Some words on the Da'wah of Najd:

@anonymous · Sep 26, 2020

Some words on the DA'WAH OF NAJD (specifically first wave najdism & its supporters) otherwise known as the call of Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhāb al-Najdī [1703-1792] (al-Muwahidūn) who religiously spearheaded the Imāra al-Dir‘iyya (first Emirate of Dir'iyya) alongside the political figurehead Muhammad bin Sa'ūd [1685-1765]:

(This article contains numerous links, resources and videos which deconstruct the najdī view regarding ''ibādah'' & ''shirk'' in relation to their view of istighātha)

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Let it be known that our sharp disagreement with the da'wah of najd has never been personal or on something petty due to our emotions, rather it's simply on account of our irreconcilable differences in principles which result in a different conclusion naturally.

Both sides sharply disagree with each other for the sake of Allāh and they do so sincerely on account of what they believe to be the sound understanding of religion. This has never been about emotions/scoring points or anything personal.

Those who support da'wah najdiyya do so on account of their position (which they sincerely believe) that Ibn Abdul Wahhāb was correct in his THEOLOGY on ideas concerning tawhīd, ibādah & shirk (based upon his reading/mishmash of previous ideas espoused by figures like Ibn Taymiyyah), thus his takfīr was justified and thus he was simply waging jihād against mushrikūn.

Those who oppose najdiyya do so on account of their position (that they sincerely believe) that Ibn Abdul Wahhāb was not upon sound theology concerning matters like tawhīd, ibādah & shirk, and thus his mass takfīr wasn't justified and thus his movement was essentially fighting & killing innocent Muslims.

For example:

https://www.ummah.com/forum/forum/library/islamic-history-persons/12713490-ibn-abd-al-wahhab-s-lack-of-qualifications-and-the-disasters-that-resulted-from-it#post12721487

https://wahhabisrefuted.wordpress.com/2017/06/04/the-original-najdis-takfir-upon-the-people-of-makkah/

https://wahhabisrefuted.wordpress.com/2017/06/04/the-original-wahhabis-attack-and-kill-people-in-markets-in-ramadan/

Obviously the najdiyya find it unimaginable that someone can oppose Ibn Abdul Wahhāb as according to their framework, such Muslims that he considered kuffār truly are mushrikūn and to oppose this, it's tantamount to saying that someone finds worshiping other than Allāh as permissible.

They sincerely believe that Ibn Abdul Wahhāb was waging jihād against mushrikūn and his da'wah revived tawhīd and so to disagree with this is essentially saying we have no issue with shirk. Whilst we sincerely believe that those he waged war against were Muslims who weren't upon shirk.

Both sides believe that worshipping other than Allāh is major shirk. Those who oppose najdiyya also are in agreement upon the third nullifier set forth by Ibn Abdul Wahhāb "that whoever doesn't make takfīr of mushrikūn" himself is a kāfir (as this is normative). However the disagreement is upon what constitutes as "worship" which relates to the discussion of what constitutes as "shirk" and thus naturally who the "mushrik" is. Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhāb in his understanding of the principle (that we all agree on) also includes Muslims (as a result of his theology) that he considers mushrikūn (which under his theological framework makes perfect sense) whilst to us we are simply referring to actual kuffār mushrikūn who actually commit major shirk. We are coming different principles which lead to different conclusions.

Najdiyya consider those who believe actions like directly seeking intercession with the righteous in the graves as worship and thus shirk, whilst we don't see it as worship and thus don't see them people as commuting major shirk. This is what it essentially comes down to.

According to najdīs: simply requesting intercession from those absent, unable, or dead constitutes as worship as they believe it neccessitates you giving the one asked exclusive attributes of Allāh & thus it's major shirk & so the original najdiyya shed blood on account of this! They separated belief/intention with the action and thus considered this action similar to what the mushrikūn of Arabia did.

