ATATÜRK’ÜN TARİH KİTAPLARI LİSE VE ORTA – 1931

ATATÜRK’ÜN TARİH KİTAPLARI LİSE VE ORTA – 1931

Sanılanın aksine, dinimize aykırı muhtevalı kitaplar M. Kemal Atatürk’ten “sonra” ortaya çıkmış değildir. Bilakis, bu kitaplar M. Kemal’in direktifiyle yazılmış ve onun ölümünden sonra da inancımıza aykırı muhtevası kitaptan çıkarılmıştır.

Buna rağmen koskoca -sözde- ilim adamlarının televizyon kanallarında utanmadan 1930 yılının din dersi kitabını ekranlarda gösterip “Atatürk ve Inönü döneminde din dersi vardı” şeklinde nutuk çektiklerini gördükçe hakikaten hayrete düşüyorum. M. Kemal döneminde din dersi vardı, fakat M. Kemal din derslerini aşama aşama tasfiye etmiştir. Nitekim 1933 yılında din dersleri müfredattan tamamen çıkarılmıştır.Bu bir süreçti, aslolan ise sonuçtur; yoksa sonuca giden yolda atılan adımlar değil.

Atatürk’ün Milli Mücadele döneminde, yani halkın desteğine ihtiyacı olduğu dönemde Hilafeti övdüğü meclis tutanaklarında kayıtlıdır. Ancak dizginleri ele alınca Hilafet’i kaldırmıştır. Bu durumda M. Kemal Atatürk’e “Hilafetçi” demek ne kadar gayrı ilmî ve gayrı ciddî ise, “M. Kemal Atatürk din derslerine karşı değildi” demek de aynı şekilde gayrı ilmî ve gayrı ciddîdir.

Örneğin M. Kemal Atatürk’ün Yüksek Direktifleri dairesinde Türk Tarih Kurumu tarafından yazdırılmış olan Lise Tarih Kitaplarının birinci cildinin baş tarafına 8 sayfa tutan yazıda tabiat yahut kainatın yaradılışından, insanın zuhurundan, maymunla insan arasındaki münasebetlerden uzun uzadıya bahsedildikten sonra şu neticeye varıldığı görülmektedir:

“Filhakika insan, tabiatın mahlûkudur. Hayatın büyük kaidesi de tabiate tâbi olmaktır. Tabiatte hiç bir şey yok olamaz. Ve hiç bir şey yoktan var olamaz. Yalnız tabiati vücude getiren varlıklar, tabiatın kanunları icabı olarak şekillerini değiştirirler. Arzın ve hayatın mütalea ve tetkiklerinde bu hakikat pek açık görülür.Fakat şunu söyliyelim ki insanların bütün bilgileri ve inanışları insanın zekası eseridir. Zeka tabiî olan dimağdan (beyinden) çıkar. Bundan tabiatı anlamakta zekanın, en büyük cevher ve müessir olduğu anlaşıl­dığı gibi tabiatın fevkinde (üstünde) ve haricindeki bütün mefhumların, insan dimağı için kendi tarafından uydurma şeylerden başka birşey olmıyacağı meydana çıkar.”

Bu yazıda tabiatın üstünde ve dışındaki bütün mefhumların insan dimağı için kendi tarafından uydurma şeyler denilmekle uluhiyet mefhumunun da bunlar arasında olduğu söylenilmiş oluyor.

Yine bu kanaate göre Peygamberliğin ve bilhassa vahyin de insan beyni tarafından uydurma olacağı fikri müdafaa edilerek deniliyor ki:

“… Muhammed birdenbire Allah’ın Resûliyim diyerek ortaya çık­mamıştır. O, Arapların ahlak ve adetlerinin pek fena ve pek iptidaî ve ıslaha muhtaç olduğunu anlamış, bunları ıslah için tenha yerlere çeki­lerek senelerce düşünüşten sonra kendisinde vahiy ve ilham fikri doğ­muştur.”

“….Muhammed uzun bir devredeki tefekkürlerin mahsulü olan ayetleri lüzum ve ihtiyaçlara göre takrir ediyordu. Bununla beraber kendisini tahrik eden kuvvetin tabiat fevkinde bir mevcudiyet oldu­ğuna samimi surette kani idi. Muhammed’i harekete getiren ilk amil bu samimî heyecanlar olmuştur.”

Yani, -haşa- Hz. Peygamber (sallallahu aleyhi vesellem) Efendimiz için; “aldandı”, Onun “sandığı” gibi değildi denmek isteniyor.

Yazıklar olsun! Yıllarca Müslümanlara bunları okuttular.Hiç kimse Milletimizin bu hakikatleri görmesini engelleme hakkına sahip değildir.

