What really is Wahhabism?

[Keep it a boqol]

I was at a Islamic lecture at a university and the imam at one point was going off on “Wahhabis” and how some local imams at mosques around my city are following Wahhabism and it isn’t real Islam.

I understand that there is a salafiyyah group of people who are quick to takfir everyone call, everything kufr and innovation but what really is it? What makes someone a wahhabi if they trying to follow the sunnah? Is it best to stay away from it or nah

 

[Omar del Sur]

"Wahhabism" is just a slur for Salafis. There is no "Wahhabi" sect. If you want to know the truth, read Kitab At-Tawheed by Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab. It's stuff like "amulets are shirk". Basically, he was warning against all kinds of polytheistic type practices that were going on in his time. Therefore, the extreme Sufis got mad and acted like he was coming up with some sort of brand new sect, as though those sort of basic truths were some sort of radical new idea.

 

[Keep it a boqol]

"Wahhabism" is just a slur for Salafis. There is no "Wahhabi" sect. If you want to know the truth, read Kitab At-Tawheed by Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab. It's stuff like "amulets are shirk". Basically, he was warning against all kinds of polytheistic type practices that were going on in his time. Therefore, the extreme Sufis got mad and acted like he was coming up with some sort of brand new sect, as though those sort of basic truths were some sort of radical new idea.

What about the salafis that are quick to takfir and calling everything kufr and innovation?

 

[AdoonkaAlle]

I was at a Islamic lecture at a university and the imam at one point was going off on “Wahhabis” and how some local imams at mosques around my city are following Wahhabism and it isn’t real Islam.

I understand that there is a salafiyyah group of people who are quick to takfir everyone call, everything kufr and innovation but what really is it? What makes someone a wahhabi if they trying to follow the sunnah? Is it best to stay away from it or nah

Wahabism as the name implies is named after their founder mohammed abdulwahab who introduced a new understanding of tawheed & shirk. Basically according to him tawheed is subdivided into 3 parts

1.Tawheed Rububiyyah (Lordship)
2.Tawheed Uluhiyyah (Worship)
3.Tawheed Al asma wa siffat (names & attributes)

To be considered a muslim you need to have all 3 present. In his understanding bani adam never differed with regards to the 1st category as they all affirmed it. Meaning muslims, christians, jews, pagans all of us believe in the Oneness of Allah's Lordship. Where we differed was in the Oneness of Allah's Worship ie 2nd category. Now this is very problematic as this doctrine goes against revealed texts.

Take for instance christians we know they're guilty of shirk as they believe that Jesus AS is their god. So it's impossible for them to have affirmed the Oneness of Allah's Lordship as they ascribed Jesus AS as a partner to Allah. Except us muslims all other groups don't believe in one God they all commit shirk by believing in other god(s )besides Allah. Despite this being common knowledge MIAW nonetheless claimed that ALL of us have affirmed Tawheed Rububiyyah.


His reasons for believing in that is because he has another definition of what god (ilah) means. To him god is the being that you merely direct an act of worship to but don't believe has Lordship. Meaning you can believe in 1 Lord and multiple gods at the same time. This definition of his is obviously very wrong as god is the one you believe is your lord, creator, sustainer ie possessing attributes which make Him worthy of worship. So our worship of god is directly linked to and a result of god being our Lord.

Your god is always your Lord so it's impossible to claim that one can have multiple gods but at the same time believe in 1 Lord. Worshiping multiple gods means that you believe in multiple lords but due to his deviated understanding MIAW didn't believe this which is why he claimed christians who worship Jesus AS didn't commit shirk in Allah's Lordship.

MIAW then took his understanding and accused the muslims of his era of falling into major shirk since according to him they were doing the exact same actions of the christians, jews, pagans of quraysh which led them to be labelled as mushriks.

Anyone who disagreed with him, abandoned his dawah, didn't takfir those he himself considered to be kafir were all kafir and mushriks according to him and his followers. He even made takfir of his brother (including the entire town which he presided as the qadhi).


