Part two: Part Two: Fanatic Muslims violate the religious freedom in Islam
Section one:
Chapter two: Historic roots of Wahabism :
Saudi Arabia brings back fanaticism of middle ages in our time
General View of emergence and evolution of man-made Muslims’ religions until the invention of Wahhabism in modern times
First: Saudi Arabia and bringing back the worst forms of fanaticism to our era and spreading it in the name of Islam
1- The problem with the Saudi state, which brought back to our times, the worst fanatical school for Muslims of the medieval ages, is represented in the Sunni doctrine, the Hanbalis.
2- Rather, it was the Saudi Wahhabism, by conducting massacres for Shiites in Iraq and Arabian Peninsula, its continued oppression of Shiites in the Gulf, was responsible for the establishment of the system of the Shiite religious state in Iran. For the Islamic Republic in Iran was founded to protect Shiite Arabs, to unify them under its leadership, and to rival the fanatical Sunni Wahhabi Saudi Arabia in leading Muslims, and to dominate and control the Gulf (Arab/Persian) where the Oil is found, and where the majority of Shiite Arabs live, dominated by minority Sunni governments protected by America, deemed by Iran as (The Great Satan).
It is well known that the Shah of Iran was secular, pro west and in alliance with the Americans and the Saudis. He was not concerned with the Saudi persecution of Shiite, which caused the uprising against him to have religious overtones, rather than nationalistic or communist tendencies, even with the intensity of both trends at the end of the Shah’s rule. We can concur that Saudi Arabia is the one responsible for the establishment of this extreme, Shiite theocracy in Iran, which in turn, persecutes the Arab and Sunni minorities in southern Iran.
3- With the spread of Wahhabism in Egypt, many Sunni Wahhabi societies were founded, through agents of Abdul Aziz Al Saud, founder of the current Saudi state, some of which were, Ansar A-ssuna (Helpers or Supporters of Sunni), and (A-shuban Al-Muslimoon..Muslim Youth Society). A young man from the latter organization (Hasan Al Banna) was chosen to head a new organization, politico-military, to overthrow regimes inside Egypt and out, which was (Al-Ikhwan Al Muslimoon...Muslim Brotherhood), founded in 1928. Within 20 years, and right before the assassination of Hasan Al-Banna in 1948, The Muslim Brotherhood had 50 thousand branches throughout Egypt, in addition to an international organization and a secret military army for assassinations. The Brotherhood was successful in establishing branches in other Arab and Muslim countries especially in India. Due to their influence, an uprising took place in Yemen in 1948 that ended in the assassination of its leader, which in turn, alerted the Egyptian government to the dangers of the Muslim Brotherhood, hence, a campaign against them that ended with the assassination of Hasan Al Banna. But the Egyptian Government did not realize that before his assassination, Hasan Al Banna had already penetrated the Egyptian Army, and the response from the Muslim Brotherhood, came through the (Free Officers) organization, which carried out a coup in 1952, an organization most of its officers were members of the Muslim brotherhood, or were influenced by them, except two who had communist affiliations, Yousuf Siddiq and Khalid Muhye Eddine. The Brotherhood and Abdu Nasser had their differences, and after the coup was met with enormous support from the Egyptian populace, transforming it into a revolution, the Brotherhood tried and failed in assassinating Abdu Nasser, who in turn, took revenge by incarcerating and torturing them, causing many of them to flee to Saudi Arabia, their spiritual homeland.
Then Sadat came, who allied himself with the Brotherhood, so they returned to Egypt. Sadat granted them control over Media, Education, Al Azher, Mosques and Egyptian religious affairs. And as usual, they took advantage of the chance given them, and started brainwashing people and penetrated the army and the police. When Sadat signed the peace treaty with Israel, they differed with him and assassinated him.
Then Hosni Mubarak came along and started his rule with the Emergency Act of 1981. In order for him to maintain his regime, he needed the Brotherhood to frighten the West and America with, indirectly hinting that they were a worse alternative, and that no matter how he behaved, he was the lesser evil. Consequently, he was the greatest defender of the culture of extremism; he even tried to outdo the Muslim Brotherhood in clinging to it.
For that reason, he oppresses and persecutes the Quranists who wage a war of ideas against Wahhabism and the Muslim Brotherhood, from within Islam, to show the contradiction between Islam and Wahhabism. If Hosni Mubarak were serious in combating extremism and terrorism, he would have supported and protected the Quranists and adopted their religious message which connects Islam with religious freedom, human rights, peace, justice and democracy, but since their approach is against oppression and corruption, it constitutes a threat to Mubarak regime, and deprives him of pretext for holding on to power, if they were to obliterate the Wahhabi culture.
4- The Saudis were successful, starting with their first state, in spreading Wahhabism in India, by taking advantage of divisions and sectarian conflicts between Muslims and Hindus on the one side, and between Indians as a whole and the British colonizers, an environment conducive to spreading Wahhabi extremism, in the name of Jihad against the (Infidel), local and foreign. Thereby, Saudi Wahhabism became responsible for the breakup of India, and the creation of Pakistan, one of the worst mistakes of the twentieth century, a consequence of a greater mistake, which was the creation of the Saudi state itself between 1902 and 1932. Saudi Wahhabism, gradually dominated the newly formed state, and through the influence of the Islamic university in Islamabad, Wahhabi extremism took hold.
5- Political and military turmoil in Afghanistan, led to Soviet dominance, prompting the Wahhabis to erupt in Jihad, aided by America, in the context of the cold war against the Soviets, producing at the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan, and specifically in Peshawar, hundreds of thousands of young orphans, sponsored by Wahhabi organizations, taught extremism in its schools, and at the Islamic university in Islamabad and elsewhere. Those (students) were later on known as Taliban; they are now the scourge of Afghanistan, practicing Wahhabism the same fashion it was practiced by the first Saudi State in (1745-1818).