Üstad Necip Fazıl Kısakürek’in bu kitaptan dolayıDedektif X Bir mahlasıyla Büyük Doğu Dergisinde kaleme aldığı bir yazı:

1 – Güya münevver geçinen, fakat ayağını nereye bastığı ve yüzünü ne tarafa çevirdiği belli olmıyan, kokmaz, bulaşmaz bir zümre vardır ki, Birinci Cumhur Reisi (M. Kemal Atatürk) hakkında şöyle düşünür:

«Onun İslâmiyete hiçbir zararı olmamıştır! Belki de, kaba taassubu yok etmek bakımından dine faydası dokunmuştur! Ne imana, ne ibadete, ne de herhangi bir dini esasa el sürmüş değildir!» Böyleleri, benzerleri ve benzerlerinin benzerleri arasında, Birinci Cumhur Reisini rahmetle ananlar, ona Mevlit okutturanlar bile vardır.

2 – Halbuki Birinci Cumhur Reisi, herhangi bir temenniye «İnşaallah…» duasını katan insan için «Bak, Allahtan bekliyor, Allaha inanıyor!» diye mukabele edecek ve Kâinatın Mefhari hakkında «Donsuz Bedevi! hakaretini savuracak kadar Allah ve Resulünün düşmanıydı.

3 – Bize her şeyden evvel düşen borç, kıymet hükmümüzü izhara lüzum bile görmeden, ukdelerin ukdesi ve bütün tarihi görüş inkılâbının düğüm noktası olan Birinci Cumhur Reisi (M. Kemal Atatürk) mevzuunda,
sadece ilmî ve (Akademik) hüccetlerle onun din, İslâmiyet ve Peygambere karşı vaziyetini tesbit etmek ve hiç olmazsa «Dine ne yaptı?» sözüne sarf imkânı bırakmamaktır. Renkler, siyahla beyaz halinde belli olsun da, mücadele ona göre dürüst ve namuskârane cereyan etsin; fakat, mevzuları bir türlü çerçeveliyememekte en feci idrak belâsı olan renkleri birbirine karıştırma zaafının önüne geçilmiş olsun…

4 – Bütün icraatı, baştan başa en keskin din ve şeriat düşmanlığını billûrlaştıran Birinci Cumhur Reisinin bu mevzuda izhar edilmiş (net) ve (ideolojik) sözleri ve görüşleri büyük bir yekûn teşkil etmediği ve bilinmediği için, icraatı sözden daha büyük bir fikir tecellisi diye alacak herhangi bir irfan zümresinin de eksikliği yüzünden, Birinci Cumhur Reisi hakkında «Canım, İslamiyete ne yaptı? Allaha ve Peygambere inanmadığı nereden malûm?» gibi bir demagocyaya muhatap bulunabilmektedir.

5 – Şimdi bizim yapacağımız, din ve imanı yok etmek için 15 yıllık icraatı dağ gibi yükselen ve bütün bir «lisan-ı hal» ile her şeyi söyliyen Birinci Cumhur Reisinin bu icraata esas teşkil edici kanaat ve sözlerini, üzerinde münakaşa edilmez şekilde vesikalara bağlamak ve onun bu cephesini artık inhiraf kabul etmez bir vuzuhla tesbit etmektir. Böylece, dine en küçük bir temayül ve sevgi içinde, Birinci Cumhur Reisini müdafaaya imkân kalmamalıdır. Müdafaacıları, cephelerini apaçık göstermeğe mahkûm şekilde, Birinci Cumhur Reisi dostluğiyle Allah ve Peygamber düşmanlığını bir arada temsile mecbur tutulmalıdır.

6 – Bu hususta tek, kafi ve riyazi hüccet, Birinci Cumhur Reisinin bizzat yazdığı, devlet işlerini bırakarak mevsimlerce meşgul olduğu ve 1931 yılında Maarif Vekâleti armasiyle devlete mal ve tabettirdiği (bastırdığı) meşhur tarihtir. Bu tarih onun bütün ruh (portre) sini ve dünya görüşünü hulâsa eder. İşte bu tarihin daha ilk sahifelerinde, Birinci Cumhur Reisinin zekâdan başka (idealist) hiçbir kıymete inanmadığı ve bütün ruh ve mavera âlemini insanlarca uydurulmuş birer masal saydığı hemen belli olur:

(M. Kemal’in yazdırdığı kitaptan):
«Bundan, tabiatı anlamakta zekâmı en büyük cevher ve müessir olduğu anlaşılıyor ki, tabiatın fevkinde ve haricindeki bütün mefhumların, insan dimağı için kendi tarafından uydurma
şeylerden başka bir şey olmadığı meydana çıkar.» (1931 yılının Lise Tarih kitabı, Cild 1, sayfa 2, satır 35 ilâ 39.)