I made a thread a while back which discusses in detail the salafi understanding of tawheed have a read and if you got questions then feel free to ask

https://www.somalispot.com/threads/salafi-understanding-of-tawheed.95570/

To summarise what makes one a wahabi goes back to the doctrine and teachings of Miaw, anyone who follows it etc becomes a part of it. However what we've today is a watered down version of the actual dawah of miaw they try to distance themselves from the consequences of what their dawah leads to. Claiming that miaw didn't mean this or that when he labelled muslims of his time as either mushriks or kafirs etc nonetheless the extremism is there just that they don't carry out the physical aspects of their dawah like killing etc. Those who do are labelled as khawarij today like isis etc but when miaw & his followers did the exact same actions they label it as "reviving tawheed"

You can't claim to follow the sunnah when your entire dawah revolves around making takfir of the majority of muslims who don't agree with your understanding. In the era of miaw & his followers they considered the ottomans to be mushrikeen, anyone who aided them or even didn't consider them to be mushriks were also labelled as mushriks and kafirs.

 

[Karaboga]

Wahabism as the name implies is named after their founder mohammed abdulwahab who introduced a new understanding of tawheed & shirk. Basically according to him tawheed is subdivided into 3 parts

1.Tawheed Rububiyyah (Lordship)
2.Tawheed Uluhiyyah (Worship)
3.Tawheed Al asma wa siffat (names & attributes)

To be considered a muslim you need to have all 3 present. In his understanding bani adam never differed with regards to the 1st category as they all affirmed it. Meaning muslims, christians, jews, pagans all of us believe in the Oneness of Allah's Lordship. Where we differed was in the Oneness of Allah's Worship ie 2nd category. Now this is very problematic as this doctrine goes against revealed texts.

Take for instance christians we know they're guilty of shirk as they believe that Jesus AS is their god. So it's impossible for them to have affirmed the Oneness of Allah's Lordship as they ascribed Jesus AS as a partner to Allah. Except us muslims all other groups don't believe in one God they all commit shirk by believing in other god(s )besides Allah. Despite this being common knowledge MIAW nonetheless claimed that ALL of us have affirmed Tawheed Rububiyyah.


His reasons for believing in that is because he has another definition of what god (ilah) means. To him god is the being that you merely direct an act of worship to but don't believe has Lordship. Meaning you can believe in 1 Lord and multiple gods at the same time. This definition of his is obviously very wrong as god is the one you believe is your lord, creator, sustainer ie possessing attributes which make Him worthy of worship. So our worship of god is directly linked to and a result of god being our Lord.

Your god is always your Lord so it's impossible to claim that one can have multiple gods but at the same time believe in 1 Lord. Worshiping multiple gods means that you believe in multiple lords but due to his deviated understanding MIAW didn't believe this which is why he claimed christians who worship Jesus AS didn't commit shirk in Allah's Lordship.

MIAW then took his understanding and accused the muslims of his era of falling into major shirk since according to him they were doing the exact same actions of the christians, jews, pagans of quraysh which led them to be labelled as mushriks.

Anyone who disagreed with him, abandoned his dawah, didn't takfir those he himself considered to be kafir were all kafir and mushriks according to him and his followers. He even made takfir of his brother (including the entire town which he presided as the qadhi).


I made a thread a while back which discusses in detail the salafi understanding of tawheed have a read and if you got questions then feel free to ask

https://www.somalispot.com/threads/salafi-understanding-of-tawheed.95570/

To summarise what makes one a wahabi goes back to the doctrine and teachings of Miaw, anyone who follows it etc becomes a part of it. However what we've today is a watered down version of the actual dawah of miaw they try to distance themselves from the consequences of what their dawah leads to. Claiming that miaw didn't mean this or that when he labelled muslims of his time as either mushriks or kafirs etc nonetheless the extremism is there just that they don't carry out the physical aspects of their dawah like killing etc. Those who do are labelled as khawarij today like isis etc but when miaw & his followers did the exact same actions they label it as "reviving tawheed"

You can't claim to follow the sunnah when your entire dawah revolves around making takfir of the majority of muslims who don't agree with your understanding. In the era of miaw & his followers they considered the ottomans to be mushrikeen, anyone who aided them or even didn't consider them to be mushriks were also labelled as mushriks and kafirs.

