجی مہم جوئی کا زکر کرتا ہے جو اسے افغانستان کی سرحد کے ساتھ رہنے والے پشتونوں کے خلاف کرنا پڑیں اور ان میں ایک اصطلاح " ہندوستانی جنونی " بار بار استعمال ہوتی ہے ، لیکن ان " ہندوستانی جنونیوں " کے بارے میں سمجھا بہت کم گیا ہے اور اس پیپر کا مقصد بھی یہی ہے کہ یہ دکھایا جائے کہ 
یہ " ہندوستانی جنونی " تھے کون ؟ 
ان کا قبائل سے رشتہ کیا تھا ؟
اور ان دونوں یعنی ہندوستانی جنونیوں ، قبائل کا دیوبندی ازم سے رشتہ کیا تھا ؟
جب بھی عام لوگ کسی نئی تحریک کی جانب جھک رہے ہوتے ہیں تو وہاں کی جو سیاسی مذھبی قیادت ہوتی ہے ، مذھب کو بھی ویسے ہی ان خیالات کے مطابق موڈیفائی کردیتے ہیں 
اس مقالے کو سمجھنے کچھ کنجیاں ہیں 
ہندوستان میں بڑے پیمانے پر جو بے چینی اور طوائف الملوکی اس مقالے میں بار بار دکھائی گئی ہے ، اس کا سبب مغل سلطنت کا زوال تھا ، اور اسی زوال نے مقامی وار لارڑز کو اپنی چھوٹی چھوٹی ریاستیں قائم کرنے کا موقعہ دے دیا ، جبکہ اس اتھل پتھل سے جنگ مستقل ہوگئی اور بے ہنگم طریقے سے اتحاد بھی بدلتے رہے اور اس زمانے میں یوروپی ریشہ دوانیوں نے اس بے چینی کو اور بڑھا دیا 
افغانستان سے ملحق شمالی مغربی علاقوں سے جن پشتونوں نے ابتداء می ہندوستان ہجرت کی ان میں بنگش اور یوسف زئی شامل تھے اور وہاں پر ان کو روہیلہ کہا گیا اور یہ وہاں پیشہ سپاہ گری یا تجارت سے منسلک ہوگئے 
ہندوستان میں ان مہاجر پشتون نے اپنی الگ شناخت کو برقرار کھا ، 1774ء میں سید احمد شاہ  نے اتر پردیش کے شہر بریلی سے اپنے ساتھیوں سمیت پاکستان کے شمال مشرقی سرحدی علاقوں میں آئے اور ان کے ساتھ ایک نئی مذھبی آئیڈیالوجی بھی تھی اور یہ آئیڈیالوجی ادنی سے فرق کے ساتھ وہابی ازم سے ملت تھی اور پھر سید احمد شاہ کے کئی سپاہی اور حامی 1857ء کی بغاوت میں بغاوت کا اہم کردار بنے اور آخرکار سید احمد شاہ کے دو شاگردوں نے دیوبندی ازم کی تشکیل کی 
احمد شاہ کے افکار پشتونوں کے اندر تیزی سے مقبول کیونکر ہوئے ؟ اس سوال کا ایک جواب تو یہ ہے کہ ان کے بہت سارے ساتھی پشتون تھے اگرچہ سب نہیں ، پھر وہ جس آئیڈیالوجی کے ساتھ آئے ، وہ پشتونوں کے ہاں بدلے ، پشتون ولی کی روايت سے قریب تھی اور ان کا تعلق زیادہ تر ان علاقوں سے تھا جن کو روہیلہ کنٹرول کرتے تھے اور زیادہ تر یوسف زئی تھے اور ان کی واپسی بھی ان علاقوں میں ہوئی جہاں پر یوسف زئی زیادہ تھے 
اقبال حسین نے اپنے مقالے 
Rise and Fall of Rohila Chirftaincies in 18th Century 
میں  
روہیلاؤں کی ابتدائی مہاجرت شمالی ہندوستان کی جانب کرنے اور پھر 19 ویں صدی میں واپس شمالی مغربی سرحدی علاقوں میں دیوبندی شریعہ نافذکرنے کی تاریخ بیان کی ہے اور دکھایا ہے کہ کیسے وہ سکھوں ، مرہٹوں ، برٹش سے لڑتے رہے ، اقبال حسین کے مطابق ہندوستان میں پشتون کی آبادکاری اور ہجرت کی تاریخ غوری کے زمانے تک جاتی ہے اور سلاطین دھلی کے زمانے میں لودھی اور پھر شیر شاہ سوری کے زمانے میں یہ تخت دھلی کے کنٹرول میں بھی کامیاب ہوئے اور یہ 1200 ء سے شروع ہوتی ہے ، ابتدائی ہجرت باجوڑ ، تیران ، سوات سے ہوئی اور یہ دھلی اور موجودہ اتر پردیش میں جاکر بسے جبکہ پانی ، ٹیرن اور کاکٹر گجرات و دکن جاکر آباد ہوگئے ، مغلیہ سلطنت کا زوال ہوا تو کئی مقامی ریاستیں وجود میں آئیں ، روہیلہ نے بھی اپنی خودمختار ریاستیں قائم کیں اور روھیلہ اس دوران براہ راست مقامی گروہوں جیسے سکھ ، مرہٹہ اور ہندؤ راجاؤں سے تصادم میں آئے  


Wednesday, 1 July 2015

پاکستان میں سنّی نسل کشی جاری - پیر سائیں ظہور شاہ قادری کھڑی شریف میں سپاہ یزید کے ھاتھوں شہید

سائیں ظہور حسین قادری کی شہادت
سانحہ داتا دربار پانچ سال بیت گئے , حملے کے ماسٹر مائینڈ گرفتار نہ ہوئے

یکم جولائی 2010ء کی شام کو جب حضرت عثمان ہجویری المعروف داتا گنج بخش رحمتہ اللہ علیہ کے مزار پرانوار واقع بھاٹی گیٹ لاہور پر عقیدمندوں کا رش لگا ہوا تھا تو دیوبندی تکفیری دہشت گرد جن کا مبینہ تعلق تحریک طالبان پاکستان سے بتایا جاتا ہے مزار شریف میں داخل ہوئے اور انھوں نے خود کش بم دھماکہ کرڈالا جس سے متعدد افراد شہید و زخمی ہوگئے

یکم جولائی دو ہزار پندرہ کو اس واقعے کو گزرے پانچ سال ہوگئے , پنجاب حکومت نہ تو اس واقعے کے ماسٹر مائینڈ کو آج تک گرفتار کرسکی ا ور نہ ہی ان دھشت گردوں کے سہولت کار سامنے لائے گئے جنھوں نے ان دھشت گردوں کو یہاں تک پہنچنے میں مددی

آج جب میں اس واقعے پر نوٹ لکھنے بیٹھا تو اسی وقت میرپور کھڑی شریف سے ایک اندوہ ناک خبر ملی کہ کہ وہاں پر پیرطریقت , رھبر شریعت حضرت سائین ظہور حسین شاہ قادری کو کسی نے کلہاڑیوں کے وار کرکے شہید کرڈالا اور ان کی لاش کھڑی شریف کے جنگل سے ملی ہے , سائیں ظہور حسین شاہ کے بھائی منظور حسین شاہ جوکہ کھڑی شریف پولیس میں سب انسپکڑ ہیں نے بتایا کہ ان کے بھائی کو کالعدم سپاہ صحابہ پاکستان کے دہشت گرد ونگ لشکر جھنگوی کی جانب سے دھمکیاں موصول ہورہی تھیں اور کہا جارھا تھاکہ وہ شرک و بدعت سے باز آجائیں اور پھر ان کو قتل کردیا گیا

میرپور سمیت آزاد کشمیر میں کالعدم سپاہ صحابہ پاکستان اہلسنت والجماعت کے نام کے ساتھ سرگرم ہے اور یہ زبردستی آزاد کشمیر جہاں کی 95 فیصد آبادی صوفی سنّی ہے کو دیوبندیانے اور سنّی مساجد پر قبضہ کرنے میں اہم ترین مدد فراہم کرنے میں ملوث ہے , جبکہ انٹیلی جنس رپورٹس موجود ہیں کہ آزاد کشمیر میں طالبانائزیشن کے پھیلاؤ میں اے ایس ڈبلیو جے کا ھاتھ صاف نظر آتا ہے , اس کے باوجود دیوبندی تکفیری قوتیں آزاد کشمیر میں سرگرم عمل ہیں اور کوئی ان کو روکنے کی کوشش نہیں کرتا

میر پور کھڑی شریف جہاں پر معروف پنجابی صوفی باصفا حضرت میاں محمدبخش کا مزار ہے اور یہ مزاردیوبندی تکفیریوں کی آنکھ میں اسی طرح سے کھٹکتا ہے جیسے پاکستان میں مزارات اولیاء کھٹکتے ہیں اور ہمیں سخت خطرہ اس بات کا ہے کہ اگر غفلت اور نااہلی کا یہی عالم رہا تو کوئی بھی المیہ رونما ہو سکتا ہے 

ہم منگلا کے کور کمانڈر , سیکڑ انچارج آئی ایس آئی , آئی جی پولیس آزاد کشمیر اور وزیراعظم آزاد کشمیر سے کہتے ہیں کہ وہ آزاد کشمیر میں کالعدم تنظیموں کو کام کرنے سے روکیں اور اہلسنت والجماعت کے نام سے کام کرنے والی تنظیم جوکہ فروری 2012 ء میں کالعدم قرار دی گئی تھی کے دفاتر بند کرائیں اور اس,لوگو,کے تحت کام کرنے والوں کی قیادت کو گردفتار کرے

ابتک دیوبندی تکفیری دہشت گردوں کے ھاتھوں پاکستان میں ایک اندازے کے مطابق 45000 صوفی سنّی شہید ہوچکے ہیں اور یہ صاف,صاف سنّی نسل کشی کا,معاملہ ہے جو دیوبندی تکفیری دہشت گرد تنظیموں کے ھاتھ پاکستان میں ہورہی ہے اور افسوس ناک امر یہ ہے کہ پاکستان کا مین سٹریم میڈیا صوفی سنّی نسل کشی کا زکر کرنا بھی پسند نہیں کرتا اور اسے شیعہ -سنّی لڑائی کا نام دیا جارھا,ہے , لیکن اتنی بڑی تعداد میں سنّیوں کی شہادتیں ظاہر کرتی ہیں کہ پاکستان کے اندر دیوبندی تکفیری دہشت گردی ایک خارجی تکفیری دہشت گرد عفریت ہیں جن سے کوئی مذھبی کمیونٹی محفوظ نہیں ہے اور پوری قوم کو متحد ہوکر اس,عفریت کامقابلہ کرنا ہوگا
Summary
On 1st July 2010 , one suicide bomber entered in courtyard of famous Shrine of Hazrat Usman Hajvari Data Gunj baksh at Bhati gate Lahore and he blew himself. In that Suicide bombing at shrine many people killed and injured. Responsibility of this terrorist attack was accepted by Tehreek Taliban a Deobandi takfiri Khariji organization.