6- On another level, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Al Qaeda was formed to combat Jews and Christians, headed by Bin Laden the Saudi, and Aymen Az-Zawaahri the Egyptian, protégé of the Muslim Brotherhood. Eventually, Taliban and Al Qaeda collaborated in an intellectual and military offensive against the West, America and the civilized world.
7- Oil was what made America an ally of Saudi Arabia, opening its doors to Wahhabi missionaries to brain wash American Muslims, to form a fifth column working against America from within, the same thing in Europe. With American help, Wahhabism penetrated most of Muslim lands, and it appeared that extremists were the majority, and that extremism and terrorism was the backbone of Islam. All this is pure incorrect, for despite all this commotion, the extremists are the minutest of a minority of Muslims, Islam has nothing to do with the crimes of Muslims, because they were founded upon man-made religions fabricated by some to fit their medieval age culture, that culture contradictory to Islam. All there is to it, Saudi Arabia, with the help of America and the West, was able to ride the wave , and present itself as representative of Islam, while the latter diagonally contradicts it.
Second: This requires a clarification
1- Muslims, since the Abbasid era and up till now, were divided into many sects, Sunni, Shiite, Sufi and a mixture of Sunni and Sufi. The majority of them number wise are Sunni Sufi, meaning they follow Sufism in practical creed, like venerating living saints, and hallowing Tombs, and they follow Sunnah in social legislation, conforming to moderation and peace. Those represent the silent majority of Muslims; they number in excess of a billion. In the Near and Middle East, in Indonesia, in Malaysia and in Central Asia, it is those masses that are sought after for dominance by both, the extremist Sunni and extremist Shiite. Next in numbers are the Sunni, who are more fanatical, they fall under four principal branches, chronologically are: Hanafis, Malkis, Shaf’ee and Hanbali.
2- Hanbalis are the strictest among Sunnis and the most fanatical. They had a bloody history in the medieval ages, of fanaticism and of street and mob control, during the second Abbasid period, especially when joined by the Abbasid caliph, Al- Mutawakkil who, to appease them, persecuted Christians, Jews, and other Muslims like Shiites and Sufis. Their influence remained intact, chasing thinkers and scholars , like At-Tabari, a moderate Sunni and most prominent scholar of his time, who when he differed with them, at the ripe age of 80, was besieged inside his home, demolishing his house atop him, then preventing his burial.
3- After their influence faded in the Abbasid period, they soon reappeared during the Memluk’s, led by Ibn Taymiyyah and his school who revived the Hanbali thought, soon to be suppressed by the Memluks who were concerned about their political stability, so they sided with the docile Sufis, supportive of their state, against this harsh strict ideology.
4- Then Mohammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab came on the scene during the Ottoman reign, advocating even a stricter form of Hanbali sect, thereby Wahhabism was born more extreme than the original Hanbalis of Iraq in the middle ages, since Iraq originally was a tolerant pluralistic environment, with many religions, sects and rich varying culture. Whereas Wahhabism was born in( Nejd), a harsh desolate desert, where prejudice and resorting to arms to force one’s personal point of view and to shedding blood for the most trivial reasons, was the nor. The need for a religious justification whereby, pillage, plunder, bloodletting, killing, fighting, ravishing of womenfolk, would become a religious duty, hence the (Wahhabi Jihad) by which the ambitions and aspirations of the Saudi family of founding a dynasty would be fulfilled.…so Mohammad Ibn Saud and Mohammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab became allies, and the First Saudi State was declared in 1745 under the banner of (Blood and Pillage). It carried out many massacres against moderate Sunni Muslims, Shiites, Sufis, in the Peninsula, Iraq, Syria and Jordan, confronted the Ottomans, occupied Al-Hejaz, and suspended or prevented performing Al-Hajj obligation, forcing the Ottomans to seek the assistance of Mohammad Ali, Governor of Egypt, who succeeded in annihilating the first Saudi State in 1818, but Wahhabism remained dormant with no meaningful intellectual confrontation, so the Second Saudi State came to being, to end up falling because of inter family dissension.
5- Then Abdul Aziz Al Saud ( Ibn Saud) reestablished the current state (1902-1932). With oil, Saudi influence in Egypt and American assistance, Wahhabism spread throughout the Muslim world and the West, through the Muslim Brotherhood and their public and secret organizations, presenting itself as true Islam, whereby Islam became accused of fanaticism, extremism and terrorism.
6- In spite of all that, Wahhabis remain a minority of few millions compared to over a billion of silent Muslims; Sunnis, Shiites and Sufis. But this Wahhabi minority (of Saudis and Muslim Brotherhood and all their secret and public organizations), is very active, rich and influential, and can exercise enough clout to impose its brand of Wahhabi religion in mosques, in media, in cultural mediums, in lands where it exercises measurable influence, like Egypt, Gulf states, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Algeria, Nigeria, Jordan, Sudan and the West, the European and the American branches.
7- For all these reasons, some chose to forget or to ignore the positive aspects in Muslims’ history, which leads us to some important historical details.
Third: The rise of man-made religions, Sunni being the most prominent, as an expression of dominance and oppression
1- After the departure of prophet Mohammad (PBUH), his companions utilized Islam in capturing and occupying other lands that committed no aggression against Muslims. To justify such injustices, they fabricated untruths; they labeled as Sunnah, and considered it to be divinely inspired, thereby, the Sunni religion was established, with alleged revelation attributed to the prophet (PBUH) under the name: (Prophetic Hadith), which they claimed, sprang out of the revelation to the prophet. They went a step further by inventing another form of divine narration; they called it (Divine Hadith). Within the context of this new man- made religion, those conquering aggressor companions, rebuked by God Almighty in : (And fight in the way of Allah with those who fight with you, and do not exceed the Alimits, surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits)( 2- 190)
2- Became infallible mini-gods, ( the companions of the Prophet Mohamed ),although they fought each other in many vicious wars, yet this Sunni religion prohibits deliberating on or discussing this conflict except in light of praises and hallowing of those fighting gods. They fabricated Hadiths making it unlawful to probe or discuss their conduct, stressing their infallibility. By doing so, they negated hundreds of Quranic verses which spoke of the hypocrite companions and their helpers during the Prophet’s time, and thus became impossible in the Sunni religion, to subject those companions’ history to Quranic scrutiny, because they were gods above the scope of the rest of mankind, due to fabricated narrations attributed to revelation.
