Assalamualaikum akhi how can we respond to the argument that ibn Abd al-Wahhab cannot be trusted because of his heritage? He was born in Najd, a region described by the Prophet SAW as comprising of tribulations and afflictions, and of Tamim descent. He and his descendants are believed to have played a significant role in Saudi rule. The Royal Saudi family itself is of Banu Amr. That tribe was criticized by the Prophet SAW along with Banu Tamim, Banu Asad and Banu Ghatafan in Sahih Muslim 2522a and Jami` at-Tirmidhi 3952. All four are branches of Banu Mudhar. Banu Mudhar and another tribe called Banu Rabi'ah were themselves criticised in Sahih al-Bukhari 3498 and they inhabit the lands that make up Najd.
I don’t need to respond to sheer speculation. Is everyone from these tribes deviant and Najd deviant? If yes, who said that? If not, then provide specific arguments against MIAW.
There are even narrations eating tribulations will come out of Madinah. So let’s be consistent then.
Among the most common arguments are he was a takfeeri terrorist, he sowed the seeds of fanaticism that resulted in wanton bloodshed such as during the Sacking of Karbala, his opponents criticized him for redefining Tawheed and what they perceived as espousing anthropomorphism regarding the Divine Attributes. Of his opponents were his own father and brother. Later critics use(d) them as a basis to discredit the Sheikh.
2) His application of that usul in all subsidiary (فرعي) issues. Is there room for disagreeing with some of his applications?
3) His theoretical understanding of takfeer
4) His application of that theoretical understanding. Is there room for disagreement? Did he engage in chain takfir by making takfeer of those who did not agree wiht his takfeer? Did he choose his phrases properly, or were they too generalized and caused confusion? etc.
5) His political decisions, including when to engage in fighting. Some were understandable, but can we justify ALL of them? etc.
Assalamualaikum akhi how can we respond to the argument that ibn Abd al-Wahhab cannot be trusted because of his heritage? He was born in Najd, a region described by the Prophet SAW as comprising of tribulations and afflictions, and of Tamim descent. He and his descendants are believed to have played a significant role in Saudi rule. The Royal Saudi family itself is of Banu Amr. That tribe was criticized by the Prophet SAW along with Banu Tamim, Banu Asad and Banu Ghatafan in Sahih Muslim 2522a and Jami` at-Tirmidhi 3952. All four are branches of Banu Mudhar. Banu Mudhar and another tribe called Banu Rabi'ah were themselves criticised in Sahih al-Bukhari 3498 and they inhabit the lands that make up Najd.
Wswrwb,
I don’t need to respond to sheer speculation. Is everyone from these tribes deviant and Najd deviant? If yes, who said that? If not, then provide specific arguments against MIAW.
There are even narrations eating tribulations will come out of Madinah. So let’s be consistent then.
Salafis have already neutralized this argument. See here https://salafcenter.org/3156/ for example.
Among the most common arguments are he was a takfeeri terrorist, he sowed the seeds of fanaticism that resulted in wanton bloodshed such as during the Sacking of Karbala, his opponents criticized him for redefining Tawheed and what they perceived as espousing anthropomorphism regarding the Divine Attributes. Of his opponents were his own father and brother. Later critics use(d) them as a basis to discredit the Sheikh.
You might want to check out the Ibadah discourse page that has articles on the notion of Ibadah and you can decide whether MIAW redefined tawheed https://islamicdiscourse.substack.com/p/ibadah-discourse
MIAW's opponents also resorted to takfeer and bloodshed, and it wasn't necessarily defensive (see here https://islamicdiscourse.substack.com/p/dr-cole-m-bunzel-on-muhammad-ibn and here https://islamicdiscourse.substack.com/p/the-antagonism-and-takfir-by-muhammad) So if you don't want to like MIAW personally, then feel free not to, but make sure you try to end up with a balanced opinion and don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Make sure to differentiate between five things when it comes to MIAW:
1) His usuli understanding of Ibadah
2) His application of that usul in all subsidiary (فرعي) issues. Is there room for disagreeing with some of his applications?
3) His theoretical understanding of takfeer
4) His application of that theoretical understanding. Is there room for disagreement? Did he engage in chain takfir by making takfeer of those who did not agree wiht his takfeer? Did he choose his phrases properly, or were they too generalized and caused confusion? etc.
5) His political decisions, including when to engage in fighting. Some were understandable, but can we justify ALL of them? etc.