After having read your post and the thread you posted I'm a bit confused as what your aqeeda is. Are you ashari, matrudi, a kind of salafi.....
By the way I don't disagree with your statements.

 

[Deleted L]

I was at a Islamic lecture at a university and the imam at one point was going off on “Wahhabis” and how some local imams at mosques around my city are following Wahhabism and it isn’t real Islam.

I understand that there is a salafiyyah group of people who are quick to takfir everyone call, everything kufr and innovation but what really is it? What makes someone a wahhabi if they trying to follow the sunnah? Is it best to stay away from it or nah

Wahhabism is just another name for the followers of a controversial sheikh in the past who’s name is Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab. To be clear, Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab’s followers don’t call themselves “Wahhabis”, they consider that to be a propaganda slur against them. Most Wahhabis would call themselves “Salafis” or nowadays, they use the term “Athari” to describe themselves.

 

[Djokovic]

That imam is probably a terrorist be careful a lot of terrorists hate salafis

 

[Aurelian]

booty licking the saudi royal family and takfir anyone who oppose them. They even can go to the level of allowing the king to have seex in the TV and support him.

 

[Djokovic]

booty licking the saudi royal family and takfir anyone who oppose them. They even can go to the level of allowing the king to have seex in the TV and support him.

Are u gay brudda why u always talking about booty licking

 

[Aurelian]

Are u gay brudda why u always talking about booty licking

That is literally what they do, when someone is booty licking, then you say he is booty licking.

 

[Djokovic]

That is literally what they do, when someone is booty licking, then you say he is booty licking.

U man are the ones doing takfir on all these Muslim leaders and then you say we takfir anyone who opposes us lol

 

[Deleted L]

booty licking the saudi royal family and takfir anyone who oppose them. They even can go to the level of allowing the king to have seex in the TV and support him.

That’s mostly the Madkhalis. Syrian or Egyptian Salafis couldn’t care less about the Saudi royal family. Extremist groups who subscribe to Salafism have made Takfir of the Saudis and the Gulf rulers.

 

[AdoonkaAlle]

After having read your post and the thread you posted I'm a bit confused as what your aqeeda is. Are you ashari, matrudi, a kind of salafi.....
By the way I don't disagree with your statements.

I don’t subscribe to any of them. When you read about Islamic history and how the different groups arose you’ll come to realise that in attempting to defend Islamic beliefs from deviancy they end up adopting extreme views down the line. Which is what we’ve today

Asharis & maturidi arose as a response to muctazila. Atharism as a response to ashairsm etc. Today’s asharis,maturidis, salafis despite claiming to adhere to their respective groups & madhabs differ very much from the earlier ones & also the 4 imam’s

Imam shafici, hanafi, Maliki etc were not ashari but majority if not all of their followers today are. Similarly salafis claim to follow imam hanbali but they differ very much from his understanding in tawheed, shirk etc in fact the imam is only utilised to refute the asharis when it relates to Allah’s names & attributes.

Sure some groups maybe closer to the truth in some aspects of the deen but in reality no single group can be considered to be correct in every aspect of the deen. This is why I don’t classify myself as belonging to any of the above groups.