3- In contrast to the Authority and its man-made Sunni religion, the strongest opposition party invented the religion of Shiite, armed with the same allegations of divine revelation and Hadiths. It was able to establish, sporadically, states in Egypt, North Africa, Persia and other locations, succeeded in consolidating and setting up its Shiite doctrine in those areas, and in persecuting its Sunni opponents. Then the Sufi religion came about without any political background, and managed to bring back old beliefs under Islamic symbols, without friction, violence or dominance over others. Details are numerous, enough to give these few examples:
Fourth: Recording the tradition of Muslim man-made religions, starting with the first Abbasid Period (132-232 Hijri) corresponding to (750-847 C. E.).
1- Because of its long duration, it became customary to divide the Abbasid period into two segments, the first Abbasid period lasting from (132-232 Hijri, 750-847 C.E.), and the second from (232-685 Hijri, 847-1258 C.E.).
2- During the first Abbasid period, the Sunni jurisprudence schools of jurisprudence appeared, attributed to major scholars of Sunni sect, like Abu Hanifa, (died in 150 H)., Malik,( died in 179 H.), Al-uzaa’i, (died in 181 H.), A-Shaaf’i (died in 204), and Ibn Hanbal. In general, the Abbasid era witnessed the recording of man-made Muslim religions, be it Sunni, Shiite or Sufi, amidst a wide open cultural atmosphere congruent to the scientific movement and openness to Greek and Oriental cultures. During the first Abbasid period, the Muslims were subjected to the Greek Culture as well as to the philosophies of the Orient. They translated that cultural wealth to Arabic, contributing to the re-emergence of old philosophical schools in Antioch, Raha, Gendi-sapoor and Harran. Some of those educated intellectuals were influenced by the Greek heritage, most prominent of them were Al-Mu’tazela, who glorified and depended on the intellect, or reason , in reading and comprehending the Quran, and because of their infatuation with ,intellect, they attributed their ideas and reasoning to themselves, rather than to divine revelation, like the Sunni, Shiite and Sufi did, and that is why the Mu”tazela remained within the parameter of Islam, no matter how erroneous they were in their interpretations, unlike the Sunni, Shiite or Sufi, who invented new man-made religions with false, supposedly, divine revelations .
3- The Mu’tazela earned the favors and admiration of Caliph Al-Me’moon (198-218 H…813-833 C.E.), being a learned man himself, their influence increased during his reign. During that time, the controversy over the nature of the Quran erupted, whether it was created or eternal; the Mu’tazela claimed it was created, but the conservative Sunni scholars insisted it was eternal. Caliph Al-Me’moon and later on Al-Mu’tasim fanatically supported the Mu’tazela, persecuting the leader of Sunni Scholars Ahmad Ibn Hanbal and his followers, thereby establishing the Hanbali sect to include all conservative scholars opponent to intellectual liberalism and openness to the West and to the Greek culture. With the leadership of Hanbalis, the Sunni legal jurists, during the first Abbasid period (132-232), stood up against the philosophers, against the Mu’tazela and against Greek culture, considering it to be disbelief and blasphemy. The Abbasid authority sided with the Mu’tazela, during the Me’moon’s, the Mu’tesim’s and Al-Waathiq’s reign, the last one, killed with his own hands, the leader of Sunnis, Ahmad Bin Nasr Al-Khuza’i. Al-Waathiq ruled from ((842-847 C.E.). The Mu’tazela’s influence lasted until Al-Mutawakkil reign, at which time, the second Abbasid period started, and lasted from (232-658 H)…and (847-1258 C.E.)
Fifth: Caliph Al Mutawakkil (232-247 H.) The strict Hanbali fanaticism period, and recognizing it as religion
1- Al Mutawakkil took over the helm, he was upset with the Mu’tazela and their leader Ibn Az-Zayyat, and so he killed him, and sided with the strict Hanbali Sunnis, became fanatic about them, sent their advocates throughout the land promoting Sunni Hanbalism under the guise of (helping and supporting Sunnah). Al Mutawakkil was the worst Abbasid caliph when it came to fanaticism. He had the same Hanbali mentality. He razed Al Hussein’s grave at Karbala’, persecuted Shiite, forced Christians and Jews to wear a specific attire to degrade them, got rid of Arabs and Persians from the military, and replaced them with Turks, allowing them to toy with the Caliphate and the Caliphs during the zenith of their influence (232-334).
2- During that period, the Hanbali scholars along with the mob dominated the streets. They invented the Hadith (Whosoever amongst you witnesses a reprehensible thing or act, let him change it physically….), which became and still is the code for practical fanaticism until now. With this fabricated Hadith, the Hanbalis persecuted Mu’tazela and exterminated them, and repressed all their opponents even if they were prominent Sunni Scholars.
3- During those times, some of the most shining examples of Mu’tazela figures lived and flourished. Al Jahiz (died 255 H), Abu Al Huzeil al-Allaf (died 235), Ibrahim Bin Yasaar An-Nazzaam (died 231) and Al- Jebaa’i (died 303).All of them were expected to have their schools of thought and their followers, but the Hanbali persecution extinguished that trend, and deprived those scholars of having their students to follow suit, better yet, one of the Mu’tazela protégé turned against them, going with the flow of the times, to be deemed an Imam, who was Abu Hasan Al-Ash‘ri(died246H).