7 – Birinci Cumhur Reisi (M. Kemal), sadece umumi mânada bir «Allahsız» değil, ruhunda en küçük (idealist) havaya pay bırakmıyan koyu ve sert bir (materyalist)’tir. Bu bakımdan, belki de (Karl Marks) ve (Lenin)’i
aşacak bir istidatta, kaba maddeden başka bir hedef tanımaz:

(M. Kemal’in yazdırdığı kitaptan):
«Her halde hayatın, herhangi bir tabiat harici âmilin müdahalesi olmaksızın, dünya üzerinde tabii, zaruri bir kimya ve fizik seyri neticesi olduğunu kabul etmek lazımdır.» (1931 yılının Lise Tarih kitabı, Cilt 1. sahife 5, satır 10 ilâ 17.)

8 – Umumi mânadaki bu ruh seciyesinden sonra Birinci Cumhur Reisi, pek, ama pek hususî mânada tam bir İslâmiyet düşmanıdır:
(M. Kemal’in yazdırdığı kitaptan):

«Mekkeliler Arapları kendi mabetlerine çekebilmek için Arap yarımadasının muhtelif yerlerinde mabut tanılan 360 putu Kabede yerleştirmişlerdi. Kabenin kutsiyetini Yahudi ananelerine de raptetmişlerdi. Bu uydurmalara göre İbrahim, karısı Hacer ile oğlu İsmail’i buraya getirmişti. Bunların hepsi, bittabi, sonradan uydurulmuş masallardır.» (1931 yılının Lise Tarih kitabı, Cilt 2, sahife 85, satır 19 ilâ 27.)

9 – Birinci Cumhur Reisinin bütün hayat, fikir ve hamlelerine hâkim olan en büyük nefret kutbu, bizzat Allahın Sevgilisidir. Bu tarih kitabında, en küçük bir hürmet edası gösterilmeksizin sadece hâs ve mukaddes ismiyle, polis zabıtlarındaki sanıklara ait üslûpla anılan Gaye-İnsan ve Ufuk-Peygamber (Salât ve Selâm O’na olsun) hattâ kasden methediliyormuş gibi durulduğu noktalarda bile sistemle düşürülmek istenmiştir. Mukaddes ismi nokta nokta göstererek metinleri takdim ediyoruz:

(M. Kemal’in yazdırdığı kitaptan):
«…….. 40 yaşına geldiği zaman, vatandaşlarını, kendisinin bulduğu ve doğru olduğuna inandığı yeni bir dine davet etmeğe başladı.» (1931 yılının Lise Tarih kitabı, Cilt 2, sahife 89, satır 15 ilâ 18.)

10 – Birinci Cumhur Reisince (M. Kemal) her şey Allah Resulü tarafından (hâşâ) uydurulmuştur. Bu uydurmaların (namütenahi defa hâşâ) mecmuası da Kur’andır; yoksa o sanıldığı gibi, Allahın kelâmı değildir:

(M. Kemal’in yazdırdığı kitaptan):
«……..’in koyduğu esasların toplu olduğu kitaba Kur’an denir.» (1931 yılının Lise Tarih kitabı, Cilt 2. sahife 90. satır 25 ila 26.)

Bakınız, uydurma diye iddia ettiği mukaddes oluşların izahını nasıl yapıyor ve Peygambere nasıl bir hile isnat ediyor:

«O, Arapların ahlâk ve âdetlerinin pek fena ve pek iptidai ve ıslaha muhtaç olduğunu anlamış, bunların ıslahı için tenha yerlere çekilerek senelerce düşünmüş ve yıllarca tefekkürden sonra kendisinde vahiy ve ilham fikri doğmuştur.» (1931 yılının Lise Tarih kitabı, Cilt 2, sahife 40, satır 33 ilâ 36.)

Aynı hile isnadının devamı:
«…….. uzun bir devredeki tefekkürlerin mahsulü olan âyetleri, lüzum ve ihtiyaçlara göre takdir ediyordu.» (1931 yılının Lise Tarih kitabı, Cilt 2, sahife 41, satır 26 ilâ 27.)

11 – O kadar İslâmiyet düşmanıdır ki, bu dinde samimî olanları bile yabancılar kabul eder ve onun kaynak teşkil etliği ırk ve kavmi, İslâmiyetle beraber düşürmek ister:

«Arap olmıyan, kavimler İslamiyeti hırsla benimsediler, halbuki asıl Araplardan olan sınıflar İslamiyeti, tahakküm etmek için bir siyaset vasıtası olarak kullandılar. Nihayet nüfuz ve iktidar Arap olmıyan Müslüman kavimlerin ellerine geçti. Araplar adeta çöllerine döndüler.» (1931 yılının Lise Tarih kitabı, Cilt 2. sahife 93, satır 25 ila 29.)