Tbh in my entire life the only label that I’ve ever identified with is being a sunni who follows the shafici madhab. Hope this was helpful

 

[Omar del Sur]

I think it's kind of funny but I want to cite Cuban Wikipedia. Cuba has its own Wikipedia and I would like to bring in what Cuban Wikipedia (EcuRed) has to say, as Cuban Wikipedia doesn't care whatsoever about being Sufi or Salafi and is just describing "Wahabismo" from a third-party, outside point of view. all of this is not totally accurate, as for example I don't believe "Wahhabism" is some new form of Islam that emerged with Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab... but this is a description of "Wahhabism" from an outside source

https://www.ecured.cu/Wahabismo

"Wahhabism . It is a very conservative current of Islam that emerged in the Arabian Peninsula in the 18th century . Wahhabism has always been popularly described as the mother of all fundamentalist movements."

now, notice- "very conservative". that is why liberal elements are staunchly opposed to Salafiyyah/"Wahhabism". it doesn't go at all in line with liberal ideology.


"The followers of Wahhabism see their role as the defenders of Islam , as well as the need to restore the purity of an Islam apparently polluted by innovations, superstitions, deviations, heresies and idolatry. There are many practices that they consider to be against Islamic tradition, such as:

• Invoke the name of the prophet, or of a saint or an angel, in prayers. Only the name of Allah can be invoked.
• Supplicate before the tombs of saints or prophets.[
• Celebrate annual festivals for dead saints.
• Wear any form of talisman and believe in its healing powers.
• Practice magic or look to wizards or witchcraft or Wicca for sources of healing.
• Innovations in religion.
• Erecting great monuments on graves.
• They do not celebrate the birth of Muhammad based on the interpretation of Hadith.
• The Wahhabis ban movies and music.
• Some even ban photographs."

if you actually read the Sheikh's books- this is the kind of thing he's talking about. "don't pray at graves, don't pray to saints, etc."

so... what exactly here is shocking or controversial? don't pray to dead people? if you are not an extreme Sufi or a Shia.... these things aren't or shouldn't be controversial.... and those are basically the two types who froth at the mouth about "Wahhabis" and then nowadays you also have the liberal types who are opposed for political reasons

the guy who was giving the lecture mentioned in OP.... probably, he had some sort of connection with Sufism... maybe he was a big Sufi or maybe he had to do with Muslim Brotherhood which is tied with Sufism

 

[Dhere]

That imam is probably a terrorist be careful a lot of terrorists hate salafis

99% of terrorists are salafis. ISIS, AQ, AS allow follow salafi teachings.

 

[Djokovic]

99% of terrorists are salafis. ISIS, AQ, AS allow follow salafi teachings.

Nah salafis don’t do takfeer of the ruler like them man

 

[Dhere]

Nah salafis don’t do takfeer of the ruler like them man

Salafis takfir muslims all the time, the whole movement started from the mass takfir of Ottomans

 

[Omar del Sur]

Wahabism as the name implies is named after their founder mohammed abdulwahab who introduced a new understanding of tawheed & shirk. Basically according to him tawheed is subdivided into 3 parts

1.Tawheed Rububiyyah (Lordship)
2.Tawheed Uluhiyyah (Worship)
3.Tawheed Al asma wa siffat (names & attributes)

Two points- firstly, Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab did not invent the division of Tawheed into categories. Sheikh Ibn Taymiyyah was talking about that I think about 500 years earlier. Some claim he invented it, I read that there were earlier scholars who discussed it before him.

Secondly, you have promoted praying to the dead.

2. Intercession with deceased more specifically with the Prophet is allowed by all 4 schools in fact it has been done since the days of the salaf. The classical scholars not only allowed it but recommended it, laakin modern day salafi disallow it and consider it to be major shirk.

I just want to highlight that because it shows what I've been talking about- yes, if you are the type who believes in worshipping graves or praying to saints and that kind of thing, Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab's views can appear as shocking and terrible. He came along and opposed that sort of thing so the extreme Sufis have this deep hatred of him.

 

[nomadmutant]

It's when you bomb people basically like ISIS and alshabab

 

[Omar del Sur]

99% of terrorists are salafis. ISIS, AQ, AS allow follow salafi teachings.

You made a whole thread promoting the idea that the Quran promotes Zionism.

https://www.somalispot.com/threads/does-the-quran-support-zionism.127348/

Maybe you're against Salafis as part of some Zionist agenda.