4- When Sufism became popular, its leadership was subjected to persecution. Al Mutawakkil persecuted the first pioneers of Sufism in what is known as Semnoon disturbance, when he arrested all of Sufi Imams. Later on , the Abbasid authorities, arrested Al-Hallaj in 301 H. and executed him in 309.H
5- At the same time, Sunni Imams multiplied, fabricating false Hadiths attributing them to God Almighty and to His messenger. Their books flowed setting the framework for Sunni religion, claiming that what was being written, was divine revelation, attributed to prophet Mohammad (PBUH), more than 2 centuries after his demise. That what was committed by Ibn Hanbal (d.241 H), Al Bukhari(d. 256), Muslim(d.261), Abu Dawood(d.275), At-Termezi(d.278), An-Nesaa’i(d.303) and Ibn Maja(d.275). They all became, in succeeding times and until now, infallible gods in the Sunni religion, not to be mentioned or referred to except with praises and laudations, and whoever argues or contends with them, is readily accused of blasphemy and disbelief in the Sunni religion or refuting Sunnah.
Sixth: The political struggle between Sunnis and Shiites and the development of moderate Sunni Sufism
1- In the second Abbasid period, The Shiite religion completed its different branches; sacred books sacred Hadiths, its rituals and its Imams. The Ishmaelite branch managed to establish stable, well grounded states, most prominent was the Fatimids, which lasted for more than 2 centuries, between (909-1127), and spread over North Africa, Egypt, Syria and parts of Iraq, it almost put an end to the Abbasid Dynasty. It founded Cairo and Al-Azher, its architectural achievements still standing …In addition; Shiites were able to establish de-centralized states, like the Zunj in southern Iraq, and Al Qarameta, who expanded in Iraq and Syria, massacring its inhabitants. The principal followers of Al Qarameta were none but the forefathers of those Bedouins of Nejd, who erected the current Saudi state. On the periphery of Sunni Shiite conflict, Sufism was born as a legitimate offspring of Shiite, which led to the persecution of the first pioneers of Sufism by the Sunni Abbasids, but Sufism soon enough parted ways with Shiite, lessened its political rhetoric and mastered the art of adulating those in power at the end of the second Abbasid period, thereby avoiding persecution, then to control and dominate during the Memluk period, and after the strict Hanbalis were the ones who persecuted Sufis under the Abbasid second period, it was the turn of Sufis to dish out the same as reflected in the history of Ibn Taymiyyah.
We pause at some important junctions:
2- The Abbasid Caliphs became weak, controlled by the Buwayyhid (334-447 H), who had Shiite leanings, so they humiliated the Sunni Caliphs. Followed by the Seljuk (329-552H), who were fanatic Sunnis, they returned the Hanbali influence, and persecuted European pilgrims on their way to Jerusalem, encouraging thereby European fanatics to call for the Crusades, establishing fiefdoms and miniature kingdoms in Syria, Iraq and Asia Minor, abolishing the Seljuk states in those areas. The Abbasid caliphate, due to its weakness and disintegration, was entirely absent from facing the Crusades onslaught, leaving the task to successive independent Sunni mini states within the framework of the Abbasid Caliphate.like the Zenkids, then the Ayyubids, and finally the Memluk.
3- During the Buwayyhid’s (334-447 H), who were resentful of Sunni religion, no new Sunni Imams appeared who surpassed their teachers, Al Bukhari, Muslim and others, on the contrary, the Fatimid Shiite in North Africa summoned the courage to invade Egypt in 358 H/969 C. E. and transforming it to become the center of Shiite missionary work, in the name of the Fatimid Caliphate, who founded Cairo and built Al Azher in 972 C.E. The Fatimid did not encounter many problems in spreading their brand of Shiite, for the Buwayyhid were in control in Baghdad, and they did not object to that. This way, the Sunni religion was confined between the Buwayyhid in Baghdad and the Fatimid in Egypt, Syria and parts of Iraq itself. The Sufi religion, benefited from the plight of the Sunnis and the supremacy of the Shiite, and started to spread on the theoretical and philosophical levels as well as among the population.
4- The tide swung in favor of the Sunnis with the arrival of the Seljuk Turks, who favored, and were fanatics about Sunni religion. But through the duration of their reign (329-552 H), Sufism was already established and well nourished, so it was impossible to eradicate it, and the next best thing was to come to terms with and contain it.
5- During this period, many families and dynasties rose to power, like the Zenkid, the Ayyubid. Each had its internal struggle, coupled with the struggle against the Crusades and the many alliances among and against each others, and utter weakness of the Abbasid Caliphate, the soil was tilled for Sufism to flourish, since itself, was a man–made religion with no political aspirations, except patronizing any existing regime. That is how moderate Sufism was born, and that is why Imams of moderate Sufism attacked and criticized plain and orthodox Sufism, claiming that such type of Sufism is meant only for the private elite, whereas the moderate form is meant for the masses, cutting off Hanbalis from objecting their doctrine. First to set its fundamentals and principles was Al Qusheiri (376-465), in his famous treatise defending Sufism and attacking the Sufi mob, to pull the rug from under the strict Hanbalis, and to make the case for moderate Sufism by adopting some of Sunni religion principles. Followed by Abu Hamid Al Ghazali (Died 505 H), the most prominent jurist and the most prominent Sufi of the Sunni Seljuk Abbasid Era, thereby establishing Sufism as a recognized form of man-made religion, and narrowing down the domain of extreme Sufism. That was the route followed by Sunni sheikhs after Al Ghazali, and it was those Sheiks who celebrated Al Ghazali after his death, giving him the title (Hujjetul Islam-Authority of, Evidence of, Argument of and for Islam), as if the prophet (PBUH), left Islam without the Quran or without an evidence or a reference for 5 centuries until Al Ghazali came along. With Al Ghazal in the era of Abbasid Seljuk, the birth of the new religion of Sunni Sufism was finalized, and this newly Sunni-Sufi derived religion needed political clout to protect it against Shiite propaganda exemplified by Al-Feddaweyya or Al-Bateneyya (Secretive Assassins) who preceded others in brain washing techniques to the extent that a follower of theirs would commit suicide on mere orders from his leader. This (Knowledge) dissipated by Al Qusheiri and Al Ghazali needed a strong authoritative leader to adopt, protect and propagate, ( Sunni Sufism), against the political aspirations of Shiite religion and its followers, that was the unknown role of Saladin the Ayyubid.