Now it is July 2015 and 5 years have been passed and neither master mind of this terrorist attack, nor facilitators of this act we're arrested.

When I was writing this note that I received a sad  news from Mirpur of Azad Kashmir that Hazrat Pir Saien Zahoor hussain Qadri was killed by takfiri terrorists and his dead body was found in jungle of Khari Sharif near Shrine of renowned  Sufi poet Main Muhammad Bakhsh.

We have no dispute or personal enmity with anyone ,  but my brother was receiving threatening calls from banned outfits like Lashkar jhangvi,  Said  Mazoor Hussain younger brother of diseased Zahoor hussain Shah Qadri. Manzoor hussain is sub inspector in Azad Kashmir police.

Mirpur a big city of Azad Kashmir particularly and whole Azad Kashmir has become center of banned outfits like Deobandi takfiri organizations like SSP aka Ahle Sunnat  Wal Jamat -ASWJ,  Jaish Muhammad etc. Deobandi mosques and,seminaries are growing more and more in Azad Kashmir with Saudi funding and most of these seminaries and mosques are under control of banned outfit ASWJ or Jaish Muhammad which was formed by Masood Azhar involved in many attacks on Sufi Sunnis of Pakistan. Seminaries and mosques under control of Deobandi takfiris are disseminating hatred against Sufi Sunnis while calling their religious paractices polytheism and innovations.

We are not seeing real implementation of National Action Plan and all extremists and banned organizations are working freely under cover name , said Pir Ateeq ur rahman former M.L.A and president of Jamiat Ulemaie Pakistan -JUP Azada Kashmir prominent Sufi Sunni political organization.

Discourse of main stream media on Sufi Sunni genocide is obfuscating and never shows Sufi Sunni identity in such cases of killing and suicide attacks in which Sufi Sunnis are targeted and in often cases identity of killers also is showed as Sunni militants. Most anchors,  analysts,  journalists and human right defenders translate into false Shia -Sunni binary or infra sect fight among two groups of Sunnis.

Takfiri Deobandi terrorism which is allied and affiliated with global Salafi takfiri terrorism is responsible of organized fatal acts of terrorism not only against Sufi Sunnis but against Shia, Christian,  Hindus and other religious communities. So this is not fight or civil war among different sects and religious communities but open and brutal terrorism by a tiny minority takfiri Khariji groups emerged from Deobandi school of thought , therefore we call them Deobandi Takfiri Khariji.

We should all oppressed and victims of Deobandi Takfiri terrorism unite  against this mess .


Tuesday, 30 June 2015

Wahhabism :Understanding the roots and role models of extremism

Note : This is very comprehensive article on Wahhabism but writer Zubair Qamar slightly pointed out about its Indian subcontinent brand Deobandism. Readers of my blogs are mostly from Indian subcontinent, that is reason I want to write some introductory note about Deobandism  Indian subcontinent brand of Wahhabism .

Darulaloom Alarabia was founded in 1866 by Qasim Nanutavi in Deoban city of United Province of India and this seminary actually was established under influences of Ideas and concepts of Shah Ismail Dehlvi - A grand son  of prominent Sufi Sunni scholar Shah Waliullah - and Syed Ahmad of Rai Barely a former solider of Wahhabi Nawab of princely state Loharu in British Punjab of undivided India. These both people introduced ideas and concepts of Muhammad bin Abdulwahhab in Indian subcontinent . Shah Ismail Dehlvi translated and summarized  "The book of Toheed " notorious book of ibn Wahhab titled with Taqweetul Ayman in Urdu. In that book he totally followed Muhammad bin Abdulwahhab and deviated from path and ideology of his grandfather Shah Walliullah and his elder uncles like Shah Abdulaziz Dehlvi. Dozens of Sunni scholars in his time wrote reply of this book including All am a Fazal Haq of Khairabad India - a freedom fighter of 1857 .Shah Ismail and Syed Ahmad both followed way of Muhammad bin Abdulwahhab and they drove a violent and terrorist campaign  against Sunni Pathan Muslims of Balakot,  Sawat and other frontier areas.

Dar ul Uloom Deoband in fact revived dead tradition but deviation of Shah Ismail and Syed Ahmad and established new brand of Wahhabism with shades of Hanafi fiqh while portraying itself as Sunni version of Islam.When Wahhabism was not established strongly in Arab peninsula,  at that time Deoband hide its Wahhabi tendency but as Ibn Said established it's occupation on whole Arab peninsula then Dad ul uloom started to unfold its Wahhabi shade publicly.

Deobandized religious seminaries and religious political parties and organizations are allied of Al-Saud and these places and organizations are acting as proxies of Al-Saud ruling family of Saudi Arab .Indian subcontinent including Pakistan , Bangladesh and India is main target of process of  Deobandization which is in fact process of Wahhabization of Indian Subcontinent .Process of Deobandization in Pakistan , India and Bangladesh is continuing with massive funding of gulf states particularly funding from Saudi Arab,  Qatar,  Kuwait  and U.A.E. In 80s due to massive funding from western world and Saudi Arab and militant training  radicalised Deobandism more and made fast the process of Deobandization of Indian subcontinent.

Result of ongoing process of Deobandization in Indian subcontinent is emergence of radical Deobandi Takfiri terrorist current representing by Tehreek Taliban Afghanistan and Pakistan , Sipah Sahabah Pakistan aka Able Sunnat Wa Aljamat -ASWJ,  Jaish e Muhammad,  Lashkar Jhangvi etc. This Deobandi Takfiri radical fanatic current is responsible of Shia and Sufi Sunni genocide in Pakistan,  Afghanistan and attacks on Christians , Hindus and other non Muslims. Deobandi Takfiri current is very important for Al-Saud not only but this current provides main logistical and manpower support to Wahhabi Salafi international terrorist current like AL-Qaeda, Daa'esh etc. Although Salafis and people from Jamat Islami are also allies of Wahhabism in Indian subcontinent but Deobandism is more important,  big in size and influence on people of Indian subcontinent for Saudis, Qatris,  Kuwaitis and international Wahhabi terrorists networks.

Pakistan is more vulnerable country where Deobandization is in full swing and process of Deobandization here in Pakistan got state sponsorship in 80s when Army dictator Zia captured power and he started to patronage Deobandism in Pakistan and Zia regime with massive funding from Saudis helped Deobandis to deobandize the mosques of Ahlesunnat which are called barelwis  in Indian subcontinent and are more than 80% in India and Bangladesh and,60 to 70 % of total Muslim population. Before partition Deobandis were only 8 to 10 % of total Muslim population but after partition they grew more and more and now they are 15 to 20 in Pakistan and near about 10 % in India and 10 % in Bangladesh.

In Pakistan due to many factors in tribal areas including six agencies of federally administered areas,  KPK and Baluchistan Deobandization marginalized Sufi Sunnis who were majority of these areas. Sufi Sunnis in those areas slaughtered , internally displaced and their shrines and mosques were bombed by Deobandi Takfiri terrorist organizations.

With massive funding from Saudis and due to establishment of massive business of drugs,  weapons and kidnappings by Deobandi militant so called jihadi current all over Pakistan Deobandi seminaries and mosques are being built and thus we are witnessing intensive process of Deobandization of society and marginalization of other religious communities in Pakistan.

Deobandization of Pakistani society is real threat for diverse Sufi culture of Pakistan and basically this process is pushing society toward more monolith form of religion which have no  space for diversity and pluralism which is essence of civilization of Indian subcontinent.  Deobandization is directly attack on identity of Sufi Sunnis of Indian subcontinent and this process is trying to replace Sufi Sunni version of Islam with other so called Sunni Deobandi Islam which is in fact other name of Wahhabism and Indian subcontinent brand of so called Salafism.


Introduction

The most extremist pseudo-Sunni movement today is Wahhabism (also known as Salafism). While many may think that Wahhabi terror is a recent phenomenon that has only targeted non-Muslims, it will surprise many to know that the orthodox Sunni Muslims were the first to be slaughtered in waves of Wahhabi massacres in Arabia hundreds of years ago. One only has to read the historical evolution of Saudi Arabia to know the gruesome details of the tragedy – a tragedy in which thousands of Sunni and Shi’ite Muslims perished at the hands of Wahhabi militants.

The extremist interpretations of Wahhabism, although previously confined to small pockets of people in Arabia, has survived to this day under the protection, finance, and tutelage of the Saudi state religious organs. This has transformed Wahhabism – and related Salafi groups that receive inspiration and support from them – from a regional to a global threat to be reckoned with by the world community. To a Wahhabi-Salafi, all those who differ with them, including Sunni Muslims, Shi’ite Muslims, Christians, and Jews, are infidels who are fair targets.