12 – Ve nihayet mahut tarihte ki gayet sinsi (taktik), Âlemlerin Efendisini bir kumandan ve devlet reisi olarak medheder gibi görünüp O’nun aslî, ulvi ve münezzeh mâna ve hakikatine ağız dolusu sövmek, böylece güya yeni bir rütbe ve paye adına nihaî ve mefkûrevî rütbeyi, en haşin bir küfür asabiyetiyle ayaklar altında çiğnemektir:

«Aksi takdirde……..’i her şeyi bir melekten alan ve aynen muhitine tebliğ eden ümmi, cahil, hissiz, hareketsiz bir put derekesine indirmek hatasından kurtulmak mümkün olmaz.» (1931 yılının Lise Tarih kitabı, Cilt 2, sahife 93, satır 32 ilâ 35.)

tumblr_nkgtkaAncp1r3n52go1_500 tumblr_nkgtkaAncp1r3n52go2_500 tumblr_nkgtkaAncp1r3n52go3_400 tumblr_nkgtkaAncp1r3n52go4_500 tumblr_nkgtkaAncp1r3n52go5_500 tumblr_nkgtkaAncp1r3n52go6_500 tumblr_nkgtkaAncp1r3n52go7_540

Advertisements

THE RATIFICATION OF THE SIGN IN THE WORDS OF THE FAMOUS HISTORIAN OF ARABIA

Sayyid Ahmad Zayni Dahlan al-Makki’ ash-Shafi’i (d.1304 AH / 1886 CE)

THE RATIFICATION OF THE SIGN

IN THE WORDS OF THE FAMOUS HISTORIAN OF ARABIA

SHAYKH ZAINI DAHLAAN MAKKI

Sayyid Ahmad Zayni Dahlan(ra)

AL FATUHAT ISLAMIA

Ad-Durar-us-Saniyyah fir-Raddi ‘alal-Wahhabiyyah

(a treatise refuting the Wahhabiys)

Fitnat-ul-Wahhabiyyah

 (a treatise of the tribulations inflicted by the Wahhabiyyah)

 —

Sayyid Ahmad Zayni Dahlan al-Makki’ ash-Shafi’i (d. 1304 AH /1886 CE)

Shaykh_sayyid-ahmad-zayni-ad-dahlaan-al-hasani

Sayyid Ahmad ibn Zayni Dahlan was of the eminent scholars of his time and the Shafi’i mufti of Makkah during the second half of the 13th century. He was born in 1231AH. He lived when the first printing press was established in Makkah, which resulted in a number of his works being printed. He wrote chiefly on fiqh and history. Aside from his writings, his major contribution to the madhhab came in the form of his numerous students, including Sayyid `Alawi ibn Ahmad al-Saqqaf, Sayyid Abu Bakr Shatta, Shaykh `Umar Ba Junayd, and Sayyid Husayn ibn Muhammad al-Hibshi.

Some of the works published by the Sayyid include:

1- Sharhu Matn-il-Alfiyyah; (an explanation of the text of al-Alfiyyah in the Arabic language)
2- Tarikh-ud-Duwal-il-Islamiyyah bil-Jadawil-il Mardiyyah; (a history of the Islamic states)
3- Fath-ul-Jawad-il-Mannan ‘alal-‘Aqidat-il-Musammati bi Fayd-ir-Rahman fi Tajwid-il-Qur’an; (a summary of the tajwid rules of recitation of the Qur’an)
4- Khulasat-ul-Kalam fi Umara’-il-Balad-il-Haram; (the history of the rulers of Makkah)
5- Al-Futuhat-ul-Islamiyyah; (a history of the opening of the different countries by Muslims)
6- Tanbih-ul-Ghafilin, Mukhtasaru Minhaj-il-‘Abidin; (a summary exposing the good manners of the worshippers)
7- Ad-Durar-us-Saniyyah fir-Raddi ‘alal-Wahhabiyyah; (a treatise refuting the Wahhabiys)
8- Sharh-ul-Ajurrummiyyah; (an explanation of an Arabic grammar text)
9- Fitnat-ul-Wahhabiyyah; [this booklet] (a treatise of the tribulations inflicted by the Wahhabiyyah).

Sayyid Muhammad bin ‘Alawi al-Maliki gives his sanad to Sayyid Ahmad Dahlan in his abridged book of Ijaza, Iqdatu l-Farid as follows,From his father, Sayyid ‘Alawi al-Maliki from Sayyid ‘Abbas al-Maliki

Najdi Evil History Repeats Itself  

Their prophet

Mu-hammed ibn Abdul Wahhab Najdi

demanded:

NOT ONLY MEN BUT ALSO ALL WOMEN WHO ENTERED HIS “RELIGION”  THAT THEY SHOULD ALL SHAVE THEIR HEADS

This was done because he said:

 “This is the hair of the period of Kufr therefore it must be shaven off”.