Seventh:
Saladin the Ayybid and establishment of Sufi Sunni religion
1- In the beginning, Saladin came at the head of an army sent by Sultan Nour Eddine Zenki to save Fatimid Egypt from falling in the hands of the Crusaders, for the Fatimid Caliph, Al Adid, was at the mercy of two powerful feuding viziers, Sha-wer and Dhergham, both enlisting the help of the two biggest feuding powers, the Crusades and the Zenkid of Aleppo and Damascus, which was leading Jihad in the name of the weak Sunni Abbasid Caliphate in Baghdad. After establishing himself and his power in Egypt, Saladin abolished the Fatimid Caliphate, and returned Damascus and Egypt to the spiritual influence and nominal sovereignty of the Abbasid in 1171 C.E. He founded the Ayyubid state over Egypt, Syria, parts of Iraq and Yemen. The Ayyubid dynasty remained in power until 1250 C.E., when they were inherited by the Memluk, who themselves were dethroned by the Ottomans in 1517.
2- We pause here with the unknown role of the Triumphant Sultan Saladin the Ayyubid, who continued Jihad against the Crusaders, regaining back Jerusalem and most of what they had captured. He was famous for being kind and tolerant with his Crusaders enemies in his victorious wars against them. He would set prisoners free by the thousands, giving them the chance to re-enter another war against him, at the same time, never showing any tolerance toward Shiites or extreme Sufis. This obscure contradiction in Saladin’s personality is explained by his intellectual war against Shiites. He was a forerunner in using intellectual war against ideological state built around a specific doctrine. It was not enough to vanquish them militarily and politically, but to confront them ideologically too, with another ideology that inter-relate and oppose it at the same time. Strange thing that none who came after Saladin duplicated him. Governor Mohammad Ali Pasha, who abolished the first Saudi state in 1818, was content with doing just that. He left the Wahhabi doctrine re-grow and re-establish the second and the current third Saudi state. Nasser of Egypt, who decimated the Muslim Brotherhood, a Wahhabi Saudi fabrication, was content to lock them up in jails, leaving Wahhabi thought free unchallenged, which helped them a great deal upon returning to Egypt during Sadat reign, to manipulate, in a short time, the religious mentality and direct it accordingly to their benefit. Those military leaders, from Mohammad Ali, to Nasser, to the American Generals in our times, none of them matched Saladin’s ingenuity although he was a military figure like them.
Going back a capital, little….
After the Fatimid commander, Jawher the Sicilian, captured Egypt; He built a new Cairo, to be the capital of Shiite religion, and the center of the Shiite Fatimid Caliphate, to rival the Sunni Abbasid Caliphate in Baghdad. He also built Al Azher to be the seat of Shiite thought in combating Sunni religion. For Saladin, It was not enough to dismantle the Fatimid Caliphate and to abolish it, returning Egypt to the Abbasid sovereignty, even though nominal, he went further by combating the Shiite ideology, for he realized, one needs another ideology to fight an existing one. So he not only closed down Al Azher, but founded a replacement school, (Khanqah Sa’eed A-Su’ada), to re-spread the Sunni religion, over toned with the new emerging Sufi religion, brought over Sufi Sunnis, assigned them religious characters and rituals to attract the Egyptians and keep them away from Shiite religion. This was not because of love lost for Sufism, for Saladin murdered Shehab Eddine Essehrawerdi, philosopher of Illumination, and leader of extreme Sufism in 587 H. Saladin’s objective was to establish the principles of this new Sufi Sunni religion, where there was no place for either, extreme Sufis or extreme Sunni Hanbalis at the same time.
3- After Saladin, the implementation of the new Sufi Sunni religion was accomplished by combining the concept of (TRUTH and SHAREE”A), meaning to stress the existence of (TRUTH) or the Sufi doctrine, known only to those saints and men of God who possess divine knowledge, and not permitted for others to delve into or object to such knowledge, at the same time, stressing the importance of (Sharee’a) and adhering to it, clinging to the four jurisprudence schools, in subsidiary matters and in rituals. The Sunnis were tolerant in sanctifying moderate Sufi Sheikhs, as much as the Sufis were, regarding the four Imams of the major schools of Sunnah, who all of a sudden started to have miracles and feats, usually reserved for Sufis. To the list of the sanctified, Ahl al Beit (Descendents of Prophet Mohammad through his daughter Fatima) were added, along with all of the companions, contrary to what Shiite believe, that Abu Bekr, Omar and Ossmaan are all blasphemous, and the rest of companions despised by Shiite.
Eighth: Sunni Sufi Dominance during the Memluk period (648-921 H…1250-1517 C.E)
1- Memluk era was famous for actually implementing the Sunni Sufi religion. Venerating and sanctifying graves; genuine, symbolic or fake became widespread. Cairo’s graveyard contained sacred tombs of bygone Sufi Imams, like Ibn Al Farid and Z noon, the Egyptian. As well as Sunni Imams like A-Shaaf’i and A-layyth Bin Sa’d, also of Shiite Imams and from Ahl Al Beit, like Sayyeda Nafeesa and Ali Zein El Abedeen, in addition to many companions who had never seen Egypt, yet they built tombs to commemorate them. Those tombs became a prosperous market for those who worshiped it, led by Sunni Sheikhs, Judges of the four jurisprudence schools along with prominent Sufis and the Sultan of Memluk and his elders.