Do the majority of Sunnis support Wahhabism? Are Sunnis and Wahhabis one and the same?

What is a Wahhabi?

Because Wahhabis claim to be “true Sunnis,” it is difficult for one who is unfamiliar with Wahhabism to distinguish it from orthodox Sunni Islam. If a Wahhabi is asked if he/she is Sunni, he/she will always reply in the affirmative. When asked if they are Wahhabis, they reply with an emphatic “no” as they consider it an insult to what they believe and stand for:  “Purity of worship and reverence to God alone. The authentic carriers of Islam from the time of the Prophet (s)[1]Wahhabis implies that they learned ideas from a man – Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab – instead of the Qur’an and Sunnah – the two great sources of Islam. Irrespective of what they think, they are not following the Islamic sources authentically, but the wrong interpretations of the founder of the Wahhabi movement who appeared in the 1700s. Sunnis and other Wahhabi detractors have labeled them as Wahhabis to differentiate them from orthodox Sunnis. until now.” Calling them

Wahhabis as Salafis: deceptive semantics

Wahhabis differentiate themselves from orthodox Sunnis by labeling themselves Salafis, which refers to the word salaf – the time period in which the early Muslims lived in the first 300 years after the Hijra, or emigration, of Prophet Muhammad from Mecca to Medina in 622.  The Companions (Sahaba), those who followed the Companions (Tabi’een), and those who followed those who followed the Companions (Taba al-Tabi’een) who lived in the time period of the Salafsalaf.  This means that when a Wahhabi calls himself a Salafi, he claims to be a genuine follower of pristine Islam. This, however, is far from the truth. are exemplars par excellence of what Muslims should be, as Prophet Muhammad (s) had praised these Muslims as being the best of Muslims.  Therefore, it has been the aim of every Muslim since the time of Prophet Muhammad (s) to adhere to and to follow the footsteps of the adherents of the

Orthodox Sunni Muslims believe that they are the true bearers of pristine Islam since the time period of the Salaf. Because there were time gaps between the noble period of the Salaf and centuries that followed, the authentic positions of the early Muslims were passed by scholars in those times and afterwards to later generations via meticulous, systematic, and methodological means of preservation. The knowledge was passed from qualified scholars to other qualified scholars through the centuries, who passed it to the masses.  This uninterrupted chain of knowledge from the time of the Salaf until now has been authentically preserved by the orthodox Sunnis.  Orthodox Sunnis, therefore, have roots in the Salaf, and are represented today by the four surviving authentic schools of Islamic jurisprudence:  Hanafi, Shafi’i, Maliki, and Hanbalimadhahib). schools (

The Wahhabis, by calling themselves Salafis, not only claim to follow the footsteps of the early Muslims, but also use semantics to fool and allure less informed Muslims into accepting Wahhabism. Wahhabis say, “You must follow the Muslims of the Salaf.” (This is undoubtedly true.) Then the Wahhabi semantics: “Therefore you must be a Salafi and nothing else. Following anything else means you’re following a path that is different from the Muslims of the Salaf.” By such deceptive semantics, the less informed Muslims believe that Salafis must truly represent the pristine interpretations of the early Muslims of the Salaf.  After all, the word Salafi sounds like Salaf, so it must truly be representative of it. Far from it.  When the less informed goes beyond semantics and blind faith and investigates what a Salafi believes, the truth unveiled is that the understanding of Salafis (Wahhabis) is different and contradictory to the understanding and positions of the pious Muslims who lived in the Salaf – and the majority of Muslims who have ever lived (Sunnis).

Wahhabi-Salafi variety

The Wahhabi-Salafis believe that Sunnis have been vehemently wrong for the past 1,000+ years and aim to bring the Muslims out of a state of ignorance (jahilliyya) that has existed, in their minds, since the time of the pious adherents of the Salaf.  Even if the majority of orthodox Sunni Muslims were strong today, indeed if they ruled an empire that stretched far to every corner of the globe, it would still be a failure to Salafis because to them the foundations of such a political system would have been based on reprehensible innovation (bid’a) and blasphemy (kufr).

To the Salafi, the presence and power of Sunni orthodoxy, in all of its manifestations as illustrated throughout Islamic history, is just as impure as the rising European hegemony in all of its manifestations since the demise of the Muslim Ottoman Empire. To the Salafis, a minority in this world, the world is an abode of blasphemy, ruled and occupied by infidels that demands reformation through both non-violent and violent means to bring about a supposedly pure Islamic world system.

Wahhabi-Salafis come in various strains, some being more extreme than others. The variety in strains is due to differences in approach of bringing the Muslims back to a state of strengthened belief based on the example of the pious ancestors. It must be emphasized that although all Wahhabis are called Salafis, all Salafis are not purely Wahhabi.  “Salafi Muslims” include those like Syed Qutb who wish to eradicate the supposed current state of ignorance (jahiliyya) and bring Muslims back to a state of purity – a purity reminiscent of the purity of Muslims who lived in the time period of the Salaf.  However, all Salafi Muslims, whether they are Wahhabi or Qutbi, admire with exaggeration the role models Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab and Ahmad Ibn Taymiyah, whose hard-line interpretations have inspired revolutionaries today. Therefore, although all Salafis are not Wahhabis, they admire many of the same role models  – role models who have been rejected and condemned by masses of orthodox Sunni scholars for their unauthentic representations of pristine Islam. It can also be said that all Wahhabis consider themselves to be Salafis and prefer to be called by this name (instead of Wahhabi), even though differences exist between Salafi groups.

Although there are differences in approach among Salafis, they have nonetheless allied themselves in an attempt to make the Salafi vision a reality by both non-violent and violent means.

An example of this are the Salafi-oriented Deobandis and their alliance with the Wahhabis.   The alliance between the Muslim Brotherhood (and its various factions and offshoots) and the Wahhabis in Saudi Arabia was strengthened during the 1950s and 1960s in the struggle of the Muslim Brotherhood against Egypt’s Nasserist regime. Saudis had provided refuge for some leaders of the Brotherhood, and also provided assistance to them in other Arab States. The Wahhabi-Salafi alliance was further strengthened as a response to the growing threat of Shi’ah power when the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini of Iran revolted and overthrew the U.S.-allied Shah in 1979.

Lastly, the alliance made itself manifest in the holy struggle (jihad) against the atheist/Communist Soviets in Afghanistan.  Salafis of all strains worked together as the “righteous Sunnis” to counter the Shi’ah-Communist threat, from proselytizing to killing to make their Salafism prevail. Indeed, Salafis have used both proselytizing and revolutionary means to express their message using both political and apolitical approaches. So-called “Sunni terrorism” today is perpetrated by radical Salafis who desire to replace “infidel” governments with myopic “scholars” who adhere to their fanatical interpretations and ideologies. Their tentacles are spread to all corners of the globe, including Bosnia, Albania, Indonesia, Philippines, Uzbekistan, England, Malaysia, South Africa, Lebanon, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.   Salafis have demonstrated the havoc they are capable of wreaking in recent decades.

Wahhabis as neo-Kharijites

The Wahhabis are especially notorious for reviving the ways of the Khawarij (or Kharijites). They originated in the time of the caliphates of Uthman and Ali, among the closest companions to Prophet Muhammad.  They were the earliest group of fanatics who separated themselves from the Muslim community. They arose in opposition to Ali – Prophet Muhammad’s son-in-law – because of his willingness to arbitrate with Mu’awiyah, governor of Damascus at that time, over the issue of the caliphate. The Khawarij, meaning “those who exited,” slung accusations of blasphemy against Ali and Mu’awiyah – and those who followed them – saying that the Qur’an, and not them, had the ultimate authority in the matter.  Ibn al-Jawzi, an orthodox Sunni scholar, in his book Talbis Iblis (The Devil’s Deception) under the chapter heading “A Mention of the Devil’s Delusion upon the Kharijites,” says that Dhu’l-Khuwaysira al-Tamimi was the first Kharijite in Islam and that “[h]is fault was to be satisfied with his own view; had he paused he would have realized that there is no view superior to that of Allah’s Messenger…”  Furthermore, the orthodox Sunni scholar Imam Abd al-Qahir al-Baghdadi discusses the Kharijite rebellions and their bloody massacres of tens of thousands of Muslims in one of his books. He explicitly mentions the Azariqa, one of the most atrocious Kharijite movements led by Nafi’ ibn al-Azraq from the tribe of Banu Hanifa – the same tribe where the heretic Musaylima the Prevaricator (or Liar) who claimed prophethood alongside Prophet Muhammad came from.  Just as the Khawarij threw accusations of blasphemy on Ali and Mu’awiya, Wahhabis throw accusations of blasphemy against SunnisShi’ites. and

The Al-Sa`ud and Muhammad ibn `Abdul-Wahhab – the founder of Wahhabism

Wahhabism is named after the its founder, Muhammad ibn `Abdul-Wahhab (1703-1792), and has its roots in the land now known as Saudi Arabia. Without this man, the al-Sa`ud ‎, one of many clans spread over the Arabian peninsula, would not have had the inspiration, reason, and determination to consolidate the power that they did and wage "jihad" on people they perceived to be “polytheists” – those who attribute partners in worship to Almighty God. How intimately close was al-Sa`ud’s association with Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab? Robert Lacey eloquently illustrates this association:‎

Until [Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab’s] coming the Al Sa`ud ‎ had been a minor sheikhly clan like many others in Nejd, townsmen and farmers, making a comfortable living from trade, dates and perhaps a little horse-breeding, combining with the desert tribes to raid outwards when they felt strong, prudently retrenching in times of weakness.  Modestly independent, they were in no way empire builders, and it is not likely that the wider world would ever have heard of them without their alliance with the Teacher.[2]

The al-Sa`ud are originally from the village of ad-Diriyah, located in Najd, in eastern Arabia situated near modern day Riyadh, the capital of Sa`ud‎i Arabia.  Ancestors of Sau’ud Ibn Muhammad, whom little is known about, settled in the area as agriculturists and gradually grew in number over time into the clan of al-Sa`ud .‎

Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab was raised in Uyainah, an oasis in southern Najd, and was from the Banu Tamim tribe. He came from a religious family and left Uyainah in pursuit of Islamic knowledge.  He traveled to Mecca, Medina, Iraq, and Iran to acquire knowledge from different teachers.  When he returned to his homeland of Uyainah, he preached what he believed to be Islam in its purity – which was, in fact, a vicious assault on traditional Sunni Islam.