This shaving off of the female hair carried on for some time until anindignant woman stood up and challenged:

 “Why don’t you shave off the beards of your recruits when they enter you Deen. That is also the hair of the period of Kufr?”

“Hair is the precious ornament of a female as is the beard for a male. Is it apt to leave human beings deprived of their ornaments bestowed upon them by Allahu ta’ala?”

 —

Shaykh Zayni Dahlan  (ra)  said in his book Futuhat al-Islamiyya  (vol.2, pg. 268):

“The sign of the Khawarij (the first deviant sect that appeared in the time of the Companions)  concerning the  shaving of the head, was not found in the  Khawarij of the past, but only in theNajdi’s of our time!” 

Fitnat-ul-Wahhabiyyah

( Read the full version in Arabic & English)

 In brief

Introduction

During the reign of Sultan Salim III (1204-1222 AH) many tribulations took place. One was the tribulation of the Wahhabiyyah which started in the area of al-Hijaz{ where they captured al-Haramayn, and prevented Muslims coming from ash-Sham and Egypt from reaching their destination to perform Pilgrimage (Hajj). Another tribulation is that of the French who controlled Egypt from 1213 A.H. until 1216 A.H. Let us here speak briefly about the two adversities, because each was mentioned in detail in the books of history and in separate treatises.

Background On The Tribulations Of The Wahhabis
Muhammad Ibn ^Abdul-Wahhab started as a student of knowledge in the city of the Prophet, sallallahu ^alayhi wa sallam: al-Madinah al-Munawwarah. Ibn ^Abdul-Wahhab’s father was a good, pious man among the people of knowledge as was his brother, Shaykh Sulayman. His father, his brother, and his shaykhs (teachers of religion) had the foresight Ibn ^Abdul-Wahhab would innovate a great deal of deviation and misguidance, because of their observance of his sayings, actions, and inclinations concerning many issues. They used to reprimand him and warn people against him.

Some Of The Beliefs Of Ibn ^Abdul-Wahhab

What Ibn ^Abdul-Wahhab’s father, brother, and shaykhs speculated about him came true
–by the Will of Allah, ta^ala. Ibn ^Abdul-Wahhab innovated deviant and misleading ways and beliefs and managed to allure some ignorant people to follow him. His deviant and misleading ways and beliefs disagreed with the sayings of the scholars of the Religion. His deviant beliefs led him to label the believers as blasphemers!
He falsely claimed visiting the grave of the Prophet, sallallahu ^alayhi wa sallam, and performing the tawassul by him as shirk. Additionally, he falsely claimed visiting the graves of other prophets and righteous Muslims (awliya’) and performing tawassul by them was shirk as well. He added to this by saying, “To call upon the Prophet, sallallahu ^alayhi wa sallam, when performing tawassul by the Prophet is shirk.” He passed the same judgment of shirk on the ones who call upon other prophets and righteous Muslims (awliya’) in performing tawassul by them.

In an effort to give credibility to his innovations Ibn ^Abdul-Wahhab embellished his sayings by quotations which he selected from Islamic sources, i.e., quotations which are used as proofs for many issues but not the issues which Ibn ^Abdul-Wahhab was attempting to support. He brought false statements and tried to beautify them for the laymen until they followed him. He wrote treatises for them until they believed that most of the People of Tawhid were blasphemers.

Alliance With The Su^udiyy Family

Moreover, Ibn ^Abdul-Wahhab called upon the princes of eastern Arabia and the people of ad-Dar^iyyah to support him. They carried his doctrine and made this endeavor a means to strengthen and expand their kingdom. They worked together to suppress the Bedouins of the deserts until they overcame them and those Bedouins followed them and became foot-soldiers for them without pay. After that, these masses started to believe that whoever does not believe in what Ibn ^Abdul-Wahhab said is a blasphemer, and it is Islamically lawful (halal) to shed his blood and plunder his money.

The matter of Ibn ^Abdul-Wahhab started to evidence itself in 1143 A.H. and began spreading after 1150 A.H. Subsequently, the scholars–even his brother, Shaykh Sulayman and the rest of his shaykhs– authored many treatises to refute him. But Muhammad Ibn Su^ud, the Prince of ad-Dar^iyyah in eastern Arabia, supported him and worked to spread his ideology. Ibn Su^ud was from Banu Hanifah, the people of Musaylimah al-Kadhdhab{9}. When Muhammad Ibn Su^ud died, his son ^Abdul-^Aziz Ibn Muhammad Ibn Su^ud took over the responsibility of fulfilling the vile task of spreading the Wahhabi beliefs.