During the Memluk period, the new Sunni Sufi religion combined the contradictions of both in favor of Sufism which overcame the hearts of the populace, enjoying acceptance by both, the governing and the governed. It also, as a new religion, combined what was common to everyone, of sanctifying human beings, like Imams, Companions, Ahl Al Beit and previous Sufi saints, with no criticism or insults to any like the Shiite would do. Both participated in the practice of pilgrimage to the Idol in Al Medina (Prophet’s Mosque), and in sanctifying the building at Mecca and the Black Stone. In this Sunni Sufi religion, sanctification was not restricted to Al Kaaba (The Sacred House in Mecca) in contradiction to Islam; it surpassed it to sanctifying all tombs erected over the corpses or the memories of Sufi saints and the rest of companions, Imams. Jurists and Judges, representative of Sunni religion. The elders of the Memluk Empire were leaders of festivities and carnivals and pioneers in seeking blessings of Sufi saints, dead or alive. At the same time, those extreme Sufis who openly espoused the original doctrine of Sufism,(Incarnation and Unification, and Pantheism),like Al-Hallaj, their fate was also trials and accusations of apostasy and possibly murder, if they did not fake being possessed, sometimes they were forgiven under the guise of being mentally impaired. On the other hand, Sunni extremism was not allowed, which explains Ibn Taymiyyah’s ordeal.
Ninth: Ibn Taymiyyah(died in 728 H, 1327 C.E. ), the Hanbali’s persecution in the Memluk period
1-In 705 H, in Damascus, Ibn Taymiyyah’s trial started when he objected to Ibn Arabi’s book (Al-Fusoos), who openly advocated the Sufi doctrine of (Unity of existence), or there is no difference between Allah and the universe. The actual ruler then was Sultan Byberss the Jashnkeer, who usurped the throne from the lawful ruler, Sultan Mohammad Bin Qalawoon. Ibn Taymiyyah, being the greatest jurist of his time, supported Ibn Qalawoon, the lawful sultan, earning Byberss’s wrath, who in turn sided with the Sufis.
2- Another trial for Ibn Taymiyyah was held in Egypt, where he was incarcerated at the citadel’s cellar, waiting for a verdict for his execution. His trial revolved around some jurisprudence issues, because his opponents prevented debating him over Ibn Arabi’s ideas on Sufi issues, for fear of degradation, yet they hoped to kill him for those minor jurisprudence differences. While in prison, they tried to have him recognize and acknowledge their doctrine in return for his release, which he refused. At long last, they set him free, expelling him to Alexandria, hoping that his enemies there would get rid of him, but his followers multiplied, and Byberss the Jashnkeer was forced to release him.
3-A popular uprising in Egypt, forced the Jashnkeer to abdicate, after the Sufis and the soldiers abandoned him, so he fled, and the lawful Sultan Mohammad Bin Qalawoon, friend of Ibn Taymiyyah, was brought back to power. He set imprisoned Ibn Taymiyyah free, treated him well and asked him to be his advisor. Soon enough, the Sufis offered their loyalty to the returned Sultan, they prepared and arranged a monumental welcoming festivity to the returning Sultan, An-Naser Mohammad, whom they abandoned not long before, but regained favors with, atoning for their conduct. Sultan An-Naser Mohammad Bin Qalawoon soon acquiesced to the Sufis’ plotting, for he had his own worries about Ibn Taymiyyah strong personality, his popularity, the vast number of supporters, his severity in promoting what is commendable and forbidding what is detested and his actual physical participation in combat (Jihad). He was afraid of any political ambitions on the part of Ibn Taymiyyah, besides, he learnt a great deal from being deposed twice before and wanted to preserve his third attempt at governing without worrying about opposition or criticism, even probable. So he sided with the Sufis, sacrificing his old friend Ibn Taymiyyah, building for the Sufis, the largest khanqah (A Sufi Institution), named Khanqah Seryaaqus, which he inaugurated in an big ceremony in 725 H. In the year after, he ordered his old friend arrested for a previous fatwa (religious opinion), banning and rendering unlawful, graves visitations. This last arrest carried with it all the hatred, animosity and jealousy of the Sufis. Yet, Ibn Taymiyyah was happy and pleased with this incarceration, because it afforded him time to write and worship. But his Sufi enemies prevented him from writing, which affected him psychologically, so he tied two years later in 728 H.-1327 C.E.
Tenth: The effect of persecution on Ibn Taymiyyah’s severity in decreeing death and apostasy
1- This persecution reflected itself in his jurisprudence and fatwas; he was more severe in declaring his opponents as apostates, more daring in decreeing their killing. A fast review of his Fatwas will show us how swift he was in distributing death sentences to all who differ with him, even from outside Sufi circles. An innovator is to be killed, and how easy it is to accuse any other group of being innovators, and if we knew how varied Muslims were in their approach to religion, we conclude that this Fatwa, were it to be carried out, it will affect every Muslim and none would be left. He also issues fatwa in killing a Muslim who loudly utters his intention to pray, even though he, the Muslim, might believe that he is required to do so by Almighty Allah. He also decrees death on the one who does not pray on time, or delays Fajr prayer until after sunrise, or delays noon and afternoon prayers until after sunset. He also decrees death to the one who attends a mosque but does not participate in communal prayers. In all of above examples, Ibn Taymiyyah requires or demands that it be conditional on their repentance, if not, then implementation.
More dangerous than all of that, is his decree to kill any Muslim who he deems a hypocrite, who conceals his disbelief and profess Islam.
A leave that flings the doors wide open for anyone to kill anyone under the guise that they were hypocrites, without even a chance for repentance. Ibn Taymiyyah says: (As for the one who professes Islam and conceals disbelief, the hypocrite labeled by jurists as Zindeeq, most of said jurists decree his death even if he repented)
2- It was possible for those extreme bloody Fatwas by Ibn Taymiyyah to remain buried deep within the withering writings of old tradition without concern or regard by anyone, not to be mentioned or referred to, but thanks to the Saudi state, its Wahhabi religion, who brought it to life through the bloody implementation. For Sheikh Mohammad bin Abdul Wahhab, at the end of Ottoman Era, adopted the Hanbali religion, in its Ibn Taymiyyah format, struck an alliance with Ibn Saud, and started those massacres in applying this Sunni, Hanbali, Taymiyyah and Wahhabi religion, and with that we enter the Ottoman period.