The orthodox Sunni scholar Jamil Effendi al-Zahawi said that the teachers of Ibn `Abdul-Wahhab, including two teachers he had studied with in Medina – Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Sulayman al-Kurdi and Shaykh Muhammad Hayat al-Sindi – became aware of his anti-Sunni Wahhabi[3] creed and warned Muslims from him. His shaykhs, including the two aforementioned shaykhs, used to say:  “God will allow him [to] be led astray; but even unhappier will be the lot of those misled by him.”

Moreover, Ibn `Abdul-Wahhab’s own father had warned Muslims from him, as did his biological brother, Sulayman Ibn `Abdul-Wahhab, an orthodox Sunni scholar who refuted him in a book entitled al-Sawa’iq al-Ilahiyya fi al-radd `ala al-Wahhabiyya [“Divine Lightnings in Refuting the Wahhabis”].  Ibn `Abdul-Wahhab was refuted by the orthodox Sunni scholars for his many ugly innovations. Perhaps his most famous book, Kitab at-Tawheed (Book of Unity of God) is widely circulated amongst Wahhabis worldwide, including the United States. His book is popular in Wahhabi circles, although orthodox Sunni scholars have said that there is nothing scholarly about it, both in terms of its content and its style.

Ibn Taymiyah: the Wahhabi founder’s role model

It is worth giving an overview of a man named Ahmed Ibn Taymiyah (1263-1328) who lived a few hundred years before Muhammad ibn `Abdul-Wahhab. The Wahhabi founder admired him as a role model and embraced many of his pseudo-Sunni positions. Who exactly was Ibn Taymiyah and what did orthodox Sunni scholars say about him? Muslim scholars had mixed opinions about him depending on his interpretation of various issues. His straying from mainstream Sunni Islam on particular issues of creed (`aqeedah) and  worship (`ibadat) made him an extremely controversial figure in the Muslim community.

Ibn Taymiya has won the reputation of being the true bearer of the early pious Muslims, especially among reformist revolutionaries, while the majority of orthodox Sunnis have accused him of reprehensible bid’ah (reprehenisible innovation), some accusing him of kufr (unbelief).[4]

It behooves one to ask why Ibn Taymiyah had received so much opposition from reputable Sunni scholars who were known for their asceticism, trustworthiness, and piety. Some of Ibn Taymiyah’s anti-Sunni and controversial positions include:

(1) His claim that Allah’s Attributes are “literal”, thereby attributing God with created attributes and becoming an anthropomorphist;

(2) His claim that created things existed eternally with Allah;

(3) His opposition to the scholarly consensus on the divorce issue;

(4) His opposition to the orthodox Sunni practice of tawassul (asking Allah for things using a deceased pious individual as an intermediary);

(5) His saying that starting a trip to visit the Prophet Muhammad’s (s) invalidates the shortening of prayer;

(6) His saying that the torture of the people of Hell stops and doesn’t last forever;

(7) His saying that Allah has a limit (hadd) that only He Knows;

(8) His saying that Allah literally sits on the Throne (al-Kursi) and has left space for Prophet Muhammad (s) to sit next to Him;

(9) His claim that touching the grave of Prophet Muhammad (s) is polytheism (shirk);

(10) His claim that that making supplication at the Prophet Muhammad’s grave to seek a better status from Allah is a reprehensible innovation;

(11) His claim that Allah descends and comparing Allah’s “descent” with his, as he stepped down from a minbar while giving a sermon (khutba) to Muslims;

(12) His classifying of oneness in worship of Allah (tawheed) into two parts:  Tawhid al-rububiyya and Tawhid al-uluhiyya, which was never done by pious adherents of the salaf.

Although Ibn Taymiyah’s unorthodox, pseudo-Sunni positions were kept away from the public in Syria and Egypt due to the consensus of orthodox Sunni scholars of his deviance, his teachings were nevertheless circulating in hiding. An orthodox Sunni scholar says:

Indeed, when a wealthy trader from Jeddah brought to life the long-dead ‘aqida [creed] of Ibn Taymiya at the beginning of this century by financing the printing in Egypt of Ibn Taymiya’s Minhaj al-sunna al-nabawiyya [italics mine] and other works, the Mufti of Egypt Muhammad Bakhit al-Muti‘i, faced with new questions about the validity of anthropomorphism, wrote: "It was a fitna (strife) that was sleeping; may Allah curse him who awakened it."

It is important to emphasize that although many of the positions of Ibn Taymiyah and Wahhabis are identical, they nonetheless contradict each other in some positions. While Ibn Taymiyah accepts Sufism (Tasawwuf) as a legitimate science of Islam (as all orthodox Sunni Muslims do), Wahhabis reject it wholesale as an ugly innovation in the religion. While Ibn Taymiyah accepts the legitimacy of commemorating Prophet Muhammad’s birthday (Mawlid) – accepted by orthodox Sunni Muslims as legitimate – Wahhabis reject it as a reprehensible innovation that is to be repudiated.

Ibn Taymiyah is an inspiration to Islamist groups that call for revolution. Kepel says, “Ibn Taymiyya (1268-1323) – a primary reference for the Sunni Islamist movement – would be abundantly quoted to justify the assassination of Sadat in 1981…and even to condemn the Saudi leadership and call for its overthrow in the mid-1990s”.[5]

Sivan says that only six months before Sadat was assassinated, the weekly Mayo singled out Ibn Taymiyya as “the most pervasive and deleterious influence upon Egyptian youth.” Sivan further says that Mayo concluded that “the proliferating Muslim associations at the [Egyptian] universities, where Ibn Taymiyya’s views prevail, have been spawning various terrorist groups.” Indeed, a book entitled The Absent Precept, by `Abd al-Salam Faraj – the "spiritual" leader of Sadat’s assassins who was tried and executed by the Egyptian government – strongly refers to Ibn Taymiyya’s and some of his disciples’ writings. Three of four of Sadat’s assassins willingly read a lot of Ibn Taymiyya’s works on their own.[6]

Ibn Taymiyah is also noted to be a favorite of other Salafi extremists, including the Muslim Brotherhood’s Syed Qutb. Ibn Taymiyyah’s student, Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah, is also frequently cited by Salafis of all colors.

Ibn Taymiyah’s “fatwa” of jihad against Muslims

What is also well-known about Ibn Taymiyah is that he lived in turbulent times when the Mongols had sacked Baghdad and conquered the Abassid Empire in 1258.  In 1303, he was ordered by the Mamluk Sultan to give a fatwa (religious edict) legalizing jihad against the Mongols. Waging a holy war on the Mongols for the purpose of eliminating any threat to Mamluk power was no easy matter.  The Mongol Khan Mahmoud Ghazan had converted to Islam in 1295.   Although they were Muslims who did not adhere to Islamic Law in practice, and also supported the Yasa Mongol of code of law, they were deemed apostates by the edict of Ibn Taymiyah.  To Ibn Taymiyah, Islamic Law was not only rejected by Mongols because of their lack of wholesale adherence, but the “infidel” Yasa code of law made them legal targets of extermination. The so-called jihad ensued and the Mongol threat to Syria was exterminated.  Wahhabis and other Salafis to this day brand the Mongol Mahmoud Ghazan as a kafir (disbeliever).  Orthodox Sunni Muslims, however, have praised Mahmoud Ghazan as a Muslim. Shaykh Muhammad Hisham Kabbani writes:

In fact, Ghazan Khan was a firm believer in Islam.  Al-Dhahabi relates that he became a Muslim at the hands of the Sufi shaykh Sadr al-Din Abu al-Majami’ Ibrahim al-Juwayni (d.720), one of Dhahabi’s own shaykhs of hadith….During his rule he had a huge mosque built in Tabriz in addition to twelve Islamic schools (madrasa), numerous hostels (khaniqa), forts (ribat), a school for the secular sciences, and an observatory.  He supplied Mecca and Medina with many gifts.  He followed one of the schools (madhahib) of the Ahl al-Sunna [who are the orthodox Sunnis] and was respectful of religious scholars.  He had the descendants of the Prophet mentioned before the princes and princesses of his house in the state records, and he introduced the turban as the court headgear.[7]

Muhammad ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab would later follow Ibn Taymiyah’s footsteps and slaughter thousands of Muslims in Arabia.