Many of the shaykhs of Ibn ^Abdul-Wahhab in al-Madinah used to say, “He will be misguided, and he will misguide those for whom Allah willed the misguidance.” Things took place as per the speculation of the scholars. Ibn ^Abdul-Wahhab claimed his intention behind the madhhab he invented was “to purify the tawhid” and “repudiate the shirk.” He also claimed people had been following the shirk for six-hundred years and he revived their Religion for them!!

The Methodology Of Ibn ^Abdul-Wahhab

Ibn ^Abdul-Wahhab took the verses revealed to speak about the blasphemers and applied them to the Muslims. The following examples from the Qur’an illustrate this point. Allah, ta^ala, said in Surat al-Ahqaf, Ayah 5:
This verse means: [Who is more astray than the one who performs supplication (du^a’) to [worship] other than Allah; the one other than Allah he supplicates to will not answer his du^a’.]
Allah, ta^ala said in Surat Yunus, Ayah 106 :
This verse means: [Do not perform supplication (du^a’) to [worship] other than Allah; the one other than Allah you supplicate to will not benefit you and will not harm you.]

The verses in the Qur’an similar to these ones are numerous. Muhammad Ibn ^Abdul-Wahhab gravely misinterpreted the previously cited verses and said: “The Muslim who asks help from the Prophet, sallallahu ^alayhi wa sallam, other prophets, or the righteous people (salihun), or who calls or asks any of them for intercession is like those blasphemers mentioned in the Qur’an.” According to the false claim of Ibn ^Abdul-Wahhab, the Muslims who do these things are blasphemers.

He also considered visiting the grave of Prophet Muhammad and the graves of other prophets and righteous Muslims for blessings as blasphemy. Allah revealed Ayah 3 of Surat az-Zumar in reference to the mushrikun:
This verse means: [Those who worship the idols said: “We do not worship them except to achieve a higher status from Allah.”]

Ibn ^Abdul-Wahhab falsely stated: “Those who perform tawassul (asking Allah by the prophets, for example) are similar to those blasphemers mentioned in Surat az-Zumar, Ayah 3, who claim they do not worship the idols except to achieve a higher status from Allah.” He said: “The blasphemers did not believe the idols create anything; they believed Allah is the Creator.” He gave his version of proof from the Qur’an by citing Surat Luqman, Ayah 25 and Surat az-Zumar, Ayah 38, in which Allah said:
These verses mean: [If you ask them, ‘Who created the heavens and earth?’ They will say, ‘Allah’.]

In Surat az-Zukhruf, Ayah 87, Allah said:
Which means: [If you ask them, ‘Who created them?’ They will say, ‘Allah’.] Ibn ^Abdul-Wahhab falsely concluded from these verses that the Muslims who perform tawassul are similar to those blasphemers.

The Scholars Refute Ibn ^Abdul-Wahhab

In their writings to refute Ibn ^Abdul-Wahhab’s sayings, the scholars said his deduction was false. The believers did not consider the prophets or the awliya’ as gods and they did not deem them partners to Allah. Instead, they correctly believe the prophets and awliya’ are good slaves and creations of Allah, and they do not deserve to be worshipped.

The blasphemers intended in these verses believed their idols deserved Godhood. They exalted them as one would exalt his Creator, even though they believed the idols did not create the heavens and the earth. The believers, on the other hand, do not believe the prophets or righteous Muslims (awliya’) deserve to be worshipped, nor do they deserve to be attributed with Godhood, nor do they exalt them as one would exalt God. They believe these people are good slaves of Allah, His beloved ones whom He chose, and by their blessings (barakah) Allah grants His mercy to His creation. Hence, when the slaves of Allah seek the blessings (barakah) of the prophets and righteous Muslims (awliya’) they are seeking these blessings as a mercy from Allah.

There are many proofs and examples from the Qur’an and Sunnah about this basic belief of the Muslims. Muslims believe Allah is the Creator, the One Who grants benefit and inflicts harm, and the only One Who deserves to be worshipped. Muslims believe that no one other than Allah has the power to affect the creation. The prophets and righteous people do not create anything. They do not possess the power to bestow benefit or inflict harm on others, but Allah is the One Who bestows the mercy upon the slaves by the righteous Muslims’ blessings.

Hence, the belief of the blasphemers, i.e., the belief their idols deserve to be worshipped and have Godhood, is what makes them fall into blasphemy. This saying of the blasphemers, as previously cited in Surat az-Zumar, Ayah 3, was said in an effort to justify their belief when they were disproved and shown idols do not deserve to be worshipped.