Eleventh: The dominance of the Sunni Sufi religion in the Ottoman Era
1-The Sunni Sufi religion became more dominant and prominent during the Ottoman reign, setting it back worse than its predecessor, the Memluk period. At the time when Europe was rising exploring the world, the Masters of Sufism, like Sheikh Abdul Wahhab A-Sha’raani was working hard at spreading fables and lies of miracles in boldness permitted only in such atmosphere, for it was not allowed to object, criticize or discuss such miracles based on social principles set and established by Sufism. It made it possible for A-Sha’raani to write volumes upon volumes filled with his achievements, miracles and falsehoods, and how some of his miracles were to compromise time and place, and to travel around the world, by land, by sea and above the clouds, all in a blink of an eye. In his writings, he sets the foundations for patronizing those in power, for submitting to those Sheikhs, and not to confront or object to whatever they say at all. A-Sha’raani witnessed both, the Memluk period and the fall of Egypt under the Ottoman sway. His “intellectual” output remained domineering, justifying backwardness and setting the framework for Sunni Sufism and its nonsense, while Europe advanced, exploring the new world and colonizing the old one, until the Egyptians were awakened by Napoleon’s cannons bombarding Al Azher. That is when the Sheikh ran to confront the French cannons by reading two volumes of sacred Sunni Sufi scriptures, Al- Bukhari (for Sunnah) and Dala’l Al-Kheirat (for Sufism). It was fortunate for Al-Jeberti to be around chronicling that Era, because we gather from his writings that Sunni Sufism remained in charge and in control, although its heavy duty cannons, Al-Bukhari and Dala’l Al Kheirat, failed to stand up to Napoleon.
2-Social and religious lives during the Ottoman period, lay dormant, not vibrant except around sacred tombs and around living Sufi Sheikhs. The Ottoman period centered on seeking blessings from living saints, sanctifying the graves of the dead among them, conducting festivities around them, according to Sunni Sufism, whose stars were none but the scholars, jurists and Sheikhs of Sufism, and where festivities and tombs, used to and still does, join between signs of polytheism and moral decadence, at the same time and place. Al Jeberti witnessed the establishment of the first Saudi state, its application of promoting what is good and forbidding what is detested, through murder and massacres. As he witnessed the moral decadence condoned and spread by Sufism in Egypt , under the banner of (No Objection) , which is the behavioral value for Sufism that contradicts ( promoting good and forbidding the detested), in its Wahhabi concept. That requires a fast pause.
Twelfth: (Promoting the good and forbidding the detested), between Islam and Sufism and Wahhabism
1-The absence of the virtue of promoting good and forbidding the detested in the Memluk society, worsened conditions. This same virtue was also abused by the extremist Hanbalis who implemented it vigorously before, and transformed it to coercion and forced indoctrination, dominance over people, transgression against them and interference in their personal freedoms. Through it, they oppressed their adversaries of Sufis, Shiites and people of the book. Sufism rebounded with another form of extremism, which was, no objection, no denial and free for all attitude. By striking that alliance between the two schools, the virtue of promoting good and forbidding the detested was abandoned by the Sunni in favor of Sufis, and was replaced by no objection, no denial in the social and religious life. Later on, this phenomenon was transformed to circles of knowledge and intellectual, rational discourse. Religious innovation turned into imitation, and imitation in the Memluk period turned to stagnation in the Ottoman period, thereby, to investigate issues differed upon by both schools became forbidden, and who dared of the jurists to tackle such issues, was persecuted no matter what position he held, and no matter what arguments he presented. That is how we understand the persecution, Ibn Taymiyyah endured in the Memluk period, for he dared to debate, discuss, argue, moreover considered some Sufi Imams as disbelievers, and called to confront that trend by force. We pause briefly to get acquainted with the issue of promoting Good and forbidding Evil, in Islam and in both religions; Wahhabism and Sufism.
Thirteenth:Features or characteristics of( promoting good and forbidding evil ) in Islam
1-It is verbal exhortation only, if the person insists on his opinion or behavior, it is his business, as long as no harm is reaching others due to his stand. If harm does affect others, then he becomes a culprit subject to whatever penalty the law specifies, and the matter is outside the perimeter of enjoining good and preventing evil and enters the perimeter of penalties for crimes committed by a culprit. Penalties specifically mentioned in Islam are related to thievery, terrorist crime, murder, fornication, tarnishing the reputation of innocent womenfolk. Some alterations and additions were introduced by man- made religions to these penalties, due to political interferences, thereby adding death sentences for those who exit the folds of Islam, and for those who do not perform daily prayers and stoning of the fornicator. Same thing occurred to the concept of promoting good and preventing evil. Initially it was a verbal advice, then avoiding those who do not comply, implementing the Quranic injunction in chapter 5 verse 105(O you who believe! take care of your souls; he who errs cannot hurt you when you are on the right way; to Allah is your return, of all (of you), so He will inform you of what you did)
2-The politics and its man-made religions transformed that concept into revolutions, justified and fortified by fabricated Hadiths and Fatwas, as Ibn Taymiyyah, Al-Ghazali and others had done in contradiction to Islam.
Allah Almighty told His messenger about his companions :( Lower your wing to who followed you of the believers), meaning be soft and kind with your companions, so what would happen if his companions disobeyed him? Does he beat them up? Does he accuse them of disbelief?, the answer is in the next verse: ( But if they disobey you, then say: Surely I am clear of what you do). (Verses 215 and 216 of chapter: 26)
Meaning if they disobeyed him, all he can do is distance himself from their deeds, He did not say; if they disobeyed you and committed an evil, punish them and change that evil with your hands or tongue, he was not even told to distance himself from them, rather from their deeds only.
So the first remark or observation in the concept of (enjoining good and forbidding evil) is verbal advice, if it did not achieve its objective, then avoiding the believing sinner and distancing self from his bad deeds not him personally.