Orthodox Sunni scholars who refuted Ibn Taymiyah’s pseudo-Sunni positions

Ibn Taymiyah was imprisoned by a fatwa (religious edict) signed by four orthodox Sunni judges in the year 726 A.H for his deviant and unorthodox positions.  Note that each of the four judges represents the four schools of Islamic jurisprudence that Sunni Muslims belong to today. This illustrates that Ibn Taymiyah did not adhere to the authentic teachings of orthodox Sunni Islam as represented by the four schools of Sunni jurisprudence. There is no evidence to indicate that there was a “conspiracy” against Ibn Taymiyyah to condemn him, as Wahhabis and other Salafis. purport in his defense. The names of the four judges are: Qadi [Judge] Muhammad Ibn Ibrahim Ibn Jama’ah, ash-Shafi’i, Qadi [Judge] Muhammad Ibn al-Hariri, al-`Ansari, al-Hanafi, Qadi [Judge] Muhammad Ibn Abi Bakr, al-Maliki, and Qadi [Judge] Ahmad Ibn `Umar, al-Maqdisi, al-Hanbali

Some orthodox Sunni scholars who refuted Ibn Taymiyya for his deviances and opposition to the positions of orthodox Sunni Islam include: Taqiyy-ud-Din as-Subkiyy, Faqih Muhammad Ibn `Umar Ibn Makkiyy, Hafiz Salah-ud-Din al-`Ala’i, Qadi, Mufassir Badr-ud-Din Ibn Jama’ah, Shaykh Ahmad Ibn Yahya al-Kilabi al-Halabi, Hafiz Ibn Daqiq al-`Id, Qadi Kamal-ud-Din az-Zamalkani, Qadi Safi-ud-Din al-Hindi, Faqih and Muhaddith `Ali Ibn Muhammad al-Baji ash-Shafi’i, the historian al-Fakhr Ibn al-Mu`allim al-Qurashi, Hafiz Dhahabi, Mufassir Abu Hayyan al-`Andalusi, and Faqih and voyager Ibn Batutah.

Najd –  A place not so holy

Najd, in Saudi Arabia, is where the founder of Wahhabism came from. It was a mostly barren and dry land inhabited by Bedouins who used to graze animals.  With sparse water, it is not the most comfortable of places since its climate has extremes of heat and cold in the summer and winter seasons.  Najd has a notorious reputation in the orthodox Sunni community for originating seditions (fitan) long before Muhammad ibn `Abdul-Wahhab came.  Indeed, it is known to have harbored many  trouble mongering individuals who challenged the Muslims both spiritually and physically. The orthodox Sunni Iraqi scholar Jamal Effendi al-Zahawi says:

Famous writers of the day made a point of noting the similarity between Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab’s beginnings and those of the false prophets prominent in Islam’s intial epoch like Musaylima the Prevaricator, Sajah al-Aswad al-Anasi, Tulaiha al-Asadi and others of his kind [14].

Fenari says that although Najd is closest to to the holy cities of Mecca and Medina, it has only been dispraised by Prophet Muhammad (s) in authentic traditions.  He raises another interesting point that while many Arabian tribes were praised by Prophet Muhammad, the Banu Tamim – the most well known tribe of Central Arabia where Muhammad ibn `Abdul Wahhab was from – is praised only once. Moreover, authentic traditions that “explicitly critique” the Banu Tamimites are far more numerous.  Ibn al-Jawzi, an orthodox Sunni scholar, documents the evolution of the Kharijite movements and illustrates how the tribe of Banu Tamim played a leading role in it.  Imam Abd al-Qahir also states that the Tamimites – and the Central Arabians in general – were intimately involved in the Kharijite rebellions against the Muslims, contrasting their immense contribution to the minimal contribution of members of the tribes of Medina and Yemen.  It is from Banu Tamim where a man name Abu Bilal Mirdas came from, who, although being a relentless worshipper, turned out to be one of the most barbaric Kharijite fanatics. “He is remembered as the first who said the Tahkim – the formula ‘The judgment is Allah’s alone’ – on the Day of Siffin, which became the slogan of the later Kharijite da’wa.”  It is reminiscent of what Wahhabis say today – that they strictly adhere to nothing but the Qur’an and Sunnah – although it is merely a jumble of words without coherent meaning. Najda ibn Amir of the tribe of Banu Hanifa was a Kharijite whose homeland was Najd, and the best known woman among the Kharijites was a Tamimite named Qutam bint `Alqama. It is fascinating to see that fanatics of all types came from a region where the fanatic Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab came from.

The Wahhabi assault on graves and the massacre of Muslim communities in Riyadh and Karbala

With the ferocious zeal of a “divine” mission, aimed at terminating what they perceived as the filthy polytheistic scum of Arabia, the Wahhabi army led by Muhammad ibn Sa`ud ‎ first destroyed graves and objects in Najdi towns and villages that were used for what they condemned as “polytheistic practices.”  The Wahhabi movement mustered supporters who rallied behind their cause, increased the size of their army, and successfully united most of the people of Najd under the banner of Wahhabism by 1765.

The assault and “jihad”of Wahhabism did not stop after the death of Muhammad ibn Sa`ud ‎ in 1765, but continued with unrelenting and barbaric force under the leadership of his son, Abdul-Aziz, who captured the city of Riyadh in 1773. Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab died a year earlier but left four sons who continued spreading Wahhabism and strengthened the Wahhabi family’s alliance with the Al-Sa`ud ‎.[8] Later, in 1801, the Wahhabi army marched to Karbala with a force of 10,000 men and 6,000 camels.[9] Upon reaching Karbala, they mercilessly and indiscriminately attacked its inhabitants for eight hours, massacring about 5,000 people. Moreover, they severely damaged Imam Hussein’s mosque, looted the city, and left the carnage-laden city with its treasures on 200 camels.[10] This holocaust won the Wahhabi criminals the unforgiving hatred and wrath of the Shi’ite and Sunni Muslims, who, until this day, curse them passionately.  The Shi’ite Muslims consider Imam Hussein, a grandson of Prophet Muhammad (s), one of the most sacred figures and his tomb one of the most sacred sites on earth. Every year, thousands of Shi’ites gather at the site to commemorate the death of Imam Hussein.  Visiting Karbala one is indeed filled me with awe and spiritual strength even as a devout Sunni. Shi’ite wrath, of course, didn’t mean much to the Wahhabis. The Shi’ites, along with the Sunnis, had already been labeled as “blasphemers” for practicing tawassul and tabarruk.  What are these practices? Are they part of Sunni Islam or not?

Tawassul and Tabarruk

Nuh Keller, an orthodox Sunni scholar, defines tawassul as “supplicating Allah by means of an intermediary, whether it be a living person, dead person, a good deed, or a name or attribute of Allah Most High”. I remember doing tawassul in 1989 at Imam Abu Hanifah’s tomb, the noble and renowned Islamic scholar whose ijtihad the majority of Sunni Muslims follow. Although I had not studied much about Islam and the practices of tawassul at that time, I had been told by trustworthy Muslims that using pious individuals as intermediaries when asking Allah for something was a blessed opportunity that I couldn’t afford to miss.  I had also visited the tomb of the great sufi and saint Abdul-Qadir Jilani and performed tawassul over there.  An example of tawassul is: “Oh Allah, I ask you to cure my illness by means of the noble status of Imam Abu Hanifah (s).”

When doing tawassul, the source of blessings (barakah) when asking Allah through an intermediary is Allah – not the intermediary.  The intermediary is simply a means to ask Allah for things. Although it is not necessary for a Muslim to use a pious intermediary when asking Allah, it is recommended because it was a practice of Prophet Muhammad (s), the Companions (ra), and of the great scholars of Islam (ra). It is not only prophets and saints (in their graves) that are used as means to asking Allah. A Muslim can also ask Allah through relics (tabarruk) that belonged to pious people, and may even use amulets with verses on the Qur’an on them as a means of asking God for protection from evil. It is not the means that provides protection, but Allah.

Wahhabis reject a type of tawassul accepted by orthodox Sunni Muslims

Although Sunnis, Shi’ites, and Wahhabis believe that tawassul by one’s good deeds, a name or attribute of God, or intercession by someone who is alive and present is permissible, WahhabisShi’ites) of committing shirk (attributing partners in worship to God) when doing tawassul through an intermediary who is not alive or present (in the worldly life). That is, to a Wahhabi, tawassul through an intermediary who has died and is in his grave is ugly blasphemy. This is critical to know because this is the primary reason why Muhammad ibn `Abdul-Wahhab and the Al-Sa`ud ‎ criminals that collaborated with him massacred many Muslims in the Arabian peninsula.  Muslims had been doing this form of tawassul for over 1,000 years but the WahhabisWahhabis were doing in actuality was massacring orthodox Sunni Muslims, even though they foolishly believed they were fighting against evil blasphemors that didn’t deserve to live.  Wahhabis were not following the footsteps of the pious Salaf, but the footsteps of Ibn Taymiyyah who a couple of hundred years before them denounced that particular form of tawassul as sinful. Wahhabis today forbid Muslims from doing tawassul through Prophet Muhammad, and have enforced strict rules around his grave in Medina, Saudi Arabia. It is for this reason that Wahhabis forbid Muslims from visiting the graves of pious Muslims, and have destroyed markings on graves to prevent Muslims from knowing the specific spots where saints are buried. Yet, it is interesting to note the hypocritical nature of the Wahhabis when they had refused the demolishing of the grave of Ibn Taymiyah  in Damascus, Syria to make way for a road. Somehow, this is not “polytheism” to them, but it is “polytheism” for the majority of the Islamic community. accuse Sunnis (and believed it was blasphemy that had to be exterminated by the sword.  What

The flawed Wahhabi understanding of tawassul: confusing the means with the Giver

Wahhabis wrongly accuse orthodox Sunnis of committing shirk (polytheism) when asking God for something using an intermediary, whether the means is a pious human being in his grave,  objects (tabarruk), or seeking protection from God using amulets with verses of the Qur’an written on them (ruqya).   The Wahhabi believes that asking God for something through a means is the same as worshipping the means itself. That is, for people who do tawassul through a pious saint in his grave is asking the pious saint – and not God – for things. People who do tabarrukruqya are asking the ruqya itself for protection – and not God. When a Muslim visits the Prophet Muhammad’s (s) grave and calls on the Prophet (s), “Oh Prophet,” (Ya Rasulullah), the Wahhabis accuse such a person of worshipping the Prophet (s) and refuse to accept the understanding that the Prophet himself is a means to asking God for things. Such an act to Wahhabis drives a Muslim out of the realms of the religion of Islam. In sum, the Wahhabis through a relic of Prophet Muhammad (s) are asking the relic – and not God – for blessings, and people who wear believe that such people are worshipping creation alongside God, and are therefore guilty of polytheism – attributing partners in worship to God.

