The title of Shaykh Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab as the renewer and the scarcity of his writings
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
Question:
Some people say that the title "Shaykh al-Islam" should not be used for Shaykh Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab, and that he is not a reformer, because he did not write long, large works; rather, all of his books are small and short. What is your response to this claim?
Answer:
What is the measure? Is it in the books? The measure is in the impact, the measure is in the impact. For example, some authors have more writings than the Shaykh, but they have no impact, and no benefit has resulted from them. So the measure is not in the abundance of writings and books; the measure is in the impact. The Shaykh (may Allah have mercy on him) called to Allah, and his call had an impact. Allah saved generations through him and benefited people through him, and the impact of his call continues to this day, praise be to Allah.
So the measure is not in the abundance of books or writings; the measure is in the benefit and impact that result from a person. That is the intended point, and books are merely means. As for calling him Shaykh al-Islam or the renewer, these are simple matters. Whether he is given these titles or not, it is an easy matter. The important thing is that we do not deny merit to its rightful owner, and we testify to Allah that this scholar was a source of manifest benefit and profound impact, praise be to Allah. As for saying "Shaykh al-Islam" or "the renewer," that is not necessary. Whether we said it or not, it is not necessary. He did not intend this, may Allah have mercy on him. He did not intend to be praised or to be given a title of permanence or the like. He intended the face of Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He). The proof of that is the impact of his call, which indicates the sincerity of the person. The impacts that result from his call are proof of his sincerity. The great impacts that arose from this blessed call are proof of the sincerity of its owner. Yes, yes. We do not evaluate men by the abundance of their speech, or the abundance of their writings, or the abundance of praise. No, we evaluate men by their deeds and their impacts. That is how we evaluate men. Yes.
Some people say that the title "Shaykh al-Islam" should not be used for Shaykh Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab, and that he is not a reformer, because he did not write long, large works; rather, all of his books are small and short. What is your response to this claim?
Answer:
What is the measure? Is it in the books? The measure is in the impact, the measure is in the impact. For example, some authors have more writings than the Shaykh, but they have no impact, and no benefit has resulted from them. So the measure is not in the abundance of writings and books; the measure is in the impact. The Shaykh (may Allah have mercy on him) called to Allah, and his call had an impact. Allah saved generations through him and benefited people through him, and the impact of his call continues to this day, praise be to Allah.
So the measure is not in the abundance of books or writings; the measure is in the benefit and impact that result from a person. That is the intended point, and books are merely means. As for calling him Shaykh al-Islam or the renewer, these are simple matters. Whether he is given these titles or not, it is an easy matter. The important thing is that we do not deny merit to its rightful owner, and we testify to Allah that this scholar was a source of manifest benefit and profound impact, praise be to Allah. As for saying "Shaykh al-Islam" or "the renewer," that is not necessary. Whether we said it or not, it is not necessary. He did not intend this, may Allah have mercy on him. He did not intend to be praised or to be given a title of permanence or the like. He intended the face of Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He). The proof of that is the impact of his call, which indicates the sincerity of the person. The impacts that result from his call are proof of his sincerity. The great impacts that arose from this blessed call are proof of the sincerity of its owner. Yes, yes. We do not evaluate men by the abundance of their speech, or the abundance of their writings, or the abundance of praise. No, we evaluate men by their deeds and their impacts. That is how we evaluate men. Yes.
Source
الفوزان -أشرطة- أسئلة وأجوبة من دروس التوحيد - الفوزان - أسئلة التوحيد - ٠١ — archive.org (1:12:54)
The Arabic text is a machine transcription of the audio recording.