3-The second feature is that, this concept is not to turn into an official job or popular charge for a certain grouping, restricted to its members, rather a societal job for all the members of the society of believers as described in (103: 3): (Those who believe and do good, and enjoin on each other truth, and enjoin on each other patience).Allah Almighty exhorts all believers to perform that duty in many verses in the holy Quran :( 3/104 : -)( 5/ 78 :79).If all mankind are subject to committing mistakes, and the best among them are the ones who ask for forgiveness, it is incomprehensible that some would become professionals at advising others, with no one to advise them professionally, otherwise, they would be as those described by Allah Almighty in ( 2/44): ( What! do you enjoin men to be good and neglect your own souls while you read the Book; have you then no sense? ).
Fourteenth: Features or characteristics of( promoting good and forbidding evil ) between Sunni Hanbalis and Sufis
1-Then Sunni Hanblis man-made religions evolved to convert that advice from mere verbal and simple avoidance, to physical interference, violence, turmoil and bloodshed, or a job performed by specific groups under the guise of resisting and removing evil, as the Hanbalis of Abbasid Era used to do. The Historian Abul Feda’ stated in his book (History of Abul Feda’), in the year 323H. Under the title (Hanbali Turmoil in Baghdad):
[In that year, the influence of Hanbalis increased drastically, they would raid homes of leaders as well as commoners, if they found wine, they would spill it, if they found a songstress, they would beat her up and break the musical device. They interfered in commercial matters, and in men accompanying youths on the streets, and the likes of that].
2-With Sufi dominance, Negativity dominated, objection to detested behavior became unacceptable, moreover what used to be reprehensible became socially acceptable, and shameful to oppose it. This prevailed during the Memluk period, intensified in Egypt during the Ottoman period. At that time, the whole society was engaged in religious and moral decadence, not to find any who would advocate and enjoin Good and prevent Evil.
The historical text we quote from Al Jeberti, (The most famous historian in the Ottoman era) describes those conditions in Cairo:
[A tomb was built for Sheikh Adul Wahab Bin Abdus Salam, they turned it into a shrine to be visited by men and women in mixed company, they then fabricated a festival and an annual date, where they would invite people from upper and lower Egypt, they erect lots of huge tents, they call upon ironsmiths, they prepare buffets, kitchens and coffee shops. The vast majority of people gather, their elites and their commoners, peasants from rural areas, owners of amusement facilities, spacious playing fields, women dancers, prostitutes, monkey and snake handlers, they fill deserts, orchards, stepping on graveyards, setting fires on top of it, desecrating it with filth, urinate, defecate, fornicate and indulge in homosexual activities, horse around, dance, beat drums and blow horns day and night, for ten continuous days or more, jurists and scholars are invited, emulated by officials, traders and common people without any objections, thinking it is a form of worship that draws them closer to God, and if it was not so, it would have been frowned upon by scholars, who themselves indulge in it, May Allah guide us all]
3-Al Jeberti, the Egyptian historian who witnessed this moral decadence, was the same one who lived the opposite conditions under the first Saudi state in Nejd, where raids were conducted in the name of Jihad and in the name of enjoining good and preventing evil, and under those two slogans, blood was shed, old men, women and children were murdered. Their news reached Egypt after they conquered Al Hejaz and committed as usual their atrocities chronicled by Al Jeberti:
[On Friday the 15th of zul Hijja, correspondence arrived from Al Hejaz, telling of the Wahhabis making it to At-Taa’f, where Shereef of Mecca, the nobleman Ghaleb came out to confront them, but they defeated him, so he returned to At-Taa’f to burn his home before fleeing to Mecca, whereupon the Wahhabis entered At-Taa’f, its people fought them for 3 days, but they overcame them, taking the city by force, killing the men, enslaving women and children, and that was their custom with those they fought.]
In other words, that was their method of dealing with other Muslims who differed with them, killing men and enslaving women and children. For Wahhabism appeared as a challenge to Sufism which was founded on the principles of (No Objection, No Denial), so Wahhabism came on the scene raising the banner of (enjoining good and forbidding evil), in Hanbali style, deliberate random killing, to become more extreme in the age of human rights, more so than the Hanbalis of Abbasid period.
Finally:
1-Wahhabism founded states and establishes secret movements, like Muslim brotherhood, implementing through bloodshed, its religion, the Sunni, Hanbali, and Salafi as Islamic Jihad.
Because of Wahhabism, reports from world human rights and religious freedom organizations are filled with violations committed by Muslims, and Islam became accused of extremism, terrorism, abstruseness and stagnation.
Dictatorships, secular or religious, militarized or politicized dominated the Muslim world; democracy became synonymous with blasphemy, although it has always been an Islamic religious obligation, but unfortunately has always been put on the backburner.
The practical application of (enjoining good and forbidding evil) according to Islamic Sharee’a is exactly what the International American commission for religious freedom is doing, also human rights organizations in the West, and what United Nations Charters and its organizations call for, of defending the oppressed, warning and counseling the oppressor.
Nowadays, the oppressor ascribes himself to Islam.
2-The Quranists in Egypt evolved as a positive reaction rejecting Wahhabism and Muslim Brotherhood, and as an extension to the school of Imam Mohammad Abdu (1849-1905) after he was betrayed by his student Resheed Reda, who allied himself with the Saudis, and founded for them Wahhabi religious societies, the last of which was the Muslim Brotherhood.
The Muslim Brotherhood succeeded with its Wahhabi culture, in spreading Hanbali fanaticism and extremism in Egypt. After Egypt was famous for tolerance during the strict medieval ages, with sporadic limited incidents of prejudice, it became, in the age of human rights, an advocate of Wahhabism, restoring Hanbali culture of oppressing the OTHER in religion ( The Christian , the Jew and the Revert), to oppressing the OTHER in denomination ( Shiite, Baha’i and Quranist).
3-Because the Wahhabi violations fill volumes, gathered and recorded by local and international human rights organizations, also by the American commission for religious freedom, we are not about to repeat what has been recorded, rather, what we are doing, is historical chronicling of such crimes, because what they are doing in our own times, they have already committed before, after they have fashioned it as a religious law according to their man–made religion which contradicts Islam.