The now deceased former Mufti of Saudi Arabia, Abdul-Aziz ibn Abdullah Ibn Baz, defends Ibn Abdul-Wahhab’s accusation of polytheism that he had heaped on the Muslim masses and his resorting to “jihad” by saying that Muslims had gone astray because they had “worshipped” things are than God:

The people of Najd had lived in a condition that could not be approved of by any believer. Polytheism had appeared there and spread widely. People worshipped domes, trees, rocks, caves or any persons who claimed to be Auliya (saints) though they might be insane and idiotic.

There were few to rise up for the sake of Allah and support His Religion. Same was the situation in Makkah and Madinah as well as Yemen where building domes on the graves, invoking the saints for their help and other forms of polytheism were predominant. But in Najd polytheistic beliefs and practices were all the more intense.

In Najd people had worshipped different objects ranging from the graves, caves and trees to the obsessed and mad men who were called saints.

When the Sheikh [Ibn Abdul-Wahhab] saw that polytheism was dominating the people and that no one showed any disapproval of it or no one was ready to call the people back to Allah, he decided to labour singly and patiently in the field. He knew that nothing could be achieved without jihad (holy fighting), patience and suffering [italics mine].[11]

Orthodox Sunnis, however, have never claimed to worship the means, but only God. Because Wahhabis didn’t tolerate this, they massacred thousands of Muslims who they saw as being “polytheists” in Arabia. In actuality, they were Sunni Muslims who were following Islam in its purity as taught by the pious ancestors that lived in the time period of the Salaf. 

Wahhabis attribute a place and direction to Allah

While accusing the masses of Muslims of being polytheists, Wahhabis themselves have differentiated themselves from other Muslims in their understanding of creed. Due to the Wahhabis’ adherence to an unorthodox, grossly flawed literal understanding of God’s Attributes, they comfortably believe that Allah has created or human attributes, and then attempt to hide their anthropomorphism by saying that they don’t know ‘how’ Allah has such attributes. For example, Bilal Philips, a Wahhabi author says:

He has neither corporeal body nor is He a formless spirit.  He has a form befitting His majesty [italics mine], the like of which no man has ever seen or conceived, and which will only be seen (to the degree of man’s finite limitations) by the people of paradise.

Discussing each part of his statement will shed light into his anthropomorphic mind.  Bilal Philips says that “Allah has a form befitting His majesty…”  What he confirms in his mind is that Allah definitely has a form. He even specifies the kind of form by saying: “He [Allah] has neither corporeal body…” meaning that Allah has a form that is not like the forms of creation, and then says, “nor is He a formless spirit.  Then he says, “He has a form befitting His majesty…”  The problem with such statements to a Muslim is that they express blatant anthropomorphism. What Bilal Philips is doing here is foolishly attributing a “form” to God that, in his mind, nobody has ever seen.  Therefore, Bilal Philips believes that God has some type of form, or non-corporeal body. No orthodox Sunni Muslim scholar has ever said such a perfidious thing.

Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, one of the greatest mujtahid Sunni imams ever to have lived, refuted such anthropomorphic statements over a thousand years before Bilal Philips was born.  The great Sunni Ash`ari scholar, Imam al-Bayhaqi, in his Manaqib Ahmad relates with an authentic chain that Imam Ahmed said

A person commits an act of disbelief (kufr) if he says Allah is a body, even if he says:  Allah is a body but not like other bodies.

Imam Ahmad continues:

The expressions are taken from language and from Islam, and linguists applied ‘body’ to a thing that has length, width, thickness, form, structure, and components.  The expression has not been handed down in Shari’ah.  Therefore, it is invalid and cannot be used.

Imam Ahmed is a pious adherer of the time period of the Salaf that was praised by Prophet Muhammad (s).  How can Bilal Philips claim to represent the pious forefathers of the Salaf?  He not only contradicts them but is vehemently refuted by them. The great pious predecessors had refuted ignoramuses like Bilal Philips in their times long ago.

Blatant anthropomorphism is also illustrated by the Wahhabi Ibn Baz’s commentary on the great work of Imam Abu Ja’afar at-Tahawi called “Aqeedah at-Tahawiyyah” (The Creed of Tahawi), a work that has been praised by the orthodox Sunni community as being representative of Sunni orthodoxy. The now deceased Ibn Baz was Saudi Arabia’s grand Mufti.

Article #38 of Imam Tahawi’s work states:

He is beyond having limits placed on Him, or being restricted, or having parts or limbs. Nor is He contained by the six directions as all created entities are.

Ibn Baz, in a footnote, comments:

Allah is beyond limits that we know but has limits He knows.

In another footnote, he says:

By hudood (limits) the author [referring to Imam Tahawi] means [limits] such as known by humans since no one except Allah Almighty knows His limits.

Ibn Baz deceptively attempts to represent the noble Sunni Imam al-Tahawi as an anthropomorphist by putting his own anthropomorphic interpretation of Imam Tahawi’s words in his mouth.  It must be emphasized that not a single orthodox Sunni scholar understood Imam Tahawi’s statement as Ibn Baz did.

Ibn Baz’s also shows anthropomorphism in a commentary by the great Sunni scholar Ibn Hajar al-`Asqalani.  Ibn Baz says:

As for Ahl ul-Sunna – and these are the Companions and those who followed them in excellence – they assert a direction for Allah, and that is the direction of elevation, believing that the Exalted is above the Throne without giving an example and without entering into modality.

Another now deceased Wahhabi scholar, Muhammad Saleh al-Uthaymeen, blatantly expresses his anthropomorphism.  He says:

Allah’s establishment on the throne means that He is sitting ‘in person’ on His Throne.

The great Sunni Hanbali scholar, Ibn al-Jawzi, had refuted anthropomorphists who were saying that Allah’s establishment is ‘in person’ hundreds of years ago:

Whoever says:  He is established on the Throne ‘in person’ (bi dhatihi), has diverted the sense of the verse to that of sensory perception.  Such a person must not neglect that the principle is established by the mind, by which we have come to know Allah, and have attributed pre-eternity to Him decisively.  If you said:  We read the hadiths and keep quiet, no one would criticize you; it is only your taking them in the external sense which is hideous.  Therefore do not bring into the school of this pious man of the Salaf – Imam Ahmad [Ibn Hanbal] – what does not belong in it.  You have clothed this madhab [or school of jurisprudence]  with an ugly deed, so that it is no longer said ‘Hanbali’ except in the sense of ‘anthropomorphist’

Sulayman ibn `Abdul Allah ibn Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Wahhab, the grandson of the Wahhabi movement’s founder, says:

Whoever believes or says:  Allah is in person (bi dhatihi) in every place, or in one place: he is a disbeliever (kafir).  It is obligatory to declare that Allah is distinct from His creation, established over His Throne without modality or likeness or exemplarity.  Allah was and there was no place, then He created place and He is exalted as He was before He created place

Just as Bilal Philips affirms a form to Allah in his mind, and Ibn Baz confirms limits to Allah in his mind, al-Uthaymeen confirms that Allah is literally sitting ‘in person’ on the Throne in his mind.  All of them have loyally followed the footsteps of Ibn Taymiyyah and Muhammad ibn `Abdul-Wahhab – the two arch-heretics who were instrumental in causing tribulation (fitna) and division among the Muslim masses because of their reprehensible, unorthodox interpretations of the Islamic sources.

Wahhabi anthropomorphists say: Allah is in a direction, Allah has limits, Allah is literally above the Throne, and that Allah is sitting ‘in person’ on the Throne.  To a Muslim, the fact is that the Throne is located in a particular direction and a certain place.  By understanding Allah to be above the Throne literally as the Wahhabis do, they are attributing Allah with created attributes and, as a result, are implying that a part of the creation was eternal with Allah.  This opposes what the the Qur’an and the following hadith authentically related by al-Bukhari says:

Allah existed eternally and there was nothing else [italics mine].

Sunni orthodoxy clears Allah of all directions and places.  To a Sunni, Allah has always existed without the need of a place, and He did not take a place for Himself after creating it.  Orthodox Sunni scholars have said exactly what was understood by Prophet Muhammad (s) and his Companions (ra).  Imam Abu Hanifah, the great mujtahid Imam who lived in the time period of the Salaf said:  “Allah has no limits…”, period.  And this is what Sunni orthodoxy represents.

Orthodox Sunni scholars oppose Wahhabism

I end this article with a selected list of orthodox Sunni scholars who have refuted Wahhabism[12]: and warned Muslims from its poison. The list of scholars, along with names of their books and related information, is quoted from the orthodox Sunni scholar Muhammad Hisham Kabbani

Al-Ahsa'i Al-Misri, Ahmad (1753-1826): Unpublished manuscript of a refutation of the Wahhabi sect. His son Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn `Abd al-Latif al-Ahsa'i also wrote a book refuting them.

Al-Ahsa'i, Al-Sayyid `Abd al-Rahman: wrote a sixty-seven verse poem which begins with the verse:

Badat fitnatun kal layli qad ghattatil aafaaqa

wa sha``at fa kadat tublighul gharba wash sharaqa

[A confusion came about like nightfall covering the skies

and became widespread almost reaching the whole world]

Al-`Amrawi, `Abd al-Hayy, and `Abd al-Hakim Murad (Qarawiyyin University, Morocco): Al-tahdhir min al-ightirar bi ma ja'a fi kitab al-hiwar ["Warning Against Being Fooled By the Contents of the Book (by Ibn Mani`) A Debate With al-Maliki (an attack on Ibn `Alawi al-Maliki by a Wahhabi writer)"] (Fes: Qarawiyyin, 1984).