Whereas in our view, there is no difference in seeking intercession from the pious like the Messenger ﷺ in their life or in the grave, for our request to them isn't with the belief they are Allāh or share any divine qualities for we simply believe they are created slaves who are dependent upon Allāh who can only intercede with His permission and neither do the Muslims ask from them things which are exclusively to Allāh and His Divine attributes! So for example, requesting the Messenger ﷺ even from afar "Yā RasūlAllāh, help me by seeking intercession for me!". (In our view, istighātha is an issued which is differed upon in the realm of jurisprudence and not something which is elevated to the level of usūl of imān whereby one makes calls others as polytheists over such issues). So to conclude: the issue of shirk isn't based upon the differentiation of whether someone is being called who is alive/in grave. Rather the issue is whether he calls upon the people in the grave/absent/far-away/unable to help (or anyone else) as a God and believes the called upon can do something independently of Allāh or intercede without the permission of Allāh. In our view, this is a consistent definition of shirk. Whether someone is alive or in the grave (the soul), we believe that in both states they are always dependent upon Allāh and it isn't the case that we believed the person who was living had any capability to do something from himself in the first place and then he lost such an intrinsic ability as he died, rather we always believe the human is dependent upon Allāh in all states.

https://sunnianswers.wordpress.com/2009/12/27/the-meaning-of-worship/

http://sunniport.com/index.php?attachments/shirk-dr-3-pdf.5645/

https://hornofsatan.wordpress.com/answering-the-four-principles/

https://sunnianswers.wordpress.com/2009/05/16/the-pillar-of-false-shirk-accusations/

https://sunnianswers.wordpress.com/2009/05/14/as-sanuusiyy-on-the-types-of-shirk/

http://www.marifah.info/belief-aqidah/190-asharis-on-true-tawhid-and-shirk

http://www.marifah.info/belief-aqidah/189-tawassul-istighatha-shirk-and-causality

http://www.marifah.info/belief-aqidah/137-assessment-of-the-division-of-tawhid-into-uluhiyya-and-rububiyya

http://marifah.info/articles/Madad-HabibUmar.pdf

http://marifah.info/articles/Mawlid-HabibUmar.pdf

https://hornofsatan.wordpress.com/2012/10/10/answering-the-wahhabi-deceit-surrounding-the-issue-of-dua-2/

https://sunnianswers.wordpress.com/2008/05/25/wahhabi-contentions-1-asharism-and-sufism-were-separate-and-merged-and-2-calling-to-other-than-allah-is-shirk/

Divine Lightning, refutation of MIAW by his brother, Imam Sulayman Ibn Abdul Wahhab.

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLtWrqEAWw-mlN8Uc-4JCF8GiqxRMVR1tu

The so-called repentance of Imam Sulayman Ibn Abdul Wahhab:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1304594967449530368.html

Shaykh Sayf al-Asri critique of the taymiyyan/najdi creed:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFtvkS-c3iw&feature=emb_title

Key moments from the legendary istighatha debate (2016):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rgRuHunf7M&list=PLfuOnTgfohAeANSe7PUPx3PO4n6MIVhAP

Tawhid Essentials Series:

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL4GILDsvK8lMhpiN9jPogE1EJatags3tA

https://wahhabisrefuted.wordpress.com/2015/07/20/imam-taqi-al-din-al-subki-on-tawassul-istighatha-and-tashaffu/

https://hornofsatan.wordpress.com/2014/01/31/traditional-scholars-on-hearing-of-the-dead/

https://sunnianswers.wordpress.com/2008/09/17/ibn-al-qayyim-argues-for-the-validity-of-calling-the-dead/

https://wahhabisrefuted.wordpress.com/2017/09/03/on-the-messenger-of-allah-s-asking-for-our-forgiveness-after-his-passing/

https://wahhabisrefuted.wordpress.com/2016/03/26/various-scholars-quoted-by-qadi-yusuf-al-nabhani-on-istigatha-and-tawassul/

The Najdiyya believe those who regard such actions as permissible as mushrikūn whilst we regard najdiyya as a heretical movement on account of their misunderstanding of theology, takfīr (mass takfīr) and then on top of this, their bloodshed of the Muslims.

Both groups are sincere and hold such positions for the sake of Allāh so it has never been about emotions or personal issues.

Thus, it is actually more productive and healthy for both sides to make clear where they stand with each other rather then beating around the bush.

Indeed, no matter how much we oppose each other on a theological level, we can still always maintain basic decorum in our dialogue to get our ideas across, whilst alongside having the sincere intention of pursuing the truth, rather than simply point-scoring. And Allāh knows best.

502 visits · 1 online

Vote: 0 0

0 Save as PDF