How can Ibn ^Abdul-Wahhab and those who follow him find it permissible to equate the believers, who believed in tawhid, to those blasphemers, who believed in the Godhood of the idols? All the previously cited verses and the verses which are similar to them are specific to the blasphemers who associate partners with Allah–none of the believers are included.
Al-Bukhariyy narrated by the route of Ibn ^Umar, may Allah raise their ranks, that the Prophet, sallallahu ^alayhi wa sallam, described the Khawarij as those who took the verses revealed about the blasphemers and attributed them to the believers! In the narration by the route of Ibn ^Umar the Prophet said:

which means: <<What I fear most for my nation is a man who mis-explains the Qur’an and takes it out of context.>> This hadith and the previous one apply very well to the Wahhabis.

Debating With The Scholars Of Makkah

Initially, the Wahhabis sent a group to Makkah and al-Madinah thinking they would be able to spoil the belief of the scholars of these two holy cities and tamper with their belief through lies and fabrications. When they reached there and declared their beliefs, the scholars of Makkah and al-Madinah refuted them and established the Islamic evidences against them–which they could not refute. The scholars were certain about the Wahhabis’ ignorance and misguidance and found them absurd and thoughtless.

After evaluating their beliefs and finding them full of many types of blasphemy, the Wahhabis fled like frightened zebras fleeing from a lion. Hence, after establishing the proofs, the scholars wrote an attestation against the Wahhabiyyah to the Head Judge of Makkah confirming the Wahhabis as blasphemous because of their beliefs. The aim of the scholars was to disclose the misguidance of the Wahhabis and make it known to the Muslims near and far. This action took place during the rulership of Sharif Mas^ud Ibn Sa^id Ibn Sa^d Ibn Zayn, the ruler of Hijaz who ordered the imprisonment of those unjust Wahhabis. Sharif Mas^ud Ibn Sa^id Ibn Sa^d Ibn Zayn died in 1165 A.H.

Some Wahhabis managed to escape their imprisonment. They went to ad-Dar^iyyah and spoke about what they encountered in Makkah. This made the Wahhabis more devilishly haughty, and they started attacking the tribes which were loyal to the prince of Makkah.

Outbreak Of Hostilities:
Fighting In At-Ta’if, Makkah, And Juddah

The fighting between the Wahhabis and the prince of Makkah, Mawlana Sharif Ghalib Ibn Mus^id Ibn Sa^id Ibn Sa^d Ibn Zayd, broke out after 1205 A.H. Many battles took place between the prince and the Wahhabis. Although many people were killed, the Wahhabis’ strength kept intensifying. Their innovations kept propagating until most of the Bedouin tribes paid allegiance to them–even the Bedouins who were under the rulership of the prince of Makkah.

In 1217 A.H., they marched with big armies to the area of at-Ta’if. In Dhul-Qa^dah of the same year, they lay siege to the area the Muslims were, subdued them, and killed the people: men, women, and children. They also looted the Muslims’ belongings and possessions. Only a few people escaped their barbarism.

After at-Ta’if{18} came under their control, the Wahhabis planned to march towards Makkah, but this was during the time the Muslims were performing Pilgrimage, and many of the Muslims from ash-Sham and Egypt were in Makkah. The Wahhabis knew if they attacked Makkah at that time all the people performing Pilgrimage would join in fighting them. They stayed in at-Ta’if until Hajj was over, and the people had returned to their countries. Then the Wahhabis and their armies set out to attack Makkah. Sharif Ghalib did not have enough power to face these armies, so he went to Juddah. The people of Makkah were afraid the Wahhabis would treat them in the same manner the people of at-Ta’if were treated, so they negotiated and surrendered to them. The Wahhabis granted the people of Makkah security and entered Makkah on the eighth of Muharram, 1218 A.H. They occupied themselves there for fourteen days ordering the Muslims to repent and embrace Islam–since the Wahhabis falsely claimed them as blasphemers. The people were prohibited from doing what the Wahhabis incorrectly believed to be blasphemy, like performing tawassul and visiting the graves.

Having gained control of at-Ta’if and Makkah, the Wahhabis turned their armies towards Juddah to fight Sharif Ghalib. When they surrounded Juddah, Sharif Ghalib bombarded them with cannons and projectiles. He killed many Wahhabis and prevented the conquering of Juddah. After eight days, the Wahhabis departed Juddah to return to their own territories. The Wahhabis left some of their army in Makkah and appointed ^Abdul-Mu^in, the brother of Sharif Ghalib, as prince. ^Abdul-Mu^in only accepted this position to protect the people of Makkah and shelter them from the evil mistreatment of the harmful Wahhabis.

In the month of Rabi^-ul-‘Awwal of the same year, Prince Ghalib left Juddah accompanied by Sharif Basha–the governor of Juddah and the representative of the Supreme ^Uthmaniyy Sultan. They arrived in Makkah with their army and overpowered the Wahhabis. They expelled the Wahhabi army and this brought Makkah back under the authority of Sharif Ghalib.

