Thread by @ClassicalMuslim

HOW IBN ABDUL WAHHAB CHANGED THE SHAHADA [THREAD]

[1-8] ilāh & rabb are inseparable
[9-14]
• MIAW redefined ilāh
• used this to redefine the shahada
• made takfir on anyone who disagreed
[15-19] contradicted the Salaf
[20-21] killed Muslims who opposed him
[22-24] Review

Salafis, it's normal to be upset when your beliefs are challenged. But a bricked-wall defensiveness is a sign that Allah left you misguided. Before reading, please make a duʿa for guidance, from wherever it may be🤲

Sunnis, be generous of character: the truth is on your side.

[1]
The word god [ilāh] is sometimes defined as that which is “worthy of wor-ship”.

Allah is the only one worthy of worship.

Why? Because He is the LORD of all existence. It is His Lordship (creator, sustainer, cause of harm and benefit) that makes Him WORTHY of worship.📖

[2]
If you believe that someone is your god (worthy of worship) it's because you believe they have attributes that make them worthy - attributes of lordship.

Your god is ALWAYS your lord.

This is how it's defined in the most authoritative Arabic dictionary "Al-Lisān al-ʿArab".

[3]
The Qur'an also confirms this explicitly 📖.

So whenever dictionaries & ulema define god (ilāh) as "that which is worshipped" the attributes of lordship are always IMPLIED as the reason WHY they're worshipped, even if not mentioned explicitly.

Again, your god IS your lord

[4]
It works the other way too.

If you make something your LORD you've automatically made it your GOD/object of worship. A Christian who believes 'Jesus is my Lord & Saviour' regards him as "worthy of worship", even if he doesn't physically prostrate to him.

See the Qur'an📖

[5]
The reason is b/c feeling that someone has a DIVINE POWER over you [rubūbiyyah] puts you in a condition of humility & servitude to them [ubūdiy-yah]. This is enough to make you a "worshipper" of that thing even if you don't physically act upon it. Thus, worship is internal.

[6]
The EXTERNAL ACT comes from this internal condition. Without it, the act is meaningless. Thus, an atheist who performs Salah did not worship Allah. He had no ubūdiyyah driving the act b/c he did not believe in Allah's rubūbiyyah.

Worship CANNOT be the ACT ONLY, otherwise..

[7]
... when Ya'qūb PROSTRATED to Yūsuf (as) he thus "worshipped someone who wasn't his Lord". Such a claim is kufr.

You can't say: "it was allowed back then" OR "he's excused by ignorance."

Shirk was NEVER allowed, is never excusable & Prophets don't make errors in shirk.

[8]
So god (ilāh) INCLUDES lord (rabb). This is confirmed by Taqi ud-Din Ibn Taymiyyah:

"godhead includes within it lordship... when one is mentioned it includes the other, even if each word has its own meaning." [Majmu al-Fatawa, II, p. 275]

Further evidence in sura 21:22 📖

[9]
MIAW changed all this. How?

PHASE 1: MIAW said:

"The Jahili mushriks believed Allah was their ONLY LORD, but they had other GODS besides Him, which they believed DID NOT have attributes of lordship [rubūbiyyah]."

Thus he conceived of GOD [ilāh] and LORD [rabb] as SEPARATE.

[10]
MIAW's claim that the mushriks believed Allah was their ONLY LORD is false. As we've shown, their GODS were also their LORDS.

So, the whole basis for dividing lord from god was wrong to begin with.

Imām al-Tabari also confirms that the mushriks "DENIED His rubūbiyyah".

[11]
So now, let's review the 2 definitions of god [ilāh]

SUNNI: "god is the one you believe is your lord/creator-sustainer/possessing attribute which make Him worthy of worship".

WAHHABI: "god is the one you direct an ACT of worship to, but you don't believe has lordship".

[12]
PHASE 2: Next, MIAW plugged this new definition of ilāh into the shahada. So when the mushriks heard lā ilāha ill-Allah, "ilāh was NOT the Creator, Sustainer or Regulator", rather the intent of the Prophet ﷺ was: "do not dedicate acts of worship to other than Allah".

[13]
Now compare the 2 different shahadas:

THE TRUE MUHAMMAD ﷺ:
"There is no ILAH (lord creator, sustainer, cause of benefit/harm etc.) except Allah".

THE FALSE MUHAMMAD
"There is no ILAH (one to whom acts of worship are directed & IS NOT creator & sustainer) except Allah".

[14]
PHASE 3: MIAW said whoever doesn't accept HIS shahada is more ignorant than the Jahili mushriks.

This was mass takfir on Muslims, b/c if they didn't know the shahada then they couldn't have believed in it. (He added that whoever doesn't join him in takfir is also a kafir).

[15]
THE SAHABA DEFINE THE SHAHADA
Let's compare MIAW's shahada to the Sahabas', then see who was the kafir.

• Umar ibn al-Khattāb
"There is no ilah (fulfiller of needs) except Allah."
• Ibn Abbās, a master mufassir:
"There is no ilah (Source of Harm or Benefit) except Allah."

[16]
THE TABIʿIN DEFINE THE SHAHADA

• Sheikh al-Islam Sufyān ibn ʿUyaynah & Abu ʿĀliya, a tafsir authority:
"There is no ilah (Source of asylum, fear & sanctuary) except Allah."

• Qatāda ibn Diʿāma, a tafsir authority:
"There is no ilāh (fulfiller of our needs) except Allah."

[17]
So there it is!

The Quran says ilāh means on thing. MIAW says: "No, it DOES NOT - it means something else".

The Qur'an & salaf define the shahada one way. MIAW defines it another way & makes takfir on those who stand by the other definition.

So who is the kafir?

[18]
There is no ikhtilaf on the meaning of THE SHAHADA. MIAW did not simply have a different meaning (which is bad enough), but made takfir on those who take the original meaning from the Qur'an & salaf.

MIAW cannot be rescued from this. It is an error of both kufr & kharijism.

[19]
The fact that MIAW had HIS OWN personal understanding of lā ilāha ill-Allah is evident in his own words, claiming that none of his teachers knew the mean-ing, but rather that Allah somehow 'inspired' or 'graced' him with it.

[20]
So what happened next? His troops fought anyone who disagreed. Countless Muslims were killed IN HIS OWN LIFETIME & more after. This is document-ed by his student & appointed historian Ibn Ghannam.

For a visual reference see videos of ISIS slaughtering & terrorising Muslims!

[21]
So when you see quotes from MIAW that he only made takfir on those "who rejected the truth"; know that his definition of "truth" was HIS OWN PERSONAL one, not that of Islam. He thus killed people who held the genuine shahada. It's no wonder why all ulema rejected him.

[22]
Salafis still uphold MIAW's shahada. It's the basis of their religion & takfir of Muslims.

So next time a Salafi argues about intercession or mawlid, etc. remind them to get their priorities in order: "If your shahada is kufr, you have no right to speak about anything."

[23]
To review. MIAW was:

• IGNORANT: a 7 year old knows the shahada

• UPON KUFR: judged Muslims kuffar b/c their shahada was invalid (but he was wrong).

• KHAWARIJ: used verses about mushriks against Muslims & killed them.

2 contradictory shahadas =2 different religions.

[24]
Whomever Allah guides by this knowledge or leaves in misguidance and stubbornness, that is His will. The sovereignty belongs to Him.

May Allah bless the Prophet ﷺ, his Companions, his Family & shield the believers from the assaults of those ignorant of lā ilāha ill-Allah.