`Ata' Allah al-Makki: al-sarim al-hindi fil `unuq al-najdi ["The Indian Scimitar on the Najdi's Neck"].

Al-Azhari, `Abd Rabbih ibn Sulayman al-Shafi`i (The author of Sharh Jami' al-Usul li ahadith al-Rasul, a basic book of Usul al-Fiqh: Fayd al-Wahhab fi Bayan Ahl al-Haqq wa man dalla `an al-sawab, 4 vols. ["Allah's Outpouring in Differentiating the True Muslims From Those Who Deviated From the Truth"].

Al-`Azzami, `Allama al-shaykh Salama (d. 1379H): Al-Barahin al-sati`at ["The Radiant Proofs..."].

Al-Barakat al-Shafi`i al-Ahmadi al-Makki, `Abd al-Wahhab ibn Ahmad: unpublished manuscript of a refutation of the Wahhabi sect.

al-Bulaqi, Mustafa al-Masri wrote a refutation to San`a'i's poem in which the latter had praised Ibn `Abd al-Wahhab. It is in Samnudi's "Sa`adat al-Darayn" and consists in 126 verses beginning thus:

Bi hamdi wali al-hamdi la al-dhammi astabdi

Wa bil haqqi la bil khalqi lil haqqi astahdi

[By the glory of the Owner of glory, not baseness, do I overcome;

And by Allah, not by creatures, do I seek guidance to Allah]

Al-Buti, Dr. Muhammad Sa`id Ramadan (University of Damascus): Al-Salafiyyatu marhalatun zamaniyyatun mubarakatun la madhhabun islami ["The Salafiyya is a blessed historical period not an Islamic school of law"] (Damascus: Dar al-fikr, 1988); Al-lamadhhabiyya akhtaru bid`atin tuhaddidu al-shari`a al-islamiyya ["Non-madhhabism is the most dangerous innovation presently menacing Islamic law"] (Damascus: Maktabat al-Farabi, n.d.).

Al-Dahesh ibn `Abd Allah, Dr. (Arab University of Morocco), ed. Munazara `ilmiyya bayna `Ali ibn Muhammad al-Sharif wa al-Imam Ahmad ibn Idris fi al-radd `ala Wahhabiyyat Najd, Tihama, wa `Asir ["Scholarly Debate Between the Sharif and Ahmad ibn Idris Against the Wahhabis of Najd, Tihama, and `Asir"].

Dahlan, al-Sayyid Ahmad ibn Zayni (d. 1304/1886). Mufti of Mecca and Shaykh al-Islam (highest religious authority in the Ottoman jurisdiction) for the Hijaz region: al-Durar al-saniyyah fi al-radd ala al-Wahhabiyyah ["The Pure Pearls in Answering the Wahhabis"] pub. Egypt 1319 & 1347 H; Fitnat al-Wahhabiyyah ["The Wahhabi Fitna"]; Khulasat al-Kalam fi bayan Umara' al-Balad al-Haram ["The Summation Concerning the Leaders of the Sacrosanct Country"], a history of the Wahhabi fitna in Najd and the Hijaz.

al-Dajwi, Hamd Allah: al-Basa'ir li Munkiri al-tawassul ka amthal Muhd. Ibn `Abdul Wahhab ["The Evident Proofs Against Those Who Deny the Seeking of Intercession Like Muhammad Ibn `Abdul Wahhab"].

Shaykh al-Islam Dawud ibn Sulayman al-Baghdadi al-Hanafi (1815-1881 CE): al-Minha al-Wahbiyya fi radd al-Wahhabiyya ["The Divine Dispensation Concerning the Wahhabi Deviation"]; Ashadd al-Jihad fi Ibtal Da`wa al-Ijtihad ["The Most Violent Jihad in Proving False Those Who Falsely Claim Ijtihad"].

Al-Falani al-Maghribi, al-Muhaddith Salih: authored a large volume collating the answers of scholars of the Four Schools to Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Wahhab.

al-Habibi, Muhammad `Ashiq al-Rahman: `Adhab Allah al-Mujdi li Junun al-Munkir al-Najdi ["Allah's Terrible Punishment for the Mad Rejector From Najd"].

Al-Haddad, al-Sayyid al-`Alawi ibn Ahmad ibn Hasan ibn al-Qutb

Sayyidi `Abd Allah ibn `Alawi al-Haddad al-Shafi`i: al-Sayf al-batir li `unq al-munkir `ala al-akabirMisbah al-anam wa jala' al-zalam fi radd shubah al-bid`i al-najdi al-lati adalla biha al-`awamm ["The Lamp of Mankind and the Illumination of Darkness Concerning the Refutation of the Errors of the Innovator From Najd by Which He Had Misled the Common People"]. Published 1325H. ["The Sharp Sword for the Neck of the Assailant of Great Scholars"]. Unpublished manuscript of about 100 folios;

Al-Hamami al-Misri, Shaykh Mustafa: Ghawth al-`ibad bi bayan al-rashad ["The Helper of Allah's Servants According to the Affirmation of Guidance"].

Al-Hilmi al-Qadiri al-Iskandari, Shaykh Ibrahim: Jalal al-haqq fi kashf ahwal ashrar al-khalq ["The Splendor of Truth in Exposing the Worst of People] (pub. 1355H).

Al-Husayni, `Amili, Muhsin (1865-1952). Kashf al-irtiyab fi atba` Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Wahhab ["The Dispelling of Doubt Concerning the Followers of Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Wahhab"]. [Yemen?]: Maktabat al-Yaman al-Kubra, 198?.

Al-Kabbani, Muhammad Hisham, Encyclopedia of Islamic Doctrine, vol. 1-7, As-Sunnah Foundation of America, 1998.

Islamic Beliefs and Doctrine According to Ahl as-Sunna - A Repudiation of "Salafi" Innovations,  ASFA, 1996.

Innovation and True Belief: the Celebration of Mawlid According to the Qur'an and Sunna and the Scholars of Islam, ASFA, 1995.

Salafi Movement Unveiled, ASFA, 1997.

Ibn `Abd al-Latif al-Shafi`i, `Abd Allah: Tajrid sayf al-jihad `ala mudda`i al-ijtihad ["The drawing of the sword of jihad against the false claimants to ijtihad"].

The family of Ibn `Abd al-Razzaq al-Hanbali in Zubara and Bahrayn possess both manuscript and printed refutations by scholars of the Four Schools from Mecca, Madina, al-Ahsa', al-Basra, Baghdad, Aleppo, Yemen and other Islamic regions.

Ibn `Abd al-Wahhab al-Najdi, `Allama al-Shaykh Sulayman, elder brother of Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Wahhab: al-Sawa'iq al-Ilahiyya fi al-radd 'ala al-Wahhabiyya ["Divine Lightnings in Answering the Wahhabis"]. Ed. Ibrahim Muhammad al-Batawi. Cairo: Dar al-insan, 1987. Offset reprint by Waqf Ikhlas, Istanbul: Hakikat Kitabevi, 1994. Prefaces by Shaykh Muhammad ibn Sulayman al-Kurdi al-Shafi`i and Shaykh Muhammad Hayyan al-Sindi (Muhammad Ibn `Abd al-Wahhab's shaykh) to the effect that Ibn `Abd al-Wahhab is "dall mudill" ("misguided and misguiding").

Ibn `Abidin al-Hanafi, al-Sayyid Muhammad Amin: Radd al-muhtar `ala al-durr al-mukhtar, Vol. 3, Kitab al-Iman, Bab al-bughat ["Answer to the Perplexed: A Commentary on "The Chosen Pearl,"" Book of Belief, Chapter on Rebels]. Cairo: Dar al-Tiba`a al-Misriyya, 1272 H.

Ibn `Afaliq al-Hanbali, Muhammad Ibn `Abdul Rahman: Tahakkum al-muqallidin bi man idda`a tajdid al-din [Sarcasm of the muqallids against the false claimants to the Renewal of Religion]. A very comprehensive book refuting the Wahhabi heresy and posting questions which Ibn `Abdul Wahhab and his followers were unable to answer for the most part.

Ibn Dawud al-Hanbali, `Afif al-Din `Abd Allah: as-sawa`iq wa al-ru`ud ["Lightnings and thunder"], a very important book in 20 chapters. According to the Mufti of Yemen Shaykh al-`Alawi ibn Ahmad al-Haddad, the mufti of Yemen, "This book has received the approval of the `ulama of Basra, Baghdad, Aleppo, and Ahsa' [Arabian peninsula]. It was summarized by Muhammad ibn Bashir the qadi of Ra's al-Khayma in Oman."

Ibn Ghalbun al-Libi also wrote a refutation in forty verses of al-San`ani's poem in which the latter had praised Ibn `Abd al-Wahhab. It is in Samnudi's Sa`adat al-darayn and begins thus:

Salami `ala ahlil isabati wal-rushdi

Wa laysa `ala najdi wa man halla fi najdi

[My salutation is upon the people of truth and guidance

And not upon Najd nor the one who settled in Najd]

Ibn Khalifa `Ulyawi al-Azhari: Hadhihi `aqidatu al-salaf wa al-khalaf fi dhat Allahi ta`ala wa sifatihi wa af`alihi wa al-jawab al-sahih li ma waqa`a fihi al-khilaf min al-furu` bayna al-da`in li al-Salafiyya wa atba` al-madhahib al-arba`a al-islamiyya ["This is the doctrine of the Predecessors and the Descendants concerning the divergences in the branches between those who call to al-Salafiyya and the followers of the Four Islamic Schools of Law"] (Damascus: Matba`at Zayd ibn Thabit, 1398/1977.

Kawthari al-Hanafi, Muhammad Zahid. Maqalat al-Kawthari. (Cairo: al-Maktabah al-Azhariyah li al-Turath, 1994).