The Capture Of Makkah

The Wahhabis left Makkah and became involved with fighting many of the tribes. They captured at-Ta’if and appointed ^Uthman al-Madayiqiyy as the governor. This governor joined forces with some of the Wahhabis’ soldiers and started fighting the tribes next to the borders of Makkah and al-Madinah until they pledged allegiance to them. They eventually subdued all the tribes and captured all the lands originally under the authority of the Governor of Makkah. After this, ^Uthman al-Madayiqiyy mobilized his army in an attempt to capture Makkah. In 1220 A.H. they lay siege to Makkah and then surrounded it from all directions to tighten this siege. They blocked the routes to the city and prevented supplies from reaching there. It was a great hardship on the people of Makkah. Food became exorbitantly expensive and then unavailable. They resorted to eating dogs.

Sharif Ghalib was compelled to ask for reconciliation with the Wahhabis. He accepted for some people to arbitrate between them. He signed an agreement with conditions stipulating the rulership of Makkah would be kept for him, and the people of Makkah would be treated leniently. The Wahhabis accepted these conditions. They entered Makkah by the end of Dhul-Qa^dah in 1220 A.H. They also gained control of al-Madinah. They plundered what was in the room of the Prophet, sallallahu ^alayhi wa sallam, took all the money that was there, and did some disgraceful acts. They appointed a man among them, Mubarak Ibn Madyan, as the governor of al-Madinah.

The Wahhabis ruled Makkah and al-Madinah for seven years.During these years, they prevented the people of ash-Sham and Egypt from entering Makkah carrying the cloak of the Ka^bah when they came to perform pilgrimage. The Wahhabis started to make the cloak for the Ka^bah from black material. They prevented the people from smoking tobacco. When they found someone smoking they punished him fiercely. During this time, the Wahhabis destroyed the domes built on the graves of the righteous Muslims.

Conclusion

This is a very brief summary of the story of Muhammad Ibn ^Abdul-Wahhab. To talk at length on each of these details would be very lengthy. The tribulations inflicted by the Wahhabis were a calamity for the Muslims. The Wahhabis shed a great deal of blood and robbed a great deal of money; their harm was prevalent and their evil spread.

Many of the hadiths of the Prophet, sallallahu ^alayhi wa sallam, spoke explicitly about this tribulation. One narration said:
which means: <<There will be people who come from the eastern side ofArabia who will recite Qur’an, but their recitation will not pass beyond their collarbones{28}. They will go out of Islam as swiftly as the arrow goes through the prey. Their sign is shaving their heads.>> This hadith was mentioned in many narrations, including Sahih-ul-Bukhariyy and other books of hadith. There is no need to expound on listing these narrations or their narrators because they are well-known and of the sahih classification.

The Prophet said: “Their sign is shaving their heads.” This is an explicit reference to the Wahhabi sect. They used to order all those who follow them to shave their heads. None of the previous sects, i.e., those who came before the Wahhabis, like the Khawarij or other innovators, had this sign.

As-Sayyid ^Abdur-Rahman al-Ahdal, the Mufti of Zabid, used to say: “There is no need for writing against the Wahhabis. For, in refuting them, it is sufficient to mention the hadith of the Prophet, sallallahu ^alayhi wa sallam: <<Their sign is shaving their heads>> since no other innovators had ever done it.”

It happened once that a women made her point against Ibn ^Abdul-Wahhab when they compelled her to follow them and she did. He ordered her to shave her head. She told him: “Since you order the woman to shave her head, you have to order the man to shave his beard. The hair of the women is her decoration and the decoration of the man is his beard.” Ibn ^Abdul-Wahhab could not answer her.

Among of what the Wahhabis used to do was to prevent the people from asking the Prophet, sallallahu ^alayhi wa sallam, for his intercession–although the hadiths about the Prophet’s intercession are numerous and are of the mutawatir classification. Most of his intercession is for the Muslims of his nation who committed major sins. The Wahhabis also prohibited Muslims from reading Dala’il-ul-Khayrat–which includes saying as-Salat on the Prophet and mentioning many of the Prophet’s complete descriptions. They said this is blasphemy. They also prevented Muslims from saying as-Salat on the Prophet on the minarets after the Adhan. Once a righteous blind Muslim was calling Adhan and said as-Salat on the Prophet after the Adhan. The Wahhabis brought him to Ibn ^Abdul-Wahhab who ordered his execution.

If I [the author] was to pursue the mischievous things the Wahhabis did, I would fill notebooks and lots of papers. However, what has been mentioned thus far is enough.

source

Up ↑