The Shaykh’s remarks on what was stated in the lecture regarding Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab (may Allah have mercy on him) being a Salafi.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : In the course of Professor ‘Ayd ‘Abassi’s speech, he mentioned that Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab (may Allah have mercy on him) was one of those Salafi callers, and he is indeed so without a doubt. However, reality bears witness that he was a Salafi in creed. Since you have heard some detail in his speech about the Salafi call, and that it calls for following the Book and the Sunnah, each according to his ability, as you heard, and that it warns against taking taqlid (following a scholar without knowing his evidence) as a religion, as long as this is part of the Salafi call’s methodology, we must know that Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab (may Allah have mercy on him) was a Salafi in creed. He holds the primary merit, after Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on them both), in spreading the call of tawhid (the oneness of Allah) in the Islamic world in general, and in the Najdi and Hijazi lands in particular in later times. The merit returns to him after Ibn Taymiyyah. Therefore, perhaps his immersion and effort in calling people to this pure, purified tawhid, cleansed of the filth of shirk (associating partners with Allah) and idolatry in all its details, is what diverted him from engaging in completing the Salafi call, which lies in combating the stagnation of taqlid and madhhab (school of jurisprudence) adherence. This had become, before his time, in his time, and after his time, a religion in itself, such that anyone who left taqlid was branded as deviant and astray, and the like of what the lecturing professor alluded to in his previous speech.
From this perspective, meaning from the fact that he called for tawhid and nothing else related to Islam purified as you heard, he differs from Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him). For this noble Shaykh called for Islam in its entirety, from all its aspects, to be understood in the correct manner, in the detail you heard. For example, he warns against weak hadiths and warns against building legal rulings upon them, and so on, of the details mentioned by the professor. Unlike Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab, who did not have this concern, neither in hadith nor in Salafi fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence). From the madhhab perspective, he was Hanbali, and from the hadith perspective, he was like others. He has no works in fiqh that indicate to us that he was, like Ibn Taymiyyah, Salafi in methodology in understanding religion. Perhaps he had an excuse for this, as we alluded to earlier. Likewise, in hadith, he was, unfortunately, like others, with no knowledge of authentic and weak hadith. One of the proofs indicating this is that he has a printed, circulated treatise among his Najdi followers to this day, titled "Adab al-Mashi ila al-Masjid" (Etiquettes of Walking to the Mosque). In the beginning of this treatise, he cited the hadith known among Salafis in general, except for a few, as weak. He cited the hadith known as weak among most Salafis, which is the hadith of Abu Sa‘id al-Khudri, narrated by Imam Ibn Majah in his Sunan through al-Fudayl ibn Marzuq from ‘Atiyyah al-Sa‘di, from ‘Atiyyah al-A‘fari, and al-Sa‘di as well, but the more famous is from al-A‘fari, from ‘Atiyyah al-A‘fari from Abu Sa‘id al-Khudri, who said: "The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), when he went out from his house to the mosque, would say:" to the end of the hadith. First, he cited it without pointing out its weakness, even though it has two defects; if one of them were alone, it would suffice to weaken the hadith, so how much more so with both defects together? Second, the apparent meaning of this hadith contradicts what he called for in creed and in the sincerity of tawhid and the call to Allah the Exalted, which is tawassul (seeking nearness to Allah through a means) through created beings. He is, like Ibn Taymiyyah and every Salafi who is discerning in his Salafism and his call, a combatant against tawassul to Allah through the servants of Allah the Exalted. In this hadith, there is, on its surface, tawassul to Allah by the right of the supplicants and by the right of this servant who is walking to obey Allah and worship Him. I say this without forgetting that if the hadith were authentic, it could be interpreted (ta'wil) as I mentioned in some of my works. But the point at issue here is that he cited it as one of the etiquettes of the mosque: when the Muslim goes out from his house, he must supplicate with this supplication, and it is a weak hadith.
This indicates that the second Shaykh al-Islam in tawhid, Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab, is not like the first Shaykh al-Islam in that he was Salafi in the entire call, in all aspects of the call and its many fields. This is the first aspect I wanted to point out. And this is, of course, in the category of giving every right its due. We certainly do not like, never, for anyone to disparage Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab as the enemies of the call and the enemies of tawhid do, where they accuse him of everything with which Salafis are accused in all lands of the world. But this does not lead us to exaggerate in giving every person among the bearers of the Salafi call what he does not possess. We must distinguish between Ibn Taymiyyah and Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab and give every right its due. For this reason, I said what I said. Otherwise, Shaykh al-Islam Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab has his station in the call with us after Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him).
From this perspective, meaning from the fact that he called for tawhid and nothing else related to Islam purified as you heard, he differs from Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him). For this noble Shaykh called for Islam in its entirety, from all its aspects, to be understood in the correct manner, in the detail you heard. For example, he warns against weak hadiths and warns against building legal rulings upon them, and so on, of the details mentioned by the professor. Unlike Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab, who did not have this concern, neither in hadith nor in Salafi fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence). From the madhhab perspective, he was Hanbali, and from the hadith perspective, he was like others. He has no works in fiqh that indicate to us that he was, like Ibn Taymiyyah, Salafi in methodology in understanding religion. Perhaps he had an excuse for this, as we alluded to earlier. Likewise, in hadith, he was, unfortunately, like others, with no knowledge of authentic and weak hadith. One of the proofs indicating this is that he has a printed, circulated treatise among his Najdi followers to this day, titled "Adab al-Mashi ila al-Masjid" (Etiquettes of Walking to the Mosque). In the beginning of this treatise, he cited the hadith known among Salafis in general, except for a few, as weak. He cited the hadith known as weak among most Salafis, which is the hadith of Abu Sa‘id al-Khudri, narrated by Imam Ibn Majah in his Sunan through al-Fudayl ibn Marzuq from ‘Atiyyah al-Sa‘di, from ‘Atiyyah al-A‘fari, and al-Sa‘di as well, but the more famous is from al-A‘fari, from ‘Atiyyah al-A‘fari from Abu Sa‘id al-Khudri, who said: "The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), when he went out from his house to the mosque, would say:
O Allah, I ask You by the right of those who supplicate to You and by the right of this walk of mine
اللهم إني أسألك بحق السائلين إليك وبحق ممشاي هذاThis indicates that the second Shaykh al-Islam in tawhid, Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab, is not like the first Shaykh al-Islam in that he was Salafi in the entire call, in all aspects of the call and its many fields. This is the first aspect I wanted to point out. And this is, of course, in the category of giving every right its due. We certainly do not like, never, for anyone to disparage Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab as the enemies of the call and the enemies of tawhid do, where they accuse him of everything with which Salafis are accused in all lands of the world. But this does not lead us to exaggerate in giving every person among the bearers of the Salafi call what he does not possess. We must distinguish between Ibn Taymiyyah and Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab and give every right its due. For this reason, I said what I said. Otherwise, Shaykh al-Islam Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab has his station in the call with us after Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him).