Al-Kawwash al-Tunisi, `Allama Al-Shaykh Salih: his refutation of the Wahhabi sect is contained in Samnudi's volume: "Sa`adat al-darayn fi al-radd `ala al-firqatayn."

Khazbek, Shaykh Hasan: Al-maqalat al-wafiyyat fi al-radd `ala al-wahhabiyyah ["Complete Treatise in Refuting the Wahhabis"].

Makhluf, Muhammad Hasanayn: Risalat fi hukm al-tawassul bil-anbiya wal-awliya ["Treatise on the Ruling Concerning the Use of Prophets and Saints as Intermediaries"].

Al-Maliki al-Husayni, Al-muhaddith Muhammad al-Hasan ibn `Alawi: Mafahimu yajibu an tusahhah ["Notions that should be corrected"] 4th ed. (Dubai: Hashr ibn Muhammad Dalmuk, 1986); Muhammad al-insanu al-kamil ["Muhammad, the Perfect Human Being"] 3rd ed. (Jeddah: Dar al-Shuruq, 1404/1984).

Al-Mashrifi al-Maliki al-Jaza'iri: Izhar al-`uquq mimman mana`a al-tawassul bil nabi wa al-wali al-saduq ["The Exposure of the Disobedience of Those Who Forbid Using the Intermediary of the Prophets and the Truthful Saints].

Al-Mirghani al-Ta'ifi, `Allama `Abd Allah ibn Ibrahim (d. 1793): Tahrid al-aghbiya' `ala al-Istighatha bil-anbiya' wal-awliya ["The Provocations of the Ignorant Against Seeking the Help of Prophets and Saints"] (Cairo: al-Halabi, 1939).

Mu'in al-Haqq al-Dehlawi (d. 1289): Sayf al-Jabbar al-maslul `ala a`da' al-Abrar ["The Sword of the Almighty Drawn Against the Enemies of the Pure Ones"].

Al-Muwaysi al-Yamani, `Abd Allah ibn `Isa: Unpublished manuscript of a refutation of the Wahhabi sect.

Al-Nabahani al-Shafi`i, al-qadi al-muhaddith Yusuf ibn Isma`il (1850-1932): Shawahid al-Haqq fi al-istighatha bi sayyid al-Khalq (s) ["The Proofs of Truth in the Seeking of the Intercession of the Prophet"].

Al-Qabbani al-Basri al-Shafi`i, Allama Ahmad ibn `Ali: A manuscript treatise in approximately 10 chapters.

Al-Qadumi al-Nabulusi al-Hanbali: `AbdAllah: Rihlat ["Journey"].

Al-Qazwini, Muhammad Hasan, (d. 1825). Al-Barahin al-jaliyyah fi raf` tashkikat al-Wahhabiyah ["The Plain Demonstrations That Dispel the Aspersions of the Wahhabis"]. Ed. Muhammad Munir al-Husayni al-Milani. 1st ed. Beirut: Mu'assasat al-Wafa', 1987.

Al-Qudsi: al-Suyuf al-Siqal fi A`naq man ankara `ala al-awliya ba`d al-intiqal ["The Burnished Swords on the Necks of Those Who Deny the Role of Saints After Their Leaving This World"].

Al-Rifa`i, Yusuf al-Sayyid Hashim, President of the World Union of Islamic Propagation and Information: Adillat Ahl al-Sunna wa al-Jama`at aw al-radd al-muhkam al-mani` `ala munkarat wa shubuhat Ibn Mani` fi tahajjumihi `ala al-sayyid Muhammad `Alawi al-Maliki al-Makki ["The Proofs of the People of the Way of the Prophet and the Muslim Community: or, the Strong and Decisive Refutation of Ibn Mani`'s Aberrations and Aspersions in his Assault on Muhammad `Alawi al-Maliki al-Makki"] (Kuwait: Dar al-siyasa, 1984).

Al-Samnudi al-Mansuri, al-`Allama al-Shaykh Ibrahim: Sa`adat al-darayn fi al-radd `ala al-firqatayn al-wahhabiyya wa muqallidat al-zahiriyyah ["Bliss in the Two Abodes: Refutation of the Two Sects, Wahhabis and Zahiri Followers"].

Al-Saqqaf al-Shafi`i, Hasan ibn `Ali, Islamic Research Intitute, Amman, Jordan: al-Ighatha bi adillat al-istighatha wa al-radd al-mubin `ala munkiri al-tawassul ["The Mercy of Allah in the Proofs of Seeking Intercession and the Clear Answer to Those who Reject it"]; Ilqam al hajar li al-mutatawil `ala al-Asha`ira min al-Bashar ["The Stoning of All Those Who Attack Ash'aris"]; Qamus shata'im al-Albani wa al-alfaz al-munkara al-lati yatluquha fi haqq ulama al-ummah wa fudalai'ha wa ghayrihim... ["Encyclopedia of al-Albani's Abhorrent Expressions Which He Uses Against the Scholars of the Community, its Eminent Men, and Others..."] Amman : Dar al-Imam al-Nawawi, 1993.

Al-Sawi al-Misri: Hashiyat `ala al-jalalayn ["Commentary on the Tafsir of the Two Jalal al-Din"].

Sayf al-Din Ahmed ibn Muhammad: Al-Albani Unveiled: An Exposition of His Errors and Other Important Issues, 2nd ed. (London: s.n., 1994).

Al-Shatti al-Athari al-Hanbali, al-Sayyid Mustafa ibn Ahmad ibn Hasan, Mufti of Syria: al-Nuqul al-shar'iyyah fi al-radd 'ala al-Wahhabiyya ["The Legal Proofs in Answering the Wahhabis"].

Al-Subki, al-hafiz Taqi al-Din (d. 756/1355): Al-durra al-mudiyya fi al-radd `ala Ibn Taymiyya, ed. Muhammad Zahid al-Kawthari ["The Luminous Pearl: A Refutation of Ibn Taymiyya"]; Al-rasa'il al-subkiyya fi al-radd `ala Ibn Taymiyya wa tilmidhihi Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya, ed. Kamal al-Hut ["Subki's treatises in Answer to Ibn Taymiyya and his pupil Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya"] (Beirut: `Alam al-Kutub, 1983); Al-sayf al-saqil fi al-radd `ala Ibn Zafil ["The Burnished Sword in Refuting Ibn Zafil (Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya)" Cairo: Matba`at al-Sa`ada, 1937; Shifa' al-siqam fi ziyarat khayr al-anam ["The healing of the sick in visiting the Best of Creation"].

Sunbul al-Hanafi al-Ta'ifi, Allama Tahir: Sima al-Intisar lil awliya' al-abrar ["The Mark of Victory Belongs to Allah's Pure Friends"].

Al-Tabataba'i al-Basri, al-Sayyid: also wrote a reply to San`a'i's poem which was excerpted in Samnudi's Sa`adat al-Darayn. After reading it, San`a'i reversed his position and said: "I have repented from what I said concerning the Najdi."

Al-Tamimi al-Maliki, `Allama Isma`il (d. 1248), Shaykh al-Islam in Tunis: wrote a refutation of a treatise of Ibn `Abd al-Wahhab.

Al-Wazzani, al-Shaykh al-Mahdi, Mufti of Fes, Morocco: Wrote a refutation of Muhammad `Abduh's prohibition of tawassul.

al-Zahawi al-Baghdadi, Jamil Effendi Sidqi (d. 1355/1936): al-Fajr al-Sadiq fi al-radd 'ala munkiri al-tawassul wa al-khawariq ["The True Dawn in Refuting Those Who Deny the Seeking of Intercession and the Miracles of Saints"] Pub. 1323/1905 in Egypt.

Al-Zamzami al-Shafi`i, Muhammad Salih, Imam of the Maqam Ibrahim in Mecca, wrote a book in 20 chapters against them according to al-Sayyid al-Haddad.

See also:

Ahmad, Qeyamuddin. The Wahhabi movement in India. 2nd rev. ed. New Delhi : Manohar, 1994.



[1] Throughout the article, (s) means “peace be upon him,” and (ra) means “may Allah (swt) be pleased them.”

[2] Lacy, Robert. The Kingdom: Arabia & the House of Sa`ud ‎.  p. 59.

[3] Zahawi, Jamal E (1996) The Doctrine of Ahl al-Sunna Versus the ‘Salafi’ Movement. Translated by Shaykh Muhammad Hisham Kabbani. As-Sunna Foundation of America.

[4] For example, orthodox Sunni scholar Abu Ala Bukhari accused people of unbelief (kufr) if they called Ibn Taymiyah “Shaykh”. Imam Zahid al-Kawthari accused Ibn Taymiyah’s positions on the creed to be tantamount to apostasy.

[5] Gilles, Kepel. Jihad: The Trail of Political Islam, p. 72.

[6] Sivan, Emmanuel. Radical Islam: Medieval Theology and Modern Politics. Yale University Press, New Haven and London. pg. 102-103.

[7] Kabbani, Hisham M (1996). Islamic Beliefs & Doctrine According to Ahl al-Sunna A Repudiation of “Salafi” Innovations. Volume I. As-Sunna Foundation of America.

[8] Safran, Nadav.  (1988).  Saudi Arabia:  The Ceaseless Quest for Security.  Cornell University Press: Ithaca, NY.  Pg. 11.

[9] Safran, Nadav.  (1988).  Saudi Arabia:  The Ceaseless Quest for Security.  Cornell University Press: Ithaca, NY.  Pg. 12.

[10] Bagot, Blubb, Sir J. (1961). War in the Desert .New York:  Norton. Pg. 44.

[11] Abdul Aziz ibn Abdullah ibn Baz. “Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab.” Available: www.alinaam.org.za/library/hist_bio/ibnwahhaab.htm.

[12] Ibid., Zahawi. pp. 7-15.