Part 7
Written by: Mawlawi Ahmad Ali
In recent years, particularly during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, followers and adherents of Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab Al-Najdi (may Allah have mercy on him) showed considerable attention to this issue under the title of “al-wala’ wa’l-Baraa” (loyalty and disavowal). They labelled Arab Muslims who supported the Ottoman forces—the armies of the last Islamic Caliphate (the Ottoman Caliphate)—against Al-Saud as apostates under the pretext of “al-Muwaalat” (alliance with disbelievers).
This was because, from the perspective of the Wahhabi movement’s adherents, the Ottomans were considered polytheists. They referred to the Ottoman Caliphate not as an Islamic State or Caliphate but rather as “al-Dawlah al-Wathaniyyah” (the pagan state) or “al-Dawlah al-Kafirah” (the disbelieving state). Numerous fatwas and statements to this effect were issued by the founders, pioneers, and prominent leaders of the Wahhabi movement during that era. A well-known contemporary Wahhabi scholar, Nasser bin Hamad Al-Fahd, has referenced some of these views in his article “The Ottoman State and the Position of Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab’s Da’wah Toward It”.
The majority of the books, articles, and writings authored by Wahhabi scholars regarding the Ottoman Caliphate uniformly declared it as a disbelieving state.
However, contemporary Wahhabi scholars and Mujahideen who adopt a more moderate approach—those who empathize with the broader suffering of the Muslim Ummah, possess political and jihadist insight, and comprehend the disastrous consequences of the Ottoman Caliphate’s fall—have strongly criticized the role of Al-Saud’s cooperation with British colonial powers in its downfall.
The Role of the Ottoman Caliphate
During this period of weakness in the Muslim Ummah, the Ottoman Caliphate—despite its many practical and ideological shortcomings—was the last source of hope and refuge for the Muslim world. The disbelieving world sought to eliminate this final sanctuary, aiming to:
– Fragment the Islamic world into small, divided entities.
– Seize control of natural resources.
– Replace Islamic law with secular, man-made laws.
– Establish weak, tyrannical regimes and dictators who prioritized personal, domestic, and Western interests over the Muslim Ummah’s well-being.
– Deprive the Muslim Ummah of a unified leadership and central authority.
Consequently, the Muslim Ummah was deprived of a unified leadership and central authority.
Supporting Disbelievers Against Muslims: Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab’s Position
Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab (may Allah have mercy on him) declared absolute disbelief in aiding or siding with disbelievers against Muslims (referred to as “Muzaaharah ‘ala al-Muslimeen”). He listed this as one of the nullifiers of faith (Nawaqidh al-Iman). In his treatise on nullifiers of faith, he mentioned this as the eighth nullifier, stating:
(الثامن): مظاهرة المشركين ومعاونتهم على المسلمين، والدليل قوله تعالى: ﴿وَمَنْ يَّتَوَلَّهُمْ مِّنْكُمْ فَاِنَّهٗ مِنْهُمْؕ اِنَّ اللّٰهَ لَا يَهْدِى الْقَوْمَ الظّٰلِمِيْنَ﴾
Translation:
“The eighth nullifier of the faith: Supporting the polytheists and aiding them against the Muslims. The evidence is Allah’s statement:
‘And whoever among you allies with them, then indeed he is one of them. Verily, Allah does not guide the wrongdoing people.’ (Quran 5:51)”
While aiding disbelievers against Muslims is undoubtedly a grave and criminal act, the early scholars did not classify it as an act of disbelief that nullifies faith. They regarded it as a sinful action, not necessarily leading to apostasy, unless it stemmed from a corrupted belief.
If such an act was committed due to other reasons (e.g., political or strategic circumstances) rather than belief-related corruption, the early scholars did not label it as disbelief or apostasy. In this matter, Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab erred. Although some later scholars classified this act as disbelief, their statements were often overly strict or ambiguous. In some cases, even these scholars adopted positions consistent with the unanimous stance of the early scholars and predecessors.